Jump to content

quiet01

Member
  • Posts

    2,265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by quiet01

  1. I think the best thing to do is forget about anything associated with THAT debacle and move on. Warcradle will have a plan in place for Firestorm and implement that plan when the time is right.
  2. We are back in business! Time to ramble on about resin addiction and pew pew pew!
  3. The game has been around since 1992. Which predates Spartan games by a few years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jovian_Chronicles
  4. Commodore Jones, The person most likely to respond, Spartan Josh, has not logged on as Spartan Josh since December 6th. At least as of this post. Take that for what it is worth.
  5. I wouldn't hold my breath.... humans do not look good when they turn blue. When was the last time FSA got an actual release?..... Buehler.... Buehler..... Buehler.......
  6. Some factions are built around the idea of deploying SRS, such as Aquans and Relthoza. So if your opponent has SRS, then you will need some way to counter them. SRS are a good tool to have at your disposal. I would consider them.
  7. Spartan Linde is too busy elsewhere. It reads like you got your answer. Shields Offline.... no Cyclic Shielding, it just makes sense....
  8. Try this site. http://www.discountgamesinc.com
  9. That was written by someone with a PHD* in game theory. They obviously have not spent any time reviewing the War Log for the past few years. Nor have they spent more than a game playing against Directorate forces. *PHD = Piled High and Deep, as in bull manure. I say the above with the full weight of 4 years playing FSA and as a former playtester of the game.
  10. The Thraex is the most powerful of the Frigates(with the argument that the Pilgrim/Armsman is as good). If you could Spam them, it would be ugly. This was strictly a spam concern.
  11. I think the Doctrine of Don't ask, Don't tell applies to the viewing of the blog comments....
  12. My gut reaction is: NO! Mainly because your shields are offline.
  13. I see two actual game mechanic changes in my list(I do not count the movement template as one. The outcome is virtually the same, it is just faster). Are we reading the same list? If you think they are major changes. Ok then.
  14. So now that I have trolled everyone for a few days with the FF routine.... I think you can see that there are very few ways to speed up Firestorm Armada, some other them are: 1. A better movement template would help a little. 2. Changing the AD/Dice/Combining/Linking mechanic may help. 3. Improving the SRS mechanic and PD mountain(kill ships faster). 4. Some of speeding up the games falls on the players(know the rules, be familiar with the Ship and Stats)
  15. Hyperbole does not make any ones point. However I would expect a critically thinking person to understand and infer that not one person has ever accused the Aquans as playing "slow" because of the arcs. Most lamentations revolve around "lining up" Fixed Fore, bacause the target channel is only 40mm wide and we know how precise gamers must be.
  16. That is one of the weakest arguments I have ever read. Site one old post where some one complains the Aquans play slow. I dare you.
  17. Ok Nay-sayers..... The Stats.... For this quick discussion, the Battle Ship is the scariest thing on the on the table at Patrol fleet level. I am leaving the names off for this discussion and only using "Broadside" and not Gunrack or Turret to list AD Values. The AD values are for RB2 and at full value without any modifiers. In parenthesis is the average hits, rounded down. Torp AD average hits not factored. One of the ships has the Turret weapon Linked with the Fore weapon for comparison purposes(otherwise one ship would have three attack values). 1. Fore 14(11), Broadside 8(6), Torps 7 2. Fore 16(12), Broadside 10(8), Torps 7 3. Fore 7(5), Broadside 14(11), Torps 8 4. Fore 8(6), Broadside 14(11), Torps 7 5. Fore 9(7), Broadside 14(11), Torps 6 6. Fore 7(5), Broadside 15(12), Torps 7 So, are there really any outliers that throw the sacred cow of "balance" out the window? Take this into consideration also. Most players would argue that the Aquans are Overpowered. The stated reasons are variable and arguable. HOWEVER, if all the factions had Fore weapons rather than Fixed Fore weapons, wouldn't they all be more balanced against each other? If anything, I would argue the AD values are just fine... BUT many of the ships in the game should have Points Cost adjustments(both up and down!!) to better reflect the abilities of a given ship/squadron. Going back to the OP. Too speed up the game, something must be sacrificed. Either Movement or Dice Mechanic are the big ones. Doing away with FF will Speed up movement and the game. The other movement change would be to move Squadrons in "formation", I.E. move one, place the rest in the same "formation". The problem is that ships on the "outside" of a turn will gain extra movement and therefore move a greater distance. Does this really matter in a game that is focused on blowing ships to smithereens?
  18. Hey Nay-sayers, have you actually stopped and spent time thinking changing FF to Fore through or just twitched and jerked with reactions? Of the core six, only the Aquans would have no benefit. The Relthoza, Directorate, Sorylians, and Terrans would all receive the same "unbalancing" benefit. On the Kurak Alliance side, only the Terquai would not benefit. On the Zenian League side, only the Ba'Kash loose out(I'm not counting the Disco balls of death either ) Is not as lopsided as everyone claims.
  19. I do not see a huge need to restat ships with FF that were changed to the Fore Weapon Arc. That is a knee jerk reaction with no play testing to back that up. The down side for all of those ships with FF is far weaker broadside weapons or Gun Racks(mostly Dindenzi). That has always been the balancing factor, not movement. I play Dindrenzi on a regular basis and it is fairly rare for me not to be able to line up a FF shot.... It is just terribly time consuming for squadrons of Murmillo or Secutor. The Tier 1 ships have not been an issue to find a viable target, mainly because I always to the -1 TL Hardpoint.
  20. What? The exploding dice mechanic is what I love about this game. How often do dice actually run away like that. On a ship with with DR/CR of 5/10(Falchion Carrier for example) 10 hits is the same outcome as 19 hits. Your concern is really about weaker ships with lower DR/CR which is way cooler when they go pop from crazy dice rolls any way. You have a greater change of double crits!!! I love that. If you don't like random and you want to mitigate it, stick to checkers.... Dice just might be your sworn enemies....
  21. The next option is to use a hosting service line photobucket or postimage. Then link the image. That way you don't have size limits or tiny pictures.
  22. I use air brushes for priming, base painting, and special effects. So it was not a big move to use Liquitex Matte Varnish. The 8oz size bottle runs about $12 US Dollars at a local discount art supply store, so cost was a factor when compared to Vallejo 0.575oz pots costing $3.69 USD. Cost was a factor, but I do like the Liquitex results better than the Vallejo.
  23. I have used both Vallejo and Liquitex Matt Varnishes with an air brush with mixed results sprayed over top of a Gloss Varnish, just like you. The Vallejo ended up with some glossiness. So I tried the Liquitex and the results were much more to my liking, being noticeably more "dull" too the point that side by side you can see the difference right away. My point is that the Matt Varnish is the culprit, not the underlying Gloss Varnish. Every company has a slightly different outlook on what "Matt" means....
  24. The first two player Box set, Battle For Valhalla. It is intended as more of a scenery piece than an actual regular play piece.
×
×
  • 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.