Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/01 18:36:23


Post by: DarkBlack


Just wondering if it's going?

Never interested me, because KoW, but I'm curious.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/01 21:24:19


Post by: Orlanth


Wrong forum, there is a whole seperate section for this.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 12:01:24


Post by: Alpharius


Right forum now...


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 12:04:29


Post by: auticus


There is no T9A for a couple hundred miles of me in any direction.

Kings of War here has a small dedicated following. They have regular events and their last event had 32 players involved.

Most people I know won't touch T9A because its a fan project and not backed by anything legit.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 12:36:19


Post by: DarkBlack


 Alpharius wrote:
Right forum now...

Thanks. Sorry for the trouble.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 16:31:32


Post by: nels1031


A pretty timely question, DarkBlack.

The game is not dead by any means, but it appears to be in a pretty precarious position(in USA particularly) and it seems to be self inflicted.

Seems like the booting from Adepticon was an opportunity for a few folks to get some stuff off their chest. There is also a lively discussion on T9A forums that was spurred on by the first video below(Lord Tremendous Rant) . Its been pretty interesting reading. Reminds me of classic WoW when a prominent 40 man raid guild would collapse or was about to collapse and morph into something else.

My opinion as an outside looking in, they are top heavy, risk adverse and not entirely focused. Ignoring the foul language and hyperbole in the video's below, there are recurring themes in all of their criticisms. Only one of the videos is from someone who seems to have never got into T9A.


Former 9th Age "Head of Content", WHFB 8th Edition rulebook burner, vehement AoS critic(put mildly) and apparently friend of the dude who burnt his Dark Elf army at the launch of AoS:

Cursing, so NSFW if you work at an establishment that frowns on that:




This looks to be a T9A player who shares his opinion. Probably the most reasonable of the videos. If you watch any, I'd recommend this one, as this is probably the least hyperbolic and presents his arguments in a more measured manner.




A Kings of War players opinion. He seems pretty eccentric, but I think that's his modus operandi:




Another longtime T9A player. Some cursing during his morning commute!




And finally, an Aussie opinion. First 50 minutes are "state of T9A" and he played it heavily when it launched. He also makes a point about T9A players and their particular negative focus on AoS that doesn't appear amongst players in other systems. I tend to share that observation.










How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 17:53:13


Post by: DarkBlack


 nels1031 wrote:
A pretty timely question, DarkBlack.
Spoiler:

The game is not dead by any means, but it appears to be in a pretty precarious position(in USA particularly) and it seems to be self inflicted.

Seems like the booting from Adepticon was an opportunity for a few folks to get some stuff off their chest. There is also a lively discussion on T9A forums that was spurred on by the first video below(Lord Tremendous Rant) . Its been pretty interesting reading. Reminds me of classic WoW when a prominent 40 man raid guild would collapse or was about to collapse and morph into something else.

My opinion as an outside looking in, they are top heavy, risk adverse and not entirely focused. Ignoring the foul language and hyperbole in the video's below, there are recurring themes in all of their criticisms. Only one of the videos is from someone who seems to have never got into T9A.


Former 9th Age "Head of Content", 8th Edition rulebook burner, vehemeny AoS critic(put mildly) and apparently friend of the dude who burnt his Dark Elf army at the launch of AoS:

Cursing, so NSFW if you work at an establishment that frowns on that:




This looks to be a T9A player who shares his opinion. Probably the most reasonable of the videos. If you watch any, I'd recommend this one, as this is probably the least hyperbolic and presents his arguments in a more measured manner.




A Kings of War players opinion. He seems pretty eccentric, but I think that's his modus operandi:




Another longtime T9A player. Some cursing during his morning commute!




And finally, an Aussie opinion. First 50 minutes are "state of T9A" and he played it heavily when it launched. He also makes a point about T9A players and their particular negative focus on AoS that doesn't appear amongst players in other systems. I tend to share that observation.





Doom and Darkness prompted the question. Thanks for the rundown.

AoS hate does annoy me; some of my KoW opponents still seem to have a grudge. I'm not a huge fan of AoS myself, but just gaking on it is juvenile. People enjoy it, if you're not one of them do something else.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 17:55:23


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Watched the first video...

Seems running a game system isn't something easily done.

But funny how he rags on AoS, and not so casually insults its player base, then bangs on about maturity and that.

Can't we all just get along?


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 18:01:55


Post by: DarkBlack


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Watched the first video...

Seems running a game system isn't something easily done.

But funny how he rags on AoS, and not so casually insults its player base, then bangs on about maturity and that.

Can't we all just get along?


Sounds like the running of volunteer based organisations, like gaming clubs.
People who do it professionally can do it better, even if you are better at it despite their skill (they got a job doing it) and experience, they have more time and resources. It is their job, you have to find time after yours.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 18:25:31


Post by: nels1031


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Watched the first video...

Seems running a game system isn't something easily done.

But funny how he rags on AoS, and not so casually insults its player base, then bangs on about maturity and that.

Can't we all just get along?


Also, he plays 40K, which is like modified AoS, so I think the hate stems from somewhere else, other than the rules. It harkens back to Doom and Darkness's observation about some of the more toxic T9A-ers.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 18:44:58


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Unfortunately, he comes across as the sort of person that gives any game system a bad name.

Not content with choosing to insult people for daring to enjoy a game not his taste (and he can of course enjoy or not any game he damn well chooses, so no hypocrisy here), but he then makes wildly baseless claims, such as T9A being responsible for an upswing in sales over AoS.

For a man ranting about the ego of others, he could do with a little introspection.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 19:36:19


Post by: Pacific


Unfortunately I think as the game gives a massive platform to fans (it being fan run), then some of those have a very loud mouth and opinions. Honestly, I think 'friend of someone who famously burnt their Dark Elf army' can immediately be put into the same group as people that have pet root vegetables and wear a cap with the tiny spinning fan on top - i.e. they can be ignored, and aren't representative of the majority of the group.

The forums are still really active (with the majority of people being pretty reasonable), Twitter group too with loads of tournaments ongoing and I don't think it's going anywhere soon. The whole thing is such a labour of love by the designers, and very well organised for the most part, that I think you can't help but be enamoured by it.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 20:25:52


Post by: Baron Klatz



But funny how he rags on AoS, and not so casually insults its player base, then bangs on about maturity and that. 


I was with the 9th age forum since it began to the end of last year when I got fed up with the negativity.

9th age players have no room to talk down on other players. The amount of juvenile posts I've seen and endless whining(mostly from HE players) made me wonder why I stayed there.

Then we figured out they really didn't care about community input as polls were constantly ignored by the higher ups and what few things you might get would get washed away with the next update.(the whole forum hierarchy thing was tiresome as well, my friend on the art team tried to pm me Bret concepts to renew my interest but even then I was blocked from seeing it)

Then 1.3 hit and the forum anger hit a zenith with even the mods telling fans to leave if they didn't like it.

Pretty that and the increasing AoS hate had me wash my hands of it entirely. (I wished I had left with the early flood of Bret devs who got fed up with 9th at it's beginning days.)

So good luck to 9th age all the same but it's AoS and 8.5 for me where I can go to forums with happy fans that don't give me depression.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 20:44:43


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Sounds like a clash of egos, sadly.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 21:09:07


Post by: JohnHwangDD


It's dead to me, and good riddance.

As a Dogs of War player, who would have written an Army Book, the way that DoW were treated is infuriating.

I'll play and promote AoS instead.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/02 22:00:58


Post by: nels1031


 Pacific wrote:
Unfortunately I think as the game gives a massive platform to fans (it being fan run), then some of those have a very loud mouth and opinions. Honestly, I think 'friend of someone who famously burnt their Dark Elf army' can immediately be put into the same group as people that have pet root vegetables and wear a cap with the tiny spinning fan on top - i.e. they can be ignored, and aren't representative of the majority of the group.


Then what does that say about T9A that someone of this caliber could be made "Head of Content"?

Also, much of what he says is also backed/reiterated up by folks in the other videos, in more eloquent ways. Focusing on what this dude's friend did in a historic fit of nerd rage and ignoring what he has to say seems like folly. The youtube chat below this rant has the owner/mouthpiece of The Miniature Solutions( think that was the name, he was Polish and did the alternate Tomb Kings for T9A) agreeing with him. That was a guy who started a business to support T9A almost exclusively, and he seems to be jaded on the project.

 Pacific wrote:
The forums are still really active (with the majority of people being pretty reasonable), Twitter group too with loads of tournaments ongoing and I don't think it's going anywhere soon. The whole thing is such a labour of love by the designers, and very well organised for the most part, that I think you can't help but be enamoured by it.


Ya, I don't think its going to vanish like a thief in the night, but I do believe that it has already peaked.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/03 00:39:37


Post by: auticus


Where can I find a "version 8.5" of whfb?


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/03 01:25:44


Post by: Baron Klatz


Well, that's actually two 8.5's but I refer to EEFL (eighth edition for life) where they balance out the armies(within reason, no "tournament level only!!" nonsense) and even make rules for AoS models.

The other 8.5 was by Furion which also did a great job at balancing out armies and keeping them fun. His stuff was going strong last year with the common "yeah, you 9th guys don't know what you're doing. I'm going to use Furion's stuff" being heard but I don't know the recent activity for it.

As a Dogs of War player, who would have written an Army Book, the way that DoW were treated is infuriating. 


Ah, that's a pity. I saw the enthusiasm for them before I left and even the on life support DoW forum sparked to life a bit when it was talked about.

Though I'm not surprised, 9th's tournament obsession and catering to popular armies ensured it being left in squatdom.

Edit: any interest in making a fan-made battletome for them like Mengal miniatures did for Tomb Kings? You could start a discord for it like we're doing with the Bret Battletome and work out new fluff and warscrolls with fellow fans there.



How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/03 12:31:04


Post by: Arbitrator


 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It's dead to me, and good riddance.

As a Dogs of War player, who would have written an Army Book, the way that DoW were treated is infuriating.

I'll play and promote AoS instead.

Coming from you that's such a shock.

Anyway, 9th's problem was always going to be the lack of an official stamp. Tabletop gamers have a huge mob mentality, especially the ones who've only ever touched Games Workshop products. Kings of War at least had an established company behind it, one that's grown fairly well with the fallout from WHFB's demise. As much as I applauded their efforts, it was always going to end poorly, just because it's still slapped with the 'unofficial fan project' issue.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/03 13:43:26


Post by: Grensche


I haven't played T9A yet. I want to, but I'm busy with setting up my army.

In my opinion, with any community made game you're going to have a power struggle and "too many hands in the pot." I understand user input with playtests but from what I'm seeing on the T9A forums is a lot of complaining just for the sake of complaining.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/04 10:19:12


Post by: jouso


 nels1031 wrote:
 Pacific wrote:
Unfortunately I think as the game gives a massive platform to fans (it being fan run), then some of those have a very loud mouth and opinions. Honestly, I think 'friend of someone who famously burnt their Dark Elf army' can immediately be put into the same group as people that have pet root vegetables and wear a cap with the tiny spinning fan on top - i.e. they can be ignored, and aren't representative of the majority of the group.


Then what does that say about T9A that someone of this caliber could be made "Head of Content"?


It says that it's an open project and that they'll take anyone who's willing to put the work (as Lord T did, he pumped a lot of YouTube videos).

Over here the scene is healthy enough, with monthly 30+ tournaments filled to capacity, and in a few weeks a 150-something team event.

There's a lot of discussion on T9A forum about the whys and the buts, but the tl;dr version is:

- T9A can't pay Adepticon for space so they've done the next best thing which is host a GT next door on the same dates.
- 2.0 will be released when it is ready, since this is still done by volunteers putting a whole lot of time, but ultimately still in their spare time. As much as Lord To wanted it right away right now it just can't be done if it's going to be done right (and it needs to)

And finally that there's already a video on the 2-player box (Brets and TK) that's going to KS by TMS and that will include 2 ready armies and a printed rulebook.





How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/04 17:33:49


Post by: JohnHwangDD


 Arbitrator wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It's dead to me, and good riddance.

As a Dogs of War player, who would have written an Army Book, the way that DoW were treated is infuriating.

I'll play and promote AoS instead.

Coming from you that's such a shock.

