[Warhammer Dark Omen Forum]

Warhammer Dark Omen Forum | Warhammer Dark Omen | Multiplayer | Rules and Standards
5000/15

[Flak]

Its true that some units dont have an increase for 2nd unit, but mages, artillery and powerful archer units have an increase after 1st unit.

The reason goblins and other weaker units dont have an increase or even decrease is because they are never used, its and attempt to invite their use.

Mages are already in extensive use and so a decrease in pts is not necessary in my mind.

Mages are hard to balance because they can save an army, or be the weak spot that crumbles the army, personally i think they should be minimum 3 pts and 4 for vampires and then increase by 1 per mage. They are just as much a calculated risk as 2 goblin fanatics that will either wreck havoc in the enemy ranks or turn and kill your own units.
The mage pts are already low, seriously 1 pts for 1st goblin mage and if he gets "Letz Go" which is a magical potion of strength he can make the day for his army.

[bembelimen]

OK, we finally finished it (I hope): latest 5k/15. Good work everyone.

[WarpGhost]

I have to agree, 1 point for a Night Goblin Shaman is too low, all mages should be at least 2 points. The Goblin shaman is actually tougher than a necromancer (T4 to T3) and the magic lores are all decent. Plus because its just 1 guy rather than a block it can be a bit tricky to catch mages if you dont have (or they trash) your cav (which tend to be rare and directed at better enemies) and archers

[alavet]

i had a long discussion with bemb yesterday regarding cost of the second mage.

he said that the main purpose of the rules is to make each second/third unit be more costly than previous one, to force people play diffirient regiments. another goal is a balance for the game simply balancing of pts on them.

as for units which have similar pts for 1st and second units (for example night goblins archers, canon, knights etc) bemb argue that 1st unit in such cases usually weaker than points he deserves. for example, goblins he made as 0,5/0,75/0,75 so cause of first unit "should" cost lower acc to rules there is not need to increase pts for such regiments by second aspect of the rule (when every secodn units costs at least 1 pts higher than 1st)

but as for mages i dont think they really have stats 2/2/3 (which is seems to be acc. to rules, when you increase pts for every regiment it will be 2/3/4

i actually think that all mages (maybe except vampire cause he is good in meele) have stats 2/1(1,5)/1 cause they split manapool and you cant efficiently use both mages. i.e. if you have two goblins you may use both of them simultaneously but you very rarely be able to use both mages simultaneously, cause of low manapool. i think ts obv that mage without mana doesnt realy worth even 0,5 pts.

second mage possibly have not so little value (1) as it should be, cause he might be as "backup" if the second mage die and also provdes bigger chance for the spell you want. thats why i think its possible that he might have 1,5 value, but not certanly.

so if you agree with mages stats as 2/1(1,5)/1 then it doesnt contradicts  with rules if we make them 2/2/2.

if you think mages have diffrient stats please eleborate why with examples.

p.s. and why Vampire  Level 1  3  4  4

p.p.s. and i think 3 for canon is too much. from other way, 2 is maybe too litle but noone uses canons (when you able to buy mortair for 1 pts more) so i think 2/3/3(4) is good stats.

[Ghabry]

Note that this is only my opinion about it and not of the other members of the community:

Imo there are only some special cases where you need more then 1 mage:

The following example is only suitable for Empire:
Let's say a somebody has an army with some mortars because he wants to camp during the whole battle. He selects The Empire map so he can shoot nearly over the whole map. But because he needs some support against rushing cavalry units he also buys 3 bright wizards and one Jet-Item to increase the chance of getting the Skull-Spell. Now he looks which wizard has the skull and exchanges the Staff of Jet to him. If an enemy is attacking he will cast some skulls on him (and if magic resistent: Use some cheap blocker unit ^^). After defeating all cavalry (and the enemy mage with the help of his other 2 bright wizards+teleport) he waits until the enemy is bored and is attacking with all the slow units which are now defeated by the mortars.
And to avoid such tactics we should keep the wizard costs high.

