Jump to content

Small Mek

Member
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Small Mek

  • Rank
    Spica

Recent Profile Visitors

600 profile views
  1. Small Mek

    Virulence class gunship

    I'd rather keep the discount for the naked ships, but at this point it all comes down to personal taste to be honest Ask your group, if they are ok with your proposed changes, and go for it! The official fleet manuals and FSA 2.0 in general is not going to change. Warcradle preserved it, but it's like an insect in amber, it's not going to go anywhere. It's glorious form is available to be witnessed in it's dying agony until Warcradle uses it to clone their dinosaurs from it's belly.
  2. Small Mek

    Virulence class gunship

    Two (1 internal and 1 external balance related) reasons: 1.) Not to step on the toes of the banes. If both would be 65 pts fully kitted out, the 6/6/6/0 beams with pack hunters of the gunships would be a much safer bet for the harasser role, as banes have to be much closer to reach their full potential (without the aid of the improved shunt matrix). 2.) The interaction between pack hunters and cloaked is a bit on the stronger side (not too much, but helps a lot on injured and cloaked ships) Plus I wouldn't compare with either of the above factions - funnily enough for the opposite reason, aquans leaning heavily over to the stronger side of the balance line, and sorylians needing all the help they can get. Also huuuuuge disclaimer: I'm really not a game designer, so my opinion is just that: an opinion
  3. Small Mek

    Virulence class gunship

    There has been a lengthy discussion about the virulence when the rules were tested/were fresh, and it is indeed in a weird spot. It shouldn't invalidate nor the Banes, nor the standard cruisers and while you can only take them in limited quantities, it is in the most contesed tier (also raising the price significantly could make them compete with the heavy cruisers, and there's no question which of the two is more worth it ). My (possibly deeply flawed) thinking about fixing these gunships looked something like this: They were intended as a disruption unit, able to remove a cruiser a turn if the stars align, and they (sometimes) worked for me as such (although as I own only one squadron of them, they vere mostly on light cruiser duty, as it worked waaaaay better then the gunships... for me at least). Currently they are neither a cheap disruption peace (not enough staying power when they meet with dedicated attention), nor a good one (not enough AD). I think stealth is absolutely necessary for them to function, and they get it as a hard point for 0 pts with an alternative I have never once considered. What I'd do is the following: -reduce the power of the beam weapon to 5/5/5/0 (-maybe loose the fixed restriction) -give them baseline stealth -drop the price to 50 pts/ship What we get is a cheap(er) harasser not worth the dedicated firepower, but you'll probably still feel those beams and torps on your tier 2, and they share a hull with the cheap light cruisers anyway. -give them hardpoint (2) -erease the stealth hardpoint (no longer needed) -give an upgrade for the beams to 6/6/6/0 or energy transfer (beams 1) hardpoint for 10 pts (we're here currently) -pack hunters hardpoint for 10 pts -leave the additional dice for the improved shunt matrix -take away the corrosive torpedoes option to leave something fun for the banes, to keep their identity. Fully kitted out they are 70 or 75 pts each (counting in the precision strike I have also never considered), which is a hefty sum for one weapon arc, but they are suddenly reliable, and add the long range punch to your force that was missing (discounting allies of course).
  4. Small Mek

    new rules set

    Thank you for commenting on these, it really means a lot (to me ) True, it isn't a lot, basicly nothing if you are starting from scratch (although it might imply things regarding the proportion of the changes from the old system on which the speculation already started in my head ). The manufacturing side is bound to be a monumental task, rebuilding the entire line will also require significant resources (even from just the CAD point of view), and I'm really really rooting for you so you will see your investment come to fruition, it's in everyones best interest! I get that, and it is why there are so many of us eager to get into the beta. I might even risk to state, that there were some betas in which I participated, and had as much or more fun during it as when I was playing the final product (even with the tedious bookkeeping part). I get that part. What I was struggling with a bit is that... How much the FSA IP is really worht? I really adore the fluff, as much as most of the people here, but outside this handful of fans even most wargamers probably know about it in the neighborhood of "It's about spaceships I guess". There's no 40k, Star Wars, or Battlestar Galactica behind it... Is there so much power in the word "REBOOT" our age of nostalgia? On the other hand, if the Spartan IPs were divided, multiple companies could have started using some variant of the spartan rules/mechanics, and when they come out with their Dystopic Battles or Lightningstorm Armadas alongside the single IP they purchased claiming to their Spartan heritage as well, it could hurt Warcradle directly stepping on their toe... But I think I have gone too far again in my speculations that nobody really cares about, so I better stop rambling
  5. Small Mek

    new rules set

    Indeed not much solid info on FSA (other than Warcradle would like it to scale fairly well, and they won’t run parallel betas, so most likely no beta until DW is finished or close to finish), but some deduction can be made. Even if it’s wrong, what’s harm in it right? The fact that the blanket answer to my (admittedly rather specific) questions about both background and basic game concepts was “We don’t know” rather than “We can’t tell you yet” is interesting (the word choice was 100% deliberate, and there’s no chance that they didn’t want to answer it in depth, so let’s build whole theories on it The whole studio fell into my clever trap!). Another thing is the recent job opening for a new Lead Games Developer. This makes it look like now, more than a year after the acquisition of the IP they have taken a few steps back and might even be reevaluating some of the things they thought they want to do initially. A few things I’ve been wondering, probably it doesn’t make any sense, so feel free to ignore it.
  6. Small Mek

    new rules set

    There's a Q&A on the 31th of January. I tried to submit some basic questions in high hopes for some info droplets, but we'll see Of course if you have something for us @Warcradle Stuart it will be indeed much appreciated *hint-hint*
  7. Small Mek

