Jump to content
Toxic_Rat

The Beta Lives!

Recommended Posts

I will be honest, this thing, at least after one read, exceeded my expectations. Such a marked improvement over the 2.0 version. Less clutter, the dual state statscards are elegant solution. Not a huge fan of so many different extra cards, but overall it looks like i will be giving it a whirl to try out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being new to the Dystopian War game the Beta rules seem good... I like the version of the Guts and Glory cards being picked up in this game as well... makes a nice symmetry with WWX...  Tho would like to the see the DW deck of cards not be the same tan color as the WWX decks... maybe a nautical blue... (reserve the Armored Clash dual deck a green)... ;)       

Will definitely be printing the proxies and giving it a go with my Navy Vet friend soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the rules seem pretty similar to the old ones just more streamlined. Since I never liked the old rules I don't like these either... will use my own ones if I ever play with the models. Really like the models though.

A bit strange though that ships no longer get reduced firepower from being crippled/damaged... where are the incentive to disengage ships from combat... the game just became more about dice rolling than the old rules... but ah..  well... it is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jorgen_CAB said:

Well the rules seem pretty similar to the old ones just more streamlined. Since I never liked the old rules I don't like these either... will use my own ones if I ever play with the models. Really like the models though.

A bit strange though that ships no longer get reduced firepower from being crippled/damaged... where are the incentive to disengage ships from combat... the game just became more about dice rolling than the old rules... but ah..  well... it is what it is.

Apparently, the stats not really changing when crippled is only temporary. They're just concentrating on the game mechanics at the moment.

Did you notice that only crippled aircraft can fly high (and only crippled submarines can go deep)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crippled submarines going deep just sounds all kinds of wrong - if a submarine is crippled then it should be surfacing not going deep - going deep would add pressure and crack the hull open all the faster. I can understand it from a gameplay perspective in that its trying to dodge attacks and going deep is what submarines can do for that; but a crippled submarine should be surfacing and prevented from going deep if its doing anything.

 

Aircraft going higher is a bit more logical - if it can still fly then going higher can let it avoid further damage whilst pulling it out of the main area of combat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I can safely say that the wait has been totally not worth it.  This is a poor, poor, shadow of a game I played for years and loved... Enjoy it gents, unlessI see some changes,  I think I will stay put in Spartans version of the game, (2.0/2.5) and continue to enjoy the game I love to play...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a quick game (French/Alliance v CoA/Enlightened) with small force, one battleship, one squad cruisers and one squad frigates. Noticed that the game does play a lot quicker as you're not reducing dice for every hit taken so much less time spent calculating dice. Assaults are much quicker, although you can't seem to prize a ship as the old rules.  I do hope they reduce the guns when the ship goes into the crippled mode.

 

One thing to note, the models we have don't seem to match the stat lines from the new release. Although this may change. For example, the Enlightened Cruiser has listed as fore and aft turrets and wave lurker. This seems to contradict both the Cleomedes (no aft turret) and the Plato (no wave lurker).

 

Please bear in mind we may have missed rules in  this game

 

Still, it's good to see D Wars back! Hope they do solid campaign rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Texas_Archer said:

Well, I can safely say that the wait has been totally not worth it.  This is a poor, poor, shadow of a game I played for years and loved... Enjoy it gents, unlessI see some changes,  I think I will stay put in Spartans version of the game, (2.0/2.5) and continue to enjoy the game I love to play...

Texas I'm certainly not going to force you to like the changes, but it would be great if you could go into detail about what changes and shifts you don't like and why. How things compare to the old rules and how you think the new ones could be adapted to find a good spot between the new and the old. As a beta this is an ideal phase and moment in time to air such thoughts and it could result in changes that you'd really like and enjoy and that which would benefit the whole game and all the players 

 

At this stage your feedback is not only really important ,but its also a lot easier to make changes because the rules are not released yet; they are not set in stone in a formal printed edition; they are at a very malleable and adjustable stage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the major thing is lack of reduction of firepower with damage and the new boarding rules.

These leads too many of the MARS and special effects of units being difficult to model.

Say the EoBS, which had fire on almost all guns and rocktes, or the Prussians which kills AP as you go. Flamethrower in 2.5 finally was streamlined and fun. But anything that kills AP is gone cuz its a constant number. One of the neat tactics was to weaken something then board it. In 2.0 and 2.5, letting the BB take a few point of damage reduced AA, which helped a lot when boarding. Add fire to kill a few AP,... Now it's far more difficult to weaken a unit then board. Now boarding is just another weapon. I would like to see boarding be different. That boarding is high rish high reward situation. Where you could kill an enemy vessel by taking out all its boarding defence.

