Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bhelliom

  1. Thanks for the posts! 

    As far as I'm concerned, Crossbows are probably THE defining faction strength in Daqan. Their dial is great, they get the perfect upgrades, and the 3x1 is extremely efficient. Kari, despite her flaws, is also a very powerful ranged threat. I would be extremely careful about giving Daqan any more ranged effects, or they could tip into that horrible gunline zone. Personally, I was always more interested in the aggressive elements of the list:

    • Scouts - I didn't get all that much play in with Scouts, but my experience was they're more cool than good. The 2x2 and 3x2 have some very cool options for champion upgrades, and their dial is ostensibly good, I just found they got clowned on by Wraiths.
    • Oathsworn - good at charging straight ahead and fighting a fair fight. Something that changes the way Impact works could be neat, or maybe an upgrade that gives them panic if they're not engaged and inspiration if they are. Really emphasize that impetuousness.
    • Spearmen - sort of count as aggressive. Their dial is incredibly strong and flexible, especially with the infantry command upgrades, but they don't really DO all that much. I always felt like they should have something more specific to their spears - free attack when being charged, immune to Impact, perhaps +1 threat if they have two full ranks.
    • Hawthorne - could use a unique or artifact to make him more fun to use. The thorns build is neat, but doesn't have the teeth to not be ignored. His dial is incredible and feels amazing to use, but then he gets in combat and... not much.
    • Rune Golems - generally not aggressive, but certainly dangerous looking. I've written at some length here. They're pretty all over the place, but a lot of fun with the theme of golems.

    I'd definitely like to see a Daqan artifact that rewards front-line hero play. Something like spend an inspiration token during a melee attack to give all friendlies at range 1-3 Lethal for the rest of the round? Some sort of challenge blade perhaps, that lets you peek at your target's dial and if they don't have a melee attack dialed in you get bonus damage? It doesn't need to be as powerful as Dimodian Blades, but something in a similar "generally useful offensive item" vein would be cool.

  2. 5 hours ago, Vergilius said:

    The real question for any miniatures game is how much it takes to feel competitive.  For runewars, I generally wanted to be field every tray size and have the option of running 2x2s of certain units.  So even at two starters, that’s still a pretty investment.  Five Darnati boxes felt a bit rough, for example.

    i don’t have enough sense of how para bellum works as a game to know how many expansions I’ll end up needing if I buy in.  

    With heavily discounted starter boxes, anything not in them is going to feel bad. At $36 per expansion, it's in line with Runewars (3 trays instead of 2 per box) so if you want to field a big unit of new unit, it's going to cost.

  3. 20 hours ago, Drakoniss said:

    Not sure where you are looking at those prices. They are all wrong. Starter sell most places for $68.

    Here is a link to actual prices. You only need 1-2 expansions so you looking about 65 models for 100$. Less $1.50 per model. 


    The loss-leading starter and expensive expansion plan kinda rubs me the wrong way. Feels hard to justify getting a couple boxes of Steel Legion or Marksmen Clones when that's the same price as a whole starter.

    Decent chance I pick up a box though, $68 is pretty nuts.

  4. On 2/2/2019 at 10:57 AM, Datskor said:

    The problem with crossbows is that they got quite restrictive upgrades and a relatively high cost making them "only strong in the 3x1 formation with rank discipline + x". The other archers has some more flexibility in how you build them with innate abilities. High damage is really all the crossbows got (and mostly in that formation) but even then 2x1 of Deepwoods with tempered steel is better in damage to cost ratio. 

    3x1 is certainly the most problematic, which is why I've focused my attention there. In addition to high damage it gets protected, niche mortal strike power, and amazing positional flexibility with marching cornicen. I think the 2x1 could probably use a boost of some sort, but that's a problem for much later.

    As for Ankaur's champion uprade version, the change would probably be fine and low-impact, but it doesn't register as important right now. I think lots of heroes in units could use tweaking, so we'll do a pass later on once the high priority items are sorted out a bit.

  5. 1 hour ago, sarumanthewhite said:

    Here’s how the changes would have affected our game:

    1) The points difference would have been a net increase of 2 points effectively removing my 2 point bid.  Any further points increase in the Crossbowmen would have forced me to remove an upgrade somewhere else.

    2) My bid allowed me to choose the scenario, ignoring one that would have been disastrous for me.

    3) We called the game after 7 turns.  During that time, we had 2 turns with 2 green runes.  One of those turns was early in the game when the Golems weren’t engaged.  The one turn I was engaged, I rolled two hits with 4 threat, didn’t need the re-roll

    I almost suspect you've fabricated this story to make me feel good about myself, because it is exactly what I was going for. Two points of bid is pretty cool but not game breaking, four points is kind of a big deal when you need to really think about whether you'd be better off with a tempered steel, etc. Golems I often find a similar thing, they amble around for positioning, blocking and threatening lanes, then get to attack once or twice. It feels really bad when they whiff one of those attacks, so boosting the lower end of their damage is just what I want.

    Thanks for the lovely feedback!

