Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

LOOOONG POST INCOMING!

Hettar wrote:
Just had one of the best games of sigmar so far using ppc at 1500pts a side, it was Skaven vs Forest Goblins

Also how was the points for undead banners worked out? my experience of undead units so far with them is there either not needed because they have not been attacked or the unit has been wiped with battle shock for it to have worked.

And bring back the undeath lore attribute lol

That's really great to hear, Hettar! Thanks for sharing!

The points for undead banners have been calculated that it will summon new models for 2-3 turns. So if it summons a D6 skeletons for 2-3 turns it will make its worth (not quite worth at 2 turns, but more than worth if used 3 turns). Does the cost feel like too high? Is it more realistic to have it been used 1-2 turns?

The undead lore attribute would be really cool to add - that way necromancers would cast other spells to empower their summoning attempt. Something to think about when we're abit further with the regular unit cost balance indeed!

 coelomate wrote:
Very minor comment: The Mark of Tzeentch costs 10 points on a Soul Grinder, but it doesn't do anything. There are no abilities in any list that confer any benefit (or target in any way) daemon units with the Tzeentch keyword.

Haven't checked carefully the other marks, although I believe at least Khorne and Nurgle do potentially have an impact.

Indeed, it's for future additions that will most certainly come And welcome to the PPC thread too!

 HawaiiMatt wrote:
Any plans on trying to get this into army builder?

I see the need to have the cost per model in large units be higher (the 21st to 30th zombie is much better than the first 10), but it makes list building a bear.

Got me thinking that we could make one for Battlescribe perhaps. Would that be appreciated and used by the community?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Some more games, some more commentary:

-Dwarf Thunderers seem overcosted, I would suggest a 1-2 ppm decrease. Or leave them the same if screening is removed.

-I feel like Stormcast Liberators need an adjustment; basic models seem just slightly overcosted (1-2 ppm decrease might be good) while the weapon upgrades seem undercosted (I would recommend 10 points to give it to a normal guy or 15 to give it to the unit leader).

-I feel similarly about Stormcast Paladins (all variants); I think knocking their ppm down by 2-3 points while increasing the starsoul mace upgrade to 10 points would be good. D3 automatic mortal wounds every single round of combat is extremely powerful.

-Mark of Slaanesh on a daemon prince is rather strong and easily worth 15 points. Certainly more than the 5 it costs now.

-Fiends of Slaanesh are overcosted. I'm still unsure how much, but I am pretty sure they are not worth 55ppm. -1 to hit in close combat is decent for keeping them alive, but their attack power is very inconsistent and not even that great overall. I would say a 10 ppm decrease would be good, but I was using them so I'm assuming a bias; I'll suggest a 5 ppm decrease instead.

-Hellstriders seem a bit off. I think their base cost is fine, but I also think they should be less ppm to add after the initial price (2 ppm less I think). For showing up they are a decent support/harass unit but they really need a lot of models for their soul hunter ability to be worthwhile. Also, the enrapturing banner should probably cost 5 points more; it's quite potent since enemies within 6" of any model in the unit take -1 to hit on shooting and melee.

-I think the Knight-Venator could use a slight points decrease (5-10) because of unreliability on his once-per-game ubershot.

-Knight-Azyros should probably get a slight increase on the grounds that he kinda does it all; a fast mover, resilient, decent melee power, a great synergy ability for ranged units, and an absolutely amazing once-per-game ability. I think an increase of about 10 would be appropriate.

Also, I am noticing a general trend that more elite an army is, the better it tends to do (to a point, obviously). Over all the games I have played, and many more which I have seen, elite armies seem to be getting more than their share of wins. I'm not sure if that is just local metal though so I'd like to hear from others on this.

Did you use the -1 for shooting into melee for the Thunderers? I don't think we'll remove Screening just yet, but lowering the cost of Thunderers could be done if it still feels like they are overcosted. Did you play any scenarios, or just kill the other?

Liberators are a tough one - they are pretty sturdy with 2W and pretty decent damage output (DO). If we pit them up against, say Empire Swordsmen, they come out pretty much the same (10 libs vs 26 swordsmen, in a vacuum). I'm not against lowering them 1 pt/model, but I think we need abit more testing first. I'll reply to Deusvult on the Chaos Warriors here as well (and a big welcome to you Deusvult!! ). The Liberator and Chaos Warrior is almost identical - the reason a Liberator cost a point (or two with mark on the warrior) is simply that is has a bigger base and therefor has a harder time bringing all their attacks to bear. But if we decide that Libs go down in points, Chaos Warriors will follow as well . I will wait with the Warriors of Chaos for awhile so we can get some more tests in before the decision, please report again if you try them out even more.

