IMPORTANT INPUT NEEDED going forward ... your counsel please

[marshalney2000]

Are large foot armies a winner, or only those that have some kind of gimmick/tweak? I haven't noticed too many large foot armies at the top of the table. How much of the playtesting was using large barbarian foot armies or was it mainly to see how the balance between knights and horse archers?

Dark age foot armies already seem a tough slog, I can't see this helping them

My understanding is that it is specific types although I'm sure the UK players can enlighten us further. My understanding is it tends to be close order with weapons like longspear (often backed up by cheapish cavalry). Not actual barbarian types with dev charger and/or loose order.

Martin

Hunter's army which did well at Skulls had four units of average protected foot with shieldwall and no other attributes. They are a bugger to kill when four ranks deep and caused significant attritional losses on their opponents. Ask Will about how his Samurai fared!!

[Simon Meg-Meister]

My Huns came very close-up beating Hunters Army though. with nothing so useful as any Elephants.

I do agree overall though on a slight balance issue which is why there is a little points boost for shooters and the prompting is being made a bit more difficult.
Note that 2-wide 4 deep will suffer quite a bit from the prompting change as they are slowed easily.

John/Hunter
John could you do a game with a cavalry shooty army vs. Hunters Arabs
Hunter can you do the same vs. John's supposed monster
.... and report back on the change in feel.

I tested it quite a bit don't fear the large armies once this and out-scouting are in.
Happy to provide the two of you the 2020 draft QRS sheets and army builder now so you can beat each other up.
Just email me.

Si

[Simon Meg-Meister]

BTW I am over in the Uk Wed-Sat with the team doing some final testing and a few other things .... news of which soon ...

Si

[mad lemmey]

Perhaps instinctive should be 2bw, pro 4, that could justify regular troops, better training etc?

[marshalney2000]

My Huns came very close-up beating Hunters Army though. with nothing so useful as any Elephants.

I do agree overall though on a slight balance issue which is why there is a little points boost for shooters and the prompting is being made a bit more difficult.
Note that 2-wide 4 deep will suffer quite a bit from the prompting change as they are slowed easily.

John/Hunter
John could you do a game with a cavalry shooty army vs. Hunters Arabs
Hunter can you do the same vs. John's supposed monster
.... and report back on the change in feel.

I tested it quite a bit don't fear the large armies once this and out-scouting are in.
Happy to provide the two of you the 2020 draft QRS sheets and army builder now so you can beat each other up.
Just email me.

Si

Simon, happy to do that and test both options. We could do old Rules and then repeat with new amendments if you can send us 2020 draft QRS sheets.
Do not know how much difference i5 made in your game with Hunter at Skulls but seem to recall that one of his allies went unreliable at the beginning.

[marshalney2000]

Perhaps instinctive should be 2bw, pro 4, that could justify regular troops, better training etc?

Not sure that would help. You need to recall that if you charge as a group then one card prompts that group through fire even if some of the units  are outside the 2 bw range. Unless of course this is changing in 2020.

[nikgaukroger]

Perhaps instinctive should be 2bw, pro 4, that could justify regular troops, better training etc?

Not sure that would help. You need to recall that if you charge as a group then one card prompts that group through fire even if some of the units  are outside the 2 bw range. Unless of course this is changing in 2020.

Only thing that is changing is the colour requirement.

[Simon Meg-Meister]

My Huns came very close-up beating Hunters Army though. with nothing so useful as any Elephants.

I do agree overall though on a slight balance issue which is why there is a little points boost for shooters and the prompting is being made a bit more difficult.
Note that 2-wide 4 deep will suffer quite a bit from the prompting change as they are slowed easily.

John/Hunter
John could you do a game with a cavalry shooty army vs. Hunters Arabs
Hunter can you do the same vs. John's supposed monster
.... and report back on the change in feel.

I tested it quite a bit don't fear the large armies once this and out-scouting are in.
Happy to provide the two of you the 2020 draft QRS sheets and army builder now so you can beat each other up.
Just email me.

Si

Simon, happy to do that and test both options. We could do old Rules and then repeat with new amendments if you can send us 2020 draft QRS sheets.
Do not know how much difference i5 made in your game with Hunter at Skulls but seem to recall that one of his allies went unreliable at the beginning.

It made a bit of a difference.  Meant he didn't attack where I expected him to.  More bad for me than him as it turned out.
Can you email me to remind me to send 2020 stuff.

ta

Si

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Perhaps instinctive should be 2bw, pro 4, that could justify regular troops, better training etc?

Not sure that would help. You need to recall that if you charge as a group then one card prompts that group through fire even if some of the units  are outside the 2 bw range. Unless of course this is changing in 2020.

... no nothing else changing.  That remains as part of the + and - of block charge decisions.

Si

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Chocks away .... Uk bound

S

[nigelemsen]

If this close to publishing I would change nothing. Only go with what has been firmly tested. Stability with a few know flaws is better than instability

[Rino]

If this close to publishing I would change nothing. Only go with what has been firmly tested. Stability with a few know flaws is better than instability

+1

[Jilu]

If this close to publishing I would change nothing. Only go with what has been firmly tested. Stability with a few know flaws is better than instability

+1

+2

[stuuk]

If we were talking about a nuclear reactor, or an aircraft I would go with stability every time.

This though is a game, and I think you are close to being 100% that this change is good - so I would ensure you are comfortable with the answer but then go with your gut feeling - you know the game best. But don't f*ck it up

[Dru]

I dont mind a couple of final tweaks. But what is being sold as tweaks is pretty big changes. Im a bit sick of it and considering bailing on MeG, at least for a year or so, until the shit gets sorted out.  It feels like a great game is at risk due to unplaytested changes (and ones that I have not seen most push for --- I wonder who the few in Si's ear are that are making all this occur). Just frustrated. Its been several years.