Voyager

The Ivory Tower has spoken...

69 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, Presidente said:

But they had blisters before and said retailers didn't want as much so they would move away from blisters....confusing?

I can sort of answer this.

When they first went down the blister route, they did so in weird numbers, meaning people would need to buy MORE than they needed and be left over with spare ships - annoying as hell. So I believe a few retailers said a box idea would be better - but instead of doing mixed boxes/blisters, they went full box mode which is perfect for starting a new force but it's awful for expanding an army or adding little bits you need. Plus its crazily expensive and annoying to display as a retailer (ex-retailer here) in full boxes. It's also heavier and harder to ship.

I don't mind a change back to blisters, as long as it is done sensibly, which from all accounts it is *fingers crossed*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gr1mdan said:

I can sort of answer this.

When they first went down the blister route, they did so in weird numbers, meaning people would need to buy MORE than they needed and be left over with spare ships - annoying as hell. So I believe a few retailers said a box idea would be better - but instead of doing mixed boxes/blisters, they went full box mode which is perfect for starting a new force but it's awful for expanding an army or adding little bits you need. Plus its crazily expensive and annoying to display as a retailer (ex-retailer here) in full boxes. It's also heavier and harder to ship.

I don't mind a change back to blisters, as long as it is done sensibly, which from all accounts it is *fingers crossed*

My biggest issue is the dramatic increase in cost. Look at what it costs to build a new marauder force compared to the old box method, it's a pretty big jump.  

WestAustralian likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2017 at 2:53 AM, Spartan Derek said:

A Note on 'restrictive' Pathogen: I don't consider then a problem child in the allied stakes as expressed by Hive. The Pathogen are a force we are continually asked for by the community to fully realise and with careful execution they can be developed so that a player who wishes to use them COULD purchase other forces if they wished to... and convert them into newly assimilated Pathogen-Hybrids! This is something that happens in FSA right now and I would very much like to open it up to the Planetfall player too. Converting and building your own models is an important part of the hobby that is often overlooked, but with the Pathogen we have an opportunity to allow these gamers/modellers their freedom - something I am passionate about.

All this is facilitated of course by a progression in the Firestorm Galaxy background which sees the Pathogen evolving into an entity of its own, no longer reliant on their construct-attachment to the mechanical/physical hosts.... of course the Pathogen can still do it....hence the Pathogen-Hybrid vessels/vehicles :ph34r:.

Well that's great and all, but unless every model has rules for a Pathogenized variant, it doesn't address my concerns at all- the fact is that is still a Pathogen model of a given archetype by the rules, and at a certain point that player isn't going to want or need more Pathogen models. I think you may have missed my point. Adding a few models that you've made Pathogen-y isn't the same as, say, including an allied helix of Aquans in a Sorylian force. For one, the rules for those models will have a very different focus rather than being an extension of the same list, and for two, now you have impetus to start adding more Aquans and building a whole force that way. It's a gateway to a whole new army, rather than a one or two-off modeling opportunity.

WestAustralian likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could keep it simple with something like to make it Pathogen models under 50 points are +5 point cost and -1AD, models 50-150 points are +10 points and -2AD, models over 150 points are +20 points and -3 AD. That way any model could be pathogen, but the hybrid model would not be as good as the standard unit. Something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/04/2017 at 9:41 PM, Nuck Fewton said:

My biggest issue is the dramatic increase in cost. Look at what it costs to build a new marauder force compared to the old box method, it's a pretty big jump.  

I don't have anything on the price rises to be honest. Not sure about that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you guys addressed the internal issues that lead to this drought of PF in the first place? New stuff is good but consistent support and communication is way better.

On to PF-related questions.

Any hints on illosians? Any hints on allied leviathans? Are you still going to offer Helix bundles (potentially for a discount?) to quickly fill out forces? What about 2.0 is an improvement rule-wise just in broad storkes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Hive said:

Well that's great and all, but unless every model has rules for a Pathogenized variant, it doesn't address my concerns at all- the fact is that is still a Pathogen model of a given archetype by the rules, and at a certain point that player isn't going to want or need more Pathogen models. I think you may have missed my point. Adding a few models that you've made Pathogen-y isn't the same as, say, including an allied helix of Aquans in a Sorylian force. For one, the rules for those models will have a very different focus rather than being an extension of the same list, and for two, now you have impetus to start adding more Aquans and building a whole force that way. It's a gateway to a whole new army, rather than a one or two-off modeling opportunity.

i agree the starter box should be zenian vs kurak

 

