Jump to content

Lifegiver

Member
  • Content Count

    600
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Lifegiver last won the day on July 2 2016

Lifegiver had the most liked content!

About Lifegiver

  • Rank
    Sircan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

774 profile views
  1. As the rules are going to change in the near future, there is little use in making suggestions from a perfomance point of view. I suggest taking a mixed force that has some elements of all. Buy some ships, a carrier, some submarines and some flyers. A combined arms approach creates balanced games and makes You a better player by learning to use all elements of the game.
  2. Units that seem too good to me: Mobile Fortifications: Ayakashi: the rocket upgrade should be more expensive, because it does a lot of damage and makes the basic version obsolete. I think +40 points instead of +20 points would be fine. Restitution: the basic version should increase by 30 points. This thing is just too cheap for what it does. (Mme Liberté seems to expensive to me. The other dreadbots seem in a good place to me.) Savannah sky fortress: No other model in the game is nearly that sturdy for the points. There is just no reasonable way of bringing this thing down, and You have to because it is a carrier (9) with good weaponry. It is really frustrating to play against, especially if it is the admiral vessel. Decrease AP to 8, decrease AA to 8. This way at least it becomes somewhat vulnerable to boarding when damaged. Alternatively, increase its points cost by +10 to +15. Saratoga fleet carrier: This carrier is extremely cheap for a stable carrier (9) with reasonable weaponry. I think it should be 5-10 points more. Fettah cruiser: No other 55 point cruiser offers nearly as much as the Fettah. It should be 5 points more. Even at 60 points it would still be very good. Gewitterwolke: Good weapons, stable, spotter, good at boarding and hard to board itself for little points. Make it more vulnerable, or make it 5-10 points more. Zhanmado: This sturdy thing throws flames and rockets at full firepower until it lost its last HP. The heavy flamethrower should go from tertiary to secondary and redoutable. Luxing air bombard: Very high firepower for little cost. This unit often just needs 1 shot at RB3 to earn back its points. It even has very good AA that makes it hard to board and a good hunter of TFT, while a full unit is a frightening boarder at 16 APs. The bombs are strong as well. Luxing is a no brainer and an auto include in all lists. Decrease the air bombard to 0-6-6-0, decrease the bomb bay to 6, decrease AA to 3. Tunguska: This thing still seems too cheap to me, even after the price increases. Make it even somewhat or expensive, I think by +5 to +10 points. Indus heavy destroyer: This thing is fast, packs a lot of punch, is very good at boarding and hard to destroy. This is too much for just 45 points. Rushing theese little monsters into the enemy to wreck havoc does require little tactics. Make them somewhat slower (10" instead of 11") an decrease AA to 2. This makes it harder to apply all those benefits, and gives the opponent time to intercept them.
  3. What exactly makes You feel the Vauban underpriced? When building fleets, the choice between Vauban and Charlemagne is very hard for me. I rarely won or lost a game because of a Vauban. It does not have that much firepower, and it tends to be priced in the late game. I do agree that some upgrades are to too cheap and that some models are not viable without specific upgrades. One of those upgrades is the cloud generator. I would like to see many RoF large and massive ships become cheaper, but the the cloud generator upgrade becoming more expensive. This way fielding ships without the cloud generator option would become a real alternative solution. If the designer team prefers to make the cloud generator compulsary, then include it in the models´ basic points. This makes fleet building easier. The same applies to Russian target jammer options. I think insulting the users that give feedback about their gaming experience and make well founded suggestions to make shelf sitters like Nakatsu viable is the wrong way. Sometimes a little tweak is all it needs to make a model viable compared to other ones. I personally am not dependant on making certain models viable, because I already own all available models of all the major factions. I just feel sad that many nice models do not get played because of ill balanced rules. If You happen to response to the arguments made instead of just making populistic remarks, we will gladly discuss.
  4. From what You describe, EoBS fits your style of play better, but it has mediocre long range capability at best. There are also nations that may fit your style of play even more, though: Covenant of Antarctica: long range combat and many tricks Federated states of America: long range, very adaptable Black Wolf: very hidious and stealthy, but short ranged League of Italian States: fast, hard hitting, vulnerable, short ranged (very eldritch) I think Egyptians may also fit Your style o play, but their rules are not out yet. If you want to know more about the nations´ style o play, use the google translator on my German nation guides: https://www.gw-fanworld.net/showthread.php/202747-Dystopian-Wars-Völkerbeschreibungen-V2-0
