Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Shadowcatdecoy

  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.
  16. I just realized that it has been a while since I have seen a discussion on what music people think fits the factions in DW. So my question, is what do you hear when you think of the different forces in DW? Do you hear something epic, or do you hear Wierd Al's Dare to be Stupid, or even The Cog is Dead's Ballad of Stuart the Sailor? Here are some of my choices. KoB: Primo Victoria (Sabaton) PLC: Winged Hussars (Sabaton) Free Australians: Rebellion (Van Canto) RoF: Rebatir (Aviators) EotBS Wani: Under the Radar (Abney Park) CoA: Flight of the Ikarus (Nathaniel Johnstone Band)
  17. The problem with that Elessar is that the fluff we have often has the Fleet Commodores on airships, not just the CoA. If I recall correctly the RoF, the PLC, and the RC all have fluff where their combined fleets have used skyships as their commodores command. I think there were others as well. Truthfully once the Navel, Air, and Land Cores are balanced vs each other it won't be such a big issue. For the record my RoF commodore does not sit on my Tourbillon, he tends to command from my La Rochelle!
  18. I had a sudden though, what program do you guys use for 3D modeling? Recently I have been giving Blender a try but was unsure what people use for professional work.
  19. About 20 minuets after I posted my earlier response I realized I was helping with thread derailment, so sorry about that Josh! We should try and keep this thread for the new toys we are getting from our fellow backers. I still hold the MKI was designed while the CoA nerds were sober and the MKII was designed the night of the MKI's launch celebration when they weren't
  20. Both of you have excellent points. Josh is correct, tech dilution is going to happen, and realistically, in the DW world, the CoA is the faction everyone is going to steal from. But Sebenko is also right, the only things the CoA has left that are unique to it are the PAs and Teleporters. This dilution is not new as CoA players have actually been complaining about it for years. I honestly have no problem with it, as I agree with Josh that other factions are working to steal the CoA's toys, they do have the bestest . My problem is this, where are the new unique toys the CoA has been working on. With everything that has been stolen from the CoA you can not tell me they would not have been working to invent new and even more ludicrous generators and other toys. Inventing new equipment to stop people from taking their stuff is totally in keeping with the CoA. As is them totally not expecting people will try and steal that stuff too, the CoA has a high INT score not a high WIS score. I have been wondering where the new generators are, give the CoA a support Gen that gives all CoA ships in an area Advanced Engines +1 on a one or a two, AE +2 on a three, four, or a five, and AE +3 and a fire token on a six . Thats my problem, the CoA has suffered tech dilution but have received no new tech while the rest of the factions have, and that is not in keeping with the DW fluff. As for wavelurker... honestly... wavelurker as it is, is really stupid. Every #$%@ submarine in the game should be able to wavelurk! Really for a sub "wavelurking" is just riding low in the water! I realize that it is taking another unique ability away from the CoA but the unique thing the CoA has, is more how much of their fleet can pull off a trick that is normally reserved for submarines and not line warships. Sorry if this feels ranty it is not meant to be. Heh, Thamoz beat me to it.
  21. Any idea on the numbers per nation breakdown, a.k.a. is one faction going to end up overloaded with new ships?
  22. I looked at the downloads page and it does say the current rules have not been finalized. So at this point it could be both. On the one hand we know boarding will be getting harder in 2.5 so it could be pointed for that, or it could be we will see an increase in the point cost as the MKII is pretty effective.
  23. No, no it would be a generator that spontaneously makes cats in a target vessel, but it only works if you do not look at it!
  24. I will be honest that I like my Pericles as well, just wish it was not handing my opponent free points. Though it sounds like that may change soon. As to what to get I agree with the rest of the posters, Navel Battle Group box is the best starting point and it lets you try most of the CoA's tactics out (teleporting, drones, and E-turrets). From there it depends on what you think fits your play style, if you come to like the drones better the Bombardment box is one of the better ways to go and it supports E-turret lists quite well. If you like E-turrets the Hunter Flotilla comes with our E sniper mediums and our corvettes for added fun. The Support Flotilla has our Time Dilation Orb (TDO) and our escorts, it also has the Pericles wich you probably noticed is liked by some but not well regarded right now. This is due to it having a battleship price tag with cruiser defenses, it is a fleet carrier though so it can put out some important hurting on people. There is also the Descartes that just came out and both variants add interesting advantages to the fleet, MKII is the only dedicated boarding platform in the CoA force list.
  • 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.