Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Merlin

  1. @Warcradle Zak is correct (except for the AD numbers. All linking in DW is rounded up. Not down). Mines cannot be deployed in the deep diving height level, but you can shoot torpedoes, if you have them. As to linking the mines, you have several options. 1) you can deploy them all as individual mines (6x5AD mines) 2) you can link two mines at a time for 3 linked mines of 8AD 2A) you can link as many or as few mines as you want. So you can have 4 mines link together, and another linked mine from the last 2 mines making one mine of 13AD, and one of 8AD for example. 3) you can link all 6 mines for 18AD. Really it's up to you have you want to split the AD. But these are your options.
  2. @RuleBritannia There's little point in comparing old DW to what Warcradle are doing. Old fluff, and old versions of tech no longer matter. Everything is weird sci fi now, for better or worse. Your best option is to just sit and wait and say nothing. The team aren't taking too much in the way of suggestions because the customer doesn't know what they want until they make it. Or at least that's the impression I get from them.
  3. @StorminWolf then you were one of the lucky ones that you could find any players at all. I was introduced to the game by a guy who had the British, played a few games with him then he disappeared from the gaming scene entirely. After that I struggled to get anybody to even look at the game let alone try it. The only person I managed to get into the game was a close friend who wouldn't look at the game until 6th edition 40k came along and ruined 40k completely for both of us. I tried hard to get more players In, but no one wanted to play the game. They just weren't interested. It took four more years before I found out that there were others who were playing Firestorm (only two guys). And it took a while before I could convince them to try DW. They haven't gone back as Firestorm is just a boring game in comparison to DW. The novelty of sea based combat is just too niche for gamers, in my experience and getting potential new players to even look at the game is the hardest part.
  4. I'm not expecting completed rules or models. Just more information as to what is going on, what they are working on and the concepts they are working with. And apparently they are two or three month from the beta tests. So obviously they are far enough along to say that much
  5. For a niche game like this, bouncing back might be tough. Everyone here had difficulty getting new players to play the game back when Spartan was around. That might not change with the new edition. Not the fault of the rules or the studio, just that many gamers just aren't interested in a game of boats.
  6. From my perspective, its not that you can't build excitement or communicate. It's that your not trying to do any. Or at least that's what it appears to look like. For example, you say the beta is coming in the summer as if that's just a throw away line. Where is the official announcement for That? Where is the attempt to get players to mark their calenders and wait with anticipation for what is to come? Nowhere. You mention that bit of news in a comment on facebook. That is something that should be bellowed from the rooftops. Not the news above that Derek is back as a rules writer (which was a big mistake on your part, btw). By this point you should be releasing the concepts for the factions by yourselves. Not letting Saltue attendees post up a few images they managed to get. I don't know, but from my perspective it just seems like your not trying to build hype. There's been plenty of news about WWX recently, but nothing about the old Spartan Games. While I don't expect a minute by minute run down of everything that is going on, a blog post every week, two weeks, month about what's been going on would be nice. At least a bit more frequent and more interesting content than news about a rules writer.
  7. To be fair Stuart, alternate history can be whatever the writer wants it to be. That is a fact. The difference here is that you purchased the IP of a game that had it's alternate history well established, or at least established enough for the fans of the game to get behind and to enjoy playing their games with. This baggage was inherited with the IP, and just like if a tv show switched show runners and writers who decided to completely ditch the established canon in favour of what they want to write your going to get push back from the existing fans. The problem with this is that you run the risk that, In the effort to make things seem more exciting or appeal to a wider audience, you've actually done more harm to the property overall as those old fans are likely to tell potential new people to stay away as it's no longer as good as it was. What a good writer would, or at least should, do with an existing canon is work with it, expand on it and try to coax the existing fans into taking the new journey with them, without invalidating everything that came before. The evidence so far shows you to be doing the former. Just wiping the slate clean and, from my perspective, just expecting a niche game to flourish with a completely new background making everything that existing fans knew completely irrelevant. Sure, your writers have thrown a bone to those fans by implementing some of the old DW fluff into the new narrative, but it doesn't feel natural. Sometimes hard reboots are good. Sometimes they are train wrecks. And for a game as niche as DW was and probably will forever be (28mm games are just far too popular, and I expect armoured clash to surpass DW in every respect when it comes out as land games are just so much more popular. Especially 10mm games) I don't know if a hard reboot will work or not. I remain hopeful that all will be fine, but I am also keenly aware that the game I like to play the most might not turn out the way I hope it does. And unfortunately the more the months go on and the little snippets you release, the more my confidence in Warcradle lowers. All of that is about DW only though. Armoured Clash looks like it might be fun to play on the table, for the models if nothing else.
  8. I designed a 3d model for printing for it. If that's of any help you you?
  9. Merlin


    Hmm...for a start I dislike that you've essentially relegated Sturgeon to only being a mere pawn in the Covenant before being given the Vault as his own personal laboratory.. .as if the Vault had been discovered decades before by others and not him personally....especially since he discovered Sturginium in the Vault. Secondly, I don't care for WWX and as a result I doubt I'm ever going to like the Dystopian Age fluff as it's just too ridiculous. The rule of cool flies way too high in Warcradle in my opinion. And it shows in their fluff.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. I was refering to Stuarts comments. Not the rules that have been brought up in this thread
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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)
  17. 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.
  18. The Chinese do not have fixed channel broadsides. Just a minor correction.
  19. 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.
  20. 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"
  21. 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.
  22. 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
  23. 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?
  24. But the rabbit is cute and fluffy....and who wouldn't want to have tea with the mad hatter?
  25. 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.
  • 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.