Phant Mastik

I noticed this too and would be glad, if somebody could answer this. In addition: from where do the fire arcs emerge? Middle of the model? Middle of the side? Nearest point to target model? Point of my choice? It doesn't really matter on small models (in physical size), but is an issue on large ones (i.e. Ice Maiden)

I've read the rules, but didn't play them yet due to RL conditions (until next Friday). So I'm just talking about things I experienced in practice. Spartan Games is dead and there is no use in loosing tears. I'm looking forward to make out of this Beta (to me it feels a lot Alpha) a game, which I will like and play. If the outcome is unsatisfying – well, I got this horribly expensive 2.5 rulebook... The rules read a lot like Fleet Action, a game I didn't like because of the massive abstraction. It made Dystopian Wars from a kind of naval simulation to a dice game. Because of the company-selected Battlegroups, list building was very limited and, as a customer, I felt externally controlled (in what to use and in what to buy). Thoughts on Dystopian Wars 3.0: What I need to play is 3 different decks of cards (statcards, outfitting cards + victory+valour), a tape measure, 2 different sets of dice (Action Dice + Critical Hits), a set of tokens, a (new) set of templates and, of course, the models themselves. A lot of stuff to transport – especially the statcards. I think they are too large. I would prefer them beeing in 2,5“x3,5“, so they would be the size of the other 2 decks an would fit into card sleeves made for CCGs (i.e. Magic the Gathering). I assume, you won't be selling printed statcards – so I will have to print them myself. Please make a printer friendly version, so I can do them in black & white – or at least choose the clours according to readability. The red numbers on black background on the crippled cards is a pest (printed in b&w). One of the problems Spartan Games had, was spreading snippets of rules over the whole rulebook and repeating similar passages, partly contradicting themselves. I assume, this was a result of living rules, where new parts were amended and the „twin passage“ was forgotten to be changed too. So having an eye on writing technic would be helpful concerning readability. A word on Tokens + Symbols: The symbols do not look very - ummmmhh - appealing (to me). Especially the "Hazard" and all of the "Critical Hits" look strange to me. A more "Dystopian" design and colouring would suit my taste. Assuming I will have to roll a (not yet released nor announced) critical die in future games and must lay this yellow.....pimple.....with its shell-shocked sign next to my ship. Even now, my eyes begin to hurt...

Depending on the models, I'm interested but don't want to check the shop every other day. Will there be some sort of notification (e.g. forum post, newsletter,...)?

Thanks for the blog. People like me, who do (and will) not have a facebook account, appreciate it.

I got mine today. Big thank you to Warcradle.

Concerning me: no One thing that fascinated me with DW (especially after 2.0) was that you had one set of rules for all theatres, and I could use all my models side by side. Interesting things to me were the above mentioned multi-purpose/surface skimming models, but also the possibility to play scenarios of coastal warfare. With the announcement of New Armoured Clash all my armoured models become obsolete to me. Although I could use some of them with the new set of rules in land games only (without the support of the navy and the fascinating mobile airfields - what a pity), there is no player base here. DW was a niche game here and a few guys maintain(ed) some navies with air support. Reviving DW 3.0 by brushing off the dust of their fleets - could be easily done. Talking them into a new game, needing new models and stop playing this scifi 10mm game of ground warfare - impossible. I don't want to sound like the guy who says: "Everything was better in the old days." The decision has been made and I have to live with it. I'm not happy with it, but I understand, that I live in a rather special situation and my concerns might just concern me. Starting a fan-based project, using SGDW2.5 as a base, with an existing new owner of the IP doesn't also make sense. So for me, DW moved from "Flank Speed" to "Standby". I invest my hobby-time now in other (28mm) projects, my ~13 fleets will stay on the shelf - for the time being. Maybe Warcradle can make me sail again, if they can preserve the feeling of the SG rules. I liked the cumbersome movement of the large ships with the templates. In my imagination it felt suitable and resembled an appropriate simulation of steering such large vessels. Another thing was the number of dice: delivering a broadside by throwing buckets of dice just feels like delivering a broadside. Throwing a D20 for example is faster - for sure - but not the same. The third thing was the tiny possibility, that weird things could happen through luck and Exploding Dice (Because Sturginium!). Take the last remaining frigate and fire her guns on the battleship and through a nearly impossible chain of 6es teleport it on a squad of cruisers... these situations are so epic, I don't even mind losing games through them. And the fourth thing was the versatility of using one set of rules for all theatres of war in one game. So will I have a look at DW3.0? Definitely Yes. Will I play Armoured Clash? Very unlikely. I hope Warcradle can make me enjoy Dystopian Wars again - at least I'm longing for it.

STO nearly had naval models - at least I remember pre-ordering them *sigh* I hope WC will release them in the future.

The entry of the generator will tell you what happens. Storm generator says, the template/cloud effects last until the end of the turn (p.172; 2.5 rules).

I received a shipping notification for an old order (Flashpoint campaign set). But no notification for the Northern Star stuff or Kickstarter pledge.

No shipping notification until now.

At the same time because of the auxiliary weapons.

Definitely - the whole underwater boarding rules are a complete mess! There are no special restrictions in the standard boarding rules. The diving model function restricts boarding to and from models on the submerged height LEVEL (but doesn't state anything about the diving height level - intended/typo?). And the Aquatic Assault MAR could be worded clearer. Especially the diving model function annoys me, why can't my model board anything without Aquatic Assault? When I go one height level below (deep diving) I'm allowed to board (RAW).

2 amendments: the ZMD turrets link to 23/20/17/14 and carrier points are not redoubtable

This and dropping a mine does not have a to-hit number

Fair point - and now the red 6 makes sense. In my gaming group we played the "Experienced Engineers" in the end phase and removed crit and persistent effects on 3+. We use repair models very seldom, so I'm not used to them.