Jump to content

Merlin

Member
  • Content count

    1,685
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Merlin

  1. Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Well, killed tiny flyers don't return to the carrier. They are dead. The carrier was always launching a brand new squadron from its many reserves of planes they have. Which is realistic. V2.5 could possibly have had a max number of TFT they could relaunch a game, instead of the always available carrier points the game already had. So, for example, if the Elbe was used, it could have had a max TFT capacity of 20 tokens, (60 planes per ship due to its size). So the carrier can do any action it likes (replenish, rearm or relaunch) but to do the replenish or relaunch digs into its limited supply. That's what it should have been in my opinion.
  2. Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    To be honest, the only way to stop them will be to kill the carrier, or just put hurt on it. It's not like they are powerhouses who can take a hit like a dreadnought (except the Russian carriers. Ablative Armour makes it so). Not sure I like the way the tiny flyers will just be removed after an attack run. Doesn't feel realistic for the scale. And more importantly, it feels too Firestorm Armada for me...and that is a really boring game to play.
  3. Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    I was refering to Stuarts comments. Not the rules that have been brought up in this thread
  4. Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    So Tiny Flyers are going back to mostly v1.1 rules, requiring them to land on carriers for a turn then relaunched? Not only that, they are getting the Firestorm Armada treatment in that they do not act independently? Both of these I can take it or leave it. Though for the latter, while i think its a bit daft, I hope you don't go whole hog with the Firestorm rules, in that they can only ever be within so many inches of the carrier at all times, unless they go on an attack run. That would be horrible.
  5. Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Or they all must activate first inside their own phase, before all other moves. Carriers can still perform their actions on them, Or respawn them when they have been destroyed as normal. But they cant do anything until the next game turn and SAS Activation Phase. It's not a complicated fix and doesn't need a full rework of the rules.
  6. New company...

    Last I saw, WC were going to put some of the most viable models back into production, if the moulds and/or master model that Spartan developed are still good for use. In my mind, that means most of the models from v2 should be fine. For example, for the Prussians I suspect that models such as the Uhlan Cruiser, Kaiser Karl HBB, and Elbe carrier might be completely fine to put back into production as they are now without modification. Other models like the Frigates, Corvettes, and the battlecruiser might not be in a good enough condition anymore for making new moulds and casts for. So these might need revamped, or just dropped in favour of a new model with drop on options to make sure that older models aren't left behind and the stats come in a Mk1 and Mk2 stat configuration, where the Mk1 is the current version and the Mk2 is the new model. Some models though will be going the way of the dodo though, like the Emperor Battleship, Riever Cruisers, and maybe the Geier. These models will be discontinued and folded into the stats of other models. The Emperor can easily be folded into the Eider stats as they are almost exactly the same. The Riever can be folded into the Uhlan Cruisers, but the Uhlan stats can be modified to have the original stats and a Tesla version to allow players to use the Riever as it is. Last I saw these were their plans for the current range, but you can't blame them for trying to do something different with the models to stamp Warcradles identity onto the range, misguided as it could well be in the end. Their modifications can quite easily backfire and instead of getting more people into the setting it might just put more people off the game entirely. However, that's not something we can predict at this stage and we can but wait to see what else they plan to reveal to the public. Sooner would be better than later, as the DW community in general has been slowly dying since WC did the Q&A, (theres only 2 topics being talked about in the forum by the same 6 people) and the Facebook page they took over has nothing but picture of people with their rulebooks, rather than a place for discussion and showing off paint jobs. That could be just most have decided to wait in silence, or they've gone their merry way. But we can't force them to reveal anything until they feel they are ready.
  7. New company...