  6. 46 minutes ago, Glucose98 said:

    I’m excited to test some of these changes.  I noticed a lot of people complained about Kari.  Did you feel she was balanced enough?  I feel like she’s ok from my point of view but my opponents usually complain :)

    I do think she's too strong (or at least too polar), but not a high enough priority to worry about at this stage. Ultimately I'd like to make her more mobile to reflect her being a scout on foot (free reform after march or shift seems good) in exchange for power from her less interactive knife throwing (reduce range to 1-3 for a start). Shooting at I2 is such a uniquely powerful ability.

    3 minutes ago, Xelto said:

    Only 25% of people responded that she was overpowered. One problem with the survey, as shown, is that the bar graphs had different scales on them. Kari's 11 out of 50 responses showed as large a bar as it did because Daqan's 'overpowered' list had a scale of 20, as opposed to 30 or 40 for most of the other graphs.

    I'm less certain that Vorun'thul should have shown up on the list. With 20 votes out of 50 for 'overpowered', how did that end up being 48.8%? It should be 40%. And even if there's some wonky stuff going on, Reanimates had 21 votes for 'underperforming', which shows as 45.7%.

    Not everyone responded to every question. It says how many did below each question - 44 responded to Daqan overperforming, 45 to underperforming, etc. Oddly, no single question has 50 responses.

  7. Hello community! Pursuant to my balance survey, I've put together a package of suggested changes to improve the health of the game. Some are small, sensible, and crowd-sourced, others are larger and more controversial, reinforcing my perceptions of design intent and unit theme. This thread is meant to be a place to share playtest experience more than suggestions for ways to change units, but I'm not a cop, follow your heart. 

    am concerned that I'm trying for too many changes all at once, but I feel pretty strongly about them all. Outside of Latari, any given list is likely to encounter one or two of them, plus the blanket change to terrain, so I feel it should be manageable. 

    Realistically, we need an impossible amount of feedback to get a real sense of certification for any changes, but I'll take whatever you feel like giving me! As a rough guideline, here's a format to help figure things out:

    Army List #1:

    Army List #2:

    Deployment and Scenario used:

    Something that really stood out by performing well:

    Something that really stood out by performing poorly:

    General impressions:

  8. 1 hour ago, DivisibleByZero said:

    How are new people going to join a game that they most likely aren't going to be reprinting?

    It certainly does slow things, and in many cases the attrition rate is insurmountable, but there are a whole swath of boutique minis games out there, some whose parent companies are long dead, which continue to see regular play in many areas. Epic 40k, for example, for which official models have not been available for years, has an oddly thriving worldwide playerbase. Obviously that's partially due to its strong IP, but the fact remains that minis games exist in a weird intersection of game and hobby, so when people invest time and love into an army it can gain legs beyond its actual support.

    I'm not trying to argue that the end of official support won't hurt the playerbase, but existing metas will be able to weather it to some extent.

  9. Great stuff.

    Errata: Entering terrain when already in contact

    RRG 55.3 already provides a way to resolve a collision for cases like this, so technically this should be more of an FAQ item than an errata, but it being pointed out is definitely good.

    FAQ: Assigning accuracy to a one-rank unit

    I'd prefer to be able to target models without accuracy in these cases, simply because it works more like you'd expect. If it 1) is in the back rank and 2) wouldn't split the unit then you're good to go is the simple explanation, though I guess 2) is in a tray that, if removed, would split the unit isn't THAT much worse.

  10. 41 minutes ago, sarumanthewhite said:

    That’s a great showing.  One of my friends said he was going to complain that Rune Golems were overpowered because I wiped out his Elves the past couple of showings.  Besides using Zacareth, I rolled double hits with my Fire Runes and 4 unstables a couple of times.  Wiped out two ranks of Leonx Riders in two shots.

    LOL, but this reinforces why we need to get a lot of responses- gotta even out the rage moments... 😂

    Let's just say that although your friend's perspective isn't quite unique, it's pretty close.

  11. 14 minutes ago, Church14 said:

    Hm. I’ve been running Ardus again to fulfil the Madlands requests. He is not as abysmal as the community sees him. I bring two 2x1 archers with rank and tempered. That saves me 20 points in trying to get archers of that quality normally. 

    I then put Dimodian Blades on him. His net cost to my army is 22 points. For actually running him, the most success I have is to keep him as a blocker and either defend or wait for late round charge opportunities.

    22 points and 4 trays of archers, you mean. Getting access to the upgrades is nice, and being able to fit in smaller terrain can sometimes be a big deal, but the fact remains that you're spending points on Ardus instead of on boots. That 2x1 unit is 4 damage from dropping to threat 1 and virtual irrelevance, which most ranged units can manage quite handily, whereas the 2x2 can weather anything but a spike from a 3 threat unit with Tempered. This is more true of melee units than ranged since they'll be up fighting, but certainly the feeling locally has been that the points are better spent on trays than on Ardus (outside of niche builds like double deathcaller).

  12. 45 minutes ago, Jukey said:

    Not to degenerate into a suggestions thread, but if the thresher got a nerf, I would say simply change the wording to make it spend a panic token to reroll.  This eliminates accurate damage rolls with high morale tests following.  Also stays away from point or hp changes then.

