Jump to content
Guest Delboy

Dystopian Wars Playtester Thread

Recommended Posts

Guest Delboy

This is sort of a weird aside, but can you clarify, Delboy, if there's any thought about how the fluff of the Teutonic Order fits into the Prussian Empire as a whole? I've always thought it weird that the Teutonic Order would set up shop in Scandinavia anyway, butw hat's the relation of the order to the Imperial government?

So far it seems like the allies are

a) independent nations, like the Chinese, Ottomans, etc.

B) client states and dominions, like Canada, RNAZ, the Belgian Protectorate

c) the Teutonic Order

So I guess I'm just curious as to why they count as a separate faction, flag and (potentially) list and all, rather than jus a part of the PE that the fluff mentions in unit entries and the like? Would the Hospitallers and Templars work the same way? I suppose it doesn't matter much, but it seems like a hanging inconsistency. Or is the intent that the TO is granted enough autonomy and territorial sovereignty to act more or less like one of the client states listed in option b?

Interesting question.

 

I think the core reason the Teutonics are a separate Faction in the game is.......'cos its cool!.....' B) and Franco wanted to write them that way.

 

But from a game-designers point of view, I prefer the distinction as it gives us more room to grow both Prussians and Teutonics in the future as separate entities.

.

As to whether the other 'Orders' will be represented in time........ :ph34r:  ......... "Am no tellin'..." :ph34r: 

 

d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

........ and Franco wanted to write them that way.

Until he decides to completely change the established fluff for absolutely no reason. Changing the land the Italian's owned in Africa from Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria (which was established way back when the fluff for them was first wriitten and reaffirmed with the Italian Booklet) to just Libya and suddenly the British own Algeria and Tunisia with no explanation as to why.

 

Thats the most recent, and the biggest, inconsistency he has done to the Fluff whenall it needed was a little paragraph explaining that the British stormed into Algeria and Tunisia when the Italians joined in the war and the Imperial Bonds assault on those countries was a belated counter-attack.

 

Something as small as that is all that is needed to keep the consistency that some of us ask for. After that he can go nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Delboy

Until he decides to completely change the established fluff for absolutely no reason. Changing the land the Italian's owned in Africa from Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria (which was established way back when the fluff for them was first wriitten and reaffirmed with the Italian Booklet) to just Libya and suddenly the British own Algeria and Tunisia with no explanation as to why.

 

Thats the most recent, and the biggest, inconsistency he has done to the Fluff whenall it needed was a little paragraph explaining that the British stormed into Algeria and Tunisia when the Italians joined in the war and the Imperial Bonds assault on those countries was a belated counter-attack.

 

Something as small as that is all that is needed to keep the consistency that some of us ask for. After that he can go nuts.

Poor comment.

Perhaps you should reconsider your tone, Heartbroken Tone76

 

Franco has driven the lore and setting of the game further than anybody. Single-handedly.

Your comment seems petulant and childish.

 

If you have noticed inconsistencies perhaps rather than posting comment like the one above, which appears to be ego-focused and snide in its delivery, you might contact Spartan directly? Wouldn't that be more productive? :rolleyes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Delboy in this instance, HBT76.

 

I will be the first to admit there have been some elements of the story that have got me wondering (eg. why the Americans would even want to send an expeditionary force to Africa when they've got a hostile force on their doorstep and a major operation on on the other side of the world), but, by and large, its been consistent, well planned out and suitably epic.

 

In fact, the story has been so well planned, it makes me wonder if Spartan doesn't already have the full, high-level 10-year timeline of the war worked out and sitting on the wall of their offices as a reference point.

 

If I could suggest though - Spartan is still hiring freelance staff. If you believe that you can be of assistance to Franco in some way, even in such a way as a continuity checker and proof-reader, why not make an application? I'm sure someone as dedicated as you would be of great assistance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No because the damage has been done and printed. What would be the point in contacting them now? And I don't know what inconsistencies he has planned so I can't complain about future ones.

