Slann
Lizards of Renown
Herald of Creation
- Messages
- 10,817
- Likes Received
- 27,010
- Trophy Points
- 113
All of you have made fair points.
I was concerned that Toughness 6 may have been too much, especially as only some monsters ever reached such a high Toughness, and I agree that alongside the Poison Immunity and additional healing it would be too much. I will disregard that suggestion and keep the Ushabti as Toughness 5. That still adequately represents their stony constitution and adheres to @NIGHTBRINGER ‘s point of being able to damage stone more easily with heavy equipment - Great Weapon Troops will still be able to wound T5 Ushabti on 4s or 3s depending on their base Strength, which sounds right. I don’t want to make Tomb Kings overpowered anymore than I want to leave them underpowered. I simply chose Ushabti to be the benefit of a fair few buffs from my amendments because they just seem to be the weakest unit in the book from what I’ve heard from you all, and I felt they deserved the most to benefit from a little boost. However, I wish to improve the army in general, not just one unit, and have done so with the other listed amendments.
I only wish to introduce amendments to those factions that really need it, i.e. those that are toward the lower tiers of power (Tomb Kings, Bretonnia, Beastmen and probably Greenskins too) plus those that are higher tier but have outdated/incomplete army lists (Skaven and Chaos Dwarfs) - the former because I just don’t think it’s fair that players who just happen to like these armies have to pull out all the stops to make a decent list to have any chance of winning (particularly because of GW’s shit faction bias reasons), and as a perfectionist I want to see the latter given full GW-style 8th Ed rules for sake of completeness (Chaos Dwarfs in particular because they’re list is undersized and underdeveloped, as well as having at least one outdated rule). The whole point of playing a game is to have a roughly equal chance of winning and I want to make those chances a bit more balanced for everyone. Of course simply improving the weakest factions doesn’t solve all problems and will simply rearrange the tier table a little, but my amendments should make sure all the factions are closer together in terms of balance, and that is all I want.
To ensure this is the case, it’d be great if as many of you as possible could have a go at playtesting these amendments and reporting back to me, and I’d be happy to alter these amendments as necessary if anything is too strong or too weak. @NIGHTBRINGER @Lizards of Renown @BrotherSutek @Killer Angel @Imrahil are you up for the fun of doing this?
Factions that are middle tier and upwards already have pretty good rules and have no need to be improved anymore (even if some of their units are subpar, they have enough other units to make competent, thematic armies), and I will not condone any updates toward those factions because they simply aren’t necessary and I don’t want an arm’s race on our hands.
Of course you’re all perfectly at will to either take these amendments or leave them, but if you leave them, you’ll be missing out on amendments that will almost certainly make your gaming experience with Tomb Kings and other underpowered factions more fun. I’m not just doing this for me, I’m doing this for you, the players of those armies that need the most attention, because you deserve a reward for your patience and dedication. GW aren’t going to give us one anymore, and officialness carries much less weight now that they no longer support it, so might as well take action and use the second best thing.
If I can get a game in
I'm with @BrotherSutek to be honest...
It's few and far between for me now. If I get a chance to play, I'll be using the 8th rules just so that I can rapidly get the game done.
Sorry mate