Jump to content

sleeping_squirrel

Member
  • Content Count

    740
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

sleeping_squirrel last won the day on August 6

sleeping_squirrel had the most liked content!

About sleeping_squirrel

  • Rank
    Sircan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

1,573 profile views
  1. Thanks guys, we have a nice little overview here :-) I have a lot of requests about point values and it is nice to have something to forward people to.
  2. Please help me to create point values overview of all posse boxes, 1.09 edition. No upgrades, just respect miniature itself. For example in Tribal Retribution Starter contains "1x Brave with Gatling Gun", so add cost for gatling gun for this miniature to overall cost of the posse. I started with my posse, Dixie Ressurection, which is 620 points. Add values in comments, I will update the overview regularly. 1 Absolute Power Posse 770 points 2 Amber Clade Posse 555 points 3 Armoured Justice Posse 470 points 4 Confederate Rebellion Posse 495 points 5 Dark Nation Posse 635 points 6 Death from Above Posse 500 points 7 Discordant Symphony Posse 430 points 8 Divine Intervention Posse 720 points 9 Dixie Resurrection Posse 620 points 10 Faithful of Castilla Posse 465 points 11 Father of the Enlightened Posse 445 points 12 Forlorn Hope Posse 790 points 13 Galvanic Mysteries Posse 570 points 14 Hour of the Wolf Posse 605 points 15 Infernal Investigations Posse 855 points 16 No Surrender! Posse 642 points 17 Portal Vanguard Posse 695 points 18 Ranger Showboat Posse 720 points 19 Secret Service Posse 810 points 20 Tainted Biology Posse 545 points 21 The Bloody Espinosas Posse 640 points 22 The Conquistadores Posse 640 points 23 The Cowboys Posse 695 points 24 The Deadly Seven Posse 915 points 25 The Golden Army Posse 655 points 26 The Regulators Posse 700 points 27 The Wayward Eight Posse 865 points 28 Tribal Retribution Posse 580 points (Kaga Brothers) 29 Viridian Clade Posse 630 points
  3. This is what I submited upon playing 750 point and 1300 point games in 0.06. It would be nice have your feeback as well.: General notes Games were played on 750 points and then on 1300 points. We did not use rules for reserves nor customised weapons except generators, to be precise only the Shield generator was used. Version played 0.06. In general we have positive feeling about the game, below are my notes which I would like you to consider. Cards + initiative Cards are too situational and hit or miss – you must be lucky to have a card on hand the moment you can use it. We played them only few times and most of the rounds in all games we just discarded cards at the end of the turn to draw new ones in hope of getting more useful hand. For example conditions like “killing the ship by ramming” are way to situational. Bonuses like rerolling one dice (“reroll any dice”) are very weak when you look at the sheer number of dice you are usually rolling, one dice does not matter most of the time. Or conditions like “killing a unit of small ships” or “cripple a unit of mediums” take time to fulfil so if those cards are drawn at the beginning of the game then it is better to discard them. Or at least that was our obvious strategy. That leads me to the fact that we did not study which “types” of cards have high numbers because … initiative is still very crucial from round two on so cards with high numbers were kept just for the purpose of winning the initiative. It happened to me that I draw only cards with low numbers the whole game so my opponent won initiative every, not happy moments at all. To recap – with limited usage and initiative too important the whole card game was only about having the card with highest number possible to win the initiative, all other aspects were secondary. Question: if you have two or more cards with the same victory condition – can you play all of them when the condition is fulfilled. For example after killing a unit of smalls can I play 2x card which gives me victory points for that and on top of that card which gives me a victory point for killing “any” unit? Markers Critical hits adding condition markers – it’s clumsy. Not only you have to keep in mind that some critical effects do that and some do not but, at least until you know the game well, you have to study the rules every time and flip pages to remind yourself what that particular condition means. And what is more – you just add two markers instead of one and only outcome is that the playing area is more cluttered. At one point we felt that there is the same amount of markers like in 2.0 edition. There should be a marker or something to mark crippled models. With a lot medium models in 1300 point game you have two options: a) to stack all the damage next to the model and remember from what amount of damage the model is crippled = playing area is cluttered with more and more damage markers; b) make notes separately = bookkeeping and if you have all models painted in the same scheme than you have think about how to differentiate individual models in the squadron so you know which is which. Boarding For attacker it’s an uphill struggle with risks involved while effects of boarding are nothing special. In general Attacker is using FRAY against CITADEL+DEFENSE. Every additional model in the unit except the first one does not add its FRAY but +2 dice to the pool. CITADEL stat is usually much higher than FRAY and you add defence dice as well. +1 dice for SRS is a joke and defender can have this bonus as well. So, attacker starts with LESS dice and needs to score at least 4 more successes than defender to do at least something useful. As his dice explode, he can of course hope for excellent rolls but where is strategy in that? The most problematic part about the boarding is that CITADEL stat does not degenerate with damage; it stays the same high number through the whole game. In 2.0 boarding was (too) strong but its main beauty was that you could weaken the ship before you committed your men to the assault. Other game mechanics LOS – I think more examples are needed in this section but in general everything was clear. However, blocking something is not easy; you basically can see and shoot everything in range, with obscured condition weight in only here or there. Turn limit and torpedo interaction – from Turn limit (3) on this MAR is useless. Sure, you can roll more than 3 ones in one roll but what chances you have for that? In our opinion this MAR is to complicated for the effect it can