Haven't tried the Paladins since the latest increase in points, but looking at them again I agree and will lower them 2 pts / model. Will also adjust their special equipment accordingly.

Agreed on the Daemon Prince, and goos suggestion to raise to 15 pts to start with. Also raised the Nurgle one to 10 pts.

Have added the input on Hellstriders and Fiends of Slaanesh so I can review them further when I get around to updating the DoC and WoC to 0.6

The Venators special shot is hard to value, so it might be overcosted right now, but on the other hand it does have the potential to one-shot most heroes (especially less armoured ones) so I think we need some more feedback before we touch that one. The same goes for the Azyros. While very powerful in the right place, you need to move the Azyros up to the right position before unleashing it in your next turn, which might or might not happen depending on your opponents move. And his melee DO is not really very high when compared to other heroes that needs to be very close to enemy lines to maximize their effectiveness. Again, will of course change the cost if requested, but need abit more testing first.

About the elite armies, that sounds alarming, and well worth keeping an eye out on, especially why it might be that way and if its due to certain scenarios or points limits. Also, what constitutes an elite army - do you mean Chaos with lots of Warriors/Chosen/Monsters, and Ogre Kingdoms with Ironguts, or "non-elite" armies with elite units (like Empire armies using Greatswords/Knights or similar)?

Cheers for all the good input this time too!

Deusvult wrote:I realise you have yet to update warriors to 0.6 but I hope that you'll look at Chimera when you do since its very expensive at 300 pts yet it isn't 50% "better" than a giant and certainly not the equal of two dragon ogre shaggoths.

I will indeed look at it when I update! But right now I can see that the Shaggoth will probably have its cost increased. The Chimera does have slightly worse melee capabilities than a Giant (if we take the Stuff in Bag into account against 1-2W models) but on the other hand it has a longer movement (with fly!), much better charge, and can breath fire. It's going to be interesting taking a closer look at it for sure! But from a glance it is most likely going to drop in points.

Smellingsalts wrote:
I played a few games this weekend and watched a few others. I have to agree with Ninth in that Dwarf Gunners aren't that good. I fought Skaven this week and can I just say that Skaven Jezzails are better than pretty much any other artillery unit they have. Hit on 4+, wound on 3+, Re-roll to hits of 1 if they didn't move, but can move 6" if they need to. Rolls of 6's to hit are 2 mortal, otherwise Rend-2 and 2 wounds. WAAY better than a Warp Lightining Cannon or a Doomwheel. 30" range is better than most. My friend ran them in a unit of 10 and annihilated units in one volley. I told him to get 10 more and ditch both his Warp Lightning Cannons! On average a Lighting cannon will roll 3-4 so with 6 shots he may hit with 3. and do 3 damage. 4 Jezzails that don't move hit with 3 (because of re-rolling ones) and do 6, with maybe 2 being Mortal. I don't think they are classified as Warmachines (so no 25% limit), so they can be ramped up to the point that you could have 20 and really wreck somebody.

Hm, mathematically a Jezzail have a DO of about 0,8 over 30" if they are stationary, while a Lightning Cannon has an average DO of 3,33 over 24". This assumes that all rolls of 1 are failures, so even if a Cannon rolls a 1 on the first roll, you will still need 2+ to hit on the second rolls. Otherwise it would have a DO of 3,5 instead.
The Cannon costs the same as 4 Jezzails, which would equal 0,8*4=3,2 DO, so the Cannon have a very slight edge in the dmg department over the Jezzails, trading 6" of range for the 0,13 more damage. The Cannon has 2 less wounds than four Jezzails, but slightly better save. It moves 3" less.
Cannon vs 4 Jezzail
Damage: Cannon (+0,13 to 0,30). Cannon also have ever so slightly better melee DO.
Range: Jezzail (+6")
Save: Cannon (+1 better save in melee)
Move: Jezzail (+3")
Wounds: Jezzails (+2W), but will lower their damage with 0,8 for every two wounds taken!
Bravery: Same, although Jezzails are likely to flee if they take casualties while the Cannon does not flee!

