Ode to the Deliverance Engines

[vtmobius 47]

ooooo look

http://www.spartangames.co.uk/the-deliverance-engines

exciting times ahead! enjoying the expansion into overseers!

fits perfect with the Rift traders.

[Bessemer 340]

yep. we wanted communication and a schedule, now we have it. Balls in your court, SG.

[reddwarf 1,156]

I guess I'm in the minority that wishes the Overseers had stayed in a 40K style mythos, and Firestorm kept to a more understandable, less mysterious universe.  Cool looking model though.

Some interesting info in the Firestorm 2017 blog post, that's for sure.

[Brimat 176]

My hope is, that one of the many volunteers working on 3.0 is solely writing fluff for the universe.

The model is ok. A more "none-fore-aft"-look and it could be used as a ghost station. Or perhaps it gets rules as another terrain piece.

[Hive 607]

47 minutes ago, reddwarf said:

Some interesting info in the Firestorm 2017 blog post, that's for sure.

It's a lot to take in, right? I'm not sure what to think about it. The last few, like, months have been a massive burnout for me on gaming stuff in general- a big part of that is that I am super into Firestorm and had trouble feeling enthusiasm for anything else, given the absence of any potential positivity for Armada's future. Now there's a message of ambition and great things in the relatively near future and I'm not sure if I trust it or not. 

 

It's hard to gauge how much the game will change, too. Command and Control bringing more fluff to the way the game works SOUNDS cool, but without an example it could be either a sign of complete overhaul or something as simple as shifting things like Fleet Tactics and TACs into a meta-category of rules components that are more independent to the board state. The fact that the Marauders stats are being developed so close to when they'll be obsolete also makes me wonder if maybe the rules changes will be more streamlining and organization than overhaul- it would make sense to develop them this way, then, if they'd give a still mostly-functional bridge to statting them for the new ruleset.

[hahnc77 249]

Command and control needs some rework, failing a disorder check has in many cases no real effect on the game. So that the rules are often forgotten.
So I hope that disorder checks and therefore a command and control mechanism become more important, in the game.

The Basic game shouldn't change much i vote for some streamlining.

The game is good as it is, one of the best balanced games I know. Not the standard by the newest fleet if you want to win!
So a mayor Change in anything like movement or the weapon mechanics, will have a huge effect on the balance (there needs a lot of testing), so it should be applied very carefully.

 

[Flamebeast 169]

I'm nervous about the fact that Derek is being set loose on a ruleset again - his last two offerings (Planetfall 1.0 and Taskfarce) have been utterly awful.

[Sniddy 81]

Im assuming the deal hasn't started yet? 

[MinscS2 104]

16 minutes ago, Sniddy said:

Im assuming the deal hasn't started yet? 

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/Add-to-your-Easter-celebrations-with-our-Sci-Fi-Giveaway-.html?soid=1103441312609&aid=GSvxOM9-GBc

it has.

[Anulovlos 93]

8 hours ago, Brimat said:

My hope is, that one of the many volunteers working on 3.0 is solely writing fluff for the universe.

ME! PICK ME!

[azrael 155]

That's already a step in the right direction 

I am no longer walking completely blind for the next year when it comes to firestorm armada 

Just keep it up sg ! 

[Commodore Jones 529]

16 hours ago, hahnc77 said:

Command and control needs some rework, failing a disorder check has in many cases no real effect on the game. So that the rules are often forgotten.
So I hope that disorder checks and therefore a command and control mechanism become more important, in the game.

Actually in our local meta most of us hate the effects of a failed Disorder Check, we mostly forget the rules because we don't want to use them.  I for one hope they don't become more important.

 

Quote

The Basic game shouldn't change much i vote for some streamlining.

The game is good as it is, one of the best balanced games I know. Not the standard by the newest fleet if you want to win!
So a mayor Change in anything like movement or the weapon mechanics, will have a huge effect on the balance (there needs a lot of testing), so it should be applied very carefully.

I totally agree, but lets hope the streamlining doesn't turn out to be the kind of disaster that v1.5 was.

[gr1mdan 1,261]

On 14/04/2017 at 10:44 AM, Flamebeast said:

I'm nervous about the fact that Derek is being set loose on a ruleset again - his last two offerings (Planetfall 1.0 and Taskfarce) have been utterly awful.

I'd say Derek can do decent rule sets but being nailed down to make a fully functioning set within a handful of weeks (like he was made to with PF and TF, I know) is nuts and bad management from up top, but hopefully they'll realise that rushing out sets is NOT the way forward. A good rule set takes months to do and then months to test.

His work with both Halo games has been decent and they both play very well though, but I wouldn't want FSA to head down that path as I find them slightly too simplistic (Although HGC is much better than HFB in my opinion, it's a cracking game now there is more units)

Planetfall isn't awful either, I've played much worse, and I've had some tremendous games back in the day. The rulebook itself was utterly awful but again it was rushed out with glaring errors and some rules that didn't make much sense or wasn't worded correctly. That's Derek's biggest issue IMO, in that he assumes that gamers know what to do, when in fact gamers generally need their hand holding so it leaves little room for "interpretation".

 

[alextroy 582]

Completing the rules in 3 months will mostly be a question of how much is already done and how much the rules are changing.

[alamo 455]

3 hours ago, gr1mdan said:

Planetfall isn't awful either, I've played much worse, and I've had some tremendous games back in the day. The rulebook itself was utterly awful but again it was rushed out with glaring errors and some rules that didn't make much sense or wasn't worded correctly. That's Derek's biggest issue IMO, in that he assumes that gamers know what to do, when in fact gamers generally need their hand holding so it leaves little room for "interpretation".
aves
'

.........and i have several pf books still stacked up[mine and others] that are useless. i sincerely hope these rules have time and testing done so we dont have to spend 2-3 months forum questions and waiting for various faqs. of course all this is moot if the 'repackage' plan leaves a bad taste it wont really matter.

thats alot of work in a short time............hope the testers are up for this...........much riding on neils statements. hope to see.