58 minutes ago, Viktus106 said:

 6 assorted 3D plastic, unpainted objective tokens. These are the same size and shape as the objective tokens but are more like totem poles, Daqan flags/spears, etc. Just something to spice the field up a little.

Oh man this just gave me the idea of crafting some thematic objective tokens.... Up In Flames has been coming up a lot lately. Need to figure out how to make some awesome looking fire objective tokens that won't impede gameplay...

2 hours ago, QuickWhit said:

Oh man this just gave me the idea of crafting some thematic objective tokens.... Up In Flames has been coming up a lot lately. Need to figure out how to make some awesome looking fire objective tokens that won't impede gameplay...

I was just looking up terrain for purchase, and came across these fire tokens . But every time I look up terrain for purchase, I tell myself, "Eh, it's probably a better use of money to make it. For example, I looked up some gravestones by the same company, and then I realized that I could make some very passable gravestones out of floral foam that I purchased for rocky outcrops. Why pay money when I can use what I have?

Of course, now the question is: can I make convincing flames out of floral foam? Eh...perhaps, but they'll be so fragile that they won't stay convincing for long ? .

Just now, Parakitor said:

I was just looking up terrain for purchase, and came across these fire tokens . But every time I look up terrain for purchase, I tell myself, "Eh, it's probably a better use of money to make it. For example, I looked up some gravestones by the same company, and then I realized that I could make some very passable gravestones out of floral foam that I purchased for rocky outcrops. Why pay money when I can use what I have?

Of course, now the question is: can I make convincing flames out of floral foam? Eh...perhaps, but they'll be so fragile that they won't stay convincing for long ? .

Yeah those are pretty cool. I do generally prefer to make my own stuff as well though... I'm probably gonna take a shot at this in the next week.

I know I should be grateful that we've got so many releases recently, but I'm still itching to know FFG's long term plan for this game. I was hoping something would be mentioned at World's, but maybe a Christmas announcement?

As a side note, do you think new factions have a better or worse chance at this point? It seems like a good opportunity to spark some new interest in the game, but it's also an uphill battle to get any new factions on parity (and potentially less of a market if existing players aren't interested in adding). Do most people collect multiple factions?

14 hours ago, Hepitude said:

I know I should be grateful that we've got so many releases recently, but I'm still itching to know FFG's long term plan for this game. I was hoping something would be mentioned at World's, but maybe a Christmas announcement?

As a side note, do you think new factions have a better or worse chance at this point? It seems like a good opportunity to spark some new interest in the game, but it's also an uphill battle to get any new factions on parity (and potentially less of a market if existing players aren't interested in adding). Do most people collect multiple factions?

New factions is a bit risky. It could spark new purchases and players but it can also hurt if no one is willing to jump to a new faction. The way to avoid that situation however is to make the new faction quite strong . . like . . obviously strong, which will help sales but then cause issues in the game.

Personally, I have Uthuk, some Latari and Waiqar but I only play with Uthuk. The others are more for D&D.

That being said, if an Orc faction was released, I would be all over that regardless of their power level.

Some of the recent releases hint for me that what we've been calling specials are more of a series of releases along the standard infantry/cavalry/seige categories and that we will likely see another of each for the current factions. Beyond that, I don't know.

Looking at Descent for inspiration, there are two more Waiqar heroes (Necromancer who was seen standing in for Maro in a promotional poster and a Chaotic Evil Elf) that have molds already and could easily be converted over.

Uthuk:
Blood Harvestors
Chaos Lord
Blood Sisters as an actual unit
Doombringers
Flesh Ripper Brute (Command Unit?)
Grotesques as a unit.

Daqan:
Citidiel Lancers
Ironbound
Yeoman Archers
Riverwatch Riders
Roc Warriors

Waiqar:
Bone Horrors
Barron Wyrm
Banshees
Barghests

Latari:
Pegesus Riders

Neutral Units:
Razorwings
Giants
Beastmen
Hellhound
Dragons

There is also the idea of army themes. Runebound seemed to like to mention sudden famous legions or groups such as Warband of Scorn, Bleeding Covern, Hernfer Guadians, etc. Perhaps they could explore that ?

I mean, 40k did it and it worked, kinda. . .

On 11/21/2018 at 9:21 AM, Viktus106 said:

New     factions is a bit risky. It could spark new purchases and players but it can also hurt if no one is willing to jump to a new  faction        .  

There is another approach - let's take orcs.

