9th Age Is negative power creep the reason why 0.99 is not doing very well?

Flavour in the form of fluff is a definite possibility... I'd be surprised if it wasn't developed. The Undying Dynasties are a great start.

Flavour in terms of game rules is a tricky business because it very quickly finds itself at odds with balance. 9th Age seems to focus on balance and streamlined rules, while flavour requires rules that are less streamlined and presents a potential risk to balance.

I think by September the 9th Age player base will be fairly set. I think judgement day comes in April.

 

True. The April release will be the tipping point for most players. I am saying that to the higherups at 9th Age every chance I get

 

That's good! Give them every opportunity to foster a larger gaming community. Your work is appreciated.

 

I agree April will be very important, I am at the core a tournament style player (I don't go to tournaments anymore but I play that way) and jumped right on board with 9th age. Balance is incredibly important to me, probably more so than fluff or play style, because those can always be added in easier later. I think the RT have a very hard road forward though especially with SA, as from what I have been able to play test our book is not externally balanced at all with the exception of a single specific build. If this isn't rectified by the official 1.0 release then I will probably move on, honestly it takes a ton of time and effort to play with rules that are changing and may be broken, I'm not saying that I would never try 9th Age again but that I wouldn't be involved in it or play it until very far down the road when they may have finally worked things out.

I strongly believe that the RT needs to make sweeping changes to the SA book, half of those changes can be in cost of models and options, but they would be large adjustments. But the other half truly is needed to bring a variety of builds into external balance with other books. I sincerely hope that 9th Age does amazing and that the tournament results are positive and we can all find a great compromise, it looks daunting right now but we have solid people that are working very hard to bring us a quality game and I am very grateful.

 

I don't think adjustments should ever by made in a "large" manner, because you will simply create a new problem. I see balance as analogous to driving a boat. When you crank on the steering wheel to avoid an object, the boat is sluggish to respond (much unlike a car), so you crank harder, over-correcting and putting yourself in a worse position than before.

The game is still in beta, we should expect imbalance, and this imbalance should be delt with oh-so incrementally. Lets not all pretend like we know what units should have what point values, point values are all relative. If a unit needs a big nerf, lets see that happen over several iterations of tiny nerfs (ie add 3pt/model, or 0.5pt/model). Even 3x3 spear backs with AP2 will eventually become balanced if the point cost is right.

Honestly I think the idea of how Swedish works is great for balance. IE, the bigger your unit gets, the more expensive it becomes per model. Yes this is more complicated for list building but lets be honest, we are complicated people who play a complicated game. Besides, we have software to do all this work for us.

Why is there such an early push for a finished product in April? It has been less than a year and we are already expecting to put out a polished product? Competitive games take years of tweaking and adjusting to get things balanced, and the balance never stops. T9A should be no exception, we must give time to let the win/loss statistics speak for themselves. The game is already fully playable, there are no rules (or lack thereof) that break down the fabric of how the game mechanics work, so in this respect the project is doing very well.

As to the topic, no idea why the plan is negative creep. It seems like a reaction to a made up deadline from which nobody profits.

 

I strongly believe that this power level they have set is a too low for players to enjoy the game at its fullest. Completely agree with much that has Al ready been mentioned, in that this means less interest from certain players.

Lowering the power creep wasn't a bad idea from the RT, but this should have been done gradually from the very beginning. The idea was that lower power creep is easier to balance. I can see the logic in that statement, but I do to fully agree. Sure if everything is worth worthless and worth one point you might have achieved perfect balance, a very boring game, but perfect balance. If you aim for a lower power creep however, i however think that some times you can confuse lower numbers with easier balance, which just isn't the case. Having to adjust a unit by .456 point is not more difficult than giving them slight buffs.
Just my thought, and I am aware of the issues with webbing, where one good rule be omes great because of other options. Our army is especially hit hard because of that. ( it actually seems like every unit must be balance accordingly to some potential build, when it omes to our army)

 

I thought the 1.0 edition was expected to be released towards the end April. Has that changed or was I mistaken?

 

This is what troubles me the most. Fantasy scene in my country is small as it is and it is going to be hard to find people to play with, since ETC players (we have few) will stick to 9th ed, people who enjoyed 8th moved to KoW or will pick up something else and it further breaks already small community.
On the other hand I know this rule set has not been written for me, but for tournament players and I just have to deal with it.
I just hope it will be fun..

 

I agree that community fragmentation is the biggest issue facing Warhammer Fantasy Battle style gaming. This is the reality that we are faced with since GW killed Warhammer. 9th Age along with the other competing systems only furthers this division. The best hope would have been for one of the systems to emerge as the dominant leader, but I don't see that happening. I predict that the future will consist of small pockets of players who adopt one system or another but it will never be as good as it once was.

 

A vast overhaul was not what was hoped for, by me.
AoS was a vast overhaul and was therefore disappointing to a swath of buyers.
9th age being a vast overhaul —just not as extreme as AoS— that was a recipe for disappointment.

Terminology question? "0.99" means what? What is it short hand for?

All the different numbers schemes 8.1, 8.2, 8.5, 9th, 8th, and 0.99 just add to the chaos & confusion.

 

0.99 is the current version of rules at 9th age. It is basically last "beta" update before 1.0 version.