Jump to content

Marquis

Member
  • Content Count

    135
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Marquis

  • Rank
    Mimreg

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK
  1. Marquis

    What I (we) want... (dystopian empires reply)

    Personally, I would quite like to see the promise of gargantuan, sturginium-tainted, weird science horrors from the depths of Lovecraft's and HG Well's worst nightmares realised in miniature form, as was promised in the earliest days of the setting's development. Although I accept, this might be more suited to the development of Dystopian Legions, than Dystopian Wars...
  2. Marquis

    Gewitterwolke-Any opinions?

    Thanks Prussian Guy, I must admit, I'd only given the update a cursory read (skipping straight to the stats) - They rather snuck those adjustments in! Whilst I'm only a casual player (my usual weekend opponent runs FSA), and those with more tactical acumen will probably shake their heads in despair, I do quite like the Gewittewolke and have been known to run two to provide something (psychologically) menacing on each flank to distract my opponent. I tend to feel the points cost isn't unreasonable for the AD output (especially on a platform that benefits from an unobstructed view of the battlefield) and (as ridiculous as it sounds) I find the movement tends to put it a little in advance of the heavier hitters and thus means it can be manoeuvred forward into situations that pressure an opponent and draw fire at range away from other units. To dissuade TFT interdiction, I run local air support as two wings of Torpedo Bombers, usually operating in the near vicinity of my blimps. In a similar vein, I find the threat of 9AP can also be used to 'steer' an opponent's units, and if deployed to the flanks, can reduce your opponent's manoeuvrability and funnel an enemy onto your guns: Nothing quite boxing a fleet into a central bottleneck, then closing it off by crossing the T on them. Weekend before last I ran a Blucher with Shield Gennies and 4x Wachters, 3x Hussars, 3x Stolz and 2x Gewittewolke, against a frigate-heavy 1000pts of FSA. GW's heading down the flanks caused my opponent to head down the middle (either to escape or ignore them). On the left flank the Hussars crossed the T and decimated his on-coming Cruisers hoping to punch through and encircle, in the centre the Blucher did the same with Broadsides and aft turrets pummelling his escorted Battleship, whilst forward turrets pounded his Frigates on the right flank, which the Stolz had given pause for thought and hampered turning in. GW's kept this all neatly contained (with fire for effect from broadsides), and had the game lasted longer, would have got in behind and closed the box with broadsides, then turned in to assist in finishing the survivors. That being said, the above may speak more to my opponent's mistakes, than any ability on my part or suitability on the Gewittewolke's!
  3. Marquis

    Gewitterwolke-Any opinions?

    I'm a little late to the conversation, but I believe I've missed something here, as I cannot for the life of me find any updates to the rules for the Imperium and Gewittewolke which state that the Fore and P/S Tesla coils are now 90 degree and broadside arc (respectively). From what I can see, certainly my print run of the 1.1 book, and all the current PDFs on site, state that they are fixed channel?
  4. Marquis

    Battle Group Francis Bacon

    Have just looked through this thread, and am seriously impressed - I know others have already said it (and with much greater finesse), but that scheme is superb and beautifully executed - You've achieved a really unique look, with a very simply palette combination. The modelling work on the submerged battleship and carrier is inspiring.
  5. Marquis

    Mortimer's caribbean fleet

    Definitely seconded!
  6. Marquis

    Mortimer's caribbean fleet

    Very nice indeed! Especially keen on the Merchant vessels, as there's a distinct dearth of painting threads concerning the non-nation specific vessels and installations. The second vessel (beginning from the foreground); really liking the green and red, and I think the use of grey on the housing of all three works particularly well, as does the little detailing differences (such as the white piping on the Aleppo). Definitely setting the standard! In regards to your use of pigments, is it impolitic to ask whose you're using and how you're getting on with them? Have noticed a certain, large company have recently released some 'Technical' paints for weathering, and was wondering if you'd use their Oxide on your metal work or if you'd gone for something more traditional such as Tamiya's 'makeup boxes' (for want of a better term)?
  7. Marquis

