Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/01/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Spenetrator

    new rules set

    Yeah, Different scales for different classes (fighters and the like aside per the standard for genre) would be a hard no for me. I want my big ships BIG, and to look it! At the current scale - A frigate is approximately the length of a WWII Battleship - (I worked it out ages ago) which is a great little metric. I think that depends on the price of the IP... They may well have bought it simply to make their own game without the risk of someone else revitalising FA in competition (Which would be a perfectly legitimate thing to do, even though I would be saddened) A couple of decades following battletech has taught me all about IP wrangling. I'll be interested in the Beta - Like you @Small Mek I am hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
  2. 1 point
    It's worth keeping in mind that the Beta ships are literally just for the Beta. They are not the actual designs for the Third edition game. For example, the new Boridino class Battleship is not the same as the beta test commonwealth Battleship (it has a different profile, an integrated cryo generator and many more distinctions). Those units are just for beta testing and are intentionally generic (and almost bland) . You'll see many differences in the final units when the game comes out.
  3. 1 point
    True, but the beta is only a beta, it might be the similarities are stronger now simply to allow the team to focus on the mechanics of the rules themselves; once they've a robust working system more variety can be built into the game; unique weapon options, modifiers, adjustments etc... Also note that SG always had a fairly similar spread of ship types for most factions. In fact in their latter year SG themselves stated to cut down on some variety options. Eg early on the Prussians were the only faction with a huge walker. Come the last year or so nearly every large faction had some kind of mega-walker. Meanwhile the cores of their armies - friggates, escort carriers, carriers, battleships, dreadnoughts were all very similar. It was actually a rarity for a faction, like the Russians, to not have something like an airship carrier (though it was nearly patched over by the fact that they had a natural ally faction who provided just that very airship). I do agree the game has to have flare; its got to capture that mad science steampunk inspired world where lasers match against heavy cannon and impossible numbers of smaller ones before a huge kraken machine arises from the deep only to be shot aside by a huge whale with a laser on its head.
  4. 1 point
    Unarmoured clash?
  5. 1 point
    Warcradle Stuart

    new rules set

    Regarding our plans changing, no not really. Firestorm has always had some guiding principles we set down as to how we want the game to be for its new edition. The Games Developer role we are advertising is to build on what I said about a year ago, we would scale up the studio as we create more concurrent games. We have around a dozen games in development right now (including Firestorm, Dystopian Wars and Wild West Exodus). We are expanding the team so that we can deliver on those. We have also had a Lead Illustrator join us, and are expanding our writing, sculpting, CAD and graphic design team too. While it has been just over a year since we acquired Firestorm, in terms of games development that really isn't very long at all, especially when we take into account things like manufacturing which has lead times of its own. As for the purpose of the Beta, the Beta is never about getting the rules out there for the community to go have fun playing games. Its about giving the community the opportunity to help shape the final form of the game. If you want to do that, great, if not, no problem.
  6. 1 point
    That's also if the game is enhanced like so. We have no real information that any nation is getting more comprehensive equipment other than what is in the beta. Or at least I haven't seen any other info. And so far in the beta, every nation has the same ship (battleship, carrier, large sub, medium sub, small sub) that only Celestials have a variety due to being a Korean, Chinese, Japanese version of each ship which as far as I've read, is only crew differential. It is a faster game, but no unique flair of old.
  7. 1 point
    Ah but they are only the same if they are equipped the same. They might all have access to the same basic core "Broadsides" however Bretonnia could have "Enhanced Broadsides" which are a different weapon. Now they might have better long ranged ones whilst Russians might have "Close range Broadsides" and now has a close ranged advantage. The standardized naming and stats only keeps things the same if the ships are equipped the same; as soon as a new weapon is introduced it gets a new set of abilities and a new stat line. New weapons might be limited to specific hulls and specific factions. Eg a faction that generally has few large ships might have limited access to larger turrets, even the generic ones. I think the real telling element will be how varied the weapon choices are and what options different races have within weapon profiles.
  8. 1 point
    But it really weakens the differentation between all the factions. Everyones turrets will act the same and everyone seems to have access to torps, guns, broadsides, rockets, mortars. There are no short, medium or long specialists. I'm not saying that the current approach can't work, just that for me it leads to a shallower game that undermines the stronger factional differences that made classic Dwars more tactical and made it more fun to play different factions.
  9. 1 point
    Not quite, all weapons will have the same stats based on weapon name. So a heavy turret is a heavy turret no matter which faction uses it. However there's nothing to stop them giving a faction a Heavy Ultra Turret that has different rules. I think basically their upshot is if its called X Then it behaves like X no matter what. Which likely makes it easier for learning the game. Esp for things like standard torpedoes all behaving in the same way. Plus they can just add more faction specific weapons and names and upgrades to provide variety where needed. Use standard torpedoes or your faction specific extra long range torpedoes. A faction like the techno force from the polar north might well have lasers and ion beams and not actually share any weapons with other factions at all under this rules system.
  10. 1 point
    Overread

    new rules set

    I think the question of scale is interesting, though for me when it comes to space ship games the only things that I never feel are in scale are fighters and other such craft. Frigates and corvettes and the like always feel like they are in the same scale as the rest of the game. Personally I'd rather it remain like that as it makes the game much easier to visualise by and large. If they start making frigates one scale and cruisers another and battleships yet another I think it starts to lose a connection for the player. One thing I LOATH (And computer games do this a lot) is when I see a cinematic that shows one scale of battle only to jump into the game and find that the actual playing scale is vastly different. A classic example would be showing big ships next to frigates and cruisers that look small so the big ship looks huge. Then having dozens and dozens of the smaller craft. Jump into the game and your'e playing with 10 ships total - the cruisers and frigates are not too much smaller than the battleship. Visually it feels like a lie. So I'd far rather they stuck to one scale and then let fighters/torpedoes be oversized purely for practical considerations of being able to see them. I feel that's fair in a game where the ships are supposed to be massive -a Dreadnought is supposed to be a big city in space; heck one faction had justthat floating cities in space. I feel if WC stick to that scale they will keep the cinematic feel of the game; the epic sweepings of battles.
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.