--> In general you buy more mages if you want to increase the chance for good spell which should be combined with some risk = more points

[olly]

My own Personal opinion is to keep 3 and 5k

Battles small and with only 1 mage on the battlefield.


I feel that, since we designed 3 and 5k Rules,to allow new fans

to control fewer units and not to feel overwhelmed by a large Battle.


Keeping the Large Battles for 9k, I would like to see 3 and 5k kept different

and think facing 2 mages, means that potentially i should spend more on anti magic.


Eventually, if we lower Mages 2nd and 3rd points, it will encourage their use, something that I don't want.


However, Great Debate and we i think 5k is pretty much finalised now.

Good Work!

[Flak]

I agree Olly i also feel that 5k is now pretty finalized, atleast until after next tournament, which is the biggest test for the current 5k ruleset

[WarpGhost]

My only problem is Goblin Shaman costing less points than other mages when its the equal of all other mages; the costing of additional mages in 3-5k seems irrelevant to me either way. People who've played more MP seem to think 2 points is a fair price, so I'll go with that but I dont need to play lots to know allowing 1 cheaper is a very bad idea, especially in the context of O&G relative low unit costs.

[bembelimen]

On the one hand, a bright wizard can teleport or has fire skull, an ice mage has +1 spell and an orc shaman is good in cc, the goblin shaman........he's a goblin........on the other hand, with the right spell, he's very nasty. So perhaps, we should set him to 2/2/3 and the orc shaman to 2/3/3. Let's wait for other opinions.

[WarpGhost]

Just floating the idea, but what do people think about Potion of Strength costing no points? Or no points if certain criteria are met). Its the only one-shot item other than the Heart of Woe, but unlike that, once its used its gone completely.

[alavet]

seems kinda reasonable. from other hand i never used it and dont have experience to say whether its good or not.

what excactly gives this potion?
also im looking for the situation when u be want to have a casual shield artifact. since its only gives only extra armor or one single armor if regiment dont have such.
and for the last case, you may use any other shield, which provides not only 1 single armor if regiment dotn have any, but also antimagic or ptoloss.

so this shield seems pretty useless, except its price.

another useless item is a firehelm. chances that the enemy will have bright wizard are about ~20% (1/3 that he will choose empire and 20(not 16)% cause ppl tend to use bright wizard more than ice).
also there is a high possibility that choosen regiment wouldnt be able to use it properly anwyay, cause not fact that mage will attack excactly this regiment; as for protecting mummies - banner will be much better cause its universal.
also very litle % of ppl use fireswords, so its also not an argument.

so if you gonna make potion=0 then i also suggest make firehelm=0 and shield =0
maybe we may make a rule that items which cost 0 actually costs 0.5 so if you gonna have two "0" items you have to pay 1 but still able to buy 1 item "for free"

[Ghabry]

what excactly gives this potion?

The potion increases the Strength of the unit imo. THe Letz go goblin spell does the same (one of the best spells in Goblin Campaign... cast it on Ragnar/Dreadaxe!

also im looking for the situation when u be want to have a casual shield artifact. since its only gives only extra armor or one single armor if regiment dont have such.
and for the last case, you may use any other shield, which provides not only 1 single armor if regiment dotn have any, but also antimagic or ptoloss.

Yes, this Shield ist quite useless. But Imo nearly no unit which has 0 Shieldslots can wear a shield?

another useless item is a firehelm.

THe Firehelm protects against Bright Magic, Fire-Casting swords AND Screaming Skull Catapult! BUt it'S still useless, yes (you can block SSC with Ptolos)

so if you gonna make potion=0 then i also suggest make firehelm=0 and shield =0
maybe we may make a rule that items which cost 0 actually costs 0.5 so if you gonna have two "0" items you have to pay 1 but still able to buy 1 item "for free"

I would agree with a one of this item for free rule (except the money ). To the other users: Your opinion?

[alavet]

flagellants may take it. i hvnt remebered all completely but there might be another regiment with zero armor as well

[WarpGhost]

The only units that cant take the magic shields are mages or units with no item slots; all other no-armour units can!

[bembelimen]

Please make a list of all items with points (or grouped items who are "buy 1 get one free")