Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Shadowcatdecoy last won the day on April 30 2017

Shadowcatdecoy had the most liked content!

About Shadowcatdecoy

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

974 profile views
  1. I was browsing Drachinifel's Youtube channel and found Warcradle had released it's starter set. Here's hoping this does well, my Prinnies would love to see the table again!
  2. So wait, my Aquans will be getting a ship with access to boarding abilities? That does not seem right, thematically. The only time I have ever boarded with my Aquans was verse a Directorate heavy cruiser in a desperation move. I crit the stupid thing too, my opponent and I thought it was hilarious. But still I hope the Aquans have the least boarding ability in the game. Lt. Flipper flopping his way through the corridors of an enemy ship just does not feel righ to me .
  3. First time coming to the FA forums from DW in a while, I have to say I like these changes. Though I am apparently a rare dissenting voice against the loss of fighters, my Aquan fleet tended to use their increased range for hunting tier 3s. I can accept the change though. All in all I like the various rules I have been hearing, nice work.
  4. The Prussians are a good boarding faction their special weapons strip crew off enemy ships and their Tesla Generators help them close distances. Their generator options and abilities mean they have some tricks up their sleeve to allow for surprising game play. Russians tend to have some of the highest crew values in the game but they are all conscripted so they only hit on 5+. What they do best is mid to close range gunnery with little in the way of fancy tricks. They have massive guns and thick armor but tend to be one of the slower factions in the game. An excellent move forward and shoot force that their opponents have to think around and be tricksy to fight. The Brits I do not know as much about due to not having an opponent play them in a long time. Not because they are bad, they have redoubtable turrets and guardian shields everywhere, but because he lost interest in tabletop gaming.
  5. The current Orbats are just placeholders, they were put out quickly so that people could play with their fleets. Mike has stated that SG has a new team of play-testers working on the full updates. The new Generators and other toys will be in the full Orbat release.
  6. Thats why my suggestion is to call the short range large blast we have currently a plasma cannon. Yeah the new weapon has been less the problem than it still being called a PA. Truthfully i think we could easily accept a name change, as when you say Particle Accelerator for most it conjures the image of a beam weapon.
  7. Welcome back Jupy! Yeah Mike has said that these are the hard fast rules so people can play with their models and not the end product. From the sound of it Spartan is getting a new team of play testers together to get the factions sorted.
  8. For me it would depend on my mood as both picking traits and rolling them have advantages and disadvantages. I would like to see rules for a campaign where your commodore starts at the most basic level and as the narrative advances they gain new traits as they gain experience. You could mix it up with additional faction traits and other abilities to represent the tactics your commodore gained through the campaign.
  9. One of the things we had bandied around a long time ago on these forums was instead of relying on overly large dice pools the CoA should make better use of the firepower it has. The original idea was to use the Hunter MAR to represent the CoA having better targeting equipment than other people. With the release of the French battleship that can alternate between submerged and air Hunter the though hit me that something like that would allow the CoA to make better use of its firepower but not necessarily overpower them.
  10. Ok here goes: PAs: Not sure about these statwise but they are no longer what anyone thinks when you say particle accelerator. With them no longer being a linear beam weapon the name just no longer feels right. With their current stats it would be better to call them short range heavy plasma cannons or something similar. I realize this is nit picking but most of the complaints I have seen on and off the forums have been that the name no longer fits the weapon. And lets be honest, we can all totally see the CoA putting a giant plasma cannon on the front of their ships, you know, for the lols. Generators: Yes, the current generator options are stale, they are so stale they have not improved since 1.1 at least (actually we have lost generators). I doubt these rules are the full 2.5 rules and more likely something Spartan Games did to get out quickly and as such I hope we will see the generators Mike and Josh hinted at. That said the 2.0 "temporary fix" for CoA drones lasted two and a half years. Drones: I will be honest and say i understand the problem with how many drones the CoA can field. It is totally SG fault, but I understand. It is actually very hard to make an effective CoA list that doesn't spam drones because of how many of our L/M ships bring them. For a while SG thinking got into a rut that said drones were the CoA's signature weapon instead of SAS, so they put them on everything, everything. That said I think the combat coordinator rule is the way to go for the specialized MARs, you know Acrobatic Pilots, Big Fuel Tanks, Swarm Tactics. I would not even mind the drones only having 10" move if the carriers had a CC MAR that added 4" to their movement. Hunter is not a specialized MAR for SAS, it is role defining and core to the SAS types. There are two major problems with the rules that were just dropped. One, if you want to use the hunter MAR as a CC MAR then the CoA drones need to have only one statline. I mean seriously, two of the drones listed currently are just named differently. Personally I think it could work, and it would be very flavorful to the CoA drones, but right now it just seems half baked and really rushed. The second problem with the new approach to the CoA drones is the range of the CC MARs. I can see the Kepler and Diophantus classes only having 8" CC. One is a medium without a lot of room for specialized control equipment and the other is a close range brawler that does not need the long range control equipment. The rest of the fleet though, needs to have a longer range. The worst of the bunch is the Pericles, it still is DR 5 and all we got for it was Acrobatic Pilots at 12" and being allowed to have Air Hunter again. It needs to actually be the fleet carrier, and if you are going to use CC MARs this is best represented by it providing coverage for the fleet. Honestly I would recommend removing the CC MARs from most of the non-carrier ships in the fleet. Right now the way they are spread around makes it very convoluted to deal with on the tabletop. And if those of us that regularly play the CoA find it convoluted to deal with, imagine what our opponents would think! If the CC MARs were mainly concentrated on the carriers it makes them feel and act more like the control centers for the drone network. It allows their range to be boosted so it feels like the carriers are the CnC for the drones, it allows the carriers to be specialized for specific roles (fleet carrier, sub hunter, ect..), and our opponents can target specific ships to try and weaken our defenses against their play style. Hunh, this section on drones ended up being far wordier than I intended. Also: Holy $#%%$ Sky Captain is not dead!
  11. Remember the orbats are changing, so some ships will probably have different generators in the new rules. I am hoping that there will be two kinds on Target Painters, those that paint for everyone, and those that only paint for their squadron.
  12. In another thread they confirmed the wording is accurate, TPs now only affect the squad with a TP Gen in it.
  13. Ahh, I like to think of the CoA scientists as a mix of modern scientist and the old school ones that liked to combined things for the childish delight of seeing what weird reactions they can get. I also like to think alcohol and a hold my beer and watch this attitude is their primary fuel source for invention
  14. Yup, I am fairly sure Prinnies are a large part of the CoA weapons development program, look up my post in the Descartes thread for my description of the MKII
  15. Wall O text!!! This will take me a while to sort through (I have only read the A section), but all in all I am liking the what the new layout sounds like. My only concern is with the index. 2.0's index was better than 1's, but it still left me searching through the book quite often.
  • 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.