 

And as 'not so nice' as the comment is written, I do have a valid point in the topic within a topic. Not even the GW changes the established fluff of 40k as drastically as that. They work well within the fluff that they have established which is considerably large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I will be the first to admit there have been some elements of the story that have got me wondering (eg. why the Americans would even want to send an expeditionary force to Africa when they've got a hostile force on their doorstep and a major operation on on the other side of the world), but, by and large, its been consistent, well planned out and suitably epic.

 

In fact, the story has been so well planned, it makes me wonder if Spartan doesn't already have the full, high-level 10-year timeline of the war worked out and sitting on the wall of their offices as a reference point.

 

These references in your post I readily agree with.

 

Delboy

To keep this on subject somewhat. I've wondered how much of the background influences your playtesting and design work ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the answer to why the Americans would deploy a force to North Africa is because they already had a large force that was being deployed to England as a base for future operations, and seeing as current Britannian strategy has been to strengthen their ties with their allies and to strengthen their hold on Britannian territory, it would make sense to have the Americans help defend other parts of Britannia.  Also, the FSA had not been able to strike at the Republique, so that is an advantage of North Africa.  Also, if they continued to fight in the Caribbean, they would be eternally stuck playing catch up to the Imperial Bond as they would be retaking territory that is lost after every Imperial Bond offensive, now they are trying to match the Imperial Bond so nothing like the Caribbean Catastrophe can happen again.

 

Finally, I think it was also one of the, I think awesome, attempts of Spartan to match up with history in weird ways.  In 1942 the Americans did indeed send an expedition to England and then to North Africa even though the Pacific War was going on.  The biggest difference is that they are defending in DW instead of attacking.  Even two of the three ports from Operation Torch are used in Sirocco! I love the Dystopian Wars fluff and how it connects up to real history in subtle, and not so subtle ways (Waterloo).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@hbt

One of the reasons GW fluff fits so well is that they use a fixed moment in time over a moving timeline with the excuse being that the named models needed to stay playable. This always ment the timeline felt stagnent to me and certain chars, especally Empire, should have dropped dead from old age along time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@hbt

One of the reasons GW fluff fits so well is that they use a fixed moment in time over a moving timeline with the excuse being that the named models needed to stay playable. This always ment the timeline felt stagnent to me and certain chars, especally Empire, should have dropped dead from old age along time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys we're literally witnessing the evolution of a world and a game system, there's going to be some revision as Spartan figures out what works and what doesn't.

 

40k is 25 years old, its very well established by now, Dystopian wars in no where near that old things are still a bit in the air. During the first few years of 40k things were even worse, anyone every read the original Rogue trader book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys we're literally witnessing the evolution of a world and a game system, there's going to be some revision as Spartan figures out what works and what doesn't.

40k is 25 years old, its very well established by now, Dystopian wars in no where near that old things are still a bit in the air. During the first few years of 40k things were even worse, anyone every read the original Rogue trader book?

More recent stuff is just as bad - Blood Angel and Necron bro-sefs? Retcon out the C'tan?

*shudder*

=====================

Delboy! Polish airships! Polish winged fire-breathing airships!

If you would be so kind...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More recent stuff is just as bad - Blood Angel and Necron bro-sefs? Retcon out the C'tan?

*shudder*

=====================

Delboy! Polish airships! Polish winged fire-breathing airships!

If you would be so kind...?

Ha, I was about to point out Matt Ward and his horribly inconsistent and juvenile fluff writing.

I prefer Spartans fluff overall, there's at best a handful of inconsistencies, inconsequential at best unless you're nitpicking. It helps that it looks like there's only one person helming the fluff writing, which makes fluff more consistent overall, and the fluff here is fluid, campaigns matter in the Dystopian universe.

There's also amusing ones like Time-Travelling Tesla. (Hey, with technology like the Time Dilation Orb, who knows?!)

That said, I do have some issues with the fluff. Like Her Divine Empress and her silly flame spewing dragon hat with the mini glowing bits, that hat is far too silly, please change it to something more dignified. Also the Yurgi Destroyer, I will point this out over and over again that Yurgi is not a Japanese word, he's a sneaky Russian.

