Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


hyde1352 last won the day on January 6

hyde1352 had the most liked content!

About hyde1352

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

795 profile views
  1. That is exactly what I needed to read Stuart. Now if you could just condense the units lists as having that many bland units for all those factions when they're really not needed (as is why have eight factions with twenty ships each that are the same? Just have three factions or so?) But now we know.
  2. That's also if the game is enhanced like so. We have no real information that any nation is getting more comprehensive equipment other than what is in the beta. Or at least I haven't seen any other info. And so far in the beta, every nation has the same ship (battleship, carrier, large sub, medium sub, small sub) that only Celestials have a variety due to being a Korean, Chinese, Japanese version of each ship which as far as I've read, is only crew differential. It is a faster game, but no unique flair of old.
  3. There we go, something I missed, Latin and Commonwealth both have Crit-on-hit weapons. Thank you RuleBritannia. And after a few drinks in me, looks like Celestials can be a pretty decent rocket thrower, with the Mark of Yama gen. I'm still scratching my head where this is going, as some of the earlier feeds and designs don't line up to the beta we have. Example: Union battleship has listed as 3 turrets, 2 fore, 1 aft, but the latest image has 3 fore, 0 aft with a A-fore 270, B-180 fore/port offset, C-180 fore/starboard offset scheme, which matches the battlecruiser. I'm aware of the nitpicky attitude, but I'm quite confused as to what's set in stone for the nations and models. I mean in the sense that are we getting just fillers to test the rules, or should the nations and models be played like this? If this is just filler, okay, I'm quite content to just hash it out and make these rules as precise as can be with not loopholes. I'd rather have a game with minimum min/max players, and more guidelines for as many possible outcomes and contingencies that may come up while playing with some of our more hardcore players. Yes, there is a difference between hardcore and min/maxers.
  4. I know it to be fairly early into the beta, and with the rules and background still being rewritten, but I am curious if Warcradle would release an idea/goal as to the factional differences they plan to implement. It is one thing for us as players to go at each other, but I cannot really get into this version if I have no idea which faction suites me. I understand that this version may wish to set a level playing field across the nations, and that is their decision/right. My views are as follows: Enlightened as trickster, we-have-cool-tech, mad-scientists. Commonwealth as a faction causes critical hits and have small Enlightened tech. Crown as the ultimate defensive turtle, with boosted torpedo usage. Sultanate as a low tier Enlightened. Celestials are looking as a swarm faction with many, many units. Imperium are a faction that counters Crown, or any defensive faction. I believe that leaves Latin and Union, which have standard equipment and standard units with nothing special. In the few games, there has been almost no diversity or drive to play other than above with anything other than Enlightened, Crown, and Imperium. Weapon placement means almost nothing as I just need to measure from center of model and try to broadside most targets. If I need to Indirect, I stack mortar units behind a large/colossal shielded 2* heavy Crown within range of few units with their own shields. If I need to assault, I used Imperium with storm generators and bum rushed over with atomics and zapped em all. I will admit to unimaginative tactics. I asked this in my feedback, but maybe the community can see something I missed, what is the difference for each faction?
  5. @RuleBritannia by weapon differentiation, do you mean like of olde, or in one nation has an experimental munitions while others having something new? Of old, was more like one nation was better with one weapon like torpedoes, while others had similar weapons with additional traits: like main guns that were fire starters. If by something new, do you mean that Crown has middle ground covered with guns and able to outlast in a fuster-cluck, while Commonwealth has heavier short range guns that do exactly as intended by demolishing any contenders that get close? This is more for my understanding.
  6. if Im reading the units cards correctly, then I see a Federated Light Cruiser, Federated Battlecruiser, and a Crown Battleship.
  7. About the only thing I'm in favor of 3.0 TFT, is the separate phase. Keeps flier spamming from affecting the model game.