Release an orc warrior group and a orc dinosaur cavalry group - with rules to enable these to be added to existing factions.

For example:

Daqan "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" - orc units must deploy within 1-3 of a Daqan hero.

Latari "Allies of Convenience" - orc units must deploy at least 5 away from Latari; and vice versa.

Uthuk "Sacrificial offering" - after deployment, lose 1 orc per two trays.

Waiqar "An unhealthy shade of green" - orc unit starts with an immobilize token and a stun token.

Do this for a couple of different new races - creating mini-factions that every existing player might buy and use. Then over time, expand each mini-faction until it has enough to be a fully fledged faction.

Theres many options for mini-factions: orcs, goblins, dwarves, catfolk, deep elves, dragon-kin, gnomes, or other factions of humans.

This also reduces the risk for each faction - if the initial units don't sell then it never becomes a full faction.

I don’t think they’d have a hard time getting people to buy orcs or dwarves as long as they put something out for other factions as well

5 hours ago, tall thin climber said:

There is another approach - let's take orcs.

Release an orc warrior group and a orc dinosaur cavalry group - with rules to enable these to be added to existing factions.

For example:

Daqan "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" - orc units must deploy within 1-3 of a Daqan hero.

Latari "Allies of Convenience" - orc units must deploy at least 5 away from Latari; and vice versa.

Uthuk "Sacrificial offering" - after deployment, lose 1 orc per two trays.

Waiqar "An unhealthy shade of green" - orc unit starts with an immobilize token and a stun token.

I think you're going too far. I've suggested that you could have some orc units be usable in other factions, so I'm not opposed on that point, but if they're available in any faction you risk the factions becoming too homogenized.

According to the Terrinoth lore that I've picked up, some orc tribes have friendly (for a certain orcish definition of 'friendly') relations with humans. So I could see one of the orcish units available for the Daqan forces, but probably costing a hair more, having a smaller maximum size (IE, it would have two unit cards: one for orcs and one for humans, with different configurations, costs, and possibly unit upgrades), and being a unique unit (maximum one per army).

But limit it to one unit type for Daqan, and maybe (only maybe) one unit type for Uthuk. I don't see the orcs and Latari working together, and as for Waiqar, well, they can get whatever they want already, if they bring the right hero.

Since being in other armies is a unit-specific trait, and with the limitations listed, you don't have to worry much about faction integrity. And it still fits the lore of the land. And I wouldn't worry about orcs not selling, after all:

5 hours ago, Church14 said:

I don’t think they’d have a hard time getting people to buy orcs or dwarves as long as they put something out for other factions as well

You could catch new factions up to existing ones by putting out two new units for the new factions for every unit the existing factions get. So long as new units came out on a reasonable schedule, you wouldn't get many complaints. (Though instead of one unit per faction every 4-6 months, I would like to see one new unit every 3-4 weeks, cycling through the factions: dwarf, orc, undead, human, dwarf, orc, elf, nutcase; repeat the cycle until parity has been met.)

Let's say they did add an Orc faction:

Heroes:
Skorn (Cav)
Anka (Support)
Mordrog (Melee)

Infantry:
Outriders (archers - armor 1, wounds 2 - Scout - Cannot be built larger than a 2 x 2)
Ravagers (melee - armor 1, wounds 2 - Brutal 1 - Cannot be built larger than a 2 x 2)

Command Models:
SpiritSeeker (Champion)
Beastmaster (Champion - Unlocks Seige upgrade)
Totem Bearer (Herald)
Wardrummer (Music)

Cav:
Gurak Tol (Little bit like the Ventala in that they can perform a ranged attack with their tale catapults)

Siege:
Beast Master - Each Beast Master allows up to two trays of beasts to be purchased. Build: 2 x 1, 3 x 1, 3 x 2)
Rules would be something along the lines that, if all Beast Master models in the unit are killed, the beasts gain Keyword: Frenzy
Gains lethal per wound token they have.

Frenzy:
Do not set a dial for this unit. Instead, at I5, check line of sight. If a unit is within line of sight, the unit must perform a Charge 3 towards it. If no unit is within line of sight, the unit must perform a Reform and face the closest unit.

(You get the idea)

2 wound infantry would make of a small army. Which equals less sales.

Like the frenzy idea, but the easier solution is to tie it to the dial. Cannot perform green manuevers or something like that. You could color it where every movement modifer must be a charge, so you are either going into combat, or taking a panic token.

I pictured dwarf infantry as either armor 2 or protected.