Anyway, 9th's problem was always going to be the lack of an official stamp. Tabletop gamers have a huge mob mentality, especially the ones who've only ever touched Games Workshop products. Kings of War at least had an established company behind it, one that's grown fairly well with the fallout from WHFB's demise. As much as I applauded their efforts, it was always going to end poorly, just because it's still slapped with the 'unofficial fan project' issue.


Indeed.

No other manufacturer could possibly produce the equivalent of what WFB8 had at the time of its demise, simply due to the incredible bloat of the range and armies, to say nothing of the capstone End Times models. At least not in 28-30-32mm. One could have taken the WFB8 engine and ported it over to multi-based 5mm blocks, and that would have been a fine opportunity to distinguish from AoS, KoW and T9A.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/04 19:17:50


Post by: Baron Klatz


Those models are fantastic!

Did TMS solve their pricing problem? I remember their first skeletons were about $10 a piece and they couldn't change it despite the protests. (That he advertised it on the AoS section of this very forum was telling the pricing was causing them trouble)

The comment section of the video just reaffirms that I was right to leave that fanbase, though. Amazing models and great video ad but first thing they do is take shots at GW. (though that GW lawsuit guy is a nuisance just trying to fan the flames. GW doesn't care about 9th age at all, especially now that they're basically fan-made Mantic with their own system and copycat models)


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/10/05 05:58:37


Post by: jouso


Baron Klatz wrote:
Those models are fantastic!

Did TMS solve their pricing problem? I remember their first skeletons were about $10 a piece and they couldn't change it despite the protests. (That he advertised it on the AoS section of this very forum was telling the pricing was causing them trouble)

The comment section of the video just reaffirms that I was right to leave that fanbase, though. Amazing models and great video ad but first thing they do is take shots at GW. (though that GW lawsuit guy is a nuisance just trying to fan the flames. GW doesn't care about 9th age at all, especially now that they're basically fan-made Mantic with their own system and copycat models)


I expect that the 2-player box with the KS discounts will be good value.

After that? Not so much. Their sphinx looks nice, and apparently the casting is top-notch and doesn't require cleaning prior to painting..... but it's not 60 euro nice.

Their ushabti are right on the money, though. Much nicer than Mantic's.



How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/16 01:16:21


Post by: nels1031


Looks like the 9th Age Quickstart boxed set from TMS is DOA.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/tms-the-9th-age-quick-starter-set/comments


Quite an abrupt end too:

Oct. 28

TMS: Rules included contain all 16 armies that are available in The 9th Age.
And we have the project funded!!!!
Of too work on the stretch goals.


Also Oct. 28

TMS: Hi, We have decided to cancel the Kickstarter. Many of you have make it obvious that this is not what you wanted, we will go back to the drawing board, and make a second attempt.
Thank you for your support.


Project cancelled.

I guess the price was a bit too much? Or was it the armies chosen for the set? Or something more relevant to the topic at hand?



How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/16 06:52:13


Post by: Baron Klatz


That's a pity, those were great Bret models. The bottom of the heap popularity of those two armies likely what did it in. (From what I recall, anyway. The numbers for our vote polls were pathetic compared to everyone else.)

Probably will have to go with a more popular army like high elves vs chaos.



How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/16 17:56:43


Post by: jouso


Price was definitely what prompted to go back to the drawing table.

According to their FB they're reworking some of the minis into monopose which for a starter box is pretty much standard to offer a better price.

Oh, and both sets of models are for sale separately anyway so everyone was going to check savings vs models purchased separately.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/17 07:00:54


Post by: Orlanth


I like 9th Age a lot, however i stopped at 1.1 and refused to move further.

Nearly all the bad stuff happened after the developers made moves to ringfence the ruleset and army lists against GW legal. This was for v1.2 which became at that time post-Warhammer.
v1.0 and v1.1 were Warthammer-fixed.

The emphasis at the beginning was in ironing out the mistakes of 8th edition WHFB, and to modernise each army book. They did a reasonable job with v1.0, then fixed a few glaring holes for v1.1 which was only a minor change.

v1.2 changed the format a lot and in doing so began restricting the lists, v1.3 ff compounded on that and made the lists increasingly homogeneous. Some improvements were made, but over all the bad outweighed the good, more importantly it lost its roots, quite intentionally, and consequently lost more appeal.

Nowadays I prep my armies for 6th, 8th and 9th Age 1.1. they roll into each other easily.




How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/17 12:07:30


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


9th didn't really get a start from me, people say it's like a better 8th edition but I didn't like a lot of the core features of 8th so I didn't really seek out 9th. Apparently there's a few people who play (or did play, a while ago since I asked) at the FLGS, but I haven't run in to them to organise a game.

 nels1031 wrote:
Also, he plays 40K, which is like modified AoS, so I think the hate stems from somewhere else, other than the rules. It harkens back to Doom and Darkness's observation about some of the more toxic T9A-ers.
I'm not saying he must be like me, but personally ever since I started playing wargames back in the mid 90's I played 40k primarily because I liked the armies and WHFB primarily because I preferred the rules and the overall setting. Over the years I've probably collected a similar number of models for both systems, but I've had more really thoroughly enjoyable WHFB games than 40k ones and I've read more of the background fluff for WHFB than 40k.

So the "well you like 40k and AoS is just like 40k" is a non-argument in why I dislike that WHFB was killed to make WHFB:40k edition and why I have no real interest in AoS. Doesn't help that one of the armies I collect was dropped, another army gutted and another army the fluff got changed to something I don't find interesting.

But personally I just avoid talking about AoS unless other people bring it up.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/17 14:40:31


Post by: DarkBlack


KoW is the version of WHFB I wanted.
T9A sounds like an effort to keep the things that put me off, I'm afraid.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/19 21:58:20


Post by: Tonhel


jouso wrote:
Price was definitely what prompted to go back to the drawing table.

According to their FB they're reworking some of the minis into monopose which for a starter box is pretty much standard to offer a better price.

Oh, and both sets of models are for sale separately anyway so everyone was going to check savings vs models purchased separately.


The price is bad for a starterset. We are also talking about resin miniatures, which really isn't suited for beginning players. Firstly cleaning up / working with resin is harmful for your healt if you don't use a proper dustmask.
Than the bizar notion that they think they can provide it to retailers is mindblowing. The amount of stock they need to proper supply different retailers in different countries is way to big for a tinyl company that uses resin. Resin production is time consuming and mould intensive. Let alone find enough flgs that would want to stock it on their shelfs.

While I love Brets and I hoped for years that GW would release new Brets I don't think the demand is high enough to really make a profit. With the fireforge range you can make a nice looking army that is in hard plastic and much cheaper and user friendly.

It seems a great company, but I think the overestimated T9A popularity as a vehicle to sell miniatures. Most of T9A players are veterans of Warhammer with huge collections, bringing in new T9A players is not an easy task and than as a beginning player / hobbyist working with resin is far from ideal.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/20 11:10:35


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


Tonhel wrote:
Firstly cleaning up / working with resin is harmful for your healt if you don't use a proper dustmask.
Only if you're using power tools, which I'm guessing new players wouldn't, or if they are hopefully they know the safety precautions.

But yeah, resin isn't the easiest thing for newbies to work with.

While I love Brets and I hoped for years that GW would release new Brets I don't think the demand is high enough to really make a profit. With the fireforge range you can make a nice looking army that is in hard plastic and much cheaper and user friendly.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the fireforge models don't look all that good IMO.

But being a starter set, yeah, too expensive, $175 is more than even GW's starter sets.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/21 16:35:54


Post by: SolarCross


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the fireforge models don't look all that good IMO.

Agreed they are fairly fugly, but it is encouraging to see them start producing things which are nakedly aimed at filling in oldhammer gaps like this:



Now that the Age of Sigmar is upon us, GW's old world miniatures are going to start disappearing more and more. Loads of those minis will be cycling through the second market in various conditions for decades to come often at crazy prices but it certainly helps if there will be new kits being made by non-GW manufacturers for oldhammer even after GW has abandoned it.

This sub-forum should have a stickied resource which collects and reviews alternative kits suitable for oldhammer.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/11/21 17:19:16


Post by: Orlanth


i liked Fireforges historicals, and used them for Frostgrave, so did Frostgrave. If you look at the miniatures photos there is a lot of Fireforge stuff used.
Frostgrave is not heroic pose though, I wonder if the new fantasy not-Bretonnians are scaled compatible to Citadel miniatures.

Anyway, anyone after Brets is better off with MoM Miniaturas
https://www.momminiaturas.com/miniaturas-fantasia/hijos-del-león/

and Norba Miniatures

http://norbaminiatures.com/en/22-kingdom-of-equitaine



Later when I can afford I will be placing a big order with Norba, particularly to get foot knights or Knights Forlorn as they are called in 9th Age.



It will cost me 30 Euro total for both packs, 18 Euro for the command group and 12 Euro for rank and file sets.
I find both Norba and MOM to be good value and the internet reviews indicate they are decent sculpts.
Interesting thing is that one can currently buy pretty much an entire range of Brets from Norba and MOM, and they were one of the more difficult armies to source.


How is T9A doing? @ 2017/12/31 21:54:56


Post by: Davidian


well 2.0 just landed for beta and I go banned from the forums for saying it was a gakky idea to remove hellcannons from Warriors 2.0. My point being that one of the founding principles of T9A was to not invalidate peoples models for any reason.... Apparantly I can use it as a portal opening monster (vortex beast springs to mind)....... :/ my second point was that companies who are actively supporting T9A by manufaturing models that would be otherwise unattainable for use, like rottenfactory.eu (make a wicked hellcannon) are going to feel the brunt of it too.

Given, it was more because the admins gave painfully passive agressive answers and were incredibley condescending.

I dont take that gak laying down, admin or not. Pow! ban-hammer.

Anyway, Conquest looks like a mint game ;

www.parabellum.com
www.facebook.com/parabellumwargames
https://youtu.be/5L8jJwuQRtA


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 00:25:46


Post by: Baron Klatz



 and I got banned from the forums


Congratulations!

But yeah, all that's stuff par for the course with them. Especially the very rude mods. ("9th never promised you whiners anything about sustaining 8th edition collections" such bull. XD )

Fully agreed on Conquest, that game looks amazing!


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 08:53:59


Post by: DarkBlack


 Davidian wrote:
Anyway, Conquest looks like a mint game

Never heard of it, will check it out.
Have a look at Kings of War though, the well written rules and balance are quite refreshing after GW.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 09:02:14


Post by: Baron Klatz


Hehe, funny you should mention KoW considering the person behind Conquest.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/740261.page



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 11:29:33


Post by: Davidian


hehe, cheers but I've been playing Kow since v1

I just enjoyed 9th age alongside it, on it's own merits tbf...

The thread I was booted out on now have community support, rules team and background team members at each others throats.... sheesh...

Yeah, Conquest looks like a really nice supplement to KoW.

KoW is MASS battle, 100s of dudes going toe-to-toe on a massive battle field.

Conquest is smaller model count, smaller battle space (bigger minis too) with completely different game mechanics.

it's also as good (if not marginallly more) valure as KoW.

Not saying the two should compete, I think they both have a place on my top shelf

I've just srtarted multibasing my warriors for Varangur


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 12:40:47


Post by: jouso


 Davidian wrote:
My point being that one of the founding principles of T9A was to not invalidate peoples models for any reason....


Well, it is not invalidated as such. It just shoots something else.

A couple games into 2.0 and I'm loving the new magic system. Still too soon on everything else.




How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 12:50:56


Post by: Davidian


jouso wrote:
 Davidian wrote:
My point being that one of the founding principles of T9A was to not invalidate peoples models for any reason....


Well, it is not invalidated as such. It just shoots something else.

A couple games into 2.0 and I'm loving the new magic system. Still too soon on everything else.




XD as an (ex)member of the community engagement team, I spent a great deal of time reassuring aLOT of people who were concerned about losing their hellscreamer cannons on the back of the ASAW survey.
The rules team were feeding us the line that it will not be a cannon or mortar as such but would remain a monster profile with a ranged attack of some description. I spent a long time reasuuring people of that and now I feel like a tool for feeding the WDG community a lie.

The survey was interpreted as "warriors must not have any long range heavy shooting" because that was deamed to be an army weakness.

Turns out, alot of people who downvoted it in the survey, thought it mean't that the army should be weak against heavy shooting, or that having a single stonethrower entry in a premium ctaegory was already a weakness.