Presidente and WestAustralian like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only heard about this supposed revival to PF today and have just read the posts in this thread. Frankly given SG track record I am amazed that anyone could be excited because of a few posts by SG. Armoured Clash,  Uncharterd Seas dead DL as good as they all had their box sets as well. I bought into PF when released and remember all the support we where told to expect, the posts from Derek that abruptly stopped. Onto the next game get another load of suckers to buy our models, the games well they do not matter. If anything comes from this good but I will purchase nothing until I see a decent ruleset that is supported online.

alamo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Orson76 said:

I only heard about this supposed revival to PF today and have just read the posts in this thread. Frankly given SG track record I am amazed that anyone could be excited because of a few posts by SG. Armoured Clash,  Uncharterd Seas dead DL as good as they all had their box sets as well. I bought into PF when released and remember all the support we where told to expect, the posts from Derek that abruptly stopped. Onto the next game get another load of suckers to buy our models, the games well they do not matter. If anything comes from this good but I will purchase nothing until I see a decent ruleset that is supported online.

I don't think anyone a few weeks ago expected much for PF this year. SG has stepped up to the plate and said the are going to hit a home run by August. That is a pretty aggressive deadline, but if they want to make it I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Since I was expecting nothing by August a few weeks back a whole new edition with shiny new stuff by then seems pretty good. I hope they understand the storm of torches and pitchforks coming there way in September with that missed deadline. I also hope that does not create a half baked rule set. Their current target is a small sliver of glorious success sandwiched between a rock and a hard place.

WestAustralian and Venter like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the case if the rules weren't finished, Vedar.;)

Actually, we are considerably ahead of schedule. Now all that remains is to generate our rulebook (done by Neil and his team at Spartan HQ) while continuing to test the stats of new and existing models. Once the rules are transposed, the design team looks them over and final changes/tweaks are done. This level of preparedness is one of the reasons I am able to post a rules synopsis and trial Force Lists so far ahead of scheduled release of a virtual rules-set..

We started our innovation cycle for the PF-game in January 2016, tested those ideas off and on for 6 months (in between other Spartan projects) and then I started the rules-pour (which took about 3 months). Then we allowed ourselves breathing space, and tested the Force Lists, made minor tweaks to the engine and readied ourselves. Neil finally agreed in January 2017 that the new structure was needed, and we began again in earnest - testing, reading and critiquing our work once more.

 

My sole goal with setting such an apparent 'hard deadline' is to ensure that the entire FSA Galaxy of games received the same new-rules treatment at the same time. Both FSA and FSPF should deliver on time from my end, with Neil happy he and his team can bring the two projects together at his end.

 

All in all, its looking very favourable, deadline-wise, so if I'm not worried, you shouldn't be either :D

 

 

Cheers,

Derek

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that does sounds like good news! Looking forward to the new force lists and all the changes to the game engine.

Will the faction playstyles differ a lot from the current playstyles though? There apoears to be some difference between the FSA playstyle and the FSPF playstyle of several factions although I don't play FSA it is hard to really tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, the new taskforce rules and orbats are up, but, @spartanderek - I think you really need to implement some internal proofreading procedures. 

Not that I'm complaining - I play OSO, and I'll gladly take the speed hit on my Synergies to get a DR7 HP5 frigate for 15 pts...

Flamebeast likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My three big hopes as your revise the force list is that you fix the following "problems":

  1. Stats that don't meet the lore. If Terrans have Heavy Slabs of Armor behind Powerful Shields, why do they have the 2nd worst DR ratings?
  2. Stats that lead to fixed play against certain factions. Your weapons have nearly twice my range, your faster than me, and you can move after shooting? I guess I'll be chasing you all game hoping to get a chance to shoot.
  3. Comparable Squadrons that are clearly not competitively priced. Who would ever use a Terran Assault Walker that is in every way worst than the Sorylian Assault Walker?
Mr.ponders likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Spartan all a tizzy getting their vans loaded for Salute,:D I thought I'd once again pop on this thread to point everyone to the new Planetfall 2.0 designer Feedback Thread I have set up.

In that thread I will put up the promised Force List for the Directorate/Works Raptor and the synopsis of rules changes documents....just in case during the mad rush to get all those models and games tables packed, the folks at Spartan don't have time to launch the Blogs.

Look for it in the General Discussion Section, pinned at the top.

 

(...also, have a go at the new App Spartan Gibson and I have made for Halo: Ground Command.... cos Planetfall will be getting the same treatment! Look for that in the Halo: Ground Command General Discussion Threads, pinned as usual. B) )

 

Cheers

d

tansalus likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hype intensifying. How are you (since you're the man now, dawg) guys dealing past this initital slew of deadlines? Is there a 5 year plan on the books or something equally long-term? Are you guys going to consider tourney support?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now