Legacy models in 3.0

[RuleBritannia]

There has been an official announcement from Warcradle today that confirmed they would not be producing rules for Spartan's models.  While there seemed to be some hints earlier that suggested that was a possibility, considering the size and diversity of Spartan's range and the difference in style, scale and load out of Warcradle's range this always seemed a brave concept.  This poll is mostly about gauging where the community is looking to go to think about the priorities going forward, especially for those with large extant fleets.

[Covertwalrus]

 Even with some of the few better ideas in 3.0, I still find the playability of 2.5 is much more to my liking, and the only issue I have is the awful editign alnd layout of the rule book; Which is easily worked around with reference sheets, so there's that.

[Sebenko]

Probably not play at all due to the difficulty of getting players for a dead game, put my models in a display case and stare wistfully at them.

Otherwise, play 2.0 if I find anyone to play with.

[Dakkar]

I suppose I'll proxy, but what it made we *want* to do is
"Sell off all remaining Spartan stuff; and treat anything Warcradle does as a brand new game fighting for my attention"

There's a bit of wait and see in all that - are there clear analogs/matches between old and new, etc. But if the WC position is "Ditch the old models for a our new game"  … that doesn't bring me along AT ALL.

[Landlubber]

I'm not a big fan of proxying models. But I'm also not enthused with the direction that Warcradle is taking the game either. I understand some of the decisions they're having to make (let's face it, Spartan released an unsustainable number of models for Dystopian Wars--very cool, very unique, but unsustainable), but the game is morphing into something that I'm not really excited about anymore. Plus, the new sculpts aren't working for me--just too different from what we already have.

But that's OK...I've got about 5000 points apiece of FSA and French naval, air, and land models, about 2500 points of Chinese naval and air models, and maybe 2000 points of Australian naval and air models, plus several local opponents here who are happy to play 2.5. So I'm good. 

[Semmes58]

I see the direction Warcradle is taking the Dystopian Wars game system and honestly really dislike the additional complexity , special extras etc. I will most likely play the old 2.5 version with friends until i can find a customer for my existing   KOB, French, FSA, Australians  and Aliens (my Favorite for Con Demo games). Any takers?

[Covertwalrus]

I see the direction Warcradle is taking the Dystopian Wars game system and honestly really dislike the additional complexity , special extras etc. I will most likely play the old 2.5 version with friends until i can find a customer for my existing   KOB, French, FSA, Australians  and Aliens (my Favorite for Con Demo games). Any takers?

 I'd be interested in KOB and Australians

[Quickdraw]

I haven’t been interested in anything Warcradle has done with the Dystopian line from the beginning. Not that it matters at all as they are the rightful owners of the IP and can do whatever they please, but I feel they’ve really handled the whole situation poorly.
2.5 is actually a pretty decent ruleset and there is VERY little incentive to move on from it.

[CDR G]

While I voted for the "update" choice I will prefer to play a better edited 2.5. If Warcradle decides to "not support" legacy models in any meaningful way, I may play 3.0, but I won't buy any of the new models. Natural consequences. If they do support the legacy models I would buy the new sets- because that's an honorable trade. Either way I will be looking for 2.5 games

[CDR G]

Meanwhile I will setting up some DW 2.5 games at GEN CON. Likely a demo and 1-2 competitive games. I did this in 2015. We'll see if it works. I will be looking to play 3.0 while I am there. (Along with some X-Wing).
If anyone is going to GEN Con this year and wants to play some DW2.5, friendly or official, let me know. If I have some players ahead of time it will help with getting it on the schedule and when to schedule it.

[Covertwalrus]

While I voted for the "update" choice I will prefer to play a better edited 2.5. If Warcradle decides to "not support" legacy models in any meaningful way, I may play 3.0, but I won't buy any of the new models. Natural consequences. If they do support the legacy models I would buy the new sets- because that's an honorable trade. Either way I will be looking for 2.5 games

 That's pretty much the feeling around here - So far the only factions that we've seen art for that look anythign like compatible visually are the Russians, some "Crown" and the Covenant ( Thopuigh that whale launcher still irks me.
 And yes, a better edited 2.65 would be great, and there are people working on that.

[Wanjajoral]

When Spartan Games went belly up I bought quite a few boxes for various fleets (all in all one rather large shipping box still awaiting assembly and painting). Having a new and actively supported ruleset has a lot of appeal, but if that will exclude all of the older models, then count me out, 2.5 or even 2.0 is still a very solid ruleset to play with casually.

[RuleBritannia]

Listening to the MBS podcast has made me think about this.  I don't like forcing a gap between editions full stop and we all already talked about how the divide in fluff and design may make sense for Warcradle in an acquisition sense of taking ownership and looking at marketing to new markets, it doesn't make sense for existing gamers who want continuity of experience and don't want their game to feel a dead game.  Its no fault of WC for buying the game and their decision to split the streams isn't irrational, its just to me slightly distasteful in a way that it doesn't bring existing fans with them. 

[Last Rites]

Well that sucks...guess it’s playing the old rules and proxy. Not that I’ve played in a few years.

[Last Rites]

Is there a link to where Warcradle announced that they won’t be supporting the old minis? Thanks.