Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tibour

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

1,084 profile views
  1. Many good points. The danger of keeping it to simple is that some will look and give it a pass. Others are still playing 2.0 and will not upgrade until their is some depth. Both of these could cause an early death to what is looking to be a very promising game. As to the SRS being under powered/under ranged. I agree but understand the reasoning. They are going for a early naval game not a carrier game. If they aren't careful the SRS will dominate. My club hated my FSA/Union tiny flier swarms as I had 10 carriers total in just that fleet. I am also ok with gun batteries being gun batteries and the flavor being in the upgrades.
  2. Trying to hide among the ice very cheeky Excellent paint jobs !!!
  3. Calling all FSA, I mean Union players :). Well what do you think? Yes it is bare bones, but it will grow with time. It is enough to get started with. I like the name changes. They just feel more accurate than the old ones did. Yes it will take a little time to get used to them, but we will adjust.
  4. As far as I remember, when ever a squadron fired at another squadron it was pretty much that way all along. At some point in the distant past they had "as long as the next model was a legal target". That got dropped somewhere between 1.0 and 1.5 if memory serves. We just house ruled it as it is reasonable. When ever you are rolling buckets of dice at units this is an inevitable compromise. As to range bands My 2.0 book was handy and I remember that as much as I love DW I hated Spartan rule books LMAO. We basically played from cheat sheets. We had a large sheet made for each phase and avoided the main rule book as much as possible, Having several other rule sets by Warcradle I am looking forward to a reasonable set of rules. I have been looking at the ORBATS and they look pretty solid. I actually like the Naming conventions of the Union a little better. Although I will probably screw it up for a couple of months I am sure :). As to SRS yes we just always referred to them as tiny fliers due to bases.
  5. More FSA, I mean Union
  6. Thanks for sharing your impressions. I am glad to hear your overall impressions as well as any bugs. As I long time player of the old game I have been on the fence so far about the new one. Mainly as the box set doesn't have my fleets in it(FSA and EoTBS). Having read my ORBAT has gotten me a little more excited for more news. Have you tried the tiny fliers yet?
  7. Been awhile since I have updated anything here. I am now playing Mythos as well as Wild West Exodus.

  8. It is also a natural progression from the double deck of the Saratoga and Savannah.
  9. I kind of like them. I really like the rounded look. The covered elevator would provide cover from overhead attack to a weak point. It all would be of benefit in rough seas. The only thing that I don't like is the bunting.
  10. You could class it as an Ice breaker an even be legit
  11. Providence Class Bombard Monitor (Large) (Unit size 1) This really sounds good to me and hearken back to first edition when FSA was the master of indirect fire. I like the flavor of stealing the catapult recon fighters from the French as well. Calico Light Carrier (Medium) (Unit size 1-2) This also makes me happy. I have been using the Apollo support carriers in a similar role already. It kind of reminds of of the Princeton class CVLs of WW2. I hope that they have an air group of 4 Animas Class Attack Submarine (Small) (Unit size 2-4) This will provide some company for the Boston. It tends to get lonely.
  12. Robots, repair and still no Carrier 9 looks like I will be staying mostly FSA in this KS. The small is the most interesting thing for the EotBS from my point of view and I will get them eventually.
  13. Well I am in at the Captain level as I play two Fleets FSA and EotBS. The thing I hope to see most is an EotBS CV with a rating of 9. As to the Prussians and Russians they are just targets although I must admit I do really like the iceberg carrier.
  14. As I have 2 two of the other BBs I will probably grab two 2 of these as well. The modular bits will be magnetized of course. While I am also hoping for range band 3 I am kind of fearing a big volley gun with lots of dice in RB2 with the heavy Ack Ack MAR and the standard volley gun rules. While that might work for a support cruiser I don't think it would work for a Battleship but it is what I have been worried about. That is also why I was worried about the loss/substitution of all three main guns in the picture.
  15. This would work. The new one sharing the same hull as a battleship would make an assault carrier option feasible.
  • 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.