Further, the new way of tackling to-hit number. Since it isn't a number anymore, it is impossible to have two effects stack! For example, small and submerged both had -1 to be hit. Thus it adds up to -2 which made the enemy only hit on exploding 6'es. If you had a hunter ability, it negated one of them. The ability to stack effect is gone, simply by removing to hit as numbers.

Tiny fliers: I sort of like parts of it. But, also misslike other parts. The parts I misslike is that there is no difference between torpedo bombers, divebombers or fighters. Earlier EoBS (my main faction) had better torpedo bombers, and slightly improved fighters. Now that these differences are also difficult to handle.  I somewhat like the rules for SAS, but I also hate that there is no 'fight to rule the skies'. In 2.5 whoever had the most carriers dominated the skies, and removed all enemy planes. Now you could launch new squadrons regardless of the total looses you have. Carriers should have a max capacity. For example they could have 10 launch point and 20 capacity. Once they have lost more than 10, they start reducing the number you could launch.

What I like however, is that SAS helps in boarding, both in attack and defence. In 2.5 atleast, it helped in defence, but not in ofensive. I like that. But that does not compensate for the new boarding rules.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Grand-Stone said:

For me the major thing is lack of reduction of firepower with damage and the new boarding rules.

This bit will be changing according to Stuart. At the moment they are just looking for how the core mechanics work really. Is linking easier to carry out (especially for a beginner) etc. Ships will get more nuanced and varied as we go along. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few things I see that change that I think made the game worse:

1. Range Band Change: This is the first thing I saw that I disliked. In my opinion having 4 range bands of 8" each was perfectly fine, and I personally saw no issue with it. Maybe they are trying to work it with WWX, but I dont see how you can play both systems at the same time.

2.  Damage to ships: We dont know 100 percent how this will go yet, but if I have a Cruiser that takes 1 damage, will its stats go down or will it have the same stats until it is crippled?  In the original, for every point of damage you took, your attack and defence stats went down unless you had a special rule. This made the game more strategic instead of what I see this being.   

3. Generators and such: Having generators always on in the original game ( with an exception or 2) made the game more challenging from a tactical standpoint, and required less bookeeping overall.  The fact that the generators had their own abilities that did not change the units base stats was great.  Think about it for a second... Does having a Guardian Generator make me the armor on my ship thicker? No, it is a generator that reduces successes.  In 2.0, if I fire and make 12 successes on a KoB BB with a critical rating of 10, but then he has 3 successes on his shield dice, then the total becomes a 9, and not a critical hit. This makes more sense to me.

4. Boarding: This one to me is a huge, almost game breaking change. In 2.0, a boarding action, if successful enough, could allow you to prize or derelict the ship, making it unusable to you enemy. I have seen numerous games where a smart and lucky boarding action has brought a player back to victory from sure defeat.  I know a lot of people might have not liked the boarding rules, or thought they were too powerful, but once again, it is a tactucal and strategic tool in your box that anyone could use.

5. Nation flavor:  This is another area where I see a lot has been lost from the game.  Certain nqtions has certain weapons, abilities etc... For example, the Empire had long range fire starting rockets and the Russians had shorter range, but gigantic guns.  Now I see the Crown has rockets, which they never had before, and nation only munitions, abilities have been stripped off. Way too much simplification.

 

This is just a few. I feel like this game has been so dumbed down that it has turned into "Dystopian Wars for Beginners" and I'm waiting for the real rules to come out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the fact that firepower, defense and carrier points are not affected by damage.  I know people said this will change, but I believe it when I see it.   Having firepower and such reduced by damage is a core mechanic and if it is to be in the rules it should have been included.  I really don't like the complete lack of differences and flavor between the nations.  I don't like the boarding rules do to the static number until crippled.  For how SAS work it seems too much like fleet action which I don't like.  The only part of SAS I do like is that it deals with activation spam from SAS.  Shield generators and weapons that ignore shields seem fairly pointless with these new rules.  Paying points to attempt to add 1 more armor doesn't seem to be worth it and paying points to upgrade weapons like arc weapons to counter that possible 1 additional armor seems pointless.  I do hope that on the final rules that the different weapons are not exactly the same across all nations.  The rules for how to build the battle groups allows to play a fleet that is heavy on Large ships.  I would rather have rules to make the forces more balanced for a more realistic fleet.  I am also not a fan of using cards in this game.  

