Warcradle Studios are looking for active community members to support the forum upon its relaunch!
If you're interested, drop us an email at forum@warcradle.com.

Mr.ponders

Members
  • Content count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mr.ponders

  • Rank
    Lokhagos (Captain)

Recent Profile Visitors

550 profile views
  1. @Spartan Mike Mike, can you give us background on the change in target painters? If they really are only meant to boost the shots of the squad with the TP then why not just change the AD for the listed weapons in that range band to account for the damage? Having TP not work for other elements in your fleet really doesn't make any sense thematicaly and drastically reduces the synergy or tactical play of almost all models with a TP and makes allot of the support units a lot less viable... looks at thinks in the COA or all those KOB torp painters. i.e. the Euclid pays +15 points for a target painter for a single 9AD gun in 2 range bands?
  2. First off great job with the revised rule book. Obviously we don't have the model stats to go with the revised rules and the following is my pontificating based on a bit of theory crafting and estimation using the current model stats for comparison. I may be way off on how these changes impact things based on the revised stats and specific model MAR's but would love to know the thoughts on the changes for robots and their boarding. It seams like the big Robots (at least those with a strong melee focus) got their flexibility reduced substantially as if they wish to board a target they cant ram or shoot any one other than their direct boarding target. This seams to really hurt those that had decent impact ratings (IR) as you loose both the ram and the ability to shoot your guns at more appropriate targets. I can see a high point cost robots like the Coeus or Arronax unable to make full use of its weapons/ ram resulting in overkill of single target for boarding but loss of utility for its point cost. Robot Boarding Action Limitations A Robot cannot initiate a Boarding Action under the following circumstances: • During its Activation, the Initiating Robot Model was involved in any Collision or Ram, or failed a Treacherous Terrain Test for Snaking. • An Initiating Robot Model fired any weapons at any Model except the Target Model during its current Activation. Also a bit concerning is Aggressive Boarding Actions directed against Robots by Non-Robot Models, unless this was intentional rock, paper, scissors.. ie. boarding is how you smoke robots. The Target Robot does not generate a Defensive Group that may participate in the Close Quarters Battle Step, all Hits by the Initiating Model(s) against the Robot are combined and counted against the Robot’s Damage Rating (DR) and Critical Rating (CR). My worry would be as the AP levels on ships and units is based on being a fair representation of their boarding power vs other ships/ squadrons with their own AP crews for defense. Unless robots have atypically high Ack Ack numbers they will likely get wrecked by counter boarding attacks. Also Reckless crew's have no downside in attacking robots as the defending robot doesn't hit back in in CQB. Is the intention that using a Energy Blast weapon knocks out your own shields with the Generator Offline marker or is it just to make it harder to use the Energy Blast weapon again. ie. require a repair. Just some curious thoughts, great work on revising and streamlining the rules.
  3. I wouldn't think they would stack as each one grants a Placed Bonus. I would think that they way its worded they could CQB air as they count their CQB Weaponry as being Secondary Weapons would be nice to get a designer clarification. Shrapnel Storm - All Directorate/Works Raptor elements count their CQB Weaponry as being Secondary Weapons and so may execute Fire Orders with these weapons.
  4. Was it intentional that now that small hover vehicles become very hard to hurt once they have activated? Old Hover Vehicle MAR: When firing against this Model with weaponry at Long Range, the target Model is considered to have the Hard Target (-1) MAR. For Models that already possess the Hard Target MAR (of any type), the Hover Vehicle MAR is ignored. New Hover Vehicle MAR: All Main Ordnance Attacks targeting this vehicle when it has an Activation Marker suffers a further -1 to hit modifier. This is cumulative with other modifiers as normal. Small hover tanks like the Leto, Loatu, Lamana, Assara, Nuk-Su, Hal-Su ..etc.. are now hit on a normal shot only on 6's after they've activated in the old method they would still be hit on 5's. For races without many weapons with the Scatter Mar these little tanks will be very hard to hurt and for relatively similar points these lights will vastly out perform their tracked and wheeled light tank breatheren, particularly as the hover light tanks have most of the higher DR's of the light tanks. Oddly though the Sorylian Collective Ka’Kun doesnt have hover.
  5. The SLEPNIR loss of reduced cost infantry actually increases its cost with the grand company by another 50 pts on top of the 50 pt increase for the barge itself. ouch..
  6. I still think the revised pin point Mar is a big step down in its usefulness: Pinpoint [Value] (Weapon MAR) Prior to firing a weapon with the Pinpoint (Value) MAR, roll a number of [BLACK] D6 equal to the Value listed in the brackets. For each roll of a [BLACK] 6, the target suffers a -1 to their DR in the upcoming attack. Should multiple 6s be rolled, these are cumulative, as are any other modifiers to the DR that might be in play (Flanks, Rears and Debilitating Effects). When rolling 6's with old pin point you had a 30.56% (pin 2), 51.7% (pin 4) of doing a entire point of damage (odds for rolling at least one 6. While a bit hit or miss this actually made pin point make since for hunting hard armored targets. With the new PP you would get -1 DR, whoopty dooo. Against a hard armored target, often with with DR 8 or more this means you still wont do any more damage when coupled with the fact that it doesn't look like the the AD of the pin point guns went up much at all, this is a major reduction in the damage potential. If the number of pin point dice went up allot it could be useful but that would make it very random and often even overpowered or useless depending on the luck of the dice. IMHO: The Mar isn't random anymore its just mostly useless.