    That's quite clever!

    In my mind, daqan, waiqar, and latari are pretty close in overall strength, with uthuk leading by a decent chunk. Waiqar has rough internal balance issues, but the rest are mostly alright. I'm working on a playtest package, might be too ambitious, but it's mostly fairly gentle. 

  13. Coiled Stance reminds me: how many points would you pay for Visored Helms? It's kinda perfect for Golems. 5? 4?

    Training would be nice, it just doesn't fit thematically very well. Similarly, Scout would really help Golems do what they want to do, but makes no sense.

  14. 38 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

    1) I want choices in the game, and activated abilities has to be chosen instead of something else.

    2) I want to use the dials, as they are a game component that I like, and the skill action is on the dial.

    3) I want cool effects. A constant ability has to be curbed harder than an ability that has an alternative-cost. I.e. you could add  more power to a Skill action!

    4) His skill action is at an unusually low initiative, that in it self is interesting to me and has the potential to do something interesting.

    5) I don't like loose ends, why does his dial has a skill action that can't be used?

    With all the above stated reasons, why would you want to have a static ability? :)

    Yeah, fair enough. Thing is his dial is already pretty bad and awkward to use, so forcing him to spend his action to activate an ability feels bad. Have you played with Hawthorne much? He's got a cool and useful ability, but it doesn't feel all that good to use because it grounds him so hard. Now Hawthorne has an amazing dial and is quite good at catching up on turn two, but Ardus needs absolutely every action available to him. Plus, I think there's a reasonable contingent of people that want their cool armored skeleton commander to get stuck in and do some chopping, so forcing such a hard choice doesn't appeal to me. 

    Needing to stay at range 3 of Ardus is indeed a choice that has to be planned around. Rather than choosing whether to dial in the powerful thing, you have to choose your maneuvers in such a way that he's close enough to both the units you want to buff and the units that buff him. It's possible that range 3 isn't correct for making that an interesting gameplay mechanic, but it's a start.

    You're not wrong about the under-utilized skill action, but it's also largely an artifact of core set game design. You can see that on more modern heroes, powerful skill actions come on the modifier dial, so it certainly seems like they abandoned the idea of dials like Ardus and Kari. And it still CAN be used for scenario objectives and such (though low initiative is explicitly bad for seize the artifacts at least).

    So, I want it to be a static ability because I want to be moving him into a better position or fighting with him literally every turn (or really, I want my opponent to do so) and because I want to add an explicit, deliberate boost to his power level.

  15. Hm, when the golem charges it makes fine sense, but I feel less good about the theme of the golem being charged and handing out a stun. Plus, it feels weirdly doubled up with the skill action and copy/pasted from Scions... 

    As for gameplay, it certainly wouldn't hurt, though if a golem is getting charged it almost assuredly needs to armor up next turn. Nice on the charge, but those are tough to set up.

    Overall, I think I prefer a pure damage buff in the vein of reroll 1 die if there are at least two natural runes. Loops that third rune in like it seems it should. 

  16. For those familiar with Warhammer Fantasy, I always expected waiqar to get something like danse macabre. For reference, it is a spell that lets a unit March straight ahead, and counts as a charge if it impacts. This was the foil to the shambling undead's slow speed. You could argue that it's a better fit for ankaur, but it's also a command that is unique to the game and suits ardus fairly well. Say, a unit gets a speed two march which counts as a charge but doesn't give panic for failing to contact. Initiative two is a very awkward time for that though, so it may not be worth much...

  17. 15 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

    @Bhelliom so... what do you think about the tweak i posted above? :)

    I don't immediately love it. I think it's fairly rare that I get more than one unit at range 2 of a golem, so I think this is closer to a nerf than a buff. That said, it's an interesting direction to take them, with more utility. 

    Something I'm also trying to keep in mind is the theme of the unit. Golems look like they're slow, tough, and devastating in melee, so those are the areas I'm currently concentrating.

  18. 22 minutes ago, Church14 said:

    Honestly, having Aggressive obly work on the first march still allows a lot of the shorter range nonsense, but cripples anything past range 5 for Warsprinter+Aggressive. 


    Aggressive Shrieker and anything else is largely unaffected. It’s why I think that if you must nerf that combo then this is the best nerf suggestion I’ve heard so far. I only want to make sure it is first march only and no first movement only so Berserkers still have an I7 aggresive response available. 

    I definitely agree on the I7, that introduces a bunch of cool gameplay.

    Warsprinter introduces a bunch of very good action economy, and it's very difficult to add sensible restrictions without also stripping the stuff that makes it good. I wonder if it just needs to cost 7-8 points, make it a real risk to take. Then again one of the things I'm complaining about is how swingy it is in tournament play, so that doesn't really help that issue!

    It's awkward, but how about this: "When you reveal your dial, you may perform a speed-[unstable] march. If you do, cancel your modifier dial." It eliminates the reform+charge, but is probably too limiting when combined with the proposed Aggressive change, and also opens the possibility of charge+attack, which might be even worse than the current combo! Also charge+disengage. Yeah, let's not do this.

  • Create New...