  5. Maybe take the sturginium flare critical hit oneself. This way both get teleported in a random direction. This would be a lot of fun and prevent the generator being used all of the time.
  6. I really wonder about aircraft being so slow compared to naval units. Their main advantage seems being more maneuvrable instead, which seems somewhat odd to me. To give flyers a somewhat more realistic feeling, I suggest: - give advanced engines (1") to all large and massive sized flyers - give advanced engines (2") to all medium and small sized flyers This way flyers have the option to become faster than their equivalent naval unit if they forgo their advantage in maneuvrability.
  7. Let us collect some ideas for new generators and what we think about it. Maybe those ideas find their ways into the rules at some time or other. I start with: Caustic mist generator (dangerous terrain, 16", small template): Any model that ends its activation overlapping one or more dangerous terrain templates gets a corrosion marker. This generator could be given to the Ottoman Empire. Rampage generator: target model´s crew (AP) hits on 3+ in boarding assauls and is hit on 3+ on boarding assaults for the rest of the turn sturginium coat generator: target model gains +4 IR for the rest of the turn
  8. What do you think about the stats of the new models?
  9. Weil, boarding is a main mechanism of the game, and I think it will happen in most games if both sides use all options of winning. Many -gamers just forget about boarding.
  10. Dive bombers and a more concentrated fire with subhunter reach its CR fast, and CC have crushing impact, thus just needing to reach its DR5. Then it surfaces and gets shot down. Being 40 points cheaper does not matter because Ika does very little damage. That is why the opponent eben does not have to kill the Ika. Most of the time it just gets ignored without affectIng anything... waste of points. For just 15 points more you gut a full unit of Uwatsus that is fast, hits hard and can hide from the enemy. If you want submarines, take a squad of Zariganis that is far better than an Ika. Light cruisers have many problems in the game. Their intended targets (smalls) are faster than the light cruisers and sink them almost as easily as the the other way round. Even if light cruisers reach their target, they do not survive return fire. That is why i suggested to give all light cruisers advanced deployment to get them into position. This still des not solve the flaws of Nakatsu. Marseille also suffers from not being able to survive return fire.
  11. You just never get this done because of the flaws mentioned above. There are solutions for this, but wasting even more points on a unit that does not work is not imho. There are other ways of denying victory conditions. Ika is VERY vulnerable to sub hunters, dive bombers and the like, and it gets mashed very easily when it surfaces. If that was not enough, it does very little damage. It is just wasted points if the opponent knows how to cope with it. Thank god we have many other excellent choices of large models. Many people think Nakatsu is the worst light cruiser of the game, in a faction that has many excellent other choices. That is why at least we do not miss Nakatsu. I may look average on paper, but it performs poorly on the table due to many issues, one of them being the fire arcs. I tried Nakatsu many times, and I saw many other people trying it, but it was just never worth its points. Attaching an Arashi to 4 Nakatsus would let You pay dreadnought level points for a squadron that never nearly gets back its price. Nakatsu has already been discussed many times before in many forums with all the same results, for an example see here: http://community.spartangames.co.uk/index.php?/topic/17641-whats-your-ratio/&page=1
  12. Well, I rather take 3 Honshus with aggressive crew than 4 Nakatsus for the same prize. Honshu does the work it is supposed to do, while Nakatsu does not.
  13. What does a bigger squadron change? Do you really want to waste 220 points on 4 sub par models you cannot hide from enemy shooting? These points are better spent elsewhere.
  14. KoB Bastion Problems: simply not worth taking, KoB has crappy CC Solution: give it back CC3! Orion Problem: too expensive Solution: 5 points cheaper Doncaster Problems: not worth taking, the heavy bomber is much better Solution: stronger weapons or cheaper Eagle Problems: expensive, pillow fisted, no real task in the army Solution: improve the guardian generator to give 2 shield dice instead of 1, making it the same as the dreadnought (i.e. 2, 12", protective =2). Illustrious Problem: too expensive Solution: 15 points cheaper Monarch Problem: a brawler that cannot brawl (slow, little firepower, easy to board) Solution: advanced engines (+1), heavy turrets 11 8 6 0; 10 AP stoic crew Avenger Problems: expensive, gives away many VPs Solution: 10 points cheaper, decrease SV to 50 Vengeance Problems: vulnerable, gets critcal damage when ramming, very easy to board, gives away many VPs to Prussians fast and easy Solution: CR9, 8 AP, evasive maneuvers +1, remove silly SV (Prussians) KoB fortifications: Problem: too weak in comparison to mobile units, simply not worth taking Solution: maybe make them cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...

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.