All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Today
  3. Because you are in an active combat situation. You have a lot of threats to deal with. Why extend yourself and put yourself more at risk to kill someone that is no longer a threat than to engage someone that is currently an actual threat to you. To chase after someone that "has been forced to fall back" is pretty much *the* way pincer maneuvers and ambushes happen. It pretty much makes them "bait" to get anyone foolish enough to chase after them to do so, so the other combatants can take you out. It would be different if it was a recon situation, or a very small skirmish that is almost over, but not in this case. As for pilots being rare, I think, relatively speaking, that SAS pilots aren't all that rare. They aren't as numerous as AP, but there are dozens of SAS pilots in any given engagement. With all of the other ships, and the size and scope of this conflict, I would bet most SAS pilots probably only fly 1-2 runs in their (short) life, they are a small step up from assault marines. The good pilots become aces, if they survive there for any length of time they're probably moved up to piloting things like sky fortresses. Gamewise, it is all about managing resources. You only have so many of your own units and so many activations to do things in. Even if rebuilding wasn't a thing why would you sent a unit of 5 fighters to take out 1 bomber heading back to reload when there is another unit of 5 bombers in route to dropping their payload on your ships? They are the higher threat. And if you can take out that carrier before the bomber gets back, well then he is even more useless. Even in real life there was a lot of weapons that have been built not to kill, but to wound. A wounded enemy takes a lot more resources than a dead one.
  4. Just got word today that my second event has been approved. This one is for Wednesday night. You can find details for locations for both events on the Gen Con website. Wednesday night: https://www.gencon.com/events/103639 Thursday night https://www.gencon.com/events/103637
  5. Would like to get in a pick up game sometime during the con, I'll be playing in the event but would like at least one more game
  6. The most powerful concept at work with this game and it's evolution is just that. It evolves. With player feedback and input, with data and testing efforts. The best games are "made" with and for fans. We are making strides to work towards that ideal. Be it carriers, little bug robot planes, the huge and diverse array of vessel statistics, generators and all the rest... we have a base to stand on in 2.5 that we can spring from and build off of, with the support and passion of our players... and some convoluted madness from Spartan too! -Mike
  7. Yay! Heh, um.. I don't look emails xD. Just read replys from thread. *nods* Sounds good will keep eye out for it, hmm .
  8. Awsome, thanks. Can't wait to get mine and try my best to run something over.
  9. I hope you are right. This is a weaker version of the COA drone re-build that causes the overpowering carrier spam. Although activation wise, it is even stronger. Sky Captain
  10. @Jsiegel1983 Yes, the special rule governing the Icemaiden's IR "value" is a special case, but allows for it indeed to crush (basically) everything and anything it's it path with a ludicrously mighty ram... provided you can line up the run! Hitting and iceberg, or having one drive into you, is always going to be a very bad situation! @Sailion I swear folks must have some kinda tap into my emails or comp... literally just one of the dialogues I was kicking around in the early hours of my morning! Studio paint work isn't my department... but an exciting blog with an odd cast of characters sure is! -Mike
  11. Looking into cost (hotels/B&B). If it's viable there will likely be 4 of us heading over from Somerset.
  12. Ya shiny new super guns will do that to a wargamers brain! I can assure you that they are infact rather awesome new ordinance! Should be a powerful new tool for the Emperor to smite his foes with! @Gen. Eric that's a robot I would definately like to see fall through some kinda Sturginium-created worm hole and start trouble in the universe! -Mike
  13. Also wanted to ask, you guys going to be painting up new fleets, revamping old fleets paint jobs like in "tale of gamers" sort of thing? Am curious.
  14. I noticed that the ice maiden has the hull breaker (ram action d6) mar and an IR of -. The rulebook states that to perform a ram action the model must have an IR higher than 0. Is the ice maiden capable of performing a ram action or can it only cause collisions?