Either way, it caused a bit of a backlash and the management have decided to fight fire with a bigger fire until everyone is content or ash.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/01 15:39:45


Post by: jouso


 Davidian wrote:
jouso wrote:
 Davidian wrote:
My point being that one of the founding principles of T9A was to not invalidate peoples models for any reason....


Well, it is not invalidated as such. It just shoots something else.

A couple games into 2.0 and I'm loving the new magic system. Still too soon on everything else.




XD as an (ex)member of the community engagement team, I spent a great deal of time reassuring aLOT of people who were concerned about losing their hellscreamer cannons on the back of the ASAW survey.
The rules team were feeding us the line that it will not be a cannon or mortar as such but would remain a monster profile with a ranged attack of some description. I spent a long time reasuuring people of that and now I feel like a tool for feeding the WDG community a lie.


Such are the ways of design by committee. The model is still very much usable though which was my entire point.

I don't play WDG so I can't comment on the pros and cons of having an infernal contraption shooting HE rounds or portals.





How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/03 03:36:25


Post by: JohnHwangDD


I am not entirely surprised that TPTB at T9A would ban dissenting opinions.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/03 13:56:43


Post by: auticus


T9A is a very good textbook example of a group of people trying very hard to be the daddy of what they consider an opportunity to run the next "GW Killer" riding on the coattails of existing material that set the standard for decades.

If I had to choose I'd definitely take kings of war over anything T9A puts out simply because Alessio and company are good at what they do and don't come off as gakkers trying to lord a power complex over everyone.

This is why creating a successful game is a lot harder than people think. T9A is a great example of a bunch of tournament guys focused on hyper tournament play and driving their whatever-it-is into the ground.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/03 19:00:52


Post by: Tonhel


The whole ASAW as a concept could have worked, but the outcome is flawed. Firstly t hose polls had only between 200 and 300 votes per army. Secondly the strengths are randomly applied and weaknesses are fully applied. The first army of version 2.0 the armybook Warriors of the Dark Gods is a flop. They increased the Gods to 7, but they managed to make the book bland and boring. It's more the Warriors of the Bland Gods.

The game has im ozero growth potential. There is no hype.

They are so obsessed with balance that it kills the game.

It's a shame.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/04 15:37:17


Post by: jouso


 auticus wrote:


If I had to choose I'd definitely take kings of war over anything T9A puts out simply because Alessio and company are good at what they do and don't come off as gakkers trying to lord a power complex over everyone.


KoW is what it is because Alessio designed it that way, T9A is the sum of a lot of contributions from many people, at times pulling in opposite directions. KoW has a certain vision, and T9A has a different one.

On a practical level (for me, as a player) I don't care much about whether that vision came out of one single person or a committee. I can appreciate that KoW is more focused, but the focus is on the wrong place for me.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/04 16:43:38


Post by: auticus


Design by committee rarely works in my experience. All design by committee has ever done in any projects I've been a part of is breed a lot of contempt and an end product that doesn't know what it wants to be.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/04 23:55:42


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


Baron Klatz wrote:

 and I got banned from the forums


Congratulations!

But yeah, all that's stuff par for the course with them. Especially the very rude mods. ("9th never promised you whiners anything about sustaining 8th edition collections" such bull. XD )

Fully agreed on Conquest, that game looks amazing!


Not much info on it. I can't even seem to find a site for it. :/
I did find their facebook though, and the concept art and models do look pretty damn good.
It actually looks a bit like Dark Souls, in some cases. I don't suppose they have a big greatsword wielding guy in wolf armor ?


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/05 09:10:17


Post by: jouso


 auticus wrote:
Design by committee rarely works in my experience. All design by committee has ever done in any projects I've been a part of is breed a lot of contempt and an end product that doesn't know what it wants to be.


OTOH T9A works. For many people. Tournaments keep popping up, the homebrew section has been massively boosted now that they will be published in the magazine (first one is the barbarian army).

I understand the US is its own beast but it is the game of choice over here, much bigger than any other fantasy wargame (rank and file or AoS). Some people drop for whatever reason but others come in. Overall and going by tournament frequency and attendance, games at the club and social media activity (meaning whatsapp goups nowadays) the game looks good enough. Plenty of hype going for 2.0.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/05 21:12:32


Post by: Tonhel


jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
Design by committee rarely works in my experience. All design by committee has ever done in any projects I've been a part of is breed a lot of contempt and an end product that doesn't know what it wants to be.


OTOH T9A works. For many people. Tournaments keep popping up, the homebrew section has been massively boosted now that they will be published in the magazine (first one is the barbarian army).

I understand the US is its own beast but it is the game of choice over here, much bigger than any other fantasy wargame (rank and file or AoS). Some people drop for whatever reason but others come in. Overall and going by tournament frequency and attendance, games at the club and social media activity (meaning whatsapp goups nowadays) the game looks good enough. Plenty of hype going for 2.0.


Really, when browsing through the "official" 9TA forum I see a lot of negativity about asaw and how it seems to kill flavour. It seems to me that i.e HBE players are already in fear when their armybook will get the 2.0 treatment like WDG. T9A will be sustained by small group of die hards, but its heyday already passed.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/05 23:43:23


Post by: Davidian


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Baron Klatz wrote:

 and I got banned from the forums


Congratulations!

But yeah, all that's stuff par for the course with them. Especially the very rude mods. ("9th never promised you whiners anything about sustaining 8th edition collections" such bull. XD )

Fully agreed on Conquest, that game looks amazing!


Not much info on it. I can't even seem to find a site for it. :/
I did find their facebook though, and the concept art and models do look pretty damn good.
It actually looks a bit like Dark Souls, in some cases. I don't suppose they have a big greatsword wielding guy in wolf armor ?


The website isn't live yet but it will be ; www.para-bellum.com
The facebook is their main preview tool atm but I have colated all the releases, demo videos (on page 2 from BoW) and some more leaked info I've taken directly from PB staff in this thread here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/740261.page



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/06 01:57:35


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Davidian wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Baron Klatz wrote:

 and I got banned from the forums


Congratulations!

But yeah, all that's stuff par for the course with them. Especially the very rude mods. ("9th never promised you whiners anything about sustaining 8th edition collections" such bull. XD )

Fully agreed on Conquest, that game looks amazing!


Not much info on it. I can't even seem to find a site for it. :/
I did find their facebook though, and the concept art and models do look pretty damn good.
It actually looks a bit like Dark Souls, in some cases. I don't suppose they have a big greatsword wielding guy in wolf armor ?


The website isn't live yet but it will be ; www.para-bellum.com
The facebook is their main preview tool atm but I have colated all the releases, demo videos (on page 2 from BoW) and some more leaked info I've taken directly from PB staff in this thread here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/740261.page



Cheers, will have a gander. Nice to see a new wargaming company pop up, with high quality stuff too.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/06 03:20:55


Post by: auticus


Yeah that looks neat I'll be following it.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/06 09:01:29


Post by: Davidian


And the starter set is only going to 80 euros with 80 models in it (including the thresher abomination)... follow indeed


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/06 13:04:56


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


Yeah, but its the starter set though. Doesn't that mean it will have 40 models from each faction? If you are only starting with one faction, I don't see how that's a good deal.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/06 20:32:44


Post by: Davidian


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, but its the starter set though. Doesn't that mean it will have 40 models from each faction? If you are only starting with one faction, I don't see how that's a good deal.


All this, plus rules, plastic objective markers, trays included for €80... A bad deal? Okay



Ofc, if you only want one faction, a 2 player set isn't a great idea for any game. This is just an example of the price point it's shooting for. Nothing else.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/06 20:33:39


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Davidian wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, but its the starter set though. Doesn't that mean it will have 40 models from each faction? If you are only starting with one faction, I don't see how that's a good deal.


All this, plus rules, plastic objective markers, trays included for €80... A bad deal? Okay


Fair enough. I generally pay attention to only models, but I see your point.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/07 10:20:09


Post by: jouso


Tonhel wrote:
jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
Design by committee rarely works in my experience. All design by committee has ever done in any projects I've been a part of is breed a lot of contempt and an end product that doesn't know what it wants to be.


OTOH T9A works. For many people. Tournaments keep popping up, the homebrew section has been massively boosted now that they will be published in the magazine (first one is the barbarian army).

I understand the US is its own beast but it is the game of choice over here, much bigger than any other fantasy wargame (rank and file or AoS). Some people drop for whatever reason but others come in. Overall and going by tournament frequency and attendance, games at the club and social media activity (meaning whatsapp goups nowadays) the game looks good enough. Plenty of hype going for 2.0.


Really, when browsing through the "official" 9TA forum I see a lot of negativity about asaw and how it seems to kill flavour. It seems to me that i.e HBE players are already in fear when their armybook will get the 2.0 treatment like WDG. T9A will be sustained by small group of die hards, but its heyday already passed.


Why the quotes on official? It's where development takes place so it's as official as it gets. Of course people moan in the forums, it's what people do ever since internet forums existed.

People want to have the nice toys and grumble when other armies get it.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/07 11:15:47


Post by: kodos


T9A works, for those people who like it or better said, for those who want to play Warhammer at the ETC
I don't see a big community outside this bubble for the game, especially with the constant changes of the core rules

Now the game enters a big public Beta Test for 2.0, it takes a year until the core rules are "fixed" and than the army re-design starts (and after this is done the core rules are going to change again according to the "official" plan)

And while on the official forum everyone tells you that you don't need to play the beta rules and 1.3 is the official version of the game, all big tournaments/events around are going to use 2.0

So what reason to play this community version of the game over any other version that is around (Fluffhammer, WarhammerCE, Warhammer Armies etc) if you are not interested in tournaments or want to go to the ETC because for playing an older version of the game one can stay with 7th or 8th edition of warhammer too.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/07 13:49:59


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:


So what reason to play this community version of the game over any other version that is around (Fluffhammer, WarhammerCE, Warhammer Armies etc) if you are not interested in tournaments or want to go to the ETC because for playing an older version of the game one can stay with 7th or 8th edition of warhammer too.


Because those competitive gamers play non-competitive gamers. On our club only maybe 5 people go to tournaments outside of our monthly beer-and-chips "tournaments", but the other 20-something people also play with them. And run campaigns, and so on.

I could point you to other groups near us who haven't been near a tournament since 7th edition but still play T9A because presumably they like it. There's a whole homebrew section on the website where people post their campaign rules, homebrew armies, a skirmish game in the Mordheim mould, special character development systems, etc.

But of course the Internet has decided T9A is exclusively for ETC-ultracompetitive player-fans, so there's that.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/07 13:55:47


Post by: Tonhel


jouso wrote:
Tonhel wrote:
jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
Design by committee rarely works in my experience. All design by committee has ever done in any projects I've been a part of is breed a lot of contempt and an end product that doesn't know what it wants to be.


OTOH T9A works. For many people. Tournaments keep popping up, the homebrew section has been massively boosted now that they will be published in the magazine (first one is the barbarian army).

I understand the US is its own beast but it is the game of choice over here, much bigger than any other fantasy wargame (rank and file or AoS). Some people drop for whatever reason but others come in. Overall and going by tournament frequency and attendance, games at the club and social media activity (meaning whatsapp goups nowadays) the game looks good enough. Plenty of hype going for 2.0.


Really, when browsing through the "official" 9TA forum I see a lot of negativity about asaw and how it seems to kill flavour. It seems to me that i.e HBE players are already in fear when their armybook will get the 2.0 treatment like WDG. T9A will be sustained by small group of die hards, but its heyday already passed.


Why the quotes on official? It's where development takes place so it's as official as it gets. Of course people moan in the forums, it's what people do ever since internet forums existed.

People want to have the nice toys and grumble when other armies get it.


To highlight that I was talking about the official 9th Age forum. Well there is a lot of moaning about it on their forum, I remember that a couple of months ago they posted that their first real 2.0 armybook in this case WDG should nail it.. . In all fairness it didn't and it seems that the majority of the WDG community agree with that. I really don't see any grow potential with T9A. I really liked their first versions it was an improved Warhammer. Than the IP "threat" came up and they used it to justify all their changes, than ASAW came, which is something that is changing the game for the worse. The stupid thing is that probably almost nobody that voted was fully aware of the impact that it is having on T9A and to make it even worse about only 200-300 members voted of all the forum members.... .

The new rulebook is far from easy to read., infact it's quite horrible.

