Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


hyde1352 last won the day on December 1 2019

hyde1352 had the most liked content!

About hyde1352

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,259 profile views
  1. This is more of a measure of how badly we can Yoko this topic now that it feels as wasted effort and just to talk old games now. Really don't think my chances are high in retaining a post, but after my posts here, and on the beta, and the reply I got from both, don't care. Farewell Providence, Toyokawa, Gustav, and Marans, I never got the chance to meet you.
  2. Let's see how long this lasts: I am the walrus, I am the walrus. Kukukachu
  3. Did you get pm'd by a slap in the face and a post deleted as well, or was that emote for something else?
  4. I don't think respect is the case, just a relatively small entity stretching itself to far to fast and with very little understanding of what made the fan base. This is all opinion, as I don't see very many people here on this forum as from the old days, and it is the same handful of naysayers throughout, of which I can claim to be.
  5. Not gonna lie, I found that amusing after all the disappointment going on
  6. Please clarify: any information regarding continuation of or ending, either permanent or temporary, of a model/range/game, all information is to be gained by contacting customer service? So no public updates, no blogs, no newsletter, just contact customer service?
  7. I'm just confused about the whole reinvent the wheel thing when you just need to bang the thing back into shape. Old argument, done and over with. But I agree that it's been this long, rules haven't been changed in the beta as much, no real nation flavor (that I've seen) has been released, and a constant shuffling of the old game and it's models into a dark closet is wearing thin. I really don't care about WWX, or it's adjoining games. I care that this is kinda what Spartan did with Uncharted, Dystopian, Firestorm, Halo, and the various micro games in each universe that ultimately slowed them down and gave us nothing for long stretches. Please correct me, but I thought they mentioned that they wouldn't be like that, or was that fantasy again.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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?
  12. @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.
  13. if Im reading the units cards correctly, then I see a Federated Light Cruiser, Federated Battlecruiser, and a Crown Battleship.
  14. About the only thing I'm in favor of 3.0 TFT, is the separate phase. Keeps flier spamming from affecting the model game.
  15. 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.
  • 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.