    It's the same rocket part the Japanese cruisers have. Though, I do prefer the rocket drop on the Chinese had. They were so large that it was easy to say that they had on board manual targeting system (or put another way, a Chinese soldier is inside the rocket guiding it to their target)
  8. Ottoman's in 2.5

    I won a tournament at 1500pts with the Ottomans in v2.5. Absolutely trampled my opponents in my first two games (won the first game 2000vps to 90vps vs British, 800vps to 300vps vs a submarine japanese list, and scraped a win vs another Japanese fleet when I mag exploded their dreadnought) My List was: Kanuni dreadnought with 3 frigates as escorts Hisar Sadrazam with extra GNE to give my cruisers a movement boost for capturing ships or objectives. Sinop monitors with extra SAS Sinop monitors with extra SAS Fettah cruisers Arci destroyers 17 Activations in total (Not that I was trying to get that many but it was just a perk of the Ottoman Orbat) I won my games mostly through storm template and cloud shenanigans, blocking chokepoints with them to mess with my opponents shooting (in my first game I had the cloud activated on my dreadnought, plus 1 storm template on top of it at one point so both my dreadnought and frigate escort would be 6s to hit which was lucky as the dreadnought and frigates were all the British dreadnought could see all game). Bit of advice for your list, ignore the Minelayers and anything to do with Minelaying with the Ottomans. They are the definition of worthless. They are too easily countered in 1) mines are only on one model in the fleet, so 2) They are very easy to kill before they get close enough to make use of their mines, which 3) are too easy to destroy as your opponent gets to use AA to neutralize the Mines instead of the normal CC and we all know that there is more dice in AA than CC. Devastating on the Mines is actually very very powerful, but the Mines are just too easy to neutralize and after a game or two you'll just go back to a normal list without them. That's what happened to me. Also, try playing at 1500pts per game. 1000pts is just too small a game for v2.5 and it's damaging critical hits. A 1500pts game can easily be concluded within 2 hours of playing with a definitive winner. But that's just my two pennies on that. Also, the dreadnought is the only large model you should be looking at for any game. The Sadrazam is not a very good ship and should be relegated to an add on large model if you have the Cruisers in your list to help give them a speed boost. The Hisar is a very good unit, but I struggle to get it into lists because it's an Armoured model instead of Naval. So the dreadnought is the best compromise as it gives the extra SAS and packs one hell of a punch for a fairly lacklustre Orbat. That's my advice.
  9. New company...

    The Chinese do not have fixed channel broadsides. Just a minor correction.
  10. When V3 drops and the tiny tank tokens become irrelevant and dropped completely from the game, what will players with existing models do with them? Will they just be something to throw into the rubbish since they won't have any use anymore or could they be repurposed? Obviously I think most players are in favour of the repurposing option, but how could they be repurposed? I think some of them could be used as a naval unit of sorts. The Prussian Walze could easily be converted to act like a small boarding craft in DW or a gunboat. It looks boaty enough. The Japanese Ke-Ho tank also looks like it would be a cool boat, rolling over the water. The STO Faust could easily be a Multi Purpose model. But I'm not sure about the other small tokens. What do you think? Do they have a place left in the game?
  11. Questions and Answers Blog Post

    It's the way you say it that makes it read as though you have contempt for those that still disagree with your changes. And so what if some still comment on the same point repeatedly? You've made it clear more than enough times that it's changing. They have an opinion, let them voice it. It's not going to change anything either way, so why say anything to discourage the talk? It's a general discussion thread afterall. That's what it is for. Instead of just saying it's changing and basically telling fans to just get on board or stay quiet, engage and try to get them to see your point of view and why you think it's a good change. So far, only Stuart is trying to do this. But the information he has shared is limited, either because warcrasle hasn't fully thought everything out or he can't go into too much detail yet. You, on the other hand, just say what's happening, effectively stating (without actually saying) that fan opinions don't really matter, or at least that's what it comes off like in text. All I'm saying is that you need to choose your words much better. Of all the Warcradle staff that post comments on the forums or facebook, your username is the one i personally least like seeing in the threads. Not because what you say is wrong, but I dislike the way you say it.
  12. Questions and Answers Blog Post