    Ghostwalkers adventures into dystopia

    A very fine showing! Your dazzle pattern is neat, tidy and consistent (and a little different from the usual), good contrast on the metals, and some very delicate work on the portholes. I rather like it. I'm assuming you washed your 'steel' (I want to say 'Boltgun Metal') with some form of black wash, or black ink - If you've a steady hand and a good eye for consistency, you could consider using a very watered down black wash across the armoured flanks of the model, to bring out the joints between armour plates and rivet lines, but the vessel looks marvellous without. Can't wait to see, and read, further exploits!
  8. I'm genuinely curious (at the risk of opening a can of worms), whilst I know there are single digit variances in AP between comparable vessels in differing nation's fleets, I always thought those differences (due to canny balancing) fairly negligible and that use of Boarding was more about judging class* comparisons, and/or timing, natural inclination being to initiate Boarding against vessels of a class/designation weaker than the aggressor, or vessels of comparable (or higher class) whose capacity to defend has been impaired by other means (e.g. Critical Hit results). Even then, I always assumed that the capacity to link AP for Boarding or AA for counter-fire, did allow weaker vessels in concentration to go head-to-head with notionally stronger opponents? Do people genuinely find that certain nations have a tacit advantage, and there are indeed distinct 'Haves' and 'Have nots'? * I use the terms 'Class' and 'Designation' very loosely as in 'Gunship vs. Gunship' rather than more precise estimations, such as 'Medium Capital Class vs. Medium Capital Class'.
  9. I'm a little bit late to the party, but having received my copy of FA over the Christmas period, having now had a chance to digest it, and being a keen DW player, I wanted to throw in my tuppence worth in regards to DW 2.0 for the abuse of the gallery. Vis-a-vis the great Boarding debate, I would be happy to see a switch to AP vs. AP+AA, with a retention of the current Boarding Results system/chart and Sabotage. I think the AP vs. AP+AA system is a natural evolution of what already happens, the Boarding Assault Success Table and Sabotage rules both fit for purpose (especially the latter, as it uses an existing, ubiquitous chart, i.e. Critical Hits). I wouldn't like to see a wholesale port of FA's boarding rules, as I think the targeted boarding is too finicky for DW and counter to the spirit of boarding in the game. I agree that the adjustment/wider use of certain MARs to improve the capacity of certain weapon systems to strip away AP (i.e. Lethal Strike), is an effective and unobtrusive means of countering any perceived problems (I'm a Prussian player for my sins). I also feel that the current system of tracking AP provides a natural limiter to its effectiveness and unobtrusive encouragement towards tactical use, which would make a limit on boarding assaults per game (as in FA) unnecessary. I don't know how everyone else feels, but I'd also be inclined to support a streamlining of TFT rules similar to Firestorm's SRS's. I'd keep the existing token format (i.e. number of tokens equals number of flights in a wing), introduce card counters to denominate Reconnaissance/Fighter/Torpedo Bomber/Dive Bomber, and restrict wings to operating in Command Distance of their carrier unless making an attack run (up to a specified maximum distance). In regards to Reconnaissance, I'd simply state that their LoS is always unobstructed/unimpeded (as their elevation and manoeuvrability allows them to see over/under anything). In regards to Local Air Support, I'd either abolish this, or specify that Local Air Support Wings must be assigned to a Massive/Large Capital Vessel(s), then operate as described as above, as Local Air Support is most likely going to be tasked to defend, or be commanded by, Capital-class vessels. One thing I don't want to see ported from FA to DW however, is different range bands. I think the range band system, with its standard increments of 8" is simple, effective and provides all the flexibility required by differentiating effectiveness through the modification of AD at given bands or application of effects by weapon-specific MARs. I also think that the system appeals to new players, as remembering four different ranges is so much easier than looking up different ranges for different systems, or remembering different increments for different systems. In more general terms, I hope the new rulebook is as well-organised as FA's! The rules are sensibly ordered (although I'd possibly have put SRS after Boarding Assaults and in the same section), the combination of contents, colour-coded sections and clear indexing makes finding rules ridiculously easy, and the presentation just seems a lot cleaner and clearer. I'm a fan of the colour-coding, presentation and organisation for insights, examples and important notes - I especially like that the Insights are used as section headers (rather than scattered throughout), and that Examples and Important Notes are used sparingly. It's probably going to sound ridiculously anal, but I also like that bold typeface is only used for headings and sub-headers, rather than scatter-gunned throughout text as in the current DW rulebook. The FA book seems that much tighter, 'mature' and eminently accessible. For those that have not already purchased or perused the new Firestorm Armada rulebook, the D6 Generation have a rather comprehensive and positive review of it in their latest podcast which is well worth listening to (although the segment in question is quite a way in). Anyway, those are my musings, hopefully they won't get me put up against a wall and shot...
  10. Marquis