Imo the loss of players is much greater than new players joining.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/07 14:33:22


Post by: kodos


jouso wrote:
 kodos wrote:


So what reason to play this community version of the game over any other version that is around (Fluffhammer, WarhammerCE, Warhammer Armies etc) if you are not interested in tournaments or want to go to the ETC because for playing an older version of the game one can stay with 7th or 8th edition of warhammer too.


Because those competitive gamers play non-competitive gamers. On our club only maybe 5 people go to tournaments outside of our monthly beer-and-chips "tournaments", but the other 20-something people also play with them. And run campaigns, and so on.

I could point you to other groups near us who haven't been near a tournament since 7th edition but still play T9A because presumably they like it. There's a whole homebrew section on the website where people post their campaign rules, homebrew armies, a skirmish game in the Mordheim mould, special character development systems, etc.

But of course the Internet has decided T9A is exclusively for ETC-ultracompetitive player-fans, so there's that.


It is not the internet, but the official "rule-freeze" each year happens just to suit the ETC gamers and adjustments happens based on Team-Tournament data. This is the information people get, that they came to the conclusion that the game is made by tournament players for tournament players is not a surprise

And it is good that you have local groups around that use T9A for B&B games, here we still play the original Mortheim, no need for a replacement, as some still play 8th Edition.
For a B&B player, T9A add no advantage over the original rules (there is more the disadvantage that the army you are painting is outdated/illegal as sonn as you finished it if you are a slow painter)


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/07 18:55:35


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:
jouso wrote:
 kodos wrote:


So what reason to play this community version of the game over any other version that is around (Fluffhammer, WarhammerCE, Warhammer Armies etc) if you are not interested in tournaments or want to go to the ETC because for playing an older version of the game one can stay with 7th or 8th edition of warhammer too.


Because those competitive gamers play non-competitive gamers. On our club only maybe 5 people go to tournaments outside of our monthly beer-and-chips "tournaments", but the other 20-something people also play with them. And run campaigns, and so on.

I could point you to other groups near us who haven't been near a tournament since 7th edition but still play T9A because presumably they like it. There's a whole homebrew section on the website where people post their campaign rules, homebrew armies, a skirmish game in the Mordheim mould, special character development systems, etc.

But of course the Internet has decided T9A is exclusively for ETC-ultracompetitive player-fans, so there's that.


It is not the internet, but the official "rule-freeze" each year happens just to suit the ETC gamers and adjustments happens based on Team-Tournament data. This is the information people get, that they came to the conclusion that the game is made by tournament players for tournament players is not a surprise

And it is good that you have local groups around that use T9A for B&B games, here we still play the original Mortheim, no need for a replacement, as some still play 8th Edition.
For a B&B player, T9A add no advantage over the original rules (there is more the disadvantage that the army you are painting is outdated/illegal as sonn as you finished it if you are a slow painter)


https://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?attachment/12686-data-analysis-report-pdf/

As you see data is about 50-50 for individual vs team tournaments.

The next rules freeze will come after the ETC, and will last for at least 3 years. It's true that ETC is big for T9A, but it's not the end all.

And I can see several advantages about using 9th age vs 8th or older editions. For one it's free, evolving and has a huge community behind it. There are no laggard armies like Brets or Skaven who never got a proper 8th edition book and were either underpowered or a pain to play against because their rules were intended for an older edition.

There's balance, the obvious removal of blatantly broken stuff like botwd, the nuke spells, hellebron or the unkillable nurgle DPs, unit size limits, making no-magic armies viable, removing the mandatory lv4.

But sure, you're a casual, you don't use that filth. There's plenty of fan-produced armies. Stormcast, araby, kislev, dogs of war... All have their book. And let's be honest, improved interval and external balance does improve even casual play.

There's plenty of reasons why a group who's never been near a tournament chooses T9A. You don't have to like the end result or even the process of getting there, but to reduce T9A to the ETC is just not true


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/09 15:07:27


Post by: JohnHwangDD


 kodos wrote:
the official "rule-freeze" each year happens just to suit the ETC gamers and adjustments happens based on Team-Tournament data. This is the information people get, that they came to the conclusion that the game is made by tournament players for tournament players is not a surprise

Wait, so are you somehow implying that T9A is somehow *not* a tournament game, by and for tournament players exclusively?

Because if you are, that rings awfully hollow and false.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/09 17:13:19


Post by: auticus


I guess technically anyone can play it outside of tournaments but yeah... T9A is like the zenith of tournament gaming rulesets.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/09 19:16:07


Post by: jouso


 auticus wrote:
I guess technically anyone can play it outside of tournaments but yeah... T9A is like the zenith of tournament gaming rulesets.


Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.

AoS at release was an exercise on showing a big fat middle finger to tournament gamers, yet fans were quick to make a tournament system out of it.

So whatever little boxes each one of us (including the designers) want to put game systems in means feth all.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/09 19:31:37


Post by: kodos


jouso wrote:

Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.


"easy top learn, hard to master" is main thing for casual games because you have an easy start, while "hard to learn, heavy to read and a lot of micromanagement" does not suit casual games very much (a casual gamer gives up after reading the first 40 pages of the 2.0 rules when he realise that there are a 100 more in the same style and no the quickstarter rules are a different kind of game)


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/09 19:47:13


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:
jouso wrote:

Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.


"easy top learn, hard to master" is main thing for casual games because you have an easy start, while "hard to learn, heavy to read and a lot of micromanagement" does not suit casual games very much (a casual gamer gives up after reading the first 40 pages of the 2.0 rules when he realise that there are a 100 more in the same style and no the quickstarter rules are a different kind of game)


The quick starter rules are by design a simplified version of the big book.

They haven't been brought up to 2.0 because the beta has been out for weeks, and 2.0 won't be stable until October or thereabouts anyway.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 02:09:58


Post by: JohnHwangDD


What I really don't understand is why T9A would pretend to be anything other than a "pure" tournament ruleset for ETC matched play. If it just stuck with that, it could be "perfect".


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 07:07:41


Post by: jouso


 JohnHwangDD wrote:
What I really don't understand is why T9A would pretend to be anything other than a "pure" tournament ruleset for ETC matched play. If it just stuck with that, it could be "perfect".


Why does T9A have to pretend anything? As mentioned before AoS at the beginning was the absolute total opposite of a tournament ruleset, and players made one out of it. Why? Because they wanted to. Period.

Why would anyone make a homebrew armybook or campaign rules or rules for special characters if they're never to be used on a tournament? Ask them, because they do. Some on our group didn't like the lack of the old special characters in the armybooks so they just wrote rules for them, and use them in a mighty empires campaign. On our annual Christmas 3v3v3 game (18.000 points a side) we had our Nagash, our Archaon, our Karl Franz, etc., and our plan for next year is to make it even bigger.

Of course there are pure tournament players who play exclusively 4500 points for the sole purpose of trying to find the tiniest rules loophole to exploit their OP combination, but IME they're a minority (just like pure narrative and pure campaigners, etc.) Most of us fall somewhere in the middle and dabble a bit here and a bit there.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 09:10:05


Post by: DarkBlack


jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
I guess technically anyone can play it outside of tournaments but yeah... T9A is like the zenith of tournament gaming rulesets.


Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.

What do you mean by "zenith" Auticus?
If you mean the best or top, then no; KoW is well designed and written to be suited to competitive play. If you want to test your mind and gaming skill against your opponent I don't know of a better wargame.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 09:52:35


Post by: kodos


 DarkBlack wrote:
jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
I guess technically anyone can play it outside of tournaments but yeah... T9A is like the zenith of tournament gaming rulesets.


Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.

What do you mean by "zenith" Auticus?


I guess because 60% of the T9A rules are about special cases to close all gabs of possible abuse of movement/model placement etc. written in a style that suits a lawyer
So stuff that other games have written in a FAQ or Tournament guide (not only TableTop, also Chess has tournament rules for those special things) is integrated in the Basic Rules of T9A

This is a reason why I cannot see it as a causal game, and the Quickstarter to help causal gamers is more like a different game than in indrotuction
I can also read the KoW rules instead of the quickstarter and play first games before I go to the main T9A book, it would make no difference

And than there is the problem that T9A is based on Warhammer, which is a hero focused mass-skirmish game with special rules for units in formations based on Dungeon&Dragons RPG.
So a lot of stuff is just there because it always have been there, no matter if a Tournament Battle Game needs it or not
Micromanagement because it is important were exactly a unit champion, and hero is inside a unit is one thing, having Skirmish-game rules for models inside buildings is a different one and something that should be optional


This makes KoW the streamlined and easier game, it just wanted to be a Rank&File mass battle game and nothing more (also saying it won't work on a small scale)
While T9A tries to be a mass battle tournament game, small scale casual game, single model and unit focused at the same time and this leads to the lawyer written complicated rules we have


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 10:15:08


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:
 DarkBlack wrote:
jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
I guess technically anyone can play it outside of tournaments but yeah... T9A is like the zenith of tournament gaming rulesets.


Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.

What do you mean by "zenith" Auticus?


I guess because 60% of the T9A rules are about special cases to close all gabs of possible abuse of movement/model placement etc. written in a style that suits a lawyer
So stuff that other games have written in a FAQ or Tournament guide (not only TableTop, also Chess has tournament rules for those special things) is integrated in the Basic Rules of T9A

This is a reason why I cannot see it as a causal game, and the Quickstarter to help causal gamers is more like a different game than in indrotuction
I can also read the KoW rules instead of the quickstarter and play first games before I go to the main T9A book, it would make no difference

And than there is the problem that T9A is based on Warhammer, which is a hero focused mass-skirmish game with special rules for units in formations based on Dungeon&Dragons RPG.
So a lot of stuff is just there because it always have been there, no matter if a Tournament Battle Game needs it or not
Micromanagement because it is important were exactly a unit champion, and hero is inside a unit is one thing, having Skirmish-game rules for models inside buildings is a different one and something that should be optional


This makes KoW the streamlined and easier game, it just wanted to be a Rank&File mass battle game and nothing more (also saying it won't work on a small scale)
While T9A tries to be a mass battle tournament game, small scale casual game, single model and unit focused at the same time and this leads to the lawyer written complicated rules we have


Those are your preferences. I used to play Infinity, which is more rules-heavy than T9A will ever be, yet still manages to capture a decent share of the miniature wargaming community.

KoW is simple, streamlined, etc. and my basileans are gathering dust in the shelf precisely because of that. All the armies feel same-ish and though I love the list-building of core units opening slots characters and magic for example are just too simple for my liking. It's precisely the lack of the fiddly bits that's kept me (and my gaming buddies) from going all in with KoW.

That said, there's a working group that's rewriting the rulebook in a more warhammer-ish sense. Dropping the ruleslawyer-speak for plain language. And the big book will act like the FAQ for the simple version.

I was frustrated enough by GW writing the same concept differently in different places, issuing contradictory FAQs and so on, so the FAQ-like writing was a welcome change from the often error-prone GW system. Has it swung too much on the other direction? That's often the case, but anyway there's the community to plug that particular gap.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 10:45:45


Post by: kodos


jouso wrote:

Those are your preferences. I used to play Infinity, which is more rules-heavy than T9A will ever be, yet still manages to capture a decent share of the miniature wargaming community.

KoW is simple, streamlined, etc. and my basileans are gathering dust in the shelf precisely because of that. All the armies feel same-ish and though I love the list-building of core units opening slots characters and magic for example are just too simple for my liking. It's precisely the lack of the fiddly bits that's kept me (and my gaming buddies) from going all in with KoW.


I also play Infinity, and the rules are perfect for what the game want to be, a cinematic 10 model skirmish game

Yeah but different preferences, for me the KoW armies over much more difference in playstyle than Warhammer ever did.
While there were a lot of options, in the end there was just one way each faction was doing well ending with 1-2 different lists because of different hero choices. And T9A is doing similar, if I want to play a Hit&Run army, take wood elves which do this well but cannot be played in another way (options are there but High Elves will be the better choice for a different kind of lists)

In KoW I can play different kind of lists with each faction and playing an elves army is still different to playing the same kind of undead or dwarf army

A specific faction having a specific playstyle and other options are just cosmetic as the main difference between them is something I never liked

jouso wrote:

That said, there's a working group that's rewriting the rulebook in a more warhammer-ish sense. Dropping the ruleslawyer-speak for plain language. And the big book will act like the FAQ for the simple version.


