Jump to content
murphy'slawofcombat

new rules set

Recommended Posts

Honestly I wouldn't expect big steps in the Firestorm department until we see Dystopian pushed further forward. We've also no real idea of WC's plans for how fast and how much they will roll out for Dystopian Wars - remembering that they are redesigning many of the factions and models to new sculpts as well as some adjustments to alliances. I don't think we've really got an idea how big a team and production setup WC have either - plus they already produce WWE products. 

 

So predictions are hard and its honestly the worst of times at present as whilst things are surely chugging along, there just isn't much to tantalize us. Esp since its likely they are still in phases where many things get changed or adjusted, dropped and added and where progress just takes time. It would be foolish of WC to build up hype too much now and leave us with a long period of nothing or have to change plans . 

That siad they are now making classic sculpts up for sale so there is that to look forward too! : )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Brimat said:

Any new infos on a time table for Firestorm? Any info is appreciated. :)

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* ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should be a big year for WC in terms of Spartan game licences and products. We know that Dystopian Wars is coming soon and should dominate the QA; whilst Firestorm we should hopefully hear about plans for a Beta 

 

I just hope that they can start to give us a roadmap of what is to come. Maybe not with fixed dates but at least to say what we can expect and in what order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Small Mek said:

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* ;)

Ok, i will mark this date in the calender and check the news section here. 

 

9 minutes ago, Overread said:

I just hope that they can start to give us a roadmap of what is to come. Maybe not with fixed dates but at least to say what we can expect and in what order.

Such a roadmap is what i am waiting for.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upshot is that Firestorm is still much in the same position. It sounds like a lot hinges on when the Dystopain Wars Beta ends, a shame I didn't catch them mentioning an end date for it (unless its plastered somewhere else really obviously and I've been blind and missed it). Though it sounds like when the Dystopian Wars Beta ends a lot kicks into overdrive - the game starts to go into proper production and final revisions and it sounds like a period of time after (month, two months or something like that) the Firestorm Beta will go out.

 

The video sounded like things at WC have not slowed down so much as they've had a more realistic look at the back end situation after the initial flurry of excitement. There's a more careful air and it sounds like Dystopian Wars is going to be mid year at BEST and most likely a Q3 or even early Q4 release; with a lot depending on when the Beta ends. So it sounds like Firestorm is a 2020 release at best and likely a mid to late year release then; however if the beta goes well and with Dystopian Wars out the door some things might go quicker its hard to say from the outside. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :D 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.


 I’ve been trying to lower my expectations about the new rules/fluff resembling to their old spartan roots... significantly. It’s not a preference thing, my investment in the game is shamefully large, so it is a given that I’m a fan of the old system and fluff. But... warcradle is in a tricky situation.
In my area even some of the most dedicated following is trying to sell their collection for newcomers (yep, I’ve heard of the rare breed) or people looking to finish their collection. The activity on these forums or on the facebook groups is not... significant, so I presume most fleets to be mothballed at best. When the beta hits presumably in Q3 or Q4, two years have passed since the acquisition of the IP. My question is: who is that beta aimed for? The new blood probably won’t flow in until the marketing machine starts. How clotted is the old blood? How much change the people who stuck around for two years with no content are willing to digest? Not the same, not my game? Let the old world burn? Probably as always somewhere in between. It looks like warcradle hasn’t seem to have their directions fixed, I don’t suppose there is an answer to this, and I find myself lowering and lowering my expectations, so it won’t be hard for me to pleasantly surprised.
And do you think it was worth it for Warcradle to purchase the IP and sit on it for 2.5-3 years? Sure the old moulds generated some profit in the warcradle classics line, but was it worth it compared to the price of the IP?
I know I’m eager to jump into the beta in a moment’s notice, and willing to use leverage that piled up for two years to blackmail my mates to join me (unintended benefit for the long wait), but I’m curious how many people are left that are still interested, and how open minded they have to get to avoid the inevitable disappointment for the fan expectations branched to a hundred different directions for two years not matching the singular vision of the developers?
Am I unnecessarily worrying? (I know I tend to do that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the question of scale is interesting, though for me when it comes to space ship games the only things that I never feel are in scale are fighters and other such craft. Frigates and corvettes and the like always feel like they are in the same scale as the rest of the game. Personally I'd rather it remain like that as it makes the game much easier to visualise by and large. If they start making frigates one scale and cruisers another and battleships yet another I think it starts to lose a connection for the player.

One thing I LOATH (And computer games do this a lot) is when I see a cinematic that shows one scale of battle only to jump into the game and find that the actual playing scale is vastly different. A classic example would be showing big ships next to frigates and cruisers that look small so the big ship looks huge. Then having dozens and dozens of the smaller craft. Jump into the game and your'e playing with 10 ships total - the cruisers and frigates are not too much smaller than the battleship. Visually it feels like a lie. 

 

So I'd far rather they stuck to one scale and then let fighters/torpedoes be oversized purely for practical considerations of being able to see them. I feel that's fair in a game where the ships are supposed to be massive -a Dreadnought is supposed to be a big city in space; heck one faction had justthat floating cities in space. I feel if WC stick to that scale they will keep the cinematic feel of the game; the epic sweepings of battles. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to the scale comment - all I was saying was that while each millimetre in DW equates to a real-world measurement, the ships in FS are not necessarily held to that maxim. A human battleship might be 10" long and so might a reptilian one but in real terms, they may not be exactly the same length. Battleships will be roughly equivalent in terms of role and firepower, not necessarily mass. (which is somewhat less relevant with wildly varying alien materials etc).  That was all. The principle of the centre of the flight stem actually being the ship is quite interesting. The models themselves being magnified and projected representations of those ships.    As humans, we need playing pieces to be a certain size and on the whole, we also equate size with power. The game will certainly maintain those points but that does not mean that every playing piece is to the same scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding our plans changing, no not really. Firestorm has always had some guiding principles we set down as to how we want the game to be for its new edition. The Games Developer role we are advertising is to build on what I said about a year ago, we would scale up the studio as we create more concurrent games.  We have around a dozen games in development right now (including Firestorm, Dystopian Wars and Wild West Exodus). We are expanding the team so that we can deliver on those. We have also had a Lead Illustrator join us, and are expanding our writing,  sculpting, CAD and graphic design team too.  