    c0rruptd's Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth

    Seconded - Am curious, did you make the top plates yourself, have them cut to order, or buy them from somewhere specific?
  11. Marquis

    Slightly concerned

    Don't get me wrong, I really love the fact that everything is available digitally. Being able to hop onto a laptop, or mobile to download various stats/lists etc., has proved a saving grace on more than occasion - It makes a huge difference compared to other manufacturers that want you to pay extortionate amounts of money simply to have access to what are ostensibly game aids, which are invariably, rapidly out-dated (That guy over there, that one in the black shirt, he knows what I'm talking 'bout). I guess as an 80's child, I'm just hopelessly nostalgic for wads of statcards and mountains of counters, not to mention buckets of dice, but do accept it's a little hypocritical of me to miss SG printing them, when I'm unlikely to do so myself (don't even get me started on the cost of ink cartridges).
  12. Marquis

    Slightly concerned

    ...I hear you on that front! In a similar vein to this discussion, what are current thoughts on the news that, "Printed Statistics Cards for Dystopian Wars models are no longer included in the Box/Blister, but are now available to download from the Spartan Games Downloads page"? Personally, I shall really miss this, as it was one of my favourite touches. Although I appreciate the game is going through a rapid evolution, and there were doubtless financial implications given the probable printing costs...
  13. Marquis

    New planetfall Just announced!

    Glad to see SG bringing Planetfall into the main fold, but do worry a bit about the timing, given that this puts it head-to-head with a certain other notable 10mm Science-Fiction game which has rather got the drop on Planetfall (no pun intended), and has just seen the previewing of a much lauded starter box splurged across the Internet. Also, the rival company in question has no other outstanding commitments, which perhaps gives them the edge in focussed development, pushing out product for their sole system and outstripping potential rivals such as SG. That being said, perhaps the timing is ideal and Planetfall can ride the new wave of interest in commercially-produced, mainstream 10mm science-fiction gaming generated by its rival, and lets face it; they're SG's only rival in this arena at the moment, which tends to suggest a chronically under-developed market with more than enough room for Planetfall to flourish. I do hope so, as SG produce fantastic miniatures/systems and I love the 'total package' concept of FA & PF combined, plus I've already earmarked my next pay-cheque for getting into FA and joining the Sorylian Collective, so it'd be a happy hop-skip-and-a-jump into PF!
  14. Marquis

    Building size

    Don't forget that 'in real life' many of the warmachines in DW would be absolutely immense. You only have to flick across to Legions then look at say a Prussian Grenadier compared to a Walze, then flick back to DW and look at a Walze compared to a Seydlitz! Or take a Geier for example: That's not a cockpit, so much as a Command Deck...
  15. Marquis

    Oil Rigs

    That oil rig is simply superb: All the elements work well together thematically, and I especially like the massive cogs. This is exactly how you'd imagine a Victorian mad-science oil rig to look!
×

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.