  7. I still think the revised pin point Mar is a big step down in its usefulness: Pinpoint [Value] (Weapon MAR) Prior to firing a weapon with the Pinpoint (Value) MAR, roll a number of [BLACK] D6 equal to the Value listed in the brackets. For each roll of a [BLACK] 6, the target suffers a -1 to their DR in the upcoming attack. Should multiple 6s be rolled, these are cumulative, as are any other modifiers to the DR that might be in play (Flanks, Rears and Debilitating Effects). When rolling 6's with old pin point you had a 30.56% (pin 2), 51.7% (pin 4) of doing a entire point of damage (odds for rolling at least one 6. While a bit hit or miss this actually made pin point make since for hunting hard armored targets. With the new PP you would get -1 DR, whoopty dooo. Against a hard armored target, often with with DR 8 or more this means you still wont do any more damage when coupled with the fact that it doesn't look like the the AD of the pin point guns went up much at all, this is a major reduction in the damage potential. If the number of pin point dice went up allot it could be useful but that would make it very random and often even overpowered or useless depending on the luck of the dice. IMHO: The Mar isn't random anymore its just mostly useless.
  8. I want to know more about the Fortified Command Centre with Heavy Infantry Grand Company.
  9. Dont change the guns on the large Hawker it looks great!
  10. Yeah all theory crafting at the moment, ill try to get a game soon to provide some feed back. Some nice improvements and some things that seam hard to understand. I'm sure they will get ironed out going forward. Improved Shield Harmonics now equals trash unless there is a typo and it really still adds shield dice. Why you would ever pay 80 points for the support tank or neuter the fire power of the command barge to help with kinetics doesn't really fit with the beefy Terran shield approach. Core helix got smacked hard, Vidar lost alot of its close range teeth. Why are the Uller mk2 slower than most of the tanks they can attach to? doesn't make sense. Uller mk1 6" mv and 12" range to try to catch planes that move minimum 16"+ makes me glad the Loki and Hodor got good at shooting planes because i see no reason for either of the support tanks in their current state. For a ground attach gun ship the Hermoor has some poor PB fire power even with its increase in pts and loss of CQB dice. Going to be darn hard to line up a Rindr shot with 24" min move and 15" gun range. From a quick glance it looks like most race's interceptors have longer range guns than there min move. Same problem on the hawker Guardsman... fly so fast they cant shoot. Like most of the new Hawker.. Seneschal gun looks under powered with its high cost compared to other heavies. My 2 cents. will run some battles to evaluate.
  11. It doesn't seam to make sense to me that arty strikes would ignore shields. While its logical that an explosion would negate the hard target rules of small (infantry) or floating (hover), shields should protect in all directions. Additionally, from a game balance point, it would make those races that have a higher than average DR and no shields unreasonably harder to hurt with arty than those whose defense includes shields as the proposed arty all deals the same damage.
  12. Nicely Done Spartan Mike! It is awesome to have the stats for the models out close to when they are announced rather than some weeks after you get the models. Keep up the good work.
  13. Game Nerdz www.gamenerdz.com/624 Krona Ste. 115Plano, TX 75074 (972) 881-7690
  14. Hello, Which games produced by Spartan Games do you play? Firestorm Planetfall, Dystopian Wars, Firestorm Armada also been trying out and loving Dystopian Wars: Fleet Action How long have you been playing these games? 4 Years Where do you play? Roanoke, Virginia USA Which fleets and armies do you own? Which fleets and armies do you plan to add to your collection? PF: Terran Alliance w/ Hawker, Sorylian Collective DW: Kingdom of Britannia (way more than reasonable), Covenant of Antarctica, Russian Coalition, The Black Wolf Company, Britannian Raj FA: Sorylian, Tarakian, Hawker Plan on picking up the new Hawker PF core and new KOB DW models (when available) What is your favourite Spartan Games model? With so many great models this is hard to do so I’ll pick on from each of the games I play. PF: Odin, DW: Windsor, FA: Tie: Sorylian Battleship/ Tarakian cruiser. -Mr. Ponders
  15. In my opinion part of the reason people are enjoying the Rleth changes is that the game play feels more dynamic because the force is required to be more dynamic to remain competitive. Yes the Relth could play dynamically with the old stats but from the general tone from the forums, people didn't, and who can blame them. With the old stats the Rleth had the option to play dynamically or with many of the units could sit at LR and making placed shots with cloaked snipers, and tactically long range sniping was a better bet as allot of their opponents had trouble beating their high DR's at LR with cloak. Its not the Relth players were doing things wrong they just had a much better tactical options than many other forces. This seems fairly evident in the war log with Relth reigning champs at 59% win ratio (at least for those reported on the battle log). More battles with the V6 stats will show if they are still the force to beat or if they fall to the sad terran and directorate w/r in the 30's% they have been adjusted down a bit to much. As Tansalus mentioned the current play style feels like a better fit for their lore and was in general just more fun. Additionally with the old stats Recon was allot less appealing to sink points into as you had the range to engage without predator and thus it just added to the imbalance having lower cost units. For our games we have always had a fair amount of terrain so we haven't had the start zone placed shot issues that it sounds like allot of people face against the longer range factions. Another difference from allot of battle reports we tend to run half core's with a mix of the other helixes as we tend not to have time for larger 4-6K battles and enjoy the variety and challenge of fielding and facing forces with different compositions.
Warcradle Studios are looking for active community members to support the forum upon its relaunch!
If you're interested, drop us an email at forum@warcradle.com.