Jump to content

Bastirous

Member
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Hi all, I am looking to add one or two more Razorthorns to my fleet, because if love the model. If anyone has extras, or would be fine parting with one or two, I would gladly take them off of your hands. Please pm me if you are interested. Thanks.
  2. Bastirous

    Balor's Relthoza

    those are some sexy spiders right there
  3. I see no reason to not release a rules pdf for free. Some people cannot afford the price of playing when all things are factored in (models, book, tokens, etc.). I myself can, but barely. Someone with slightly less spending money might therefore not be able to start. Not releasing a free pdf is either exclusionary to persons without the means, or going to be enough to dissuade someone to find another cheaper game. It's basically arithmetic of how many people are you willing to allow to slip away and not buy your product, or how many people might you piss off if you release free rules. Also to be fair the the only reason I ever got into FSA was the free ruleset being available for me to read and decide if I liked it. The simple barrier of not knowing the rules easily would have been enough to dissuade me, no matter the models. I simply would have continued my search somewhere else until I found suitable space craft models and game. Spartan hooked me and got me to buy their product that I would not have otherwise. Take what you will from that.
  4. I get that the change makes a big difference, and that it's nuts on the larges. I didn't make it clear in my first post, but in one or both of the follow ups I said that I was speaking strictly of Mediums and Smalls. Heck I could be even more specific, I really only meant for the basic cruiser and the Missionary FF. Essentially it would be just a cookie for those two craft. Sure it would make them more effective, but make em pay for it and I think it's not too bad. Like 10pts for the CC (hardpoint) and 5 for the FF. When I first read the original post in this topic it got me thinking of BSG and the turreted weapons under the nose of the Battlestars. Then I thought of how closely a Sentinel looks like Galactica (minus the fighter bays) and I got really excited about modeling such weapons. Which lead to me wanting an in-game reflection of the conversion, etc. etc. Plus when thinking of the Terran fluff it seems to make sense. If one admiral somewhere had damaged cruisers, and his/her techs patch them up to keep fighting but the fore (fixed) weaponry is broken still they'd probably strap some of the broadside turrets (like on the Hermes) to the front of the cruisers. Then if those cruisers preformed well in an engagement, word might spread about the modification, and then maybe more admirals would have their engineers make the same modifications. Overall I'm someone who likes more options, even if they cost too much to be worthwhile, or aren't very effective simply because I get options and can do what I please with them. Having another hardpoint upgrade, or just additional upgrade like this would be cool. Plus I'm a sucker for modifying the Sentinel hull design. I don't care what you all say I think the Sentinel is sexy!!!!
  5. Yea I knew bout the Arc Reactor fluff ( I directed people to it after the sculpts came out and speculation about the domes first began). I have not seen the underside of the minis though, so thank you for the clarification.
  6. I think your jumping a bit too far . Sure other factions could justify it somehow, but I look at the Terran Alliance list and notice it is bar none the most upgradable of them all. Then I look at their fluff, and see that being so freely upgraded makes sense, and I see another upgrade that fits perfectly in their play-style. Plus I really don't see other factions being able to argue the point much. Dindrenzi have fixed railguns, Aquans already have fore, Directorate have turrets. This leaves Relthoza and Sorylians, and they have their own unique cookies/strengths so I don't think it makes much sense. I am trying to contribute on the topic at hand, about fore (fixed) being changed (or for my opinion payed for to be upgraded) to fore on Terrans. I think it should be an upgrade option. You clearly do not. Would it be better if it was just on the list of Hardpoint options?