Orcs do need something, but i dont think 2 wounds is it. Maybe hard to kill: do not remove empty trays until the end of the end phase.

Protected stable would actually give orc infantry the tough edge they should have, but keep them in a normal power range.

They would be great against msu, chip damage builds, but still suffer from high damage units.

2 hours ago, Jukey said:

Protected stable would actually give orc infantry the tough edge they should have, but keep them in a normal power range.

They would be great against msu, chip damage builds, but still suffer from high damage units.

It would... but I see orcs and more aggressive and dwarves are more defensive.

6 hours ago, Darth Matthew said:

2 wound infantry would make of a small army. Which equals less sales.

Hmm. Good point.

But if you point them appropriately, perhaps a Orc Warband army would look like:

Hero

2 x 2 Ravager
2 x 2 Ravager
2 x 2 Outriders

2 x 3 Gurok Tol

2 x 2 Beast Master

Same effect really.

Essentially, I would like to see Orcs being the high wound faction and the Dwarves being the low wound but high armor faction. I also would like to see them bring a different style to list building so they are not just flat out better than Daqan and Waiwar.

Got to remember that the more factions that get released, the more glaring that "Wave 0" becomes.

So Viktus106, you're suggesting an orc army, pointed appropriately, would have 21 trays and average 8 wounds per infantry tray to be the "high wound army"? That's outrageously beefy and total power creep over even the resilience of Spined Thresher- or Flesh Ripper-based armies...

My worlds list was 70HP of just Threshers with a total of 116HP. It was considered a pretty bonkers amount t of HP.

2nd place was 103HP

3rd place was 96HP

4th place was 72HP

My recent Uthuk lists have been 77HP, 86HP. The last Daqan list I faced was 80HP. I think Jukey’s are more in the 50-60 range for Latari.

I’m curious what the top 8 lists would be for overall HP, but you should definitely not be exceeding 80ish HP for a typical army. Of all the lists I mentioned, only Thresher heavy ones really broke the 90HP mark

43 minutes ago, Church14 said:

My worlds list was 70HP of just Threshers with a total of 116HP. It was considered a pretty bonkers amount t of HP.

2nd place was 103HP

3rd place was 96HP

4th place was 72HP

My recent Uthuk lists have been 77HP, 86HP. The last Daqan list I faced was 80HP. I think Jukey’s are more in the 50-60 range for Latari.

I’m curious what the top 8 lists would be for overall HP, but you should definitely not be exceeding 80ish HP for a typical army. Of all the lists I mentioned, only Thresher heavy ones really broke the 90HP mark

I'd be more curious looking at the sum of units wounds*armor.

That 70 hp of threshers takes 140 damage to kill. Yeah, yeah, mortal wounds bypass; but nobody is doing that many mortals. Would be really interesting to look at army durability.

I think orcs might be able to work as 2 wound infantry, if they cost about 50% more; 24 to 28 points for a 2 tray, 40 to 45 points for 4 trays; and 60 points for a 6 tray (no options for bigger).

The problem with this is they become a smaller force, more durable, and as a result, will seem more elite. To me, that describes Dwarves.

9 minutes ago, Darth Matthew said:

I'd be more curious looking at the sum of units wounds*armor.

That 70 hp of threshers takes 140 damage to kill. Yeah, yeah, mortal wounds bypass; but nobody is doing that many mortals. Would be really interesting to look at army durability.

I think orcs might be able to work as 2 wound infantry, if they cost about 50% more; 24 to 28 points for a 2 tray, 40 to 45 points for 4 trays; and 60 points for a 6 tray (no options for bigger).

The problem with this is they become a smaller force, more durable, and as a result, will seem more elite. To me, that describes Dwarves.

Those numbers are already adjusted for defense, so "HP" is shorthand for "wounds multiplied by defense". As you point out, it's far from a perfect measure, but it's interesting to start with.

I agree, Darth Matthew, though I might argue the cost should be higher than a 50% premium to double the wounds. Not sure. But Dwarves as MSU elite infantry hits me right, and leaves room for Orcs to come as high model count units in interesting configurations, maybe with protected 1. What if they were infantry that came brutal 1 but deployed at 2x1, 2x2, 2x3, 3x3 at a premium cost?

It would have the 2x1 Thresher effect, offering a lot of threat that can crowd multiple, smaller units into a melee fight.

