Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CDR G

  1. One odd request. The STO Saint Michael Pattern Metzger. Its much better than the regular Metzger but was never available. I jury rigged one using an arm from a Metzger but would buy a updated one. The scale difference might complicate it.
  2. Hmm, I read it as the Gier on the Ice Maiden was not an indicator of new scale size Aerial models in DW, but showing a bomber TFT. As I read it, SAS/TFT will be more like Fleet Action, with the TFTs being a weapon used in the owning model activation. I have a lot of painted SAS that could end up in a box. That is a tricky bit of the road for WC in making DW their own. Not a positive for me but not a deal breaker either. It was unclear to me if any Aerial units in the current DW will not be used in DW under version three. That is the question everyone is dancing around. Not talking about a specific model here or there but systematic replacement due to scale issues. The answer may not be decided yet. I would love a straight yes/no/haven't decided yet answer. Expectation management will be a big factor in dealing with the current player group. A cantankerous group that must be driving WC designers and visionaries crazy- They will never please all, and maybe never the majority- but as a group they are, IMHO, critical to the future of DA, at least in the mid-term. One possibility is as you stated--new smaller models for the DW naval game. That will likely get a reaction from all those with painted aerial units that don't intend to be playing Armoured Clash. There will be new models- its a model company, I want new models. Forcing the replacement of current aerials models in DW, (not my preference, I like those models) will be hard on the current player set, with all the emotions that go with that. If we want to play the new version it may come to that.
  3. Has someone asked whether aerial models sizes will change in version 3.0 as implied by the Gier on the Ice Maiden?
  4. Hanks Asuo, here is another: A 2.5 question on SAS is it the case that a SAS squadron assigned as CAP is an attachment and cannot detach voluntarily? These assignments are only done at set-up. So one cannot add CAP to threatened large/massive model during a game, nor to units with the Combat Patrol MAR, right? Also is the CAP squadron available for carrier actions? The rules get vague on some important points. Namely, the fate of attachments as the result of the parent being lost. Like escorts and other attachments, if the parent model is lost they become independent squadrons-interpretation from old forum due to silence on this in the rule book. Also the rules state that if a Squadron becomes disordered it cannot have a CAP. (I suspect a mistake left over from 2.0). Therefore a CAP SAS CAN be detached. Can it then be reattached after disorder is resolved? I would suggest the rule regarding CAP and disordered models be changed/interpreted to "... a model cannot benefit from an attached CAP squadron while disordered,” or just ignored. No I don’t why the text changes color.
  5. 2.5 rules question- diving and deep diving levels: can a surface ship cross a model that is at the diving level as long as it ends its turn without overlapping bases? How about at deep diving? Do mines attacking models at the diving level? Is it reasonable for cc to be used at 8” between two models at the diving level? Same with deep diving?
  • 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.