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.

Aetius88

Members
  • Content count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Aetius88

  • Rank
    Hipparmostes (Foot Soldier)
  1. Flamers snd fanboys only destroy games, so personally I prefer that people like archer 12 goes to destroy other games, like 40k xD. Opinions and criticism shoul be welcome, but always in a constructive way. Instead of "I dont have good feelings about that" which says absolutely nothing useful, people should say "I think it could be a better system to this, such this idea:..." This helps to improve the game, the other option just confirm the bad attitude and flaming&nerd spirit of the author
  2. @Spartan Derek any news of the beta testing, or one advance of any definitive critical rule? thanks!
  3. Hi! by using higher magnets I could achieve a good results, thank you!
  4. I tried, but the magnets were too small and couldn't fix the parts in a good way, so I prefer to adquire the two full options (it is possible of course)
  5. Hi! Anyone knows if it exist a 3d file of the common parts of these both ships (the main body I mean) or if they can be bought to spartan? I adquired the taskforce sorylian box and I would like to use all the pieces, but in the parts section of the store, this main hull piece does not appear...thank you!
  6. Its ok, i did not see the first time the Hasta (with accompanient) option, sorry! if i see any error, I will post it here
  7. nice application!
  8. Regarding to the turning template, I'm thinking in something like the X wing templates, with slight differences: for example, instead of different X" templates, just use 3, one for turn 1, other for turn 2 and other for turn limit 0, marked with different signals to determine how many inches consume the turn of each ship (the same template should be divided into 2-3 segments to perform bigs and small turn movements). Due to the curve shape of the template the movement is easier and more organic than the movement performed using the current turning template, and with the method I described you can perform larger or shorter turning movements in an easier form that now, just taking off to the total movement the inch number marked in the corresponding template segment....
  9. I think boarding will be use to prepare ships to anhihilation xD, maybe avoiding the objective can turn, or destroying their PD or shields, avoidint the shooting of part of the enemy weapons....and maybe a moderate amount of physical damage to the ship HP/crew, I mean, in a stronger way that actually boarding perform part of these actions. But it could be a good idea if you get additional points for destroying an enemy ship using a boarding action
  10. Moreover, the staff admit suggestion and ideas to solve the actual problems in the ruleset, so, instead of flaming the staff, people can send proposals and offer himselves to be testers. That can be more useful than say that staff has no idea to desig games
  11. The point is actually, the movement ruleset is simply trash. You spend a lot of time using the ******* template to perform a 45 º movements, when it can be faster changin the application of this useless template by other method that can limit the maneuverability of the bigger ships and/or slower factions (drinzezi) and powering the more maneouvrable factions (aquan). But I totally agree with derek, the movement can be modified after and change the ruleset affected by the changes on movement rules. Of course, is easier to perform on the other way, change first the movement rules and after the other rules affected by the changes (MAR, shoots, stats, etc). I didn't know the planetfall rules, but in some places I saw that they have tons of mistakes and bad plannification, but the taskforce rules....it is true that they are so simple in some things that could be similar to FA, but I think that their movement is not bad, 2 turns for maneouvrable ships, 1 turn in the middle of movement for big or less maneouvrable ships. If you take into account this movement system and add additional points to give more things (f.i, I strongly recommend to allow turns equal to tier to the ships, and specific MARs to allow extra turns for concrete ships or factions). This fact reduces the time spent in difficult movements and keep the advantage of agile factions such aquans.