Lets see how this works out
I will have the next closer look on the game after the final version is released


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 11:03:04


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:
jouso wrote:

Those are your preferences. I used to play Infinity, which is more rules-heavy than T9A will ever be, yet still manages to capture a decent share of the miniature wargaming community.

KoW is simple, streamlined, etc. and my basileans are gathering dust in the shelf precisely because of that. All the armies feel same-ish and though I love the list-building of core units opening slots characters and magic for example are just too simple for my liking. It's precisely the lack of the fiddly bits that's kept me (and my gaming buddies) from going all in with KoW.


I also play Infinity, and the rules are perfect for what the game want to be, a cinematic 10 model skirmish game

Yeah but different preferences, for me the KoW armies over much more difference in playstyle than Warhammer ever did.
While there were a lot of options, in the end there was just one way each faction was doing well ending with 1-2 different lists because of different hero choices. And T9A is doing similar, if I want to play a Hit&Run army, take wood elves which do this well but cannot be played in another way (options are there but High Elves will be the better choice for a different kind of lists)


I disagree. UD (old TK) can do an almost full shooting/underground ambush army which does the hit and run in a totally different way as WE, and at the same time can also play MSU combat block, monster mash or big blocks + support.

Beastmen make a marginally better monster mash than UD? Probably, but that's where player skill makes a difference. I'd still bet on UD because the casket and stalkers are awesome against monsters.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 12:51:16


Post by: auticus


 DarkBlack wrote:
jouso wrote:
 auticus wrote:
I guess technically anyone can play it outside of tournaments but yeah... T9A is like the zenith of tournament gaming rulesets.


Personally I think that would be KoW. Much more streamlined, less rules-heavy, less choices and interactions, chess fething clocks, etc. Yet many people choose it for casual games, too.

What do you mean by "zenith" Auticus?
If you mean the best or top, then no; KoW is well designed and written to be suited to competitive play. If you want to test your mind and gaming skill against your opponent I don't know of a better wargame.


I meant extreme when I used the word zenith. It is the top of the extreme scale in terms of casual vs tournament rulesets. Most rulesets have a middle ground. T9A is in the sea of rulesets IMO the most extreme example of a tournament ruleset.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 13:06:05


Post by: JohnHwangDD


jouso wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
What I really don't understand is why T9A would pretend to be anything other than a "pure" tournament ruleset for ETC matched play. If it just stuck with that, it could be "perfect".


Why does T9A have to pretend anything?


Are you not pretending that T9A is somehow inclusive of non-tournament play and non-supported armies (i.e. Dogs of War)? Because if you are, that's a crock of gak.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 14:33:05


Post by: jouso


 JohnHwangDD wrote:
jouso wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
What I really don't understand is why T9A would pretend to be anything other than a "pure" tournament ruleset for ETC matched play. If it just stuck with that, it could be "perfect".


Why does T9A have to pretend anything?


Are you not pretending that T9A is somehow inclusive of non-tournament play and non-supported armies (i.e. Dogs of War)? Because if you are, that's a crock of gak.


There are non-tournament valid armies out there so yes.

Not that I have to care about what's legal or not when I play with my friends. This month's 9th scroll has a themed barbarian list, for example, where you can add krakens, wolf monstrous beasts and a T7 W7 Jötunn. Not tournament legal, of course, but who cares?

https://www.the-ninth-age.com/filebase/index.php?file/525-9th-age-scroll-issue-7-january-2018-mobile-version/

auticus wrote:T9A is in the sea of rulesets IMO the most extreme example of a tournament ruleset.


Based on? Again, I think KoW ticks more tournament boxes than T9A, and it being a Cavatore product rightfully so.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 17:10:54


Post by: auticus


Overall feeling I suppose. KoW is definitely also a tournament ruleset. However T9A's style of writing lends itself to be a dry academic legal document moreso, which contributes to the feeling of serious tournament play.

Style of writing may seem trivial but is a factor for people.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 19:59:15


Post by: Sarouan


T9A was made for ETC tournament players. That's why it's still popular in EU, because of the base frantically defending their way to play. They need a complex rule system so that they can abuse it to extreme levels and show everyone how clever they are.

No matter what their fans try to say, it was never meant for casual players - it's unnecessarily complicated and way too restrictive in the army list entries. And it is rebuttal for new players. T9A is really worse than GW as its bottom peak - full of themselves and thinking they are the best to make it because they are listening to the "elite" hardcore tournament players and obsessed sorely by the illusion of balance.

I'm still watching their evolution. I expect them to go the same way than Blackhammer - playerbase getting smaller with time, and then forgotten by the next generation. It's clear they're failing at attracting new players on a significant basis.

Watched also what happened at the last ETC for T9A. It was ugly to see all the worst features of hardcore tournament players, cheating in plain sight and the referees doing nothing against it. And that's called the elite ? If (when) it will disappear, to me, I say nothing of great value will be lost.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 20:39:22


Post by: Lord Kragan


 Sarouan wrote:
T9A was made for ETC tournament players. That's why it's still popular in EU, because of the base frantically defending their way to play. They need a complex rule system so that they can abuse it to extreme levels and show everyone how clever they are.

No matter what their fans try to say, it was never meant for casual players - it's unnecessarily complicated and way too restrictive in the army list entries. And it is rebuttal for new players. T9A is really worse than GW as its bottom peak - full of themselves and thinking they are the best to make it because they are listening to the "elite" hardcore tournament players and obsessed sorely by the illusion of balance.

I'm still watching their evolution. I expect them to go the same way than Blackhammer - playerbase getting smaller with time, and then forgotten by the next generation. It's clear they're failing at attracting new players on a significant basis.

Watched also what happened at the last ETC for T9A. It was ugly to see all the worst features of hardcore tournament players, cheating in plain sight and the referees doing nothing against it. And that's called the elite ? If (when) it will disappear, to me, I say nothing of great value will be lost.


Wasn't that the 2016 tournament only though? I do kind of vaguely remember that because the spanish team got involved and some friends spoke about it.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 21:30:23


Post by: kodos


jouso wrote:

Based on? Again, I think KoW ticks more tournament boxes than T9A, and it being a Cavatore product rightfully so.


How the text is written
lawyer language as basic rule book is not meant to be read by those who play a fantasy tabletop for the first time, but for those who want to have 100% failsafe tournament rules

KoW is a game that aims for casual games but also is written to suit competitive events

UD (old TK) can do an almost full shooting/underground ambush army which does the hit and run in a totally different way as WE, and at the same time can also play MSU combat block, monster mash or big blocks + support.

Beastmen make a marginally better monster mash than UD? Probably, but that's where player skill makes a difference. I'd still bet on UD because the casket and stalkers are awesome against monsters.

So two out of many
but this was not the point, and full shooting/ambush vs avoidance is not hit and run

but lets see next year when the development is done and we get finally a finished game how it works out


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/10 23:25:31


Post by: Sarouan


Lord Kragan wrote:


Wasn't that the 2016 tournament only though? I do kind of vaguely remember that because the spanish team got involved and some friends spoke about it.


Nope, it was 2017 as well with Poland and the infamous Furion.

Let's say it wasn't really incentive for new players to try the rules of T9A. Of course, we had players defending that kind of jerk attitude for the sake of competition. But I'll be honest, that kind of behaviour isn't specific to T9A.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 04:01:50


Post by: JohnHwangDD


To be fair, ETC did produce it's fair share of amusement for the casual crowd, like the Tau v White Scars forfeit.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 04:23:14


Post by: nels1031


The pic of that exact moment is amazing.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 06:14:02


Post by: DarkBlack


jouso wrote:

auticus wrote:T9A is in the sea of rulesets IMO the most extreme example of a tournament ruleset.


Based on? Again, I think KoW ticks more tournament boxes than T9A, and it being a Cavatore product rightfully so.

I think you've got different definitikns rather than opinions.
Correct me if I'm wrong. Auticus means that it is bad for casual play and written not to be played outside of tournaments (sounds accurate to me). Jouso means well suited to tournament play (also agree; KoW does it better).


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 06:50:13


Post by: Just Tony


It is much easier and infinitely better to play a tight ruleset built for competitive play casually than it will EVER be to try to play a game built for casual play competitively.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 08:09:07


Post by: jouso


 DarkBlack wrote:
jouso wrote:

auticus wrote:T9A is in the sea of rulesets IMO the most extreme example of a tournament ruleset.


Based on? Again, I think KoW ticks more tournament boxes than T9A, and it being a Cavatore product rightfully so.

I think you've got different definitikns rather than opinions.
Correct me if I'm wrong. Auticus means that it is bad for casual play and written not to be played outside of tournaments (sounds accurate to me). Jouso means well suited to tournament play (also agree; KoW does it better).


Exactly. Verbosity and colourful language sounds good in theory but when getting down at actually playing it's a recipe for gameplay problems. T9A might be imposing at first sight but it's pretty much self-contained. Again, with personal experience with both rulesets I still think Infinity is much more rules-heavy than T9A. No one here ever played Avalon Hill wargames? Getting to learn ASL or Third Reich now that was something, which read almost like a different language, and me and my group did that as teenagers.

But that's beside the point because most people either are introduced by someone else or just play like they think they should. I'm sure when me and my brother started with 4th edition we ignored or changed half the rules, each game was slightly different than the previous one because we only checked the book after the game and said feth, we did play that wrong.

So I contend that "technical" writing style does not necessarily mean tournament-ready. This style of writing only means that you want the rules to be as unambiguous as possible, and that all possible interactions are contained within the rulebook. ASL was not a tournament game (even though people run tournaments with the smaller scenarios, ASL works better with bigger maps where you just can't fit more than a single game per day).

T9A style is down to pure complexity and, let's call it, fiddlyness. It's the absolute opposite of a tournament game where you very much want the minimum possible interactions so that gameplay flows faster (hence my point with KoW or to make another current example: X-wing). KoW is for people who loved warhammed despite being fiddly and T9A is for people who loved warhammer because of the fiddly bits. Casual or tournament doesn't really matter.

I will put forward again the AoS example again. Totally casual ruleset with minimum fiddlyness (taking quite a few pages from KoW actually, in the fixed rolls) while KoW is a tournament ruleset with minimum fiddlyness..... and yet AoS works for tournaments, and KoW works for casual.

We should not talk about tournament games, but about tournament players. I absolutely despise the attitude some of those players some of you have mentioned, just like I despise the several guys that have been caught changing the dials on X-wing (on live video, no less), or the guy who got a top position on the KoW Spanish nationals by stalling their opponents on their turn and having them run out of time, etc. You have to live with the knowledge that whenever there's a tournament there's a chance there will be someone who will put winning above having a good time together.

My worst tournament experiences were back in 7th edition (and in my short stint as a 40k player), the prevailing attitude was WAY worse during my MtG days, so if anything things have turned for the better.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 08:12:12


Post by: DarkBlack


 Just Tony wrote:
It is much easier and infinitely better to play a tight ruleset built for competitive play casually than it will EVER be to try to play a game built for casual play competitively.

Especially if it's balanced. The casual vs competitive player conflict arises from having lists that are more powerful than other lists (i.e. if your list rather than your skill wins games). If something gets spammed (in lists that win) then your game isn't balanced properly.

If I take my best tournament list to a casual game (with a casual player) then my opponent wil still win if I don't play better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
jouso wrote:
KoW is for people who loved warhammed despite being fiddly and T9A is for people who loved warhammer because of the fiddly bits.

Well said.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 10:49:54


Post by: Slipspace


I played T9A just at the point it switched from the old WH-based magic lores to the new, self-designed ones, which was v1.1 to v1.2, I believe. IMO, T9A is a game clearly designed for tournament players, but I think it's gone a bit too far down this route. Yes, you can claim it's also for non-tournament players too, but I think if you look at the responses in this thread it's pretty clear there is, rightly or wrongly, a tendency to view it as a hardcore tournament/competitive game.

I think T9A has a problem at its core, unfortunately. My experience has been that the way the whole project is set-up and run seems to have none of the strengths of GW and most of the weaknesses too. The project doesn't have the player-base and model backing that GW could provide, nor does it have the world-building from the WH World. But it also doesn't seem to be agile and responsive enough to make changes favoured by the player base. When I first looked into T9A there was a massive flowchart that detailed the organisational structure of the project and it was so ridiculously convoluted and byzantine it was verging on satire. I can't find it on the website now so maybe it's been removed. It seems a lot of the people involved are more interested in the processes and sticking to self-imposed rules than taking advantage of their relatively small size to rapidly improve the game. It always seemed to me the process, rather than the game, was the most important thing to a lot of the people involved in creating the rules.