    Future FA rules

    As frustrating it is, I can understand the secrecy. If the reason is that nothing significant will change, then it’s for protecting the IP, so it won’t get hijacked while warcradle’s focus is on DW. If there will be changes that would upset the current playerbase, the manpower needed to put the fires out would have to be taken from other teams, who should be focusing on DW’s or even FSA's release. As the dystopian world is more or less established, the fluff division by this time is already working on FSA to lay down the foundation for the world. There are multiple sources that are dated a bit after Warcradle acquired Spartan’s licences, that are worth looking at to try to make guesses where the setting is going. As far as I know the most official release about FSA is still this, and it states that it’s a “Huge undertaking”. If I wanted to just reshuffle the factions, I probably wouldn’t use this phrase. An other interesting bit is an interview with @Warcradle Stuart by @Alex Mann and Oscar Mann at The Hub Systems Episode 35 - A Warcradle Christmas that is dated Dec 23 2017. I’ve typed in most of the part that is related to FSA. A lot of things might have changed since that time, so please, please read this with a grain of salt in both hands! (damn, this took waaaaaaaaaay longer than I expected, and please forgive me for any mistakes, english is not my first language, so there are things I might have misheard, but I thought some of you guys might appreciate a written version for easier referencing) Please listen to it if you have 10 minutes on your hand (it starts at ~01:42), as in the written version all the emphasis is lost. It’s worth it (plus there’s more after this part, even some real slight hints about the rules, and planetfall). What I take away from this, is not to worry one bit, even if things change, it will be for the absolute best. A setting that is worth making a(?) novel(s!) about excites me to no end
  8. Small Mek

    Future FA rules

    To be honest, as I expect the changes to the fluff to be pretty dramatic (even though I hope said departure won’t be as far from the original background). When Warcradle stated (multiple times) that I honestly don’t expect that version to play around only with alliances and timelines... I think among the lines of sorylians not being lizards anymore, relthoza are a hive minded species of rubberfaced humanoid/robotic aliens, and aquans being interdimensional energy beings or the Dramos-drama never happened (only in the alternative dimension from where the RSN came from, only they remember it, but boy they REMEMBER it all day ). Even is one such change makes its way to the fluff, a simple timeline-jump is not really plausible anymore, but... Well, if Warcradle reallly manages to flesh it out to an extend that a novel (series?) is possible to be built upon those foundations... I think might even be ok about it... (I’ll likely side with my beloved RSN commander though and start to REMEMBER like there’s no tomorrow )
  9. Small Mek

    Future FA rules

    It's a bit too farfetched... maybe... The idea was to round up everyone in the gym, erase every faction emblem, alliance, or association, and group them based on aesthetic qualities only (You have side panel thingies? Third row please. Cylindric hull? In the middle you go. Etc.). Probably the reality will be something like: “Here are the factions from now on, do anything you want with the models you own”. Some interesting/iconic designs/design elements will be recognizable, but if warcradle is taking plastic kits seriously… I expect heavy departure in certain cases. Nothing to do with rules though. All the old rules are gone from the website, which also makes me optimistic.
  10. Small Mek