  8. As for the previous comment @Overread, I don't think I can drop the old Spartan memories. I can only compare this version to the older version done by said. That may be my failing here. As for stat cards, printer friendly sheets like the site had for 2.0 worked best for me and my group. We didn't need images or colors, just stats for the units we had that stayed up to date. And if we had the equipment, a dropbox folder on our smart phones or tablets loaded with all the relevant information. I am against mass produced unit cards by the simple dislike of having to get new cards for old units for every new change. Version 1.0 and 1.1 were bad at this, with each new campaign book or faction upgrade revealing new rules, weapons, MAR's, and commodore abilities that would change old tactics and games. Does any one remember the first seven core nation upgrade boxes? They had a large, medium squad, small squad, and a change to an old unit. And 2.0 was released, some of THOSE units got changed as well. When Spartan moved over to a webpage with download faction stats, all I had to do was check each week, see the version number, copy what was new, and play the next game. It may make people who don't have a printer or internet game-wise life harder (and I know a few), but the ease of use access to stats that would/should change over time is a big point.
  9. Alright, my two cents for this errata: All that follows is opinion. You don't like it, that's your choice. Changing to a crippled setup makes little sense to me. I've played with the take damage, ship is weaker per damage, firepower is lower per damage, defenses are lower per damage, and it has forced me to think whether to move a squad up with one hurting, or maneuver around another way. This neither felt slow, nor tedious, but made the game a constant change. The ships already get crippled over time,. Now, it's functional then crippled, then dead? I may be reading that wrong, so yeah, no sense. Boarding has always been an optional in my area. That doesn't mean it's in the game or not, it means you can board or don't board a vessel. If you don't like boarding rules, here's an idea: DONT DO BOARDING ACTIONS!! As I have experienced by being witness, receiving, and using boarding actions in the 2.0 rules, they can change a game around. Have a small squad of frigates board an escorted battleship with CAP, and take it after losing all but 1 marine. Now I've disordered the enemy force, and denied commodore actions. Opponent must rethink their play. Crew types also added to the hit values as stated earlier by Grand Stone. Generators, what has become of them? Stat boosters? Really? So I can no longer roll a chain of 6s and take a triple critical and nerf it into a single hit. Nation flavor, that made my choice when I started. What does what? Which Nation plays like what? What does this nation have that that nation does not? There is some "equipment" that is nation specific, but nothing like what was previous, and then kind of one sided. Every nation has the same units, same amount of types, they do the same thing, with the same equipment. This is not exact, nor is it accurate, but such is opinions. This is an oversimplified version of a game that is only related to the previous versions by having the game name slapped on it. We lost everything with this change: lore, history, units, abilities, flavor, and the story that was being written as it grew. I do not know if this can be revitalized. but this is not dystopian wars.
  10. so in layman's terms to simplify, like old playstyle until further notice?
  11. @RuleBritannia The TFT ont eh lift is also a Prussian TFT.
  12. @Jsiegel1983 Alright, let's see if this can get by the censors. Starting at the bottom on the flight deck, TFT, Geier, TFT, TFT, TFT, TFT, TFT, with all TFT being Prussian tiny fliers.
  13. If going by the fliers on the carrier, I have to ask about the Prussian Geier model that's on the Ice Maiden. Was able to get the new Warcradle Ice Maiden model, and yes it's a well crafted piece (even though I wil admit I was skeptical about it in previews) but the model I knew as a Geier bomber is mounted on the carrier deck in at least half the size of the normal model. Does this hint at something new @Warcradle Stuart, if you can say anything?
  14. But we're all making that bastard son's child support payments. I'm looking at this topic less as a "hint-hint Warcradle" and more as a way the community can move the game forward and fix what we've seen as problems while we wait for Warcradle to publish. My gamer group and I have already gone over the old 1.0 to 2.5 books and piecemeal our own rules and tweaked current units and factions in a way we see as sensible. But it is just a stopgap attempt while we wait. And before anyone says we made on faction too French, nope, my group is split half coalition, half bond, with mercs thrown in, and two players share a faction.
  15. Am in agreement, thanks for the resurrect. And what would you compare your English to to say it's poor? I've never seen written rich English, and from where I'm from, half the folks cant even spell or write legibly.
  • 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.