I was looking forward to these rules and after reading them I am dissapointed.  I know it is only the beta and hope things will improve.  I plan on trying some games using a Battkeship, 2 Cruisers and 3 Frigates to try it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do miss the crunchy stuff, and I would say Pok that people like to have games that aren't AoS.  This is a good version of something like Fleet Action, a cut down light game, but while a lot of the mechanics are absent in this phase of the Beta its hard to judge the full impact.  I dislike making the cards no longer optional especially for initiative, disconnecting armour and crits seems like a faff and a half, and WC's fancy new dice mean they have made a rod for their own back by preventing 3+s, making defensive dice 2-3 and preventing them from exploding.  I understand why they removed defensive dice for shields and dogfights for planes but they lose some of the sense of drama and make the game slightly limper in its abstraction.  Otherwise it is what it is, a dumbed down but probably effective version of Dystopian Wars, which I find less interesting but is probably better for WC's bottom line and more importantly new fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still working my way through the rules. I can understand the simplification of a lot of things as a necessity for getting new players intothe game. The old rules were as clunky as a clunky thing. I like that movement is now split between compulsory drift and optional additional movement. I would have preferred to keep the s/m/l turning templates, but can understand the need to just use a single template and just use the traits to affect the number of turns you can make. I'm also on the fence for the SRS rules. I would have preferred to include additional uses for them (such as being able to "spend" them to improve indirect firing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, my two cents for this errata:

All that follows is opinion.  You don't like it, that's your choice.

Changing to a crippled setup makes little sense to me.  I've played with the take damage, ship is weaker per damage, firepower is lower per damage, defenses are lower per damage, and it has forced me to think whether to move a squad up with one hurting, or maneuver around another way.  This neither felt slow, nor tedious, but made the game a constant change.  The ships already get crippled over time,.  Now, it's functional then crippled, then dead?  I may be reading that wrong, so yeah, no sense. 

Boarding has always been an optional in my area.  That doesn't mean it's in the game or not, it means you can board or don't board a vessel.  If you don't like boarding rules, here's an idea: DONT DO BOARDING ACTIONS!!  As I have experienced by being witness, receiving, and using boarding actions in the 2.0 rules, they can change a game around.  Have a small squad of frigates board an escorted battleship with CAP, and take it after losing all but 1 marine.  Now I've disordered the enemy force, and denied commodore actions.  Opponent must rethink their play.  Crew types also added to the hit values as stated earlier by Grand Stone.

Generators, what has become of them?  Stat boosters?  Really?  So I can no longer roll a chain of 6s and take a triple critical and nerf it into a single hit. 

Nation flavor, that made my choice when I started.  What does what?  Which Nation plays like what?  What does this nation have that that nation does not?  There is some "equipment" that is nation specific, but nothing like what was previous, and then kind of one sided.  Every nation has the same units, same amount of types, they do the same thing, with the same equipment.  This is not exact, nor is it accurate, but such is opinions.

This is an oversimplified version of a game that is only related to the previous versions by having the game name slapped on it.  We lost everything with this change: lore, history, units, abilities, flavor, and the story that was being written as it grew.  I do not know if this can be revitalized. but this is not dystopian wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, hyde1352 said:

Alright, my two cents for this errata:

All that follows is opinion.  You don't like it, that's your choice.

Changing to a crippled setup makes little sense to me.  I've played with the take damage, ship is weaker per damage, firepower is lower per damage, defenses are lower per damage, and it has forced me to think whether to move a squad up with one hurting, or maneuver around another way.  This neither felt slow, nor tedious, but made the game a constant change.  The ships already get crippled over time,.  Now, it's functional then crippled, then dead?  I may be reading that wrong, so yeah, no sense. 

Boarding has always been an optional in my area.  That doesn't mean it's in the game or not, it means you can board or don't board a vessel.  If you don't like boarding rules, here's an idea: DONT DO BOARDING ACTIONS!!  As I have experienced by being witness, receiving, and using boarding actions in the 2.0 rules, they can change a game around.  Have a small squad of frigates board an escorted battleship with CAP, and take it after losing all but 1 marine.  Now I've disordered the enemy force, and denied commodore actions.  Opponent must rethink their play.  Crew types also added to the hit values as stated earlier by Grand Stone.