But yes, back to the thread. The Poles, I am excite for tomorrow. Trying to convince the local Russian player to grab that box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mumble mumble

Wouldn't mind flamethrower airship if they weren't called "flame blimps". It sounds idiotic and incorrect.

For some reason I see "flame blimps" and think the airship has a case of "air flatulence". :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one wasn't a fan of some of the fluff set down in 1.0, particularly the northern war, it seemed very out of place for two great powers fighting against some of the most powerful nations on earth and tied together by alliance to suddenly say "screw this" and fight a pointless war over Alaska. Though I do like the fluff justification for the retcon

 

Britain just goes "Seriously guys? World war going on over here..." and that's that

 

I have noticed that the core nations are a lot less "evil" in 1.1. In 1.0 the KoB were willing to play its allies off against each other, and I think it was suggested that they, not the EIMC, were responsible for the trade disputes. Japan straight up gassed a country. Also I think the slavery issue for the FSA was mentioned, though I'm not sure on that one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it was changed from Japan gassing Korea to Japan being subjected to gas weapons when invading Korea. I've been noticing the Dutch and Portuguese seem to get name-dropped in fluff about the Blazing Sun as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Delboy

These references in your post I readily agree with.

 

Delboy

To keep this on subject somewhat. I've wondered how much of the background influences your playtesting and design work ?

 

Franco's background is one of the key determinants in our design process. He builds the 'Vision of Dystopia' which we all readilly follow.

The writing of the background is something that steers much of our design but the process is pretty organic, with the flow of ideas working in muliple directions.

 

Very often I'll come to him with a wacky idea brought up by the Seniors, Betas, Forum Members, General Public....... having built a load of rules around the concept, and literally dump it in his lap saying...... "Can you make that work?....".....To which he will politley point out where I'm off-canon.......and then works his magic regardless. :P

 

Other times we are more hand-in-glove, chatting reflectivley about the project at hand. The Ottomans are a good example of this.

 

The issue surrounding the Ottomans was not one of historical record, as the Ottoman Empire's place in 'true-history' is well founded. Rather, it was important that both the background and rules were cognicent of the present day tensions that exist around the world regarding faith, nationality and warfare in general.

 

So despite existing in a fantastical/dystopian setting, when we approached the building of both the background and the rules, we focused upon the enlightenment aspect of the nation, making them very much 'Gentlemen Scholars' - because we were determined to represent the Nation in a fairer, global view rather than in a stereotypical manner based from a Western mindset.

 

Their rules reflect their scholastic-nature with the use of a largley agricultural generator - the Firtina is used to irrigate thier barren regions to feed their extensive populace..... and non-aggressive weaponry - the Air Burst Mines [.....although there might be some debate as to whether a Mine is defensive.....] which are used to define thier borders.

 

In time given their world-ethos, I'd like to draw the Ottomans back to the Covenant as a co-signature of sorts, given the reasons above, but really thats down to Franco. From a game-standpoint it also increases the Allies Spread for the Covenant, but it might not fit with Franco's vision [There is also the issue of the folks who have bought into the Ottomans as an Imperial Bond faction.]....but I digress.

 

I'm not sure how much I've asnwered your question BB....... ;)

But there you go!

 

d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In time given their world-ethos, I'd like to draw the Ottomans back to the Covenant as a co-signature of sorts, given the reasons above, but really thats down to Franco. From a game-standpoint it also increases the Allies Spread for the Covenant, but it might not fit with Franco's vision [There is also the issue of the folks who have bought into the Ottomans as an Imperial Bond faction.]....but I digress.

 

Tell Franco that I will send beer money if this happens. And why not both? Secretly work with the CoA on the side...

just give me an excuse to buy a Hisar...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And why not both? Secretly work with the CoA on the side...

 

 

Because Ottomans have very close ties with the Republic of France. Though they both could be secretly aligned with CoA. Finally till Markov escape they both have good ties with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delboy

Thanks for the reply. Yes that was a helpful reply. With the incorporation of the two alliances into the actual game-play in the past year I had thought that there was more collaboration between the design/ playtester team and the writers of the background. I won't get into the background here as I know you want to stay on topic. But I appreciate you delving some into the background with the Ottomans as it pertains to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • 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.