Jump to content



Photo

So I have been trying to understand the reasoning behind the SSU walkers.


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#21 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 05:16 PM

blkdymnd said:

Panzer soldier said:

 

 

Panzer soldier said:

 

My old friend blkdymnd I suspected you would answer. So let me para phrase FFG are the wrong ones to fix the issue , but….
 

Doesn't FFG produce Dust Tactics as well. Point the finger at the other guy. Weak as always.
 

I will play and drop Paolo and Olivier a line. I will be sure to quote your response as well.

If I get a response I will post it. It is nice to know that FFG is not responsible for any rules or stats that have to do with Dust Tactics, so noted!

 

 

 

 

:) I'm here for you!  To your question there, on the Tactics side, FFG literally only distributes and does organized play.  Paolo, from all I've heard, actually lives at the Hong Kong factory.  I agree though that FFG is more the face of the game and should probably have more more active communication even if its just passing along quotes from Paolo and Olivier about the hold ups

The main point here is that the majority of the fan base, "customer" have problems with aspects of the game. I would think that the company would take this seriously.
Tough **** this is the way it is just deal with it, is not an attitude a company should take if it wants to remain in business.
Yes a response to these concerns would be nice.

 

I don't even know why I put up with this game?????
 

 

 

 



#22 SolennelBern

SolennelBern

    Member

  • Members
  • 940 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 11:48 AM

Damn it's so funny when someone says "I don't even know why I put up with this game " or "Everybody has problems with the game"…

Everyone will have problems with EVERY games out there.  Some aspects won't please you while others will.  You didn't made the game, they did and they did it following their own ideas and concepts.  They had the idea, they developed a game around it and they offer it to us gamers.

DT and DW are 2 different games with 2 completely different mechanics.  You can't simply transpose every stuff from one another.

The customer, me included, will alwasy have something to say about a product, ALWAYS.  We'll find something that we don't like and we'll call out loud that this product is sh**.

When I buy a game, I buy an idea, a concept, thought out mechanics that I think will appeal to me and my gaming buddies.  If someone doesn't like the game I won't blame him/her.  If someone doesn't like some of the game mechanics, i'll gladly listen to what he would do to make it better.  I bought FFG/Dust Games ideas and I play with their games.

Why don't you write what serious problems you have with this game and offer alternatives and variants.  While at it, don't forget that YOUR ideas won't necessarily please everyone out there.  Are they making your games better? Great, use them! Share them! But don't expect everyone to like them though and if we don't, I hope you won't mind receiving some critisism…



#23 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 04:59 PM

SolennelBern said:

Damn it's so funny when someone says "I don't even know why I put up with this game " or "Everybody has problems with the game"…

Everyone will have problems with EVERY games out there.  Some aspects won't please you while others will.  You didn't made the game, they did and they did it following their own ideas and concepts.  They had the idea, they developed a game around it and they offer it to us gamers.

DT and DW are 2 different games with 2 completely different mechanics.  You can't simply transpose every stuff from one another.

The customer, me included, will alwasy have something to say about a product, ALWAYS.  We'll find something that we don't like and we'll call out loud that this product is sh**.

When I buy a game, I buy an idea, a concept, thought out mechanics that I think will appeal to me and my gaming buddies.  If someone doesn't like the game I won't blame him/her.  If someone doesn't like some of the game mechanics, i'll gladly listen to what he would do to make it better.  I bought FFG/Dust Games ideas and I play with their games.

Why don't you write what serious problems you have with this game and offer alternatives and variants.  While at it, don't forget that YOUR ideas won't necessarily please everyone out there.  Are they making your games better? Great, use them! Share them! But don't expect everyone to like them though and if we don't, I hope you won't mind receiving some critisism…

I don't think anyone who commented on this post thinks Dust tactics is ****. Why would we take the time to care to be fans if we hated the entire game.

I was very specific as to the fact that the SSU walkers where broken and why. This view was supported by the majority of other fans. Did you fail to read this whole post?

I understand that no set of rules will be perfect in everyone's eyes. But you are missing the big picture here.

If the majority of your customers are saying aspects of your rules are broken. Then maybe you should listen.

Are the designers of the rules so arrogant as to think nothing in the rules needs to be improved or corrected! I think the track record of Tactics speaks for itself so far.

Maybe the designers are to lazy to put forth the effort to listen? We don't know. We just have people like you who seem to take things personally but no one says “Hi I am Oliver a rules designer and I like or dislike your idea because.” That's rite no one has the courage to step up!

I have been a war gamer for 30 years and have designed my own rules. I welcomed comments and criticism.  I am not perfect or so arrogant and insecure that I can't consider other peoples ideas.

As I have said before your fans are beta testing these rules every day. What an opportunity you have to improve your rules by listening to them. If you won't to be sure that an idea is the most popular one then have a vote.

I can't believe FFG and Dust don't do this already.

So again does anyone care what the fans have to say?