With all this, I'm not yet convinced that Jezzails truly are better than Cannons points for points, purely mathematically that is But I will await more results and make adjustments if you play them more times and experience the same. I'll check the Doomwheel closer once I get down to updating the list to v0.6. But please keep reporting how it goes with the Skaven, my own group have sold our Skaven right before AoS so we have a hard time testing that list.

Hettar wrote:
What size games are people typically playing with PPC, i've done a couple of 1500's but is that a small or medium game?

We play different sizes, but has recently moved down to about 1000 pts and only play with rebased models that we are also painting up properly. Always fun to run escalation games and increase our points limits every few weeks We aim to move up to 1500 pts and stay there for some weeks before finally moving up to 2000-2500 pts!

I actually tried out both warriors of chaos and the chimera yesterday. Both versus Dwarves. The battle reconfirmed my belief that chaos warriors and the chimera are overcosted. With a mere 5+ save the chimera is really squishy.

The warriors are decent enough but they lack the large "support network" that the liberators get with all the awesome battalion warscrolls that give them deepstrike and all sorts of special rules. Footslogging chaos warriors are quite vulnerable.

The thunderers once again did not perform at the expected level for their point cost.

The Dwarf lord and dragonslayer both proved their immense worth at 80 and 85 points they are really cheap for the damage they can dish out. The dragonslayer absolutely slaughterered the Chimera and his twin dwarf lords killed chaos warriors by the bucketful.

We played the spellbreaker scenario from Ghal Maraz, Chaos was the attacker and the Dwarves (with some stormcast) defended. The dwarves won a major victory.

Hi all. So the Jezzails. You mentioned that rolls of 1 fail? But Jezzails that don't move re-roll ones, so the math on their damage output should go up. Also, here is something that math doesn't take into effect, range. The added range of Jezzails means they often don't have to move (so they get the re-roll), they will often get more shots off than a Cannon because of the longer range. And if both a Jezzail unit and a Cannon were poorly positioned (on a denied flank for instance) the Jezzails most likely will be able to re position and fire in one turn. The Cannon may take two or more. Also, you are right that killing a Jezzail takes down their efficiency, but adding more to a unit brings it up. This is something that a Cannon can't do, because Cannons are limited being Warmachines, so if you do take more Cannons, you are giving up other Warmachines, Abominations, etc. Also you can't take partial Cannons, so when list building if you find yourself with an extra 80 points you can't take a Cannon, but you can take another 2 Jezzails. If they had made Jezzails Warmachines it would have solved the problem, oh well.

As for Dwarf Gunners, we don't use screening in our league and they are still getting mopped up. I think People are thinking that missile troops are superior to melee troops because they can shoot and melee, but I have to disagree. Missile troops have been nerfed in that when they do get caught in melee they don't have effective attacks 4+ to hit/5+ to wound/no rend with gun butts, 5+ save. They just cannot stand against a melee army. And in the example I watched this weekend, the Dwarf player was playing a Nurgle player (who had clouds of flies making hard to hit, 6+!). His gunners were rolled up by Plague Drones. The Nurgle player also took allied Hellstriders that hit the gun lines on turn 1.

Stormcasts are doing just fine. My son uses them. He found a combo where the Knight that carries the Pennant uses it to teleport the Knight Azyeros into Lantern range. Chaos units in the area first get hit with d6 mortal wounds from the teleport effect and then d6 mortal wounds from the lantern. Since both abilities happen in the Hero Phase, you can decide who goes first, so teleport/lantern. That combo wiped out a Great Unclean One (had taken wounds from shooting previous turn), a Herald of Nurgle, and 2 chaos sorcerers in one round. Granted the Knight died next, but the trade was totally worth it!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deusvult, what mark of chaos do you run? If you run Khorne, then all of the new heroes buff your Warriors of Chaos. A Bloodstoker would let them run and charge an extra 3"(4" if they have a horn), A Great Lord of Khorne could let them re-roll charges. The Slaughter Priest can make Gunlines run towards you in your turn. That should help with the slow Move!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deusvult, what mark of chaos do you run? If you run Khorne, then all of the new heroes buff your Warriors of Chaos. A Bloodstoker would let them run and charge an extra 3"(4" if they have a horn), A Great Lord of Khorne could let them re-roll charges. The Slaughter Priest can make Gunlines run towards you in your turn. That should help with the slow Move!

@ Smellingsalts
However, in the DO of the Jezzails I did take the reroll of 1s into account I believe, so when moving they would actually do even less damage. But you are entirely right in the part where range and the added mobility of the Jezzails can be of great importance. The question is how great in points cost. And also completely agree about the Jezzails do not waste your warmachine slots, that should also be a factor when calculating their cost. I'll add the Jezzails to the list of stuff to take extra look at for v0.6. In the mean time, please report back if you play more Skaven.

