Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Dec 11, 2021 12:08:11 GMT
I haven't read too deeply into the ruleset, but I watched Squarehammer's review of the changes and decided it was too different. I've always been of the opinion that 8th only really needed a few tweaks to be just about perfect, and WAP 9th is like 9th Age 2.0 (I think) where they started departing too far from the formula. I think the difference is that 9th Age has a good niche. Its really targeted at the tourney crowd that want to play a competitive game. The main problem with 9th is it doesn't feel like warhammer faction wise like you say.
If WAP has a theme is "do you want a 6th/8th hybrid edition but with every unit entry that ever existed or could have existed? Here you go! I hope you like don't mind the unbalanced trainwreck my made up stuff has created." So you get that same result where armies don't feel like they should any more but worse still are easily exploitable just like standard 8th.
I think the few tweaks thing is what a lot of people are searching for. Like I would love a community edition of the game that is widely accepted, but to many of these mods/fan books go to far and just make things worse. Unless we are talking chaos dwarfs every faction in the game has a ton of unit options to mix and just randomly adding units is problematic. Gaps that exist can be there to add faction theme.
Another problem people run into when trying to fix these games is not understanding their local meta does not equal knowledge of overall game. Nor do things that "feel bad" (getting 1 shot by a cannon) mean that something is wildly out of balance.
If 2022 comes around and there is still no TOW, I might finally finish of my cut of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Dec 11, 2021 13:54:04 GMT
I haven't read too deeply into the ruleset, but I watched Squarehammer's review of the changes and decided it was too different. I've always been of the opinion that 8th only really needed a few tweaks to be just about perfect, and WAP 9th is like 9th Age 2.0 (I think) where they started departing too far from the formula. I think the difference is that 9th Age has a good niche. Its really targeted at the tourney crowd that want to play a competitive game. The main problem with 9th is it doesn't feel like warhammer faction wise like you say.
If WAP has a theme is "do you want a 6th/8th hybrid edition but with every unit entry that ever existed or could have existed? Here you go! I hope you like don't mind the unbalanced trainwreck my made up stuff has created." So you get that same result where armies don't feel like they should any more but worse still are easily exploitable just like standard 8th.
I think the few tweaks thing is what a lot of people are searching for. Like I would love a community edition of the game that is widely accepted, but to many of these mods/fan books go to far and just make things worse. Unless we are talking chaos dwarfs every faction in the game has a ton of unit options to mix and just randomly adding units is problematic. Gaps that exist can be there to add faction theme.
Another problem people run into when trying to fix these games is not understanding their local meta does not equal knowledge of overall game. Nor do things that "feel bad" (getting 1 shot by a cannon) mean that something is wildly out of balance.
If 2022 comes around and there is still no TOW, I might finally finish of my cut of it.
^THIS! SOOOOO many people forget this point! Just because someone has a lot of models DOES NOT make them experts on what should/shouldn't be included or "balanced". Myself included! Neither does throwing out videos on YouTube, though, most players are just so excited to watch actual game content, they'll go along with whatever, feeding the notion that it must be correct and popular. Reality is, 9th age was created out of anger. "You take my game away so I'll just make my own! You can't stop me!" mentality. WAP was created several years later out of a sense of loss, nostalgia, and the need for something new. Both of these appeal to the tournament players because it creates a new mountain for them to conquer. It also appeals to YouTube content creators because they are showing a new curiosity. Neither is "wrong" for pursuing that path, but it doesn't mean that it's balanced, well thought out or what everyone wants to play. Everyone has their preferences. Some "Old Guard" are VERY vocal about 6th Ed being "The BEST". They'll declare that there were more people playing 6th than any other time, which they feel gives them an argument. Like stated above, it's relative to their demographic and their sense of nostalgia. I'm that way about 8th. That's when I saw more games being played in my community (4 gaming stores in my immediate location - none more than a 20 minute drive) and all of them full of gamers on a DAILY basis. I had to call ahead and reserve tables or I could wind up just watching all day. (We're talking an average of 8 tables as well.) All that to say, just because someone has experienced one thing, does not make that encounter definitive proof of "how something is". It's easy to say, "A Canon one-shot killed my Demon Prince, so they must be broken, and that's why I lost!" Now, when other players experience something similar, or think about it too much, they start agreeing with those sentiments and it breeds a fervor for a vocal COMMUNITY. Doesn't make it correct. |
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Dec 11, 2021 15:17:02 GMT
The last few posts are spot on. WAP has some good rule changes, when taken individually. But overall they took it way too far, especially the way the army books were handled. Too many choices and everything seems to have a unique special rule. Each one more complicated than the last.