 

 



#24 SolennelBern

SolennelBern

    Member

  • Members
  • 940 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 05:08 PM

Panzer soldier said:

SolennelBern said:

 

Damn it's so funny when someone says "I don't even know why I put up with this game " or "Everybody has problems with the game"…

Everyone will have problems with EVERY games out there.  Some aspects won't please you while others will.  You didn't made the game, they did and they did it following their own ideas and concepts.  They had the idea, they developed a game around it and they offer it to us gamers.

DT and DW are 2 different games with 2 completely different mechanics.  You can't simply transpose every stuff from one another.

The customer, me included, will alwasy have something to say about a product, ALWAYS.  We'll find something that we don't like and we'll call out loud that this product is sh**.

When I buy a game, I buy an idea, a concept, thought out mechanics that I think will appeal to me and my gaming buddies.  If someone doesn't like the game I won't blame him/her.  If someone doesn't like some of the game mechanics, i'll gladly listen to what he would do to make it better.  I bought FFG/Dust Games ideas and I play with their games.

Why don't you write what serious problems you have with this game and offer alternatives and variants.  While at it, don't forget that YOUR ideas won't necessarily please everyone out there.  Are they making your games better? Great, use them! Share them! But don't expect everyone to like them though and if we don't, I hope you won't mind receiving some critisism…

 

 

I don't think anyone who commented on this post thinks Dust tactics is ****. Why would we take the time to care to be fans if we hated the entire game.

I was very specific as to the fact that the SSU walkers where broken and why. This view was supported by the majority of other fans. Did you fail to read this whole post?

I understand that no set of rules will be perfect in everyone's eyes. But you are missing the big picture here.

If the majority of your customers are saying aspects of your rules are broken. Then maybe you should listen.

Are the designers of the rules so arrogant as to think nothing in the rules needs to be improved or corrected! I think the track record of Tactics speaks for itself so far.

Maybe the designers are to lazy to put forth the effort to listen? We don't know. We just have people like you who seem to take things personally but no one says “Hi I am Oliver a rules designer and I like or dislike your idea because.” That's rite no one has the courage to step up!

I have been a war gamer for 30 years and have designed my own rules. I welcomed comments and criticism.  I am not perfect or so arrogant and insecure that I can't consider other peoples ideas.

As I have said before your fans are beta testing these rules every day. What an opportunity you have to improve your rules by listening to them. If you won't to be sure that an idea is the most popular one then have a vote.

I can't believe FFG and Dust don't do this already.

So again does anyone care what the fans have to say?

 

 

Don't worry I didn't took anything personally.  I'm just one of those people that just like playing, simply playing.  I don't tend to over analyze games and rules, I just like to sit up with friends and play a game.

But, I do appreciate enthousiasts and passionate people like you who take the time to do this work and check any weakness and report them.  I am also annoyed by the lack of FFG representative on the forums and find it really disturbing and irrespectful.

With that said, my post was just targetted toward the fact that too many people don't seem to be able to have fun anymore and stick on the negative.

Anyways, thanks all of you passionate gamers for your time in scanning and spotting those weak spot and contribute in improving good games.



#25 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 05:34 PM

I think Dust Tactics Is a great game and I play it every chance I get. I also think the fans should be allowed to have a voice. I take it personallythat  the designers of a such great game can't find the time or make the effort to let us have a voice.



#26 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 26 September 2012 - 12:19 AM

Panzer soldier said:

I think Dust Tactics Is a great game and I play it every chance I get. I also think the fans should be allowed to have a voice. I take it personallythat  the designers of a such great game can't find the time or make the effort to let us have a voice.

Unfortunately FFG do not comment on their own forums and although now quite quick to respond to a rules querry, they will not reply to any question on why a rule or uit profile is in place.



#27 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 26 September 2012 - 02:42 AM

Panzer soldier said:

I think Dust Tactics Is a great game and I play it every chance I get. 

And that is why you put up with this game. Since you were wondering…



#28 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 04:40 PM

So I have been tilting at winmills. Oh well I stand by what I said. So what do we do now answer questions for newbies and complain about rules that no cares to change?



#29 fhaugh

fhaugh

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:04 AM

 Change the rules yourself.  Making up your local rules is as legal as your players want it to be.  Change the cost if it's overpriced.  Swap out the weapons from the airborne walkers to the standard ones.  Find out what works to maintain the balance between the forces.

Then, when you post, you're not just b@#$%ing, you're problem solving.  People are more likely to take your complaint seriously if they know that you have thought about it enough to come up with possible fixes.  

If you tell your Wife/Mom that her meatloaf is gross…not going to end well.  If you tell her that it might taste better if…better chance of not getting hit with a spatula, and she might even try your idea.

 

But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.  -  Dennis Miller



#30 fhaugh

fhaugh

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:08 AM

 BTW, does anyone have both a airborne walker and a ground walker for SSU yet?  Could you swap the arms between them?  I think the reduced health of the airborne units might be a fair swap for the transport ability, i.e. no cost difference. 



#31 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 29 September 2012 - 12:43 AM

I don't think the airbourne units are out yet, seems a good idea to me, at least that might make the chainsaw walker of some use.



