Jump to content

Flamebeast

Member
  • Content Count

    540
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Flamebeast

  • Rank
    Sircan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

1,210 profile views
  1. I have ten Banes, and I firmly believe that others should have the opportunity to experience my joy.
  2. Any chance you could provide any detail on the changes that have been made in some of the posts on the subject?
  3. Like mine! I've never bothered with any T2 other than Banes (sometimes with some Scarabs added if I'm playing a huge game), and have played an awful lot of games with them, and I've never understood people complaining about the supposed unreliability - if you're sensible you're never going to have a problem with them.
  4. Well, this is just utter garbage. Relthoza go from being able to teleport on the battlefield, with access to maneuverability only paralleled by the Kedorians, to having faster engines than everyone else (but they're not actually better because Disorder is so absolutely crippling now)? BOOOOOO Use Meatshields' suggestion - it makes sense, doesn't retcon anything, solves the issue of unreliable jump distances for those people who are for some reason unwilling to take risks with the most inherently risky faction in the game, and isn't going to put anyone off buying (as in, purchasing with money) anything with Battle Shunt.
  5. Right, but what exactly was wrong with hazard markers to track this stuff? Throwing it all into Disorder seems unnecessary, and makes actual Disorder itself not make sense.
  6. Cheers for responding, but going to continue this line of thought a little longer. I don't mean any of this to be a direct criticism of yourself - you're new as a Spartan unless I've missed something, and it wouldn't be fair to foist wider failures on you. You've only got limited information - or are only allowed to release limited information - but at the same time, Spartan need to get on the ball and release more information to cover concerns raised by the community if there's anything that will mitigate backlash. This is just good business sense. You can't have a new edition release for one of your flagship game systems plagued by community doubts as widespread as this before it's even hit pre-order status, because that's going to kill sales. You also can't be seen to be brushing off community concerns (unfortunately, this ship might have already sailed, but no harm in starting damage limitation procedures), because that will just turn people off the company in general. I get that things have been through a testing process - though, as I've stated elsewhere, I do not have much confidence in that process due to the questionable history of some of those involved in running it - but at the same time, you have to listen to your forums. Spartan's commercial reach is so short at the moment that you have to impress people on the forums or FSA 3.0 is just not going to sell, because no stores are interested in stocking Spartan product, and precious few individuals, even here, are going to be willing to get their local gaming group involved with a dead/dying game, because Spartan proves time and time again that it can't be trusted on basically any level - you guys can't even get Kickstarters shipped in the same QUARTER as you promised you would, and there were people waiting on last year's Black Friday sales orders being shipped until February, at least. Also yes, lip service is an idiom that's shared across the Atlantic - given that it's in the dictionary I rather suspect that it predates the United States as an entity - and I assure you it's a term that has become basically synonymous with the term "Official Spartan Games Announcement". As for "Trust, but Verify" - based on the recent track record, there's more than a few people expecting 3.0 to be a complete trainwreck, precisely because Spartan are so thoroughly unreliable (and also at least partially due to some highly suspect rule-writing - looking at you, Taskfarce).
  7. Are these the same CO points that you only get a limited pool of at the start of the game? Because I can see Disorder getting houseruled out of basically every competitive environment around if so. As far as I can tell it's a pretty much universally hated mechanic in Planetfall, so I'm at a loss as to why Spartan have decided to port it to Armada. That's ignoring the fact that it makes no sense whatsoever on a space combat scale - the trained crew of a starship are going to resort to killing each other over some relatively minor damage? What?
  8. So it's basically a slightly delayed version of the cluster**** that was the Planetfall Disorder mechanic then? That's disappointing.
  9. All due respect, but as soon as you say that, you're shutting down discussion and not listening to your customers, which is a HUGE problem for a lot of people with the way Spartan conduct themselves. I would strongly recommend reconsidering this stance. The people on this forum aren't just casual fans. They're as hardcore a playerbase as you'll ever find, and when those people are pushing back against a change you intend to make, you either need to provide more information to placate that group, or you need to seriously reconsider that change, because we're not pushing back for shits and giggles - we're pushing back because we're legitimately concerned that the change is going to harm the game.
  10. Given the number of references to it in the recent series of (very helpful) posts by @Spartan Mike I am somewhat surprised that none of them deal with exactly how Disorder is going to work. Any chance you could enlighten us, Mike?
  11. Going back to percentages is going to do nobody any favours, though the adjustment to the different battle sizes helps. Biggest problem with going back to percentages is that people will now be able to spam certain choices to min/max more, and that's only going to hurt the game. At least with the "X choice of unit Y are available at points level Z" method you've got some inherent method to stop people running 60% of their list as (for example) Terquai Torpedo Cruisers.
  12. Most of the points in the OP are either changes in name only, or fixes the FFG were working on before we got disbanded. Good to see our work is being used, even if we aren't being credited.
  13. this kinda seems like it's just adding bookkeeping for the sake of bookkeeping. all of the things on that list are things you can already do in 2.0, but now you have to track them at it's very limited. Strikes me as another way of reducing the number of playstyles, which isn't something i'm ever going to support?
  14. Unless they release a free pdf on time, I'd expect it to be something like 3 months after release.
×
×
  • 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.