bring to the game. Usability during the game is poor. Penalties like -1 to FRAY (or minus one dice in general) are worthless – usually you roll so many dice that having the rule of adding/subtracting one dice does not have an effect at all. Generators – powering them up is not a good rule at all. First, generators are weak as due to linking mechanic more turrets is more dakka and that is what is handy every time, generators have limits. Second, you have cards and other means how to power them up so you can always have them up if you like. Third, if you have more generators in the fleet than it’s easy to lost track of which generators are up and which are not so one need to take notes = additional bookeping. What was obvious is that all weapons are basically the same, there is no paper-stone-scissor mechanic in this part of the rules - more dakka is more dakka. For example firing with gunnery weaponry felt the same like firing with broadsides – differences were minor. I like consistency in rules so I definitely do not like the fact that “heavy hit” is one success but “heavy counter” is two successes. Terminology should be consistent. Then you factor in “double-obscured” rule with exploding dice giving only one “heavy hit” – is it necessary? I like the rule but when already in the rulebook it should be used more and not only in this one particular situation. Other notes Unit balance – it needs to be worked on, some units felt under costed or over costed but I do not have any evidence as we did not play enough games to back up our feeling with some data. In general smalls felt too fragile. Flying models, as they do not get any cover, were targets from the turn one on 4x4’ table, especially flying smalls and mediums were taken down very quickly, immediately after someone focused on them. Large models are fine, in close range they can deliver huge amount of dice so basically no matter what their target is, they always scored hits. I like their speed, however, smalls lost another important unique aspect of being much faster that large models. We definitely did not feel that flotilla of smalls can outmanoeuvre fleet consisting of large ships only. This one little bit tricky – we kind of missed “WOW” situations which were in 2.0: the moments where lucky dice rolls completely change dynamic of the game. It is difficult to say why that is – probably it is because all ships have more HP in general but on the other hand you deal more damage as well. Most of the time you just add damage markers "without any immediate impact" or ship dies too quickly. Length of the game – games took us to play similar amount of time like 2.0 edition. Small points game – 750 points – were nice and fluent but with only handful of ships. With 1300 points per side we played 3+ hours and the game was decided in turn 3, which exactly matches usual length of 2.0 games.
  4. Lets consider this as an oportunity to submit as much feedback as we can. Right now it is only the basic rules out, lets add more layers. Although I love DW as a game, I was so dissapointed of 2.5 rules - that rulebook was published in terrible state - that in the end I played only Fleet Action (other reasons for that as well). So, from my perspective if 3.0 is anywhere between 2.0 and Fleet Action in complexity, I will be happy sailor. Where I see the ultimate danger right now is the core rules - I am under impression that maneuvering together with how LOS/fire arc works is not sufficient for challenging game. It is too easy to fire weaponsyou want on targets you want. At this stage of beta I dont care about how firing is done, how many dice, how boarding works etc. I just want to have a game where clever maneuvers give you advantage against your oponent. So lets work on this.
  5. Sizes should be added relatively soon.
  6. Models which were only available in 2.0 starter sets would be handy as well - for example Monarch and Regent for Britts.
  7. If in plastic, I hope variants of some elements will be included on a sprue so we will be able to dintinguish two "same" ships visually .... or additional plating to make heavy ships etc.
  8. Do we need to have stats there? What about just start with only names and pictures first so people can identify their models quickly?
  9. Hi Iambraka, will join your effort soon as agreed, now traveling a lot unexpectedly.
  10. Good luck with your channel. As far as sources of information Facebook is your friend. Check the official club Sturginium Lounge and latest video QaA. For unoffcial chat with people about 2.0 and 2.5 rules look for Peoples Front of Antarctica. Then there is Discord for people consolidating 2.5 rules and orbats. And of course head to www.manbattlestations.com, do not miss their blog section nor forum. Anyway, most info is still yet to be released from WC in coming weeks. Edited: for lore I hope you already checked relevant sections here on forum and blog section on WC official page.
  11. Next step is to decide how many turns should average game have. Game flow is much different if it is 2 or 5 rounds. It is all connected - more rounds provide better chance to execute late game strategies with some nice suprising moves. On the other hand ships needs to sustain more damage to not explode in round 1 and of course more models on the table for more turns means slower gameplay. And another level of archievement would be to have a double amount of models and play time 3 hours :-) As primary DW player I hope these questions are at least asked before any design changes are made.
  12. Left Kob for detailed scrutiny for appropriate time and moved to Kingdom of Denmark. Not much changes here, am I right? :-) And no turret standardisation, which is a shame. Why is that? Do you feel Danes are ok in 2.5? Never played Denmark before, just checking stats as the new fleet is on a way to me.
  13. I agree, standardisation is the way the game needs to go. Definitely plus! Valiant: just keep it 10 points for upgrade of the whole squadron, there is no point in having cost 2 per piece. Vengeance: so it is 3+ just for Vengeance, right?
  14. Starting to read orbats, starting with KOB which is my main force. Just first few observations: like that you unified numbers for standard turret across all ships. Valiant: what is the cost for upgrade? Vengeance: target painter is for what? Hasn' been this generator changed in 2.5?
  15. What is your average size game, time played and how many rounds finished?
×
×
  • 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.