@ Deus
I think the Warriors can be situational. I've really never been let down by mine yet, as they both dish out respectable dmg and can take plenty of it as well. Could be very dependant on scenario though, we usually play objectives-based that is the same for both sides. My group even argued they should go up in points, but that was in july before AoS had begun to mature.

So does anyone think that adding points to some of the battalions might be a cool idea? the reason I can see this being a positive addition is that at my local store, there is some debate whether to allow battalions or to not due to the lack of any costing method for these. Just food for thought

I have not dared venturing there yet, but in the best of worlds I would definately want the batallions to cost. They add bonuses and are not all equally good so should cost or not be allowed IMHO. Around here we play without batallions for the main part.

It might be hard to keep up with all batallions that GW will release if one intend to give them a cost though.

I would be in favor of attaching a points value to battalions, that way we can make any new recruits into the age of sigmar see the light of points without and negative cogitations affiliated with it.

maybe its just my play style against the undead that makes me think the undead banners are expencive, as i dont spread my attacks and i pick on a unit until i know for certain that battleshock will wipe it out before i move to another.

Certain battalions will probably need points costs, but I feel that is a lower priority now. The next category, I feel, should be hero command abilities. I'm in the camp now where I think having heroes come without them and the option to be upgraded is the best way to go.

On the thunderer discussion; I was playing with no screening and no melee hit penalty (was asked to try a scenario or an upcoming tournament in the store), and I felt they were about worth their cost in that match - leading to me thinking they are overcosted otherwise. Overall I think missile units are a it overcosted, but once the -1 to hit in melee is taken out I think they are about right with screening left in (played several games like this too). If screening gets removed as well, some of the weaker shooters now will probably be on-par, while many will need a points increase.

in the example I watched this weekend, the Dwarf player was playing a Nurgle player (who had clouds of flies making hard to hit, 6+!). His gunners were rolled up by Plague Drones. The Nurgle player also took allied Hellstriders that hit the gun lines on turn 1.

TBF you should never be shooting at plaguebearers, and without screening I doubt that the thunderers were at a lack for targets. They certainly tear up hellstriders very effectively.

On this:

The same goes for the Azyros. While very powerful in the right place, you need to move the Azyros up to the right position before unleashing it in your next turn, which might or might not happen depending on your opponents move. And his melee DO is not really very high when compared to other heroes that needs to be very close to enemy lines to maximize their effectiveness.

The Azyros would likely be costed appropriately if this didn't exist:

the Knight that carries the Pennant uses it to teleport the Knight Azyeros into Lantern range

On liberators: I think the cost of a unit as a whole is pretty good where it is, but I feel a larger portion of that cost should be in the weapon upgrade(s) rather than the basic models. Also, there kinda needs to be an increased cost for giving the weapon upgrade to the unit champion, since he gets an extra attack with it (which may not seem like much, but it is a 50% increase in the damage output of that weapon).

On elite armies doing better: I trend I have noticed is that the less models an army has at a given points value, the better it tends to do overall. That is to say ogres do extremely well, stormcast do well, elite chaos armies do well, while swarmy armies tend to do more poorly. I want to emphasize that this is something I am noticing across a large number of games and certainly isn't extremely pronounced (maybe like 60-40 percent win division). It may just be local meta/players or perception bias on my part, so I'm tossing it out there to see what input others may have.

I have played about a dozen games at 1500 or 2000 pts and I've noticed that unless properly buffed and supported by synergistic abilities chaff-type troops are hardly ever worth their point cost.

With proper magical/general/totem support they can do good work but this is scenario/battleplan dependent.

Bringing them as a sort of "ablative shield" for your heroes to prevent them being surrounded and hit from all sides is also a good idea. Dwarf lords shielded by dwarf warriors is what lost me my last game.

What do you mean by "being worth their point cost" though? If you mean that they don't kill stuff worth their point cost, then that is sort of a moot point, because that's not the purpose of chaff. The purpose is soaking for and protecting your more important units, such as the Dwarf lord in your example.

I think that if they accomplish that to a satisfactory degree for their point cost, then they are worth bringing to the table. The challenge lies in designing the costs so that a balance between chaff and hard hitting units is optimal (good game design), rather than bringing excessive amounts of one and very little of the other (bad game design).