|
|
simon
Full Member
Posts: 138
|
Post by simon on Dec 11, 2021 15:45:24 GMT
Wow, that IS a huge nerf to ASL! 😤 I don't like it. Personally, I've never minded the horde rule. I think people make a much bigger deal out of it than it is. Don't like it? Just hit that massive target with a couple of artillery templates. Boom. No more horde. And highly offensive things like Witch Elves, Savage Orcs, etc. have virtually no defense, so a few templates can practically wipe out that huge, scary EXPENSIVE unit! Don't have artillery? Chaff 'em up! Besides, I enjoy getting SOME sort of "reward" for painting and purchasing 30-50 minis! Nice to see them be so effective! Sorry about the horde rule rant, but I feel like it's an excuse people use to hate on 8th and that's all it is - an excuse. Now, things like cavalry getting some charging bonus, wizards getting to channel their level, etc. are fine, but very minor tweeks at best. Simple houserule. Sucks for tournament players, but that's about it. And these days, there aren't just a ton of 8th ed tournaments being hosted. Those that are, can set the rules for themselves anyway, because it'll be a local thing and have no connection to a larger network. My two cents. Well said yes I like how there is an in-game reward for painting up 30-50 minis. While I love the look of a dragon or a big lance of knights etc, I think a big block of infantry all ranked up is one of the most stunning things you can put down on the table and it does require a bit more dedication to paint it. |
|
|
|
Post by bierbaron on Dec 11, 2021 20:14:05 GMT
For example, KevinC wrote a "fix" for Tomb Kings a while back, which mostly focused on some of the army weaknesses. I printed it off and stuck it in my book. It's part of my army now. Simple. If my opponent doesn't like the rules, I don't use them. Simple. Do you have a link or a writeup of this "fix" for Tomb Kings for me? One of my playing mates plans to start a TK army, and I am getting the feeling that it may be helpful to possibly bring TK up a notch, since the general consensus seems to be that they are not a top tier powerhouse army. Thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Dec 13, 2021 14:37:23 GMT
For example, KevinC wrote a "fix" for Tomb Kings a while back, which mostly focused on some of the army weaknesses. I printed it off and stuck it in my book. It's part of my army now. Simple. If my opponent doesn't like the rules, I don't use them. Simple. Do you have a link or a writeup of this "fix" for Tomb Kings for me? One of my playing mates plans to start a TK army, and I am getting the feeling that it may be helpful to possibly bring TK up a notch, since the general consensus seems to be that they are not a top tier powerhouse army. Thank you! The errata can be found here: Tomb Kings Errata |
|
|
|
Post by bierbaron on Dec 13, 2021 21:29:18 GMT
Thank you, kind Sir!
|
|
|
|
Post by oldmandan on Feb 8, 2022 18:44:48 GMT
I think WAP had a good potential, but instead of making sensible small changes and play testing those it was sledge hammer needs. I still feel that a number of the changes were not thought through, respect to the dedication and effort is well deserved, but too many needs Skaven army are my case and point.
|
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Feb 8, 2022 23:42:59 GMT
We'll, I played a few games of it because I didn't want to grumble about it without even trying it.
My impression: 50/50.
It has some great qualities to it, and some I just didn't care for. Magic felt drastically different. It seemed geared to make sure spells got off (unbalanced).
The Ultimate Power rule in particular. "For every natural 6 rolled when casting, you automatically have to roll an additional 'free' power dice to boost the casting value even further." If that "free" dice is a 6, it continues. I saw this happen at least once each turn. Unless you stack up on magical defense, there's not much way to prevent major magic from happening.
There were good things, like cav charging, weapon and troop options, etc., but I don't know if those were enough for me wanting to re-learn an entire game.
|
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Feb 9, 2022 1:02:29 GMT
I think 50/50 is a good sum up of my thoughts. There are some really really good changes but then there also seem to be a load of unnecessary changes to items that didn’t necessarily need fixing. Your example of the magic and the additional 6’s was one, though giving a free additional power dice when casting bound spells was a good change.