  7. Considering the amount of work and maintenance that probably goes into keeping two near craft length forward mass drivers functional, I bet the amount of effort involved in replacing them and then only having to work on smaller, mass produced, turret-like weapons is a decent trade-off. Maybe the engineers just shut off the fore (fixed) weapons, and reroute power away from them to bolster shields, etc. and bolt some new turreted type weapons to the front. This is obviously all conjecture, but why not? Strategic benefit in combat would be a high priority for the Terran Alliance. Being able to retrofit older craft with more modern style weapons, without having to build a whole new hull sounds like an attractive incentive, especially if it will save time in the future. I am only talking about an OPTION to pick if desired because it would be cool from a play standpoint, and from a modeling standpoint. Keep your forward Nukes if you want em, but adding an option some people might take is good too. Finally I think you misunderstand me. I mean the upgrade would alter fore (fixed) to fore. When I say Turret type weapons, I mean the types of things on the broadsides of all Terran craft. They look like turrets. Overall I just wanted to add to this topic because 1. It interested me. Terrans are on the defensive trying to do whatever they can to survive, so why wouldn't some Admirals outfit their craft like this? 2. I agree that fore (fixed) being fore would be nice, I'm not trying to say that it needs to happen, or that Spartan should listen to my suggestion, but I wanted to contribute my opinion 3. I want to build models that reflect this type of modification, and thus feel like I should justify why the craft have weapon systems like this. I like WYSIWIG
  8. Having fore (fixed) become fore would be sweet. If incorporated into the fleet it should be a non-hardpoint upgrade (like 5-10pts), and would represent turret systems with limited arcs of fire replacing the forward guns. I personally would love to model some Terran mediums and smalls with those systems instead of the large fore gun barrels. If made to pay for the option I don't see it as an issue. Fluff-wise it makes sense, as Terrans are the turret faction and while they are upgrading all of their craft with all the other doodads, why not strip out the larger, less flexible weapon systems, replace them with wider arcs of fire, and save space to put in more redundant/backup systems (weapon shielding fluff, etc.)? Makes sense to me.
  9. Doesn't the Shaturai have a radar dish type thing towards the back of the model already? Also as someone already stated the background on the SG main site used to say that Arc Reactors, etc. etc. I would say the domes are likely reactors of some sort, able to manipulate space-time thus allowing them to hurl objects without having to have any obvious forward weapons to speak of, thus explaining the fore (fixed) kinetic weapons. The larger Ryushi vessels are able to bolster larger reactors, and feed more power to/from them therefore they are able to manipulate space-time to give them shield-like systems, and extremely powerful forward weapons, whereas the frigates are just too small to have powerful enough reactors to make the same types of manipulations. That's just my two cents.
  10. Makes sense. Cylinders are easier to make with rotating parts to simulate gravity while still conserving space for added structural integrity, cosmic ray shielding, etc. However cylindrical craft are not as inspiring as other designs.
  11. Fair enough. I just think it looks spectacular, and that more color would go a long way. My personal OCD tends to be consistency amongst like things, so when I saw the pic I was mostly expressing that.
  12. Based on the pictures of the battleship I think it would look awesome to paint all of those gill-type areas the same way (top, bottom, and sides). Totally imparts more of the quasi organic craft theme to the Aquans.
  13. That is superb. Honestly I didn't vote for that choice but it look sick in this photo.
  14. I was figuring using the extra PD and Bigger Batteries on the BB's to make them tank a little harder, plus add some extra Wing defense. Typically my strategy is to put as much low costed, decently powerful stuff onto the field (in any tabletop wargame) and flood the enemy with cross fire lanes and more threats than they can easily think about. So now I am hearing that he nukes are worth taking a second look at to mitigate my opponents small and medium craft, and that the beam weapons are equally useful. For whatever reason I just kind of dismissed the weapon options originally. I will have to try them out. must ask why is the carrier a must. Don't get me wrong, I think that carriers are awesome and the idea of flooding the field with wings sounds great. Are the carriers that much improved this edition?
  15. I love running two Razorthorns up the gut of my opponent and I still want to field 2 BB's, I'm just wondering if anyone has found that loading them up with doodads makes a big difference (amongst my other questions) or if they're better off mostly as is.
×
×
  • 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.