Generators, what has become of them?  Stat boosters?  Really?  So I can no longer roll a chain of 6s and take a triple critical and nerf it into a single hit. 

Nation flavor, that made my choice when I started.  What does what?  Which Nation plays like what?  What does this nation have that that nation does not?  There is some "equipment" that is nation specific, but nothing like what was previous, and then kind of one sided.  Every nation has the same units, same amount of types, they do the same thing, with the same equipment.  This is not exact, nor is it accurate, but such is opinions.

This is an oversimplified version of a game that is only related to the previous versions by having the game name slapped on it.  We lost everything with this change: lore, history, units, abilities, flavor, and the story that was being written as it grew.  I do not know if this can be revitalized. but this is not dystopian wars.

  I could not agree more. This WAS my favorite game of all time, but now, just a shadow of it's former glory. Hyde is perfectly correct in all his opinions.  This, to me, is a huge disappointment in every way. BUT, again, this is my opinion, you need not agree with it. 

  I'm hoping that there are drastic changes in the works to fix this game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In before thread locked for criticising WC.

These rules are the best thing that WC has produced for new-DW so far. I'm not saying that in a positive sense.

No wonder the CoA background document is hidden several pages deep in the WWX website, I'd be embarrassed about it too. Have you read this drek? It's all zombies and aliens, as though they're more important to DW than steampunk imperial geopolitics. Yeah, the vault could have been aliens in better-DW, but it could have been ancient Atlanteans, time travellers, Lovecraftian elder things or a hundred other things, but what it certainly and most importantly was, was a mystery. Don't even start on the tripods, they're non-canon and you know it. And why is Sturgeon now some kind of moron who lost 'half his expedition' dicking about getting to the vault? Where is the 'building a new nation' optimism of the CoA? Why are they now some illuminati-type stupidity? Why aren't they a nation? Do you really think the edgy cynicism is a good thing? The new CoA logo looks stupid too- what, are you chasing the 40k AdMech market? Leave the skulls to GW, thanks.

Having WWX carpathian get one over on the CoA with his RJ-whatever stuff definitely reads as "Hur-hur DW is ours now, it's second to WWX, suck it boat-lovers".

https://www.warcradle.com/uploads/wwx-pdfs/factions/Covenant-of-the-Enlightened-DA-Background.pdf

The new aesthetic sucks.

The new lore sucks.

The new rules suck.

Throw it in the trash and start again where Spartan left off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sebenko said:

In before thread locked for criticising WC.

These rules are the best thing that WC has produced for new-DW so far. I'm not saying that in a positive sense.

No wonder the CoA background document is hidden several pages deep in the WWX website, I'd be embarrassed about it too. Have you read this drek? It's all zombies and aliens, as though they're more important to DW than steampunk imperial geopolitics. Yeah, the vault could have been aliens in better-DW, but it could have been ancient Atlanteans, time travellers, Lovecraftian elder things or a hundred other things, but what it certainly and most importantly was, was a mystery. Don't even start on the tripods, they're non-canon and you know it. And why is Sturgeon now some kind of moron who lost 'half his expedition' dicking about getting to the vault? Where is the 'building a new nation' optimism of the CoA? Why are they now some illuminati-type stupidity? Why aren't they a nation? Do you really think the edgy cynicism is a good thing? The new CoA logo looks stupid too- what, are you chasing the 40k AdMech market? Leave the skulls to GW, thanks.

Having WWX carpathian get one over on the CoA with his RJ-whatever stuff definitely reads as "Hur-hur DW is ours now, it's second to WWX, suck it boat-lovers".

https://www.warcradle.com/uploads/wwx-pdfs/factions/Covenant-of-the-Enlightened-DA-Background.pdf

The new aesthetic sucks.

The new lore sucks.

The new rules suck.

Throw it in the trash and start again where Spartan left off.

Its not hidden.  The fluff in the WWX book for both the union (where the Civil war kills 1/5 of the population rather than the historical 1/50) and Covenant of the Enlightened is canon for their Dystopian age setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say hidden in the rulebook for a totally different game (frankensteinian jamming together of settings notwithstanding) is pretty hidden for anyone looking for DW background.

6 minutes ago, RuleBritannia said:

(where the Civil war kills 1/5 of the population rather than the historical 1/50)

Needlessly edgy much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

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.