As an example of this, there was a situation with the UD (Tomb Kings) book in 1.2 where the chariots were given a rule that gave them +1 Strength per rank for their impact hits, but also had a rule that meant they never counted as having ranks. This is the sort of error GW was really good at making. Now, mistakes happen, which is fine, but I remember this being pointed out but instead of fixing things quickly there was a whole back-and-forth about procedures and the correct way to fix things which resulted in an obviously incorrect rule being in place far longer than it should have been.

I'm looking at the 2.0 rulebook now and I'd have to agree with the people who say it's very, very wordy and not an inviting read at all. Rulebooks are never particularly enjoyable to read but this is such hard work to get through I can see it being a major turn-off to new players. The standard of English is pretty poor too. I've already noticed about half a dozen spelling and grammatical errors and I'm only on page 12.

Speaking of those new players I mentioned above, I think that's the biggest challenge T9A faces. It's quite easy for people involved with the ETC to believe everything is going great and the game is healthy but I worry about getting new blood into the game beyond those communities that already play in the ETC. At my club there are 2 ways we get the majority of our new members: people who used to play a game who are picking it back up (we've seen a lot of this with 40k recently), or people totally new who've decided to take the plunge into wargaming. This second set of players invariably start either with 40k or X-Wing as these are by far the most high-profile games at the moment. Once they're hooked they often take up new games such as Necromunda or Bolt Action but the hardest part is often getting them hooked on gaming in the first place. I don't see how T9A truly expands in its current state because a lot of our new players aren't too keen to play a fan-made product with no real corporate backing. I know from experience the upheavals between 1.1 and 1.2 caused problems for us, and I suspect the same sort of thing will happen with 2.0. There aren't enough new players coming into it to sustain it once some of the current players start to drift away. If you want to grow a game you don't just need new players, you need whole new communities.

My overall impressions of T9A are twofold:

1. Frustration. I think it could have been a really good game but the strange fixation of process over product and seemingly random changes in direction it takes every now and then meant it became a struggle to keep up with it. I also find the various official team members to often be too defensive and closed off in the discussion forums.

2. It's just...soulless. All of the tinkering and the desire to turn it into an airtight tournament system has ripped the heart out of the game for me. It's not that the game is bad, per se, it's more that it represents something akin to a mathematical equation rather than an immersive gaming experience. That may be what the project was aiming for but it's not what I, nor the majority of the gamers I know, really want.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 11:06:30


Post by: jouso


Slipspace wrote:
As an example of this, there was a situation with the UD (Tomb Kings) book in 1.2 where the chariots were given a rule that gave them +1 Strength per rank for their impact hits, but also had a rule that meant they never counted as having ranks. This is the sort of error GW was really good at making. Now, mistakes happen, which is fine, but I remember this being pointed out but instead of fixing things quickly there was a whole back-and-forth about procedures and the correct way to fix things which resulted in an obviously incorrect rule being in place far longer than it should have been.


UD chariots had (and have) the option of being light troops (never counting as having ranks but able to reform at will) or not (having a rank bonus and being a scoring unit). So obviously you would choose light chariots for the basic 3-unit and not-light for the units you intend to have a rank bonus. It was a free option either way.

Those are precisely the kind of adjustments where T9A absolutely excels. Whenever there's a RAI vs RAW argument, the rules writers themselves answer back and fix the wording (not that this was the case).



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 12:02:53


Post by: Slipspace


jouso wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
As an example of this, there was a situation with the UD (Tomb Kings) book in 1.2 where the chariots were given a rule that gave them +1 Strength per rank for their impact hits, but also had a rule that meant they never counted as having ranks. This is the sort of error GW was really good at making. Now, mistakes happen, which is fine, but I remember this being pointed out but instead of fixing things quickly there was a whole back-and-forth about procedures and the correct way to fix things which resulted in an obviously incorrect rule being in place far longer than it should have been.


UD chariots had (and have) the option of being light troops (never counting as having ranks but able to reform at will) or not (having a rank bonus and being a scoring unit). So obviously you would choose light chariots for the basic 3-unit and not-light for the units you intend to have a rank bonus. It was a free option either way.

Those are precisely the kind of adjustments where T9A absolutely excels. Whenever there's a RAI vs RAW argument, the rules writers themselves answer back and fix the wording (not that this was the case).



Nope, I'm looking at the v1.2 book for them and they just are Light Troops, with no option not to be. The point I was making was more of a general one though about the way the process worked (or didn't). Suffice to say I disagree with your assessment that T9A "excels" at these sort of things. I think it could, but my experience was it was for too resistant to change despite the advantages it should have had.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 12:31:31


Post by: jouso


Slipspace wrote:
jouso wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
As an example of this, there was a situation with the UD (Tomb Kings) book in 1.2 where the chariots were given a rule that gave them +1 Strength per rank for their impact hits, but also had a rule that meant they never counted as having ranks. This is the sort of error GW was really good at making. Now, mistakes happen, which is fine, but I remember this being pointed out but instead of fixing things quickly there was a whole back-and-forth about procedures and the correct way to fix things which resulted in an obviously incorrect rule being in place far longer than it should have been.


UD chariots had (and have) the option of being light troops (never counting as having ranks but able to reform at will) or not (having a rank bonus and being a scoring unit). So obviously you would choose light chariots for the basic 3-unit and not-light for the units you intend to have a rank bonus. It was a free option either way.

Those are precisely the kind of adjustments where T9A absolutely excels. Whenever there's a RAI vs RAW argument, the rules writers themselves answer back and fix the wording (not that this was the case).



Nope, I'm looking at the v1.2 book for them and they just are Light Troops, with no option not to be. The point I was making was more of a general one though about the way the process worked (or didn't). Suffice to say I disagree with your assessment that T9A "excels" at these sort of things. I think it could, but my experience was it was for too resistant to change despite the advantages it should have had.


That was fixed on 1.3 and in any case everything replied by the relevant staff member on the Q&A forum is considered an official FAQ, if there is a RAW not matching RAI problem it's the only thing you need (and will be incorporated in the book later on).



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 13:18:26


Post by: kodos


jouso wrote:
if there is a RAW not matching RAI problem it's the only thing you need (and will be incorporated in the book later on).


"later on" is the right word for it

For the 2.0 Beta test I looked at the Wood Elves stuff and there are some errors/mistakes that cannot be solved for now because there is no re-design slot left and no faction will get an extra design slot no matter if there is an obvious RAW/RAI mistake or not.
So it takes time until the first Beta stage is done when everyone get 5 Hotfix Slots but for major changes you have to wait for the next re-design phase in a year.

T9A always claims that they cannot be better than a company because of people doing it in their free time, but they have build up a bureaucracy that consumes most of the free time and makes it impossible to fix mistakes.

They are true the successor of Warhammer, if a rule is wrong in the ArmyBook you have to wait for a new BRB or Armybook, which ever is first, to get it fixed (It is not that bad for now as their game Editions only lastet 1 year at best,)


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/11 14:13:45


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:
jouso wrote:
if there is a RAW not matching RAI problem it's the only thing you need (and will be incorporated in the book later on).


"later on" is the right word for it

For the 2.0 Beta test I looked at the Wood Elves stuff and there are some errors/mistakes that cannot be solved for now because there is no re-design slot left and no faction will get an extra design slot no matter if there is an obvious RAW/RAI mistake or not.


If it needs redesign a redesign slot then it's not a RAW/RAI issue, it's something deeper (that's why it's a redesign and not an errata).



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/18 21:29:40


Post by: badguyshaveallthefun


Around here no one plays it. At least on our facebook group no one's calling out for games/opponents. I've seen some INTEREST in getting "back into 9th" but no one actually trying to get games in.

And in the store unless you play 40k/Warmahordes/Malifaux/AoS then don't expect to get a pickup game of anything in.

I don't think that 9th is dead, but they've definitely suffered a setback, and one of their own making from the sound of things. The bureaucracy of 9th is what always kept me from playing it. Heaven forbid you voice a contrary opinion on the forums, if you're not outright banned you're certainly likely to have a new a**hole torn you and that kind of rampant fanboiism is just off-putting and doesn't help the hobby at all.

I also didn't like the rampant nerfs they issued to the game; everything from warmachines to WoC statlines and unit caps.

Loved what they did with the individual weapons and have worked on adopting most/all of those rules into my games of 8th edition.

Hated what they did with magic. It's one thing to not have the "obligatory lvl4 wizard" in your lists; but they've nerfed magic so hard that nowadays its more like magic itself is just straight up optional and not even needed. If you hate magic so much play/fix/"balance" warhammer historical; magic is a huge draw to myself and others and something that should be an important enough part of the game (it gets it's own phase for crying out loud).

I don't begrudge those that want to play it; I know that it helped a lot of the armies out there (I play Beastmen amongst others so I know...I know) but at what cost?

I'm waiting for 2.0 to hit the shelves; I'll look at the rules for sure, but chances are that's ALL that I'll do.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/18 22:38:07


Post by: JohnHwangDD


 badguyshaveallthefun wrote:
Hated what they did with magic. It's one thing to not have the "obligatory lvl4 wizard" in your lists; but they've nerfed magic so hard that nowadays its more like magic itself is just straight up optional and not even needed. If you hate magic so much play/fix/"balance" warhammer historical; magic is a huge draw to myself and others and something that should be an important enough part of the game (it gets it's own phase for crying out loud).


What about Monsters? Did those get a nerf?

Because to me, Warhammer Fantasy is about having a uber-Wizard *and* a Dragon on each side, precisely because those things are *not* Historical.

To me, it feels like T9A is about the worst, most fiddly bits of 5E block movement, minus the "sizzle" of 5E's monsters & magic.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/18 23:31:31


Post by: badguyshaveallthefun


What I meant by my comment in case I wasn't clear is that if T9A guys are so adamantly against magic (seeing as it's their goto argument when talking about 8th edition and how hard they nerfed magic in T9A) then maybe they adopted the wrong version of Warhammer as their base; they should have just started with Warhammer historical and left magic out.

I for one am a huge fan of the magic. And the monsters. It wouldn't be Warhammer without them. Cannons needed...something to happen to them in order to make monsters more appealing. Not sure if they did a good job or not. I was always of the opinion that a scatter die and a d3 for the intial shot-placement could have helped make cannons not so "laser guided" but never tested it out to see if it could work.

I still play 8th, I love it despite its weaknesses.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 07:20:22


Post by: kodos


For creating a new game, 8th was the worst point to start at.
But than they just promised a more balanced 8th edition to get the ETC so needed to stick with it.

And I never liked Magic in 8th and preferred the 6th/7th Edition were it was good but optional
but for 9th I don't see magic as optional now as it is needed (some factions need it more than others), but you need that lvl 4 wizard if you want to make it worth.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 08:50:26


Post by: JohnHwangDD


PURPLE SUN!!! Yass...


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 15:47:27


Post by: Slipspace


Having now looked at the 2.0 book for a little bit I think T9A has got itself in a bit of a mess by sticking to certain parts of 8th while completely overhauling others, and not always for the best.

For example, there are some problem rules that are a legacy of 8th edition: mismatching bases and buildings spring to mind. These still cause problems and complications now but instead of embracing the fact this is supposed to be a new game with new rules and simply doing away with them, it feels as though this is simply not an option and we must stick with these things because...well, because 8th had them. There's a similar problem with war machines on round bases. They're the only thing in the game that uses round bases, which seems to be a holdover from a convention that sprung up in the ETC in 8th edition. Again, this just causes problems and it would be a simple solution to state they have to be mounted on square bases but there's a strange reticence to do it.

Then there's things like the to wound chart. It doesn't exist, instead being written out longhand. The names of stats have changed to avoid IP issues but I think that's just pulling the game further away from its roots.

The forums are, IMO, not conducive to actual reasoned debate and discussion. Criticism tends to be ignored or met with a stock response of "wait unit the Beta is finished". Note that for a long time the stock response to criticism was "wait until 2.0 arrives" but now it's here they've had to come up with something else. I can see T9A becoming gradually less and less relevant if it continues down this path, which is a shame because I think the early ideas had a lot of merit and there's clearly been a lot of hard work put into the game. I think much of that effort has been misdirected.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 18:11:04


Post by: JohnHwangDD


IMO, it's really too bad that T9A didn't take a solid look at 6E and 7E for inspiration to fix the things that were obviously wrong with 8E. Like the round bases.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 18:13:15


Post by: pm713


 kodos wrote:
For creating a new game, 8th was the worst point to start at.
But than they just promised a more balanced 8th edition to get the ETC so needed to stick with it.