Hm. Just looking at the 2 tray melee:

16 - Reanimates; 4HP/tray, RR

16 - Berserkers; 4HP/tray, RB, hit mod

18 - Leonx; 4HP/tray, RBB

18 - Spearmen; 4HP/tray, RB, early attack

19 - Darnati; 4HP/tray, BB+, hit mod

20 - Oathsworne; 4HP/tray, RRB, armor mod

22 - Rippers; 6HP/tray, RBB,

24 - Death Knights; 6HP/tray, RRB, MS mod

28 - Threshers; 10HP/tray, RR, Brutal, hit mod

Not a complete list, but looks like a heavy tax on HP

An 8HP/tray infantry (2/1 or 1/2) with RR and a hit mod looks to be worth about 22 for a 2 tray. Could possibly work?

Since Church won GenCon, I've been looking closely at Wounds/Damage in the winning lists. I think some of that list being able to perform well is the 116 HP.

If the standard list is 70-90 hit points, then much of that can be gleaned from looking at the points you pay for the health. For example, right around 40 points, you find 24HP. This can vary from the 38 points for the 2x2 Fresh Rippers or the 40 points for a 2x3 Leonx, or the 35-43 points for the 3x2 infantry formations. This works for infantry and cavalry. I think the Flesh Rippers are the most telling here, because you get a 2x2 for the price of a 3x2, and the 3x2 Flesh Rippers has the HP of a star, and costs right in the vicinity thereof. One can set the armor/wounds however one likes, but however it is set, 24 wounds is going to be in the vicinity of 40 points.

Siege works by its own metrics. So 42 points of Scions is 30 HP on average, and I started there because it is reasonably close to 40 points. You get 36 HP for 46 points on Lancers, and then Threshers take the cake with 40 HP for 48 points. I'm not going to side-detour into how this affects list building, but I think there's something to looking at the overall health your armor has in addition to how much damage it can do from turn to turn, both engaged and charged/ranged.

There's nothing that says a faction couldn't have a base 2 health or 2 armor generic infantry, but you're also going to end up with 30 point 2x1s and 50+ 2x2s, and a 70+ 3x2. Some of that depends upon what other limitations appear on the dial or card, or what other abilities the units have.

40 minutes ago, Vergilius said:

Since   Church won GenCon, I've been looking closely at Wounds/Damage in the winning lists. I think some of that list being a  ble to perform well is the 116 HP. Just looking through the units, it almost doesn't matter what you take, you're going to pay points that are  g  oing to put you between 70-90 i  n health  .  

This is part of why I suggested dropping Threshers to 2/4 instead of 2/5. It drops worlds top 4 from 116, 103, 96, and 72 HP to 102, 87, 84, and 72. Not entirely into a normal HP range, but more in line with a typical list. Mine is still exceptional for HP even with that.

There really wasn’t any reason for me to build in extra dials to deal with tokens, so I could get away with that,

Much of that stems from the fact that seige all the way across the board is more point efficient than infantry or cav, and secondarily, as points spent on a unit increase, the health becomes more efficient.

In your list’s case, a third effect is that the Zerkers are cheaper infantry and the thresher heavy adds another six health to it. That’s 42 health there.

From what I can see, it is really the health that makes the most difference. I can build lists of many different types that compete for damage, but that 30-40 points of extra health are what tilts the final result so decisively and so regularly.

Some of the problem is that seige for all factions is probably better than what players have tended to give it credit for, and taking some of their own can help bridge that gap. But some of it might be an underlying structural issue. I’m just not sure yet and need to explore more.

Im putting a Latari list with 87.5 of health on the table tonight. And that’s not counting what Hedge Shroud might do to help.

8 hours ago, Vergilius said:

Much of that stems from the fact that seige all the way across the board is more point efficient than infantry or cav, and secondarily, as points spent on a unit increase, the health becomes more efficient.

In your list’s case, a third effect is that the Zerkers are cheaper infantry and the thresher heavy adds another six health to it. That’s 42 health there.

From what I can see, it is really the health that makes the most difference. I can build lists of many different types that compete for damage, but that 30-40 points of extra health are what tilts the final result so decisively and so regularly.

Some of the problem is that seige for all factions is probably better than what players have tended to give it credit for, and taking some of their own can help bridge that gap. But some of it might be an underlying structural issue. I’m just not sure yet and need to explore more.

Im putting a Latari list with 87.5 of health on the table tonight. And that’s not counting what Hedge Shroud might do to help.

Infantry get a boat load more options for upgrades. Cav is much faster than siege. If you just look at health and hitting power, you're ignoring the strengths of cav and infantry.