Bit more commentary;

-Battalions will need to be addressed in some way, even if it is just to say that PPC assumes they aren't used. Some of the battalion options are downright broken in terms of what can be done with a given points value.

-Knight Azyros is going to be very tricky. On his own he is (barely) worth 100 points, but can easily be worth 200+ because of the most powerful synergies in the game. It might be a good idea to make his lantern-blast ability an upgrade rather than stock.

-Pink Horrors of Tzeentch are missing command options, and should probably cost 170-190 for a base unit, since they are a wizard regardless of size. That said, the cost for adding models should probably be reduced by a notable margin (2 or 3 ppm) because when wizard ability is put aside they simply aren't that good.

-Lord of Change should probably increase in price by a fair margin (like 20-40 points). He's simply better than what he costs right now. Kairos probably should too, though I don't have play experience with the latter.

-I want to mention again that Stormcast weapon upgrades need a points increase. Many base models are fine or even a bit overcosted imo, but their special weapons (starsoul maces in particular) are very powerful. My recommendation that stormcast ppm go down was contingent upon weapon upgrades going up; the total unit cost, in my eyes, should not be changing much at all.

-On the topic of Stormcast in general, I think the average cost of their heroes needs to go up to account for extremely high synergy value that is present after recent releases.

I for one am against splitting command abilities from Heroes and making them an upgrade. I am also against charging separate for the lantern on the Knight Azyeros. Here I am being consistent with my stance on changing the rules. Point costing a unit as a whole is one thing, but allowing for lesser variants without all the bells and whistles is another. If we are truly trying to make the PPC universal, so that it becomes the accepted set of tournament rules (like E.T.C), then we must change only what is absolutely necessary. If the Stormcasts have a high point cost because of all their cool special abilities, or if a Hero has command abilities that make him cost more, then I think that is one of the agonizing choices one will have to make when designing a tournament list. The more that the PPC becomes a set of home brew rules that alter the rules based on what one faction prefers rather than rules as written, the less people will use it. As for Battalions, the more I look at them, the more I feel like this was an attempt by GW to give a framework for army building. I think they were meant to be used Battalion vs Battalion with no other models beyond what comes in the Battalion. If you point caost the Battalion, I have a bunch of other questions. If I enter a tournament in which the points I am given exceed the cost of the Battalion, are the extra models in my army also part of the Battalion? If not, why not? If I pay for a Battalion (for it's rules), will the cost for the Battalion take into account other models in the army (if Battalion rules are applied to the whole army, not just what is in the Battalion)? If we say that Battalion rules only apply to models listed in the Battalion, have we just made up a rule that didn't exist previously, as no more models than what's in the Battalion are assumed? This could be a sticky wicket.

[edit] Reposted my response to Smellingsalts in the other thread since it was off topic here.

Smellingsalts wrote:
I for one am against splitting command abilities from Heroes and making them an upgrade. I am also against charging separate for the lantern on the Knight Azyeros. Here I am being consistent with my stance on changing the rules. Point costing a unit as a whole is one thing, but allowing for lesser variants without all the bells and whistles is another. If we are truly trying to make the PPC universal, so that it becomes the accepted set of tournament rules (like E.T.C), then we must change only what is absolutely necessary. If the Stormcasts have a high point cost because of all their cool special abilities, or if a Hero has command abilities that make him cost more, then I think that is one of the agonizing choices one will have to make when designing a tournament list. The more that the PPC becomes a set of home brew rules that alter the rules based on what one faction prefers rather than rules as written, the less people will use it. As for Battalions, the more I look at them, the more I feel like this was an attempt by GW to give a framework for army building. I think they were meant to be used Battalion vs Battalion with no other models beyond what comes in the Battalion. If you point caost the Battalion, I have a bunch of other questions. If I enter a tournament in which the points I am given exceed the cost of the Battalion, are the extra models in my army also part of the Battalion? If not, why not? If I pay for a Battalion (for it's rules), will the cost for the Battalion take into account other models in the army (if Battalion rules are applied to the whole army, not just what is in the Battalion)? If we say that Battalion rules only apply to models listed in the Battalion, have we just made up a rule that didn't exist previously, as no more models than what's in the Battalion are assumed? This could be a sticky wicket.

This is not the right thread, so I'll respond to this in the other one. This one is for discussing unit costs.

Could we get points done for Skarbrand? Thanks! Also, like 3 people told me that discussing whether or not to change point costs on Heroes for Command Abilities and point costs for Battalions was not a point cost issue and to go to the other thread. What was up with that?