    Future FA rules

    What a lovely graveyard we have here. Imma gonna just necro this one here. I hope you guys don't mind Sooooo... Am I optimistic, or are things beginning to be stirred in the background? In the last week (after the beta for DW had been released) @Warcradle Stuart dropped some tidbits (rumour? hype? fuel for the life support? SOLID FACTS?) which made me think, that preparations are being made for the work on FSA truly begin (after the DW beta phase is completed). I know, I know, Captain Obvious to the rescue, no need to thank me The few things I'm talking about for those not following the facebook discussions: Now for the fun part, the speculation!!! From these and the comparison between the DW beta and 2.0/2.5 rules, my genius mind allowed me to deduct, that the departure will be greater than most of us expected. With the hint to 3D movement, I can even imagine the template to be gone and replaced with different movement rules to make things interesting (and different?). The special dice... I don't think they will be the same as the DW ones - differentiation, and in the DW beta pdf the exploding symbol is marked by the DW logo. If this will be moulded on the dice, FSA dice should be different, which can open up (previously discussed) possibilities. New flight stands!!! What can this mean? Similar to DFC ones with levels (3D combat)? Dropping fire arcs? The DW beta looks like it has simplified fire arcs significantly, and if FSA simplifies them further, it might mean dropping them for good in favour of something completely different (I really hope this is not the case, but I don't think it's off the table). I'm not sure how this is going to be resolved in practice, as there are a few old models with funky bases that have to be adjusted to the new ones (looking at you RSN T1 ) I hope the stat card system (one side for the intact hull profile, one side for the damaged profile) is carried over from DW, personally I find it an interesting and elegant solution, feel free to disagree. I dare you to. I expect the same with SRS, but the probability of this is a bit lower. Not strictly on the rules topic, but the significant background shakeup has been mentioned (multiple times). This might mean that the Zenian League and the Kurak Allience is out the window, and factions are shuffled, binned and consolidated probably based on aesthetics. Will this be a 40k-esque multi faction all vs. all or some kind of 1v1v1? And if nothing is sacred, which factions do you think can be consolidated based on looks? Terrans+Omnidyne+Hawker Sorylians+Tarakian+Xelocian Aquan+??? Directorate+Kedorians Dindrenzi+??? Relthoza+??? Terquai+Works Raptor RSN+Corsairs+Ryushi Veydreth+Ba'kash As for the timeframe: sooner than summer of 2009... we'll see. Maybe the beta will drop sometimes around that period?
  11. @Warcradle Stuart has clarified it on facebook that the stat cards are faaaaar from final. The current batch are for trying out movement, target selection etc., the flavour will come at a later stage, including the reduced firepower values, so if that is true, you shouldn't have concerns about that. Flipping cards to represent battle damage to me looks like a simple solution, with interesting possibilities... (some ships getting stronger when damaged? Getting rid of damaged armor increases speed of some ships?) I agree with the dice part, (and I agree: using regular dice for this purpose isn't too much of a hassle) still, I'm looking forward to what's cooking in the warcradle labs for FSA (how much departure they want the two systems to have... FSA won't be part of the Dystopian age after all, so I'm betting on it'd be more significant... if custom dice are on the table, why wouldn't custom D12s be off?) The movement system has a paragraph to enforce that there's no backtracking mid movement, which (combined with the ramming rules) will make squadron movements interesting. I wonder how that part will translate into FSA, as many of the proposed changes to movement were trying to loosen squadron placement. I wouldn't bury fixed arc in FSA just yet... We don't even know anything about the bases warcradle intends to use (they are one of the reasons why no FSA has apppeared in the warcradle classic line yet). I can hardly wait to droool over the FSA rules Edit: I'm really fond of the tier system, but I'm really curious how the (final) fleet construction rules will flesh out in DW3...
  12. Small Mek

    Future FA rules

    I'm a plastic mould designer myself, so my expectations for the timeframe are..... set to a realistic level
  13. Small Mek

    Future FA rules

    Now you have done it! Speculation for new plastic modular frigates anybody? New bases that the rules can lean on in interesting ways? Colour me excited!
  14. Small Mek

    Reprint of older ships?

    If the Bane would be available I don't think I could resist them
  15. That's one thing yes. But @Spartan Neil, please imagine yourself in the place of players the players invested in (based on the information we currently have available, in alphabetical order, and please forgive me if I have left something out): Aquans: mines removed Ba'kash: Retractable plating removed, mines removed Corsairs: retractable plating removed, fun customization (remove something to gain something) removed Directorate: they have everything, so everything affects them Kedorian: battleshunt became a maneuvre that kills crew (or costs points to use every time) Relthoza: cloaks currently are a non-choice, battleshunt became a maneuvre that kills crew (or costs points to use every time), mines removed Tarkarian: Gravity weapons became a worse version of cyberwarfare Veydreth: ambush removed, mines removed Some of these are cornerstone racial attributes, things that make these fleets unique and fun. While not all of these are related to tokens, most of them are. Some of these tokens are not even removed from the game. The people who are invested in these races, or even those who read the back of the Relthoza shunt cruiser or any of the Kedorian boxes will be really dissapointed. Command abilities are a really good idea, hovewer there's a large amount of bookkeeping will be required (30 of them has to be spent it's regenerating, it's effects have to be tracked with... well, more tokens). And saying that you now can make a choice of allocating command points to full stop or fold space escape is removing choice from the game, not adding to it. Yes, playtesting is required to know if the ships are still viable or not (this is why I don't want to comment on the relthoza dread that has been spoiled). But seeing the loss of choices available to us doesn't require that. Please, please please prove me wrong. I really really love this system. I want the best for it, and I want to have more of your stuff. There are real gems in the proposed rules (intraducing the new linked AD value is the best solution I can imagine, even if the current AD calculation manages to ruin it for me almost completely), the natural allies are better this way (even if I'm afraid the percentage system might not be a best idea to say the least). But is it worth losing (large?) parts of the loyal customerbase for an influx of newbies? (This is an honest question, please don't misunderstand me). Maybe this is a really uninformed post, and I will regret it after the rules are in my hands. But if there's some truth in it I don't want to regret not raising the issues I see with these changes for the sake of changing things. And lastly I'm really sorry if I have misled someone or hurt feelings or I'm sounding just... plain ignorant. I don't want to cause an even larger breach in the community. If I have offended anyone, feel free to ignore all this
×

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.