1
The Swap Shop / Re: Dystopian Wars Clearout
« on: March 05, 2018, 05:02:58 am »
Interested in PE Imperium, EoBS Tanuki, possibly some Black Wolf. Can I know prices?
Have model ships, will game.
News:
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Space Naval Games / Re: Newtonian Movement?
« on: March 04, 2018, 02:14:55 pm »This could be implemented with the direction of movement marked in n the base while rotating the model to indicate facing
Yeah, actually in NA is recorded by putting a D20 in the hex next to the ship in the direction the ship is moving. Top face recording speed.
So, I suppose this is not what OP was asking for..?
3
Space Naval Games / Re: Newtonian Movement?
« on: March 04, 2018, 08:00:20 am »
Don't know if this is what you're looking for, but Noble Armada (Holistic Design) an old hex-based game, allows for putting thrust in one direction, then rotating your ships while proceeding in the direction chosen before (if no new direction is given by thrusting the engines while in the new orientation).
This is the game I'm talking about: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/11689/noble-armada
There's a newer version by Moongose which I know not, so I can't tell if/how rules are similar.
This is the game I'm talking about: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/11689/noble-armada
There's a newer version by Moongose which I know not, so I can't tell if/how rules are similar.
4
Dystopian Wars / Re: Revised Ningjing Renders
« on: March 04, 2018, 06:29:27 am »
A bit late to the party, but I'd like to add a few comments...
This is the original Ninjing design:
It is clearly noticeable that Spartan Games was already steering toward a more intricate design with its later stuff. KS vessels are way more fancier and less sober than previous models. This could be good or bad, mostly depending on individuals' tastes and opinions. I can say that a bit more variety in ship designs, with a bit more fancy stuff is good for me, but the later SG designs are fancy enough for me, sometimes already too much (like the giant sculpted balzing sun flag on Ninjing hull). The (very little) we've seen up to now from Warcradle push it a bit too forward for my tastes, I'd like DW to look more steampunk and less fantasy, but it's just my opinion and I'm still looking forward to see what WC will bring back as a complete game/setting. Chances are that while I will not recognize it as "the Dystopian Wars I used to know" I'll like it anyway, once I'll get used to the new design.
This said, the only thing that worries me a bit is the 'gigantification' of details, like the huge dragon head on the new design (as the two smaller ones above were not enough).
This is not for some sort of historical accuracy, or any aesthetic sense. This is because giant stuff like that fail to give a proper sense of scale to these kind of models, they look weird and somewhat "wrong" at a glance. This has been a major issue for me with all GW games of a similar scale (MoW, BFG) that had models with silly stuff like giant blades, shark heads, huge hammers and the like. Stuff like that make the model look smaller than it is supposed to be. It's a battery of tiny cannons on a broadside, that gives me a proper sense of scale, small windows, hatches and the like... a huge dragon head on the prow totally spoils the scale for me.
This is the original Ninjing design:
It is clearly noticeable that Spartan Games was already steering toward a more intricate design with its later stuff. KS vessels are way more fancier and less sober than previous models. This could be good or bad, mostly depending on individuals' tastes and opinions. I can say that a bit more variety in ship designs, with a bit more fancy stuff is good for me, but the later SG designs are fancy enough for me, sometimes already too much (like the giant sculpted balzing sun flag on Ninjing hull). The (very little) we've seen up to now from Warcradle push it a bit too forward for my tastes, I'd like DW to look more steampunk and less fantasy, but it's just my opinion and I'm still looking forward to see what WC will bring back as a complete game/setting. Chances are that while I will not recognize it as "the Dystopian Wars I used to know" I'll like it anyway, once I'll get used to the new design.
This said, the only thing that worries me a bit is the 'gigantification' of details, like the huge dragon head on the new design (as the two smaller ones above were not enough).
This is not for some sort of historical accuracy, or any aesthetic sense. This is because giant stuff like that fail to give a proper sense of scale to these kind of models, they look weird and somewhat "wrong" at a glance. This has been a major issue for me with all GW games of a similar scale (MoW, BFG) that had models with silly stuff like giant blades, shark heads, huge hammers and the like. Stuff like that make the model look smaller than it is supposed to be. It's a battery of tiny cannons on a broadside, that gives me a proper sense of scale, small windows, hatches and the like... a huge dragon head on the prow totally spoils the scale for me.
5
Dystopian Wars / Re: To Robot or not to Robot?
« on: February 28, 2018, 11:00:27 am »
I don't care if it makes sense. I call for the Rule of Cool here. The waterlined Metzger is the model that single-handedly drew me in the game. I owned a couple way before even considering start playing. I usually keep fielding one even if point-wise I could buy something more efficient. Just because it's a big stomping robot treading the sea floor to punch opponents' ships.
6
Dystopian Wars / Re: Fleet Action - FAQ, updates
« on: September 04, 2017, 08:44:55 pm »
Started playing DWFA a few weeks ago.
About typos in orbats, CoA Diophantus costs 3100 (should be 310, I think).
Also, EoBS Myobu is armored, not multi-purpose (this has never been confirmed as a typo, could it be intentional?)
About typos in orbats, CoA Diophantus costs 3100 (should be 310, I think).
Also, EoBS Myobu is armored, not multi-purpose (this has never been confirmed as a typo, could it be intentional?)
Pages: [1]