Smellingsalts wrote:
Could we get points done for Skarbrand? Thanks! Also, like 3 people told me that discussing whether or not to change point costs on Heroes for Command Abilities and point costs for Battalions was not a point cost issue and to go to the other thread. What was up with that?

Yup, eating dinner now - and then its Skarbrand time
EDIT: Skarbrand = 850 pts

I'd say the command topic was probably moved to the Comp thread because it deals with be or not be of a rule in the pack, rather than actual point costs for balancing issues. A captain that costs 80pts with a cmd ability now would cost the same even after the split, as long as you buy the cmd ability.

Smellingsalts wrote:
Also, like 3 people told me that discussing whether or not to change point costs on Heroes for Command Abilities and point costs for Battalions was not a point cost issue and to go to the other thread. What was up with that?

It's easy to get sidetracked (did it myself and had to repost...) but this thread is supposed to be for discussing individual costs while the other is for the general comp. Regarding command abilities, if implemented then this would be the thread to discuss the exact value of, say, the command ability of an Orc Warboss while the other would be for discussing whether or not that split should be included in the PPC as a whole.

By the way, I'm still wondering about the costs of Silver Helms and Dragon Princes. The way I see it, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to use Silver Helms for 27 pts, when Dragon Princes cost a mere 3 pts extra. I don't know if Silver Helms should be cheaper, or if Dragon Princes should be more expensive, but I definately think that the two units need to be differentiated more.

Yeah i missed that for 0.5, but its on the list for 0.6, and High Elves is the next list to be updated
So Solaris, now is the time to voice everything HighElfish your group want us to consider for next update The things previously discussed in this thread (such as Dragon Princes) will be looked into as well, of course.

Alright =) I don't currently have a whole lot to say, have been too busy with work the last couple of weeks to be able to play. Will get some games in this weekend though, so after that I might have some feedback for you.

Is it intentional to allow units to buy multiple unit leaders? example any storm-vermin may be upgraded to fang leaders and so on

Hettar wrote:
Is it intentional to allow units to buy multiple unit leaders? example any storm-vermin may be upgraded to fang leaders and so on

It is an intentionally diffuse wording on my part, simply because it seems like Aos RAW you can buy multiples of each. So I basically left it up to each group to decide this for their own. My own group would never allow more than one, though. How would you like it to be, Hettar?

I really think that it should be only one per unit as it says "The leader of this unit is the Fangleader." it doesn't say some models in this unit are fangleaders

The leader of this unit is an Ironbeard.
The leader of this unit is the Old Guard
The leader of this unit is a Gouge-horn.
The leader of this unit is a Cavalier

i think definitely 1 per unit as even the war-scroll's describes it like so.

Yeah it seems like one champion per unit, but multiples of music/banners.

Ah, yeah that does change it abit. I think a change of wording on leaders is in order. Will do that for v0.7 when we're taking closer look at unit cmds. Good catch!

So then hands up who made army's of veteran's? come on naming and shaming moment in the making lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I really think undead banners are far too expensive, i know the logic behind why you've made them the price that they are however along with the summoning spell changes it feels like the undead are being punished for being the undead, all banner's should be dropped by around half there points to make sure undead players are not discouraged from using the PPC system. The more people play the against undead the more this will become apparent as undead players just wont pay for the banner's and hence lose the flavor of there army's or they will pay for the expensive banners and then feel robbed every time a unit gets wiped out in battle shock before they used it. And i've just compared to the price and ability's of the other races banners/icon's some of which are really powerful at a 5th of the cost, this does not mean that i think that there banners/icons should be made more expensive.

Undead banners will be decreased in v0.6, as will summoning costs. After that we'll have about a month or so before their v0.7 update, during which we can fully evaluate the new banner costs and increase/decrease it along with the rest of the command options. I'll make the undead lists next on the update schedule to be made after the High Elves list is done!

Cheers!

That's an awesome response! sounds great! My next problem involves Dwarven engineers and ork bullys, the engineer has a penalty stating that he can only influence one war machine per turn but the ork bully has no such restriction is this intentional or some thing that has been overlooked?

In the future as well it would be nice if all units were catagorised back into core, special's and rares for defining a force organisation chart for army's.

The Orc bully is just not v0.6 yet

The Rares etc is something I would personally prefer too, but is not AoS RAW at all so probably will not be a PPC rule for that reason.