  15. If you didnt know the enemy location, allowing them to flee would be wise...
  16. In my example I kill 3 DB, leaving 2 of them alive, which tries to damage my BB. If you have only 1 fighter wing within reach, that is better than having the alternative, which is killing them all and then later in the game letting 5 divebombers attack my BB... My 5 cents too.
  17. I can probably make this and it sounds good
  18. Not really a good idea to ram with the russian subs, more surface, shoot and hope to dave dave dave lol
  19. I was wondering about that surfing metzger. When can we get one of those models out!
  20. How is it better to let the enemy escape and rearm than to kill them when you can? Especially as pilots are a rare resource. if you don't kill the enemy on your own term they will try to kill you on their own terms. gamewise it should never be preferable to let the enemy survive to rearm than to kill them all
  21. Starting to wonder if @Spartan Derek was joking when he said he'd respond weekly to this thread - it's been almost a month since his last post.
  22. Wow 15K points. That's a massive land army. Excelent paint job. Well done
  23. @Spartan Mike I'm not saying it doesn't look good, or that you don't already have my money for one. Remember, the metzger also surfs on the Rhine. I just want the MK4 Metzger shaped like Bender Bending Rodriguez.
  24. Good afternoon all, This is a run down of the process behind some rules I am testing in my own group that may well curb the SAS streaming problem I have seen in battle reports. Current rules allow a potentially unlimited number of aircraft to be launched regardless of losses. At the beginning of the war most fleet carrier could only carry 60 or less aircraft, with the Americans carrying 90. Even the late model carriers only reached 100 air frame capacity. Further consider that these aircraft had exclusive roles,, Fighter, Dive bomber, or Torpedo Plane, meaning that once you get one group shot down you cannot simply fly more aircraft of the wrong type (not nearly as effectively anyway). With the presumption that DW runs largely on the concept of pre-world war 1 innovation no ship will have this may aircraft aboard (not counting the Ice Maiden, that is an entirely different monster) As a prospective solution for part of the fighter spam problem from the new rules: Limited SAW capacity. If you consider that each SAW is 3 planes and a full 1x5 is actually a squadron of 15 aircraft, this would be at most 4x5 SAS for most carriers with up to 6x5 for "Pure" Fleet Carriers. Take into account that most carriers in this game are battle carriers,one can conclude that much of the space which would go to storage for air frames, aviation gas, and munitions is used instead for turret machinery and weapon magazines. With these considerations the typical carrier will likely have only enough aircraft aboard to replace its initial SAS once each if at all. Limitations: The only way to incorporate this is to use a counting system to track how many of each aircraft a given carrier has aboard and then track these numbers as the game progresses. I am reluctant to add an accounting function to this game, an alternate would be to set up a aircraft reserve to the side for each ship from which all replacements are drawn. This would of course require aircraft that are shot down to go back in the box instead of the scrap yard. Prospective Examples: All examples tell of a maximum capacity, the exact composition would need to be determined ahead of time, perhaps set as a standard issue to speed up set up times. Highest capacity: FSA Saratoga [9, 2x4] This places 24 aircraft on the board at start, if the carrier has a capacity of 72 or less there will be at most 8 SAW (24 total) of each type. This would be at the top end of what I consider a viable aircraft capacity. Medium Capacity: San Francisco [6, 1x5] 15 aircraft to start and 45 max (15 SAW), at best 5 SAW of each type. Low Capactiy: Calico [4, 1x4] 12 aircraft on the board with a max of 30 (10 SAW) this makes for an uneven distribution of aircraft types but is necessary to make sense of the smaller size ship. Perhaps 5 each of fighters and dive bombers. I will update as play-testing happens. Thanks for reading
  25. Ika: Tentacled death from below!!!
  26. So this would mean that a Low-Flying Model cannot be attacked by SAS as well? I am still stymied by the inability of SAS to use their AA against surface (or low-flying apparently) targets. US fighters fighters made a business of tearing up surface targets in Europe and the Pacific during WWII. I am worried about making SAS even more powerful than 2.5 already did...I think this will have to go into my Playtesting list.
  1. Load more activity