While it has been just over a year since we acquired Firestorm, in terms of games development that really isn't very long at all, especially when we take into account things like manufacturing which has lead times of its own. 

As for the purpose of the Beta, the Beta is never about getting the rules out there for the community to go have fun playing games. Its about giving the community the opportunity to help shape the final form of the game. If you want to do that, great, if not, no problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

16 hours ago, Overread said:

I think the question of scale is interesting, though for me when it comes to space ship games the only things that I never feel are in scale are fighters and other such craft. Frigates and corvettes and the like always feel like they are in the same scale as the rest of the game. Personally I'd rather it remain like that as it makes the game much easier to visualise by and large. If they start making frigates one scale and cruisers another and battleships yet another I think it starts to lose a connection for the player.

One thing I LOATH (And computer games do this a lot) is when I see a cinematic that shows one scale of battle only to jump into the game and find that the actual playing scale is vastly different. A classic example would be showing big ships next to frigates and cruisers that look small so the big ship looks huge. Then having dozens and dozens of the smaller craft. Jump into the game and your'e playing with 10 ships total - the cruisers and frigates are not too much smaller than the battleship. Visually it feels like a lie. 

 

So I'd far rather they stuck to one scale and then let fighters/torpedoes be oversized purely for practical considerations of being able to see them. I feel that's fair in a game where the ships are supposed to be massive -a Dreadnought is supposed to be a big city in space; heck one faction had justthat floating cities in space. I feel if WC stick to that scale they will keep the cinematic feel of the game; the epic sweepings of battles. 

 

 

Yeah, Different scales for different classes (fighters and the like aside per the standard for genre) would be a hard no for me. I want my big ships BIG, and to look it! At the current scale - A frigate is approximately the length of a WWII Battleship - (I worked it out ages ago) which is a great little metric.

16 hours ago, Small Mek said:

 

  Hide contents

And do you think it was worth it for Warcradle to purchase the IP and sit on it for 2.5-3 years? Sure the old moulds generated some profit in the warcradle classics line, but was it worth it compared to the price of the IP?

 

I think that depends on the price of the IP... They may well have bought it simply to make their own game without the risk of someone else revitalising FA in competition (Which would be a perfectly legitimate thing to do, even though I would be saddened) A couple of decades following battletech has taught me  all about IP wrangling.

I'll be interested in the Beta - Like you @Small Mek I am hoping to be pleasantly surprised. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for commenting on these, it really means a lot (to me :) )

7 minutes ago, Warcradle Stuart said:

While it has been just over a year since we acquired Firestorm, in terms of games development that really isn't very long at all, especially when we take into account things like manufacturing which has lead times of its own.

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!

16 minutes ago, Warcradle Stuart said:

As for the purpose of the Beta, the Beta is never about getting the rules out there for the community to go have fun playing games. Its about giving the community the opportunity to help shape the final form of the game. If you want to do that, great, if not, no problem. 

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).

17 minutes ago, Spenetrator said:

I think that depends on the price of the IP... They may well have bought it simply to make their own game without the risk of someone else revitalising FA in competition (Which would be a perfectly legitimate thing to do, even though I would be saddened) A couple of decades following battletech has taught me  all about IP wrangling.

I'll be interested in the Beta - Like you @Small Mek I am hoping to be pleasantly surprised. But willing to go back to FA2.0 if I don't like the new changes.

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 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Warcradle Stuart Whilst I know things are not as yet running as normal (since you're not actually in production stage yet) I know you've been doing castings of the resin models from the SG era (and continue to do so). I wonder if it might be worth producing a short video showing the various stages of mould production, development and casting. I think its a neat bit of in-fill content that can be put up and, if done well, can educate those who are interested but don't have a proper understanding nor appreciation of the timescales and production method involved. 

Share this post


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

@Warcradle Stuart Whilst I know things are not as yet running as normal (since you're not actually in production stage yet) I know you've been doing castings of the resin models from the SG era (and continue to do so). I wonder if it might be worth producing a short video showing the various stages of mould production, development and casting. I think its a neat bit of in-fill content that can be put up and, if done well, can educate those who are interested but don't have a proper understanding nor appreciation of the timescales and production method involved. 

I  think that is a very good idea and would love to see the process in making the models .... I would also like to say I would like very much to be involved in the Beta test . I've never done one before and don't know what is involved but I am willing to give it a try... there is not much interest here in Carlisle Pa. in Firestorm but with the new rules that may change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooooooooo... DW Beta is coming to a close at end of June. Anyone care to speculate about the timeline? Anyone hoping for Q3? Or will the finalisation of the actual DW profiles take much more time and developer resources?

Do you guys think that the FSA beta can be similar to the DW in that can be concluded without seeing actual profiles for the fleets, or the distinction between them will require stats closer to the intended final versions (Shunting, shields, cloaks, Cyberwarfare etc.)? Too early to speculate? Shall I wait a few more months? Ok ok. Patience. I know. I'll see myself out.

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.