And I never liked Magic in 8th and preferred the 6th/7th Edition were it was good but optional
but for 9th I don't see magic as optional now as it is needed (some factions need it more than others), but you need that lvl 4 wizard if you want to make it worth.

What made 6/7 better? I only played 8th.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 18:22:24


Post by: auticus


The beginning of 6th had the best balance pretty much ever with Ravening Hordes.

The mechanics were fairly sound as well with the exception of fear/auto break being so abusive.

8th edition you had to have a level 4 wizard or not bother playing and monsters were useless along with laser guided cannons. 8th also started the trend of terrain starting to do little in games with being able to see through forests and shoot cannons through them.

Steadfast was a good idea that was taken to broken extremes with min/maxing and creating the two mega blobs meeting in the center of the table to smack bellies.

8th also removed the weight of being outflanked that previous editions had, with steadfast units able to just walk up the field and lol at anything flank charging them due to them keeping their steadfast.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 18:33:20


Post by: JohnHwangDD


In addition, 7th had fewer USRs to memorize, and 6th had fewer still. The reduction in total rules volume makes 6th (using Ravening Hordes lists) faster to play, and more likely to be played correctly. 8th was basically a return to the complexity of 5th.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/19 19:43:09


Post by: kodos


6th/7th in general was more streamlined and army books were not so much over the top
end of 7th stuff was already different in more towards 8th
some armies had weaker books of course, but there was a reason why the Warhammer was the top tournament game back than

8th kept stuff a lot of people did't liked of 7th and added back stuff no one liked in 5th

T9A now is a perfect game if you liked 8th edition
those that liked a previous one more will never be comfortable with those rules

the other problem is, that they want to make a new game but need to keep the basics of 8th for whatever reason (so armies will always have those units they had back in 8th) also meaning that new mechanics must look different but "feel" the same.


@Warmachines
Using round bases and adding a lot of complicated game situations just because someone could get half an inch of range advantage by turning a square bases is just stupid and kills of the "not only a tournament game" argument instantly


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/21 08:20:36


Post by: Just Tony


pm713 wrote:
 kodos wrote:
For creating a new game, 8th was the worst point to start at.
But than they just promised a more balanced 8th edition to get the ETC so needed to stick with it.

And I never liked Magic in 8th and preferred the 6th/7th Edition were it was good but optional
but for 9th I don't see magic as optional now as it is needed (some factions need it more than others), but you need that lvl 4 wizard if you want to make it worth.

What made 6/7 better? I only played 8th.


Quite a bit was touched on as why 6th/7th was better.

7th had some main rules that I thought did the game no favors, and the army books from the beginning were showing the book creep that Warhammer is famous for. By the time we got halfway, the books were simply out of control.

6th started out revamping the system from 5th, and coming up with a better way of organizing forces. They took percentages out entirely and focused on the slot system. Some bemoan that you can break the slot system by only taking the required min sized units at your points level, but savvy players knew that if someone decided to overload on their Specials, Rares, and Characters that almost any decent Core heavy army could still keep them at bay, if not win.

And that was the beauty of it. All through 6th, your standard bog simple foot troop unit had a chance. Blender Lords in 6th could kill about 6 models if they wound up rolling perfectly, which we know doesn't happen. Monster mounts also were not as game breaking.

The magic phase was supplementary. There were spells that could potentially have high output, but those were outliers. Typically 2Dd against one unit was the most egregious offensive spell. There were spells that had some open ended random, but for the most part that was the high end.

The only real issues I had with 6th were the ways that certain armies were able to abuse the composition/organization charts, with the modularity of Chaos. There were also some flat out imbalanced lists, but even those weren't unbeatable.

There were a few rules from 7th that my club wound up keeping for 6th: A wizard could only use dice they themselves generated, or dice from the community pool, a natural roll of two 1's passed any psychology test, and we're on the fence about needing 5 man front to have rank bonus.


But yeah, if you were looking for streamlined balanced play, 6th with RH was the way to go.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 04:31:43


Post by: Orlanth


I preferred elements of 8th, supporting ranks especially. Steadfast was too much though and needed toning down. Deeper ranks should grant you an extra dice as per cold blooded, you get a better chance to pass morale, but if the odds are stacked against you.

Win button spells are also a problem, T9A didnt fix everything, but it mostly fixed. I am happy with earlier editions of those rules.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 08:10:19


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:


T9A now is a perfect game if you liked 8th edition
those that liked a previous one more will never be comfortable with those rules



And that was the point. The people who wrote T9A for the most part were reasonably happy 8th edition players who did not like that the official Warhammer did away with ranked units.

They've dabbled on stuff from earlier editions (mostly unit entries rather than core rules) but for the most part kept the 8th edition rules tweaked to avoid some of 8th worst offenders (unit caps and progressive unit cost to avoid enormous units, toned down superspells, no laser-guided cannon, no re-rollable ld10 for everyone, etc.)

There are some examples of people who never played 8th and came back to T9A, but the bulk of the players are those who carried on through 8th, and that's why there's little interest to go back to fixed distance charges, no premeasuring and dead models in the front rank not fighting back.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 10:32:36


Post by: Davidian


I think the rules for 8th ed did a lot of damage to it's popularity. Created buy-in barriers and encouraged bigger units, bigger armies, bigger games, bigger $$$, which was ofc snowballing from 7th, though it wasn't as bad then. 3rd-6th ed were my WHFB golden days and I'll always be happy to throw dice at them if the opponents appear but....

I think I'm finally in a place now where I'm comfortable to let WHFB go...

Found my new Fantasy home (and very lucky to be a demo rep): https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/749167.page
www.facebook.com/parabellumwargames
www.para-bellum.com


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 11:26:28


Post by: Slipspace


8th was the correct version to use as a basis. Apart from the inertia of being the most recent edition, I think 8th was mostly sound from a mechanical point of view, with the broken aspects being specific issues with certain units/spells, etc.

For example, 8th got rid of a lot of the really gamey redirect shenanigans with small units of chaff and reduced the power of skirmishers while trying to improve infantry to be useful again. The magic phase was also changed to allow for more diversity in what and how many magic users you needed to take to protect yourself and achieve something in the magic phase.

The real issues with 8th, IMO, were mainly around specific things rather than the core rules. Magic was fine as a mechanic, but Dwellers, Purple Sun and the like were just too powerful, for example. Monsters were probably the only mechanical issue I had with the rules, as Thunderstomp was too powerful and allowed monsters to win combat single-handed when I would have preferred to have seen them more as support. Even then, a lot of the earlier monsters were like this and it was only later things got out of hand.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 11:42:29


Post by: Davidian


I can't entirely agree. Hordes combined with step-up, steadfast and an unrealistic method for disrupting ranks. A magic phase dependant on 2D6 meaning your 100s of points to in magic could just not be usable for a turn or alternatively wipe out half an army...

8th was the problem. As far as I'm concerned anyway.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 13:26:58


Post by: kodos


8th was the "go big or go home" edition
forcing "spam" of any kind

the main rules were not worse than the previous ones, but everything was made to be bigger

using 8th as basis was a good idea to make an ETC replacement ruleset to keep those players
it was a bad idea to use it as a base for a new game


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 15:10:17


Post by: jouso


Davidian wrote:I can't entirely agree. Hordes combined with step-up, steadfast and an unrealistic method for disrupting ranks. A magic phase dependant on 2D6 meaning your 100s of points to in magic could just not be usable for a turn or alternatively wipe out half an army...

8th was the problem. As far as I'm concerned anyway.


Which is why T9A toned down magic first, and now has made it more reliable that the old 2D6.

As far as hordes, there are hard caps and progressive pricing so MSU has been the dominant playstyle for a while now.

kodos wrote:8th was the "go big or go home" edition
forcing "spam" of any kind


I don't know when you started playing Warhammer but spamming has been here since forever. Every book had its broken/undercosted unit and it was spammed to death, and then you filled other slots with the bare minimum.




How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 15:15:13


Post by: Orlanth


I agree that T9A was for fans of 8th, or continuency players in general who migrated to 8th because GW did.

The right call was made by basing T9A 1.0 on 8th then gradually move away.

T9A 2.0 doesn't look much like Warhammer and if it were introduced at the outset would be yet another set of fan rules, by going through 1.0 and following T9A inherited the Warhammer playerbase. A smart move in my opinion.

T9A no longer supports earlier editions, but 'support' doesn't mean much anyway. For those who want a fixed game of Warhammer play 1.0 or 1.1, or go back to 6th and houserule elements of 7th and 8th by agreement.

The trouble with returning to 6th is that despite the better balance it misses many of the toys of later editions brought out after GW's massive investment in manufacturing technologies about a decade ago. You couldn't make a Mortis Engine back then, and a Mortis Engine and similar items are frankly too awesome to leave behind.
Hence while playing 6th has its advantages, I think it should include caveats, some rules pasted in by mutual agreement and later army book editions added.
However how do you agree on that?

That is why I have T9A 1.1 on pdf and printout, have bought all the 8th edition army books I ca find (though some are 7th - Skaven and Beastmen), and am buying up all the 6th edition army books I can find also, which includes the Bretonnians.
This way I can host the rulesets.
After what I have read of it, I will be unlikely to bother with 2.0





How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 16:03:24


Post by: kodos


I won't suggest to play stock 6th when upgrades are already available

there is WarhammerCE, based on 7th edition with the new units available
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?373349-Warhammer-CE-the-definitive-rule-set-for-WFB-veterans/page13
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/733156.page

there also is a Warhammer Armies project out there which includes all the fancy factions

jouso wrote:

I don't know when you started playing Warhammer but spamming has been here since forever. Every book had its broken/undercosted unit and it was spammed to death, and then you filled other slots with the bare minimum.

I play since end of 4th
and spam was there in 5th, got driven back in 6th and started rising again in 7th.
before 8th it was more of an army book issue while the core rules of 8th made it worth/possible to take "more of the same" (who ever thought that having 50% characters again was a good idea)


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/22 20:13:42


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:
I won't suggest to play stock 6th when upgrades are already available

there is WarhammerCE, based on 7th edition with the new units available
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?373349-Warhammer-CE-the-definitive-rule-set-for-WFB-veterans/page13
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/733156.page


Honestly if I'd ever had to go back to fixed charge distance I'd rather go over to KoW which at least allows pre-measuring.

IMHO that and step up were the single best changes from 7th to 8th.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/23 03:52:26


Post by: Just Tony


Orlanth wrote:The trouble with returning to 6th is that despite the better balance it misses many of the toys of later editions brought out after GW's massive investment in manufacturing technologies about a decade ago. You couldn't make a Mortis Engine back then, and a Mortis Engine and similar items are frankly too awesome to leave behind.
Hence while playing 6th has its advantages, I think it should include caveats, some rules pasted in by mutual agreement and later army book editions added.
However how do you agree on that?

That is why I have T9A 1.1 on pdf and printout, have bought all the 8th edition army books I ca find (though some are 7th - Skaven and Beastmen), and am buying up all the 6th edition army books I can find also, which includes the Bretonnians.
This way I can host the rulesets.
After what I have read of it, I will be unlikely to bother with 2.0


The great thing about 6th being a dead system is that it's easy enough to look at the rules that exist for other units that mirror or vaguely resemble those newer units, and port them over. The Classichammer community is pretty open to attaching new things to whatever edition they prefer, the problem is what your idea of "fair" or "balanced" is. Dwarfs 6.0 and Dwarfs 6.5 are good examples of that. If you look at Dwarfs 6.5 and think "Yeah, they got it pretty fair", then you will have a discord with me, since I thought they were fairly imbalanced. Now take that discord and apply it to committee rules writing. You'd about have to have a 3rd party do it for you.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/01/23 08:48:48


Post by: DarkBlack


jouso wrote:

I don't know when you started playing Warhammer but spamming has been here since forever. Every book had its broken/undercosted unit and it was spammed to death, and then you filled other slots with the bare minimum.

It seems to be an unfortunate staple of GW. KoW promotes balanced armies by making a game that's balanced and requires versatility.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/18 08:12:42


Post by: Davidian


I wonder how it's going now? I've not been bothered one bit by it and I'm now looking forward to Conquest releasing next year.