    Seriously Richard, your comments over the last couple of months keep suggesting that you are the least diplomatic of the Warcradle staff. I know you mean well, but comments like the one above are not necessary. All fans know the scale is changing and that there is nothing we can do or say to keep it at it's currant scale. However, there is no need to write comments that suggests contempt for those that aren't on-board with your point of view or vision for the game. Like the old saying goes, "if you don't have something nice to say, say nothing at all"
  13. They aren't obsolete. They will still be usable in Armoured Clash. But I was talking the tank tokens still being usable in DW as a tiny boat.
  14. Nothing a little paint job wouldn't fix. I've textured up the bases on my Walze tanks, and I'm more than happy to repaint it up. And to make them usable I'm sure most others would do the same
  15. But the rabbit is cute and fluffy....and who wouldn't want to have tea with the mad hatter?
  16. Honestly, yes that would be preferable as a wargame without a war in the backstory (a big war between all combatants you can play with) makes zero sense. I mean that is like Flames of War being based on WW2, but never actually goes as far as or past the German Ultimatium of 1939 and focus solely on the build up to it. How can it be called a wargame if the backstory behind it doesn't have the war? Warcradle seem to be putting the Horse before the cart and starting their new universe at that point (landing players at the tension filled period before a global conflict breaks out), instead of doing what a wargame should be doing and putting the Cart before the horse (landing players in the middle of a global conflict and then add the reasons for it in after when they are hooked). Everything Stuart is saying sounds more like filler designed to bulk out a games universe, or be used as a premise for a tabletop board game where the politicking makes the most sense. It doesn't make for a very compelling reason for players to tabletop wargame though. If there is no real conflict (large scale global conflict specifically) why are the various factions fighting? This is the only thing Spartan have done that Warcradle, at the moment, seems to have gotten correct in terms of their fluff. You need a global conflict for a wargame like Dystopian Wars (or any other wargame) to have meaning and purpose. For example: Any wargame based on WW2 has that as a backdrop. The game has an in built conflict for players to rally behind. 40k is a never ending galaxy spanning series of wars, giving players plenty of conflict for players to rally behind, and because all of the factions are all fighting each other and there are rebel elements in all of them to some degree, there's never and conflicting notions that one faction can never fight another. Napoleonic War games (few as they may be) have the backdrop of the French Revolutionary Wars and Napoleonic Wars for players to rally behind. All these games have a reason for the wargame to exist (so factions can fight amongst each other). Warcradle seem determined to make sure that none of the factions have any real reason to be fighting, other than the limited small scale, and frankly insignificant, conflicts Stuart is suggesting. But Also, no. I do not want them to suddenly turn the world into a post apocalyptic wasteland in 5 years. But it doesn't have to be like that anyway. Warcradle can keep the conflict going for years if they wanted without to nuking the whole setting.
  17. Then players will do that in any case? Just because, for example, you decided that a war kicks off between the Prussians and Latin Alliance (Latin League would be much better an alliance name btw, just for alliteration purposes) wouldn't mean local gamers who do not have those factions would get annoyed. They will still play the game regardless, some of them making up their own narrative because some gamers like to do that (I personally don't get the appeal of writing up a story to go with my games as its not that important to me, but I understand that some players do). Declaring that all of the factions in the game are already at war with everyone at the beginning gets around this problem. Look at 40k. A huge campaign might be taking place at one end of the Galaxy involving only the Orks, Eldar and Imperium (because it always involves the Imperium) but this doesn't mean that nothing is happening at the other end of the Galaxy. As is the games tagline "There is only WAR" If DA had the same mentality, what would it matter if there was a flashpoint incident in Europe and not Asia? It wouldn't, as everyone would be at war anyway. Only one side of the world would be more at war than the other for a time. Whats the point in having all of these weird and wonderful weapons that only want to hug our enemies if the countries controlling them are afraid to use them overtly...especially in a tabletop wargame? Defeats the purpose of them.