Unlike t9a, wap wasn’t made with tournaments in mind so I don’t think it was ever necessarily mooted as balanced (has any edition ever really been balanced). I think it’s more of a version to play basement hammer, reliving some of the nostalgia through using units/character from older editions (something I actually quite like). I’m not sure I’ll play much of its 9th Ed version, though I do quite like some of the tweaks made for his 8th Ed Bret book (allowing questing knights to strike at initiative on the charge), though for Brets, we’ve pretty much house ruled that they all get devastating charge, which really helps, just as Beastmen get free marks of chaos.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldmandan on Feb 10, 2022 13:08:39 GMT
Brets with Devastating charge, I can go with that it would make sense since they have the whole purebred war horse that it would be better at charging than and normal horse.
Maybe we should all band together to make our own WAP project, I could do the Skaven though to be fair that wouldn't really take much effort.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Feb 10, 2022 16:58:06 GMT
Brets with Devastating charge, I can go with that it would make sense since they have the whole purebred war horse that it would be better at charging than and normal horse. Maybe we should all band together to make our own WAP project, I could do the Skaven though to be fair that wouldn't really take much effort. I'm working on books for Bretonnia (part-way through - Devastating Charge is included but only for units in the Lance), Beastmen (probably around 75% done) and Skaven (not very far on this one), plus errata for Tomb Kings and Greenskins and army lists for new factions (link to my fan-made rules page is in my signature). I'd be interested to hear if anyone has ideas for other armies. Additionally, a project overseen by this forum to improve 8th rather than create a separate game as first 9th Age and now Eliasson have done can fill a gap in the market, especially as endorsement by this forum would carry greater weight than one person's authorship alone. Count me as on board. |
|
|
|
Post by oldmandan on Feb 10, 2022 17:43:56 GMT
Yes I feel that is the best approach, 8th only really needed a few tweaks to improve the overall function and the reintroduction of some previous rules like the outnumber bonus for combat resolution. Skaven only need minor tweaks to magic, magic items and the available equipment options, possibly recosting some of the characters.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Feb 10, 2022 17:55:25 GMT
Yes I feel that is the best approach, 8th only really needed a few tweaks to improve the overall function and the reintroduction of some previous rules like the outnumber bonus for combat resolution. Skaven only need minor tweaks to magic, magic items and the available equipment options, possibly recosting some of the characters. And proper non-End Times rules for the new Thanquol and Boneripper and inclusion of Wolf Rats and Brood Horrors in the regular game (as they're small enough not to be OP). Also reconfiguring the Rat Ogre Bonebreaker to be more like the new Boneripper would make sense, as the new Boneripper is a Bonebreaker. I also personally want to see Plague Monks as a Core Unit and Giant Rats count toward your Core allowance to allow you to make Clan Pestilens and Moulder armies, or just generally have a more diverse Core. Wolf Rats would be Special and Brood Horrors not ridden by Warlords would be Rare. |
|
|
|
Post by oldmandan on Feb 10, 2022 18:00:59 GMT
Brets with Devastating charge, I can go with that it would make sense since they have the whole purebred war horse that it would be better at charging than and normal horse. Maybe we should all band together to make our own WAP project, I could do the Skaven though to be fair that wouldn't really take much effort. I'm working on books for Bretonnia (part-way through - Devastating Charge is included but only for units in the Lance), Beastmen (probably around 75% done) and Skaven (not very far on this one), plus errata for Tomb Kings and Greenskins and army lists for new factions (link to my fan-made rules page is in my signature). I'd be interested to hear if anyone has ideas for other armies. Additionally, a project overseen by this forum to improve 8th rather than create a separate game as first 9th Age and now Eliasson have done can fill a gap in the market, especially as endorsement by this forum would carry greater weight than one person's authorship alone. Count me as on board. Yes because they've trained to fight and therefore charge a certain way, so there should be benefits as well as disadvantages and players need to choose their style of deployment. I would have maybe gone for impact hits instead of Devastating charge. Also are you considering knights on foot, I know a few people I played with way back when Brets first appeared didn't like that 6th had done away with them. |
|