  12. Totally agree with you neratius. For straight movements of course I use the tape measure, but I found problems specially when i need to perform a complex movement ( f.i. I have my frigates oriented to the enemy deploy zone and i want to achieve the same orientation 7"to the right with a planet or something like that near to the trayectory. In these cases, if I you say that can perform an "not accuracy" movement (4 inches to perform two 90° turns and 7" of movement, considering a 11", 0 turn limit squad), directly placing the ships into the final position (7" to the right oriented to the enemy deploy zone)....then i have no problem with that, since as you said, to perform that kind of movement a very short time is required...and only using the template for individual or turn limit 1+ ships. The problem comes when no space available appears to place the turning template, due to your ships, or enemy ships, are situated near to your active ships... Another thing is related to the mines, it could be implemented any source to destroy it when they are placed ( shooting on them I mean. .) Because at this moment mines only are removed when a ship pass near to them...isn't it?
  13. Let me illustrate with my experience: 800 points game, my sorylian vs drinzezi fleet. My forces: Battleship with scort, carrier with a scort, squad of 4 cruisers, and squad of 6 frigates. In 2 hours, we played 3 turns only, caused basically by 2 concrete factors: The first one, I am very noob and when I shooted the weapons or my ships took damage, I needed to check the stats on my fleets book. The second one, I spend around 5 minutes to move properly the entire frigate squads, since to do "in a good way" I must move each frigate individually, the first one was easy, but the others.....trying to make a turn and the template and bases displace other bases, big troubles to align all frigates (which started the movement in a perfect formation in two lines of 3 frigates each) to perform a good shoot to enemy ship, cause with the scenery I used and the other ships didn't allow me to place the template in a correct way....with the four cruisers, similar problems, but since they are only four, it only took around 3 minutes to move them in a correct way....so, to move 2 squads, I needed around 8 minutes, while the carrier or battleship I just needed 40 seconds to move them.....you see the problem now? in a competitive point of view, 800 points (an small game) requires around 1 hour just to move your ships, if the enemy has similar fleet composition, 2 hours only for moving....that makes impossible to play the game in an acceptable range of time.....instead, if the movement was simpler, if I spend 40 seconds to move my 6 frigates, and other 30 seconds to move my cruiser squad, Im saving around 6 minutes per turn, which is traduced in 36 minutes per game, plus the other 36 minutes saved by my opponent....more than an hour saved if useless templates are removed of this game. Instead, is easy to allow to perform X turns per movement (attending to the ship type and MARs), up to 45 or 90 degrees, or keeping the template (with other design, similar to the plastic templates shown in this post) but just moving one ship (leader) and then placing the other ships of the squad in coherency with the leader.....both systems are simpler, accelerates the game and keep the strategic point of movement.
  14. well, regarding to the boarding discussion....in Horus Heresy you have many examples of ship boardings and sounds epic and unrealistic, but possible. Just think on little assault capsules (which are too small to can use the objective defences, since they are prepared to destroy bigger objectives, less maneouvrable that those little capsules. In addition, they can be extra reinforced, to resist the smaller fire weapons of the ship, which are more prepared to destroy this small targets. And also should be consider that the objective of the capsules are access points to the ship, not the upper hull for example, but access gates, enemy hangars....sites which are exposed to a easy boarding attack. The point is the boarding causes too much damages on enemy ship with a little bit of luck, so maybe as Corehunter said, maybe only a few specially oriented ships should be used to assaults, or maybe increasing the successfull rolls to 5+ instead the typical 4+; or reduce the boarding effects on the target ship except to the infestated faction, which is totally boarding oriented, representing that they uses virus and other toxins to destroy the ship crew and defences...
  15. Yes, but as i said previously, bombers are much more offensive than interceptors for enemy ships, and the carrier goes in small squads, so their offesnsive power without bombers is limited. Also, their speed an maneouvrability is not very high, so if you want to be protected by their interceptors, you must deploy together...I usually take 2 wings of interceptors and 6 for bombers, because I think this choice is much better, provides excellent pd and also very high offensive damage. In this sense, maybe, as other post said, is remove the pd of the bombers, giving to each srs a concrete roleplay, but your idea of 1 pd hitting on 3+ is also good, unfortunately it presents the problem of you must use separate or different colour dices to mark the interceptor dices defending vs torpedos or similar weapons...
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.