  18. In the 20th century that is true that large nations fought proxy wars and that WW1 and WW2 has dissuaded large nations from engaging in conflicts of that size ever again, but the 19th century had no such fears. The Prussians fought 3 wars inside a 10 year time period against 2 great powers and Denmark. All in the centre of Europe. The Russians fought the Ottoman Empire on several occasions throughout the century, one of those occasions pitting them against France and Britian. Also fought in Europe, albeit the farthest reaches of it. By my reckoning, The Dystopian World hasn't had that WW1 and WW2 moment yet and the sheepishness of the nation's to actually engage in proper war seems nonsensical.
  19. But do you not see that for a wargame your making a background that is basically anti war? Where the factions would rather use subterfuge and diplomacy rather than all out war? Sure, you've said there will be minor skirmishes but at the same time your telling us that most of those are swept under the carpet in favour of more secretive ways of dealing with them. I mean, what's the point of a wargame if none of the factions in the background are actually at war? Its beginning to sound like your creating a secret society within the higher echelons of society that play "wargames" with the armies of their respective empires.
  20. True, but most of those conflicts are almost always great power vs practical nobody (on the global stage). Great power vs great power usually escalates into full wars with formal declarations. And border skirmishes between major nations were almost nonexistant as that usually gave a justification for war. So if we take the armoured clash example you've given, where all of the factions are scrambling for a piece of africa and fighting each other over it, they are essentially at war with each other. I mean, say for example a Prussian expeditionary force was sent to Africa and was completely destroyed by the British, and word got back to Prussia and they have evidence of Britain's wrongdoings, are you suggesting they would just sit on their hands and go "you win some you lose some"? No. They would rile up the public and declare war in retaliation because a matter like that has to be settled. Same thing happened with the Anglo-Zulu war. The British lost a column of men to a technologically inferior nation and they needed to save face and get their honour back so they made sure they won. The backstory you are describing sounds far more unrealistic where all of the factions don't really want to fight at all for any reason, but are strangely happy to send their armies to Africa to fight amongst each other. Why are their armies fighting if they are not at war? Why are their navies sinking each other if they are not formally or informally at war? 40k isn't as unrealistic as that even though it's based in space.
  21. The Spartan fluff was more based on a more realistic way wars on this planet would be fought. I mean, how many wars have been fought in the modern era (1600 - present) in real life where all of the combatants fought everyone at the same time? Never. It was always one alliance vs another alliance. What Warcradle are doing is creating a open setting where anyone can fight anyone as the backstory essentially has everyone at war with each other at the same time...which is not realistic at all. Thus, it allows more freedom to make up whatever nonsense they want to progress any story they want. 40k can do this easily as being a space empire beset on all sides by all manner of xeno threats writers can make up whatever they want, or set it at any point of the 10,000 year history of the Imperium because what does it matter? As to temporal rifts. I think it is best to just keep time travel, and other alternate realities out of an alternate reality game. It's not needed, And it's likely to put a lot of players off, as it does allow Warcradle the ability to completely Age of Sigmar the games lore if they run out of more ideas down the line. No one wants that.
  22. First for Covenant

    The resident CoA player in my area had the same thoughts about the PA changes. But after a few games with it his mind changed quite a bit. Especially when Zenos are mixed with the Teleport generator.
  23. Rise of the Teutonic Order

    I've decided I'd start painting, Finish painting or repaint my Teutonic Order models. First up is my attempt to make Metzger look cooler in the water than the current waterlined model Spartan has made. Next is a Titan Troop Transport painted up to be a dedicated Teutonic Order Troop Transport Ship. Next up will be a "Command" Metzger model im working on, then the Hochmeister Dreadbot (yes I still despise its place in the game and never likely to use it, but I like the model in any case) then I will be moving onto the Schildtrager Robots and Fausts at some point.
  24. Rise of the Teutonic Order

    I put these up for sale on Shapeways, for anyone who wants any of them. https://www.shapeways.com/shops/joes-corner
  25. STO and Canada!!!!!!

    So typical Spartan time then? That's fair enough. By this point I'm used to the lateness of my pre-orders.
×

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.