Been a while and in my area it's dead. The UK south FB group is desolate. The 2 main tournament organisers have moved on and I only know of 2 people who still make efforts to find games.

With this in the horizon (www.para-bellum.com) T9A isn't even an afterthought.

How's it near you?


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/18 10:44:44


Post by: Mr. S Baldrick


 Davidian wrote:

How's it near you?



I was just at my FLGS on Thursday, they have a massive room for open gaming. I asked if they ever get much for 8th or a variation. They said there are some KoW guys and another group for AoS but that's about it for anything fantasy. The rest is 40K, Infinity, and X-Wing. I'm sure the fact that one of the employees is a big fan of AoS doesn't help


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/18 11:14:53


Post by: kodos


The guys that are going to the ETC have their local groups running, but it is not much outside this bubble.

I am curios how this is going to change when they finally end their beta test of the core rule and put the final second edition online end of the year


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/18 14:00:28


Post by: LiveWaaaaagh


Where I'm at, the "tournament" players have picked up T9A and they're playing it. But there's a similar amount of people still playing 8th edition - myself included. KoW is dead though. Bolt Action is picking up a bit.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/18 16:18:04


Post by: DarkBlack


I've actually been wondering too. Considering restarting this thread.

Still no interest, AoS flared up and died down again, KoW had a dip but is going strong again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 kodos wrote:
The guys that are going to the ETC have their local groups running, but it is not much outside this bubble.

I am curios how this is going to change when they finally end their beta test of the core rule and put the final second edition online end of the year

I would guess similar to how the final first edition was received, but with less people paying attention.
At least a few more of my reaction which was "there's a second edition!?".


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/18 16:48:52


Post by: kodos


 DarkBlack wrote:

I would guess similar to how the final first edition was received, but with less people paying attention.
At least a few more of my reaction which was "there's a second edition!?".


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/19 03:50:26


Post by: Just Tony


Last weekend when my brother and I played a game of 6th Ed. WFB at the store, it generated excitement from the gamers there. Some had never seen that edition played, some were grognards who appreciated seeing a dead system in. Regardless, of all the games being played that day, ours was drawing the most attention.

Make of that what you will.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/19 04:07:59


Post by: JohnHwangDD


 Just Tony wrote:
Last weekend when my brother and I played a game of 6th Ed. WFB at the store, it generated excitement from the gamers there. Some had never seen that edition played, some were grognards who appreciated seeing a dead system in. Regardless, of all the games being played that day, ours was drawing the most attention.

Make of that what you will.


6E is the best Warhammer Fantasy, simple as that.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/19 07:22:09


Post by: Just Tony


I personally agree, but it still comes to preference and what you want to get out of a gaming experience.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/19 07:36:54


Post by: JohnHwangDD


It's more than just preference, when you consider how the game works in a physical sense, from a time requirement. 6E played relatively smoothly, with better balance among various factors where the armies you created made sense from a gaming perspective, and the time and effort required to create and play a game was reasonable. Plus, it had a campaign right in the rulebook!


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/19 10:23:02


Post by: Just Tony


At the same time, the low damage count set some people off as there is a subset of gamers that want the most destructothon units on the planet.


6th is a game of maneuvering and finesse. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the kind of game people want to plan nowadays.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/19 11:48:33


Post by: DarkBlack


 Just Tony wrote:
At the same time, the low damage count set some people off as there is a subset of gamers that want the most destructothon units on the planet.

Age of Sigmar does that quite well. It's all about awesome models with epic abilities in legendary battles.

6th is a game of maneuvering and finesse. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the kind of game people want to plan nowadays.

Kings of War covers that aspect quite well.

Those two games a designed to appeal to players on opposite sides of that (Timmy vs Johnny) spectrum and both serve that intention quite well IMO.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/20 00:57:36


Post by: brr-icy


I'm amazed how large our local group has grown for 6th. Around 20 playable armies and 2-6 games being played weekly.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/23 13:29:46


Post by: jouso


 kodos wrote:


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)


They better do, there are intro boxes with rules coming:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/195172949?ref=3lt1q5&token=b882392b

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies).




How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/23 14:41:37


Post by: Davidian


TMS have attempted to KS these armies individually.

I can't recall the not-Bret results but the not-TK failed to meet the required backing.

Even the starter rules are a bit unenticing. They read like they were written by an accountant.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/23 15:09:47


Post by: Just Tony


jouso wrote:
 kodos wrote:


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)


They better do, there are intro boxes with rules coming:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/195172949?ref=3lt1q5&token=b882392b

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies).




Sweet Asuryan's Teeth, those are the worst models I've seen in a long time. When MANTIC beats you out, it's time to stick a fork in it.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/23 15:43:31


Post by: Davidian


 Just Tony wrote:
jouso wrote:
 kodos wrote:


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)


They better do, there are intro boxes with rules coming:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/195172949?ref=3lt1q5&token=b882392b

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies).




Sweet Asuryan's Teeth, those are the worst models I've seen in a long time. When MANTIC beats you out, it's time to stick a fork in it.


They are quite diabolical :/ not quite what you'd want as the poster boy for a launch....



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/23 16:48:30


Post by: Mr. S Baldrick


The "Not Bretonnians" aren't bad, but there are better alternatives out there. The undead are awful, just looks like a pile of mess going on there.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/23 17:01:07


Post by: kodos


The problem is, the Quickstarter rules are just there to introduce people to Wargaming in general and not to intro people to T9A.
They use the same names for units and similar profiles, and that is were the connection ends.

They are as much different to the T9A rules as Kings of War is (and target the same group as KoW)

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies)

Yeah, fully playable with Quickstarter and useless for T9A.

And than I have to say that the awful metal/plastic hybrid models from Mantic look better than the UD ones, not talking about the price

55 pounds for those:
https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/023/165/164/9340861612b6b31f6b7da85483bad1b5_original.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&w=680&fit=max&v=1541533896&auto=format&gif-q=50&q=92&s=22ffe6afe4e7a88f4b2f5fc74bd621d8
VS
59 pounds for this:
http://www.manticgames.com/ImageCache/Products/5175.1.1000.1000.FFFFFF.0.jpeg


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/11/24 07:01:11


Post by: jouso


 Davidian wrote:
TMS have attempted to KS these armies individually.

I can't recall the not-Bret results but the not-TK failed to meet the required backing.


I was a KS backer and got my minis. It took a while but the TK KS did indeed go ahead. Same for Bret minis, there are pics of painted minis already around.

 kodos wrote:
Yeah, fully playable with Quickstarter and useless for T9A.


Quickstarter is good enough for under 1:30h quick games where you can get a grasp of the rules and if you like the whole thing move on to the big version for which you'll need quite a few more minis. The thing is you don't really have to, it's nice enough as a stand alone game, especially if you come from older editions where 1.500 point levels were the norm.



How is T9A doing? @ 2018/12/21 18:36:48


Post by: Wolflord Patrick


I'm speaking only from my own experience regarding t9A...

In my humble opinion the game started off as exactly what the remainder of the Warhammer Fantasy Community wanted, which was the same game with a few tweaks to continue using our toys and playing a game we were happy with... I actually felt like 1.1 of T9A was one of the best versions of Fantasy Battle we've ever had.

Then somewhere the focus shifted and 1.3 dropped. Suddenly the game was no longer going to be a community-based, updated version of Warhammer, but a different game entirely. The game ceased being about a community project to grow the hobby, but a never-ending balance project to make changes to differentiae itself from Warhammer and appease a small group of tournament players (mostly in Europe). I live in Ohio where in 2015 we had a solid, thriving Warhammer Fantasy community. That community first took a hit when AoS was released, and has continued to dwindle each time a 9th Age rules change nerfs an army a little bit more.

I don't even want to get started on my issues with the 9th Age forums. Some time ago, I started a thread stating my opinion that unless some changes were made to help the hobby player, that essentially the game was doomed here in the US. I offered up all types of constructive ways to help the community as I would rather see the game flourish rather than dwindle away. My thread was met with nothing short of rampant name calling and venom almost entirely from players outside the US that couldn't care less about the game outside of their own bubble. I was banned, and the name of my thread and comments were actually changed by an admin who messaged me and told me that I was being too negative. That was the last straw for me, but it taught me something. It taught me that while people used to throw rocks and have issues with Warhammer Fantasy for being beholden to a company (Games Workshop) for it's focus on appeasing share holders. What instead we have is a game without any clear focus that's currently beholden to nobody... If 9th Age misses a stated deadline, oh well nobody cares. If 9th Age nerfs a unit or army build that you may have spent hours building and painting, oh well nobody cares. If 9th Age loses an entire fan base of people who were actively working to support it, sadly nobody cares.

When people ask me now if I've left the 9th Age, I have no problem saying, "I didn't leave t9A, the game left me." I've been playing Warhammer Fantasy for almost 25 years now, so I'm not about to rage quit. Instead, I'll go back and play 8th edition or other previous editions of WFB. The funny thing is that since I've switched back to WFB, I've had absolutely no problem finding opponents who also miss the Old World.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/12/22 15:49:14


Post by: Platuan4th


Yeah, it seems as 9th Age becomes more and more "ETC: The Game", the casual players are migrating back to some form of 8th, whether that be standard, Warhammer Armies Project, or Age of Rebuilding.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/12/22 18:23:54


Post by: StygianBeach


What is Age of Rebuilding?

I tried to get into 9th but what I wanted out of the game was not a priority.


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/12/22 18:36:13


Post by: Platuan4th


Age of Rebuilding is a community driven alt/post End Times where Incarnates never happened, Archaon didn't win, and the various factions are dealing with the results of such.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/583687008756874/


How is T9A doing? @ 2018/12/22 19:18:00


Post by: Tonhel


 Platuan4th wrote:
Yeah, it seems as 9th Age becomes more and more "ETC: The Game", the casual players are migrating back to some form of 8th, whether that be standard, Warhammer Armies Project, or Age of Rebuilding.


I think 9th Age is a niche in a niche. Small group of players that are quite fanatical about it. Kudos for doing the rules. They certainly spend a lot of hours on the ruleset. I do think think 9th Age has a shrinking playerbase, but in the end that doesn't really matter solong the ones that are playing it have fun.



How is T9A doing? @ 2019/01/01 05:40:45


Post by: Orlanth


 Wolflord Patrick wrote:
I'm speaking only from my own experience regarding t9A...

In my humble opinion the game started off as exactly what the remainder of the Warhammer Fantasy Community wanted, which was the same game with a few tweaks to continue using our toys and playing a game we were happy with... I actually felt like 1.1 of T9A was one of the best versions of Fantasy Battle we've ever had.


I have made this point several times in past threads and agree wholeheartedly. I downloaded all of 1.1 printed out army books and the magic book, and even one copy of the full rulebook, and have files of 1.1 on two computer and a USB stick. So I wont ever lose it.

 Wolflord Patrick wrote:

Then somewhere the focus shifted and 1.3 dropped. Suddenly the game was no longer going to be a community-based, updated version of Warhammer, but a different game entirely.


This was understandable, and for legal reasons. It was also clever. I think the idea from the start was to recreate 8th edition WHFB as the 'incumbent' system, fix it then migrate away to a completely new game. In this they were successful as the new game gained a measure of traction it would otherwise have lacked.
the concept held promise the trouble is its design by committee, this worked well while they had a solid common goal - take 8th edition and fix it. It worked less well when the game migrated and has since homogenised into a soulless grey paste, largely due to pandering to an revolving circle of complaints at any unit that stands out in capability..

 Wolflord Patrick wrote:

When people ask me now if I've left the 9th Age, I have no problem saying, "I didn't leave t9A, the game left me." I've been playing Warhammer Fantasy for almost 25 years now, so I'm not about to rage quit. Instead, I'll go back and play 8th edition or other previous editions of WFB. The funny thing is that since I've switched back to WFB, I've had absolutely no problem finding opponents who also miss the Old World.


Go back to 1.1, and host armies. I set all my games of T9A 1.1 in the Old World and named all the units back and added special characters ported directly from 8th. I have zero interest in the specific background from T9A, i downloaded one army book just out of curiosity. It's nicely done but not for me. I want my Warhammer with decent rules. 1.1 does this, the books were well balanced with very few flaws and none were gamebreaking and fit the Wathammer factions very closely lacking only special characters.