#32 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 04:44 PM

I have been working on some house rules but the problem is getting every to agree on them.



#33 fhaugh

fhaugh

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 12:03 AM

 I can understand that, and empathize.  Try to imagine what the Dust rule makers would have to go through if they had to get all of us to agree on even one thing.  I do agree that it would be nice for them to consider our feedback.  I think they may be listening discreetly.  I would like to believe the new command vehicel was brought out because of many peoples displeasure with the command squads ineffectiveness. 



#34 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 04:09 PM

The vehile is a heavy and will cost at least 60 points. That plus the command squad is 100+ points! Thats allot of points just to have a command squad that works.



#35 fhaugh

fhaugh

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 10:42 AM

I don't know if it will cost that much since it is only defense 4, and it doesn't have much in the way of weapons.  But even 60pts for the ability to reactivate a unit roughly every other turn, or bring back a destroyed unit more reliablely… I think it's worth it.  I say 60pts because the walkers weapons may not be much, but they'll be better than the command squads weapons, and just being a transport is worth something.

 Here's an interesting question, does using your command abilities while inside include the mechanics repair ability?  Can the mechanic repair the vehicle he's riding in?  Or another vehicle adjacent to his transport?



#36 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 05:54 PM

Rules for new units are covered in box sets. So we should see the rules In Operation Hades or perhaps the next box set to come.
 

As far as the command squad I don't favor them because they are too unreliable. The new vehicle will make them more reliable, but I still still think it is much better to spent your points on other units.
 

Even if the new vehicle cost 40 points that's still 80 points. That's almost 1/3 of a 250 point army. I would spend the points on a Stormkonig. It would put an end to the transport and the command squad in 2 turns.
 



#37 fhaugh

fhaugh

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 03 October 2012 - 11:35 AM

 In an 250 pt game, I would agree it's a bit expensive.  In a 300-400 pt battle royal it could pay for itself just if it's 2 single use abilities get used.  If it reactivates a 40 pt walker, or 50 pt squad+hero, every other turn it's worth even more.  Combat effectiveness aside, the tactical advantage could be worth the points.  Right now your opponent is reasonably safe ignoring a unit that has already activated.  With the command squad in the transport, he's going to have to consider every unit a real threat, activated or not.  That kind of thing can cripple his strategy and force him to over think every activation.



#38 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:00 PM

I in certain scenarios a command squad can give you an edge. In an objective based scenario I think the Command Squad is the rite choice, but in a slug fest I think using those points on combat units is the way to go. I also think you are correct that the higher the point limit the more feasible the Command Squad becomes.

I field two Lothars these days and four spotter units. The spotter units are cheap and almost always give you more units than your opponent. If you place then first you will out maneuver your opponent, in the first first turn of the game. They also allow you to use indirect fire from the Lothars while not  exposing  then to direct fire from your opponent.

The fact that you have have more units also you to field a heavy without your opponent getting a free shot at it on the first turn.

Any tricks of your own that you would care to share?



#39 fhaugh

fhaugh

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 11:08 AM

 I think we've had this discussion before.  I don't play in tournys and I like to just have fun with the game.  While I enjoy a "seek and destroy" mission, I also like objective missions as well.  Personally, I like blind build formats where you don't know what the mission is until you are ready to deploy.  It forces you to build a balanced force.

Two lothars and four spotters is the almost 100 points and you can only attack every other turn, or one each turn if you alternate them.  With the abundance of no cover weapons the allies have the spotters must be killed pretty quick.  Or just ignore the spotters and use the three jump/2 squads (still 10pts cheaper than the Lothars+spotters) to swarm the Lothars and pummel the to scrap.  Unless you keep some anti-infantry in the back to cover them, but then your leaving your spotters vulnerable.  I take out one spotter squad, hunker down, and win the game by 5pts.

At least your keeping the ratio of spotters to artillery pieces reasonable.  If the only reason they are in the force is to out-activate your opponent, well, that kind of meta-game strategy is the reason I quit playing M:TG.

I like the way Battletech did it.  If one force outnumbered the other then they had to activate two units near the middle of the round to keep the simultanous feel.  If you had 9 and your opponent had 6 it would look like 1/1, 1/2, 1/2, 1/2, 1/1, 1/1 not 1/1, 1/1, 1/1/, 1/1, 1/1, 1/1, 0/1, 0/1, 0/1.  If you had more than double you would move 2 or 3 to make it balance.

The only "tricks" I use are the obvious ones that the game designers probably did on purpose.  Putting Rosie in Fireball, scouting onto the board, and having her deploy and use Tankhead as soon as Fireball is in danger.  Putting Angela with the sniper squad for some ugly spotter/frenzy action.  One-eye Johnny's Badass ability with The Gunners one-shot UGL's nearly doubling the squads firepower and adding another no-cover weapon.



#40 Panzer soldier

Panzer soldier

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:53 PM

One mans trick is another version of strategy. Putting Rosie in a Fireball is a nasty one idea.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS