Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Marximus

  1. I'm not sure if that post is entirely credible. While I believe the original poster on BGG was told that story by the owner of his FLGS, I wonder how he could get this specific info given FFG's wall of silence. A similar post was recently made on BGG claiming with absolutely certainty that the longshoremen slowdown was the cause of a delay in the release of aTerra Mystica expansion by Z-Man. Turns out, as posted by the CEO of Z-MAN just a week later, the delay was the result of a limited print run (underestimated demand) and a distributor error. The delay had nothing to do with the port. Thus, unless and until FFG actually makes a public statement, I don't think we will know the cause of this interminable delay with any reasonable degree of certainty. We might as well speculate. Personally, I think Asmodee hates America and is dictating the release schedule to get back at us over "French Fries" - which apparently originated in Belgium. UK is getting a break because they took the more neutral route and refer to them as chips. Of course, actions speak louder than words - FFG could just release the doggone game today and then I wouldn't care one bit about why it took so long.
  2. You know what would be really cool? Now this is crazy talk but stay with me. Maybe - just maybe - someone from FFG could - oh, I don't know...post a short note on the website (or Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) telling us what's going on? Wouldn't that be totally insane?!?!?! Wait...what am I thinking? That would ruin all the fun we're having speculating about the cause of the delay. Thanks, FFG. You guys are the best.
  3. No flaming or shaming (but I did chuckle a little). Many people (myself included) sleeve cards that are handled frequently in order to protect them from wear, tear, and - most importantly - from the greasy and/or sticky hands of the younger set. The sleeves come in many sizes and are form fitting. They are generally transparent but sleeves for many collectible card games feature colors or artwork on the back side. The sleeves remain on the cards while being played (again, they are for protection). Yes, this makes them more difficult to shuffle and stack. The sleeves could also make the text harder to read but that would be a result of glare. In the end, you have to decide whether the benefit (protection) is outweighed by the negatives (cost, shuffling/stacking issues, glare, etc.). Now, if you want a full-throated defense or condemnation of card sleeving - as well as flaming, shaming and general ridicule - head over to BoardGameGeek.com and post a thread with either of the following subject lines: (a) "Card sleeves are a waste of money; or (b) People who don't sleeve cards don't love their game Then, just sit back and enjoy.
  4. The way this supplement is releasing seems very odd to me. There was a great deal of fanfare from FFG and from online stores about the 2nd Edition base game. It's release date was made public weeks ago and I was able to order it last Monday from Coolstuffinc - two days before FFG "officially" announced it was available in stores. The release of the Conversion Kit seems almost shrouded in mystery by comparison. Coolstuff and several other online stores don't have it for pre-order (listing it as out of stock) and don't even have a box cover pictured on the sales page. Other than a short preview months ago, FFG hasn't had much to say about the Kit at all. What gives?
  5. Shadow4ce said: Zverograd book will be in some stores this weekend, most others next week. It will have the stats you seek. Hades models are all Q4, and October is the earliest we'll see their book and stats. I don't know of many tabletop companies who publish exact stats outside of book sales. The ones who do have free rules, like DT. Dust Studios shows the stat card for DT online as soon as they announce the model. In the meantime, I'd probably cost it at 55 or 60 AP, keep Armor at 5, Wounds 6, Move 6, and the, "Assault" SA. The MG 44 is already in-game statwise, so keep that as is. The Schwere Flammenluther weapons should be given the following SAs: Burst, Spray, and Tank Killer (which is why I think it'll cost 60 AP). They should be range 8. They'll be Flame Symbol/1 vs all infantry, and most likely 1/6 vs all armor, perhaps 1/7 vs arm 1-5. I could be way off, but that's what I'd use until official stats drop next week. Thanks for the stat help; makes sense but I'm hoping the flamers are little stronger. Also - where did you get the info on Zverograd's release? Is that official?
  6. Yesterday, UPS delivered my Panzer Kampflaufer and I am eager to get it to the table. Unfortunately, that model has no official stats for Warfare - just Tactics. I only got into the game about a couple of months ago and was originally planning on collecting an SSU army. However, due to concerns about the release of a campaign book, I held off. Why buy an army that doesn't have rules? Now I have a model without rules. Ugh. So, what are the solutions? Well, I can house-rule stats based off of the Tactics card for the Kampflaufer. Anyone know of any sites that have already done so? However, I think a much better solution - for the new Axis models and all the SSU models - would be for FFG to post stats on their site. Why wouldn't they do this? It can't be much work for them and the costs would be minimal. If they are worried about reduced sales for their campaign books, they should worry more about reduced sales of their models due to the lack of available Warfare rules. I would have bought an SSU army (the models are awesome) and I have several friends in the same camp. Moreover, the campaign book offers so much more than just stats - of course I'm going to buy the book. But in the meantime, I'd really like to get the existing models to the table! C'mon, FFG! Post the stats!
  7. Thanks for all the feedback and advice. I plan to get a few games in this week and will try paying more attention to the command phase. Neither of us used the regroup order during the game so I will be interested to see its impact in our next game.
  8. I played my first full game a few days ago and scored a fairly lopsided win. Part of this was due to misreading the game rules (e.g., jump troop suppression mistakes) but the biggest factor, by far, seemed to be the fact that I won initiative four times in a row - despite rolling less dice than my opponent every time. Now, I know this is a bit of a statistical anomaly and should balance over time. However, the advantage gained by winning initiative seems dramatic. Maybe I am missing something but this is how I see it. At the end of the game turn, all units remove any reaction markers. As such, no units start with reaction markers and all may take two actions during the unit phase - at least in theory. In practice, the side winning initiative will always have the benefit of taking two actions. The side going second now has a choice - react and lose one action in their unit phase or do nothing and allow the side with initiative the advantage of an unopposed first attack or maneuver. Meanwhile, the side with initiative can react with impunity during their opponent's unit phase, knowing that all reaction markers will be removed at the end of the game turn. Thus, in practice, it seems that the side with initiative not only gets the advantage of first move but also gets an extra action. Again, the initiative advantage should be mitigated by probability. However, given the short turn length of most games, 3 - 4 "bad" dice rolls could severely hamper one side's chances of winning. Am I overstating the role played by initiative? Are there reliable options for a player to take after successively losing initiative? Are there other factors that mitigate the advantage of initiative? If this is a rules problem - and I know I have not played enough to make that claim - is there a fix? After our first game we discussed the idea of distinguishing more between command markers, reaction markers and suppression markers. As it now stand, any of these markers on a unit reduces one action during the unit phase. Our idea was to provide that a reaction marker did not reduce the number of actions available during the unit phase. Every unit could react once per game turn unless suppressed. That way, the side going second could react during the first player's unit phase and still take two actions in his own unit phase. Of course the number of actions in the unit phase would still be reduced if the unit was suppressed or issued an order during the command phase. In this way, both sides would remain more or less equal and the initiative advantage reduced. I'm probably missing something so please feel free to chime in - especially if you have tried a similar fix and found it wanting. Also, if the fix is unnecessary (which I really do hope), let me know. Thanks. P.S. This is intended to be a hate-free/non-critical post. I love the game (as my bank account can attest) and only want to play it to its full potential.
  9. Wanted:Cortez said: Yes D6G got me interested in DUST! I never miss an episode!! Ditto. It's amazing how much money that "free" podcast has cost me. I blame Russ' jedi mind tricks, "this is the game you are looking for…"
  10. Strombole said: I don't have the axis hero box yet but I am sure I will soon. Zombies are just too good to pass up for long and the axis box gives you both zombie heroes… worth 16 bucks to any zombie lover for those two alone, I would think. I have my cart loaded at Coolstuff with the base set and a few axis expansions and had originally planned to get the gorillas. I held off because I wondered whether it would be worth it without Markus. Based on your comment, I'm thinking about going for zombies instead and picking up the hero pack. But the gorillas look sooooo cool… In terms of performance on the battlefield, does it make much of a difference having a zombie hero with a zombie squad (and likewise for gorillas)? Or, should I just get a squad of zombies and a squad of gorillas and forgo the heroes altogether?
  11. Anyone know if FFG has plans to make the hero miniatures available for separate purchase? I know that each faction has a new box sets of three heroes but I'm asking about the leaders currently available only in the Dust Tactics expansions (e.g., Markus from Seelowe) or currently unavailable from the original Dust Tactics core set (e.g., Sigrid). I could see buying the expansions if I planned to play Tactics but I'm really only interested in Dust Warfare as a tabletop miniatures game. Paying $40 for two minis just isn't worth it.
  12. I understand that I may rally a single unit using a morale order token during the command phase. However, if I do so, I must reduce my House morale by one. What if I play the leadership card, "Rally all Units?" Do I similarly reduce my House morale for every unit rallied? In theory, that could result in a loss of up to seven morale (if all hexes adjacent to leader occupied by friendly units). On the other hand, if there is no morale reduction, it makes the rally leadership card very powerful - with no real downside. What do you think? I couldn't find an answer in the rulebook or the official faq.
  13. In campaign mode (Sea of Blood), is the overlord limited to using just five power dice? The Descent base rulebook on page 17 specifies a 5-power dice limit but it seems to refer to heroes only. I've looked in the other rulebooks and through the FAQ but may have missed it. My question is related to the final battle in Sea of Blood using the avatar, Captain Bones. If I purchase all three "Dark Strength" avatar upgrades, I add three gold power dice when attacking. Does that mean I can add those gold dice to cannon attacks (where I already have 1 gold, 2 silver and 2 black "trait dice" per page 91 of the SoB rulebook) for a total of 8 power dice?
  14. According to the card text from the avatar upgrade, after Captain Bones sails his ship off the eastern or western edge of the map, at the start of his next turn he,"must re-enter the map from the opposite side." Further down the card, "the rear of the ship must be the same distance from the southern edge of the map that it was before it sailed off the map." What if the Revenge is blocking your re-entry? Does Captain Bones push the Revenge (east or west) to allow sufficient room?
  15. If I purchase the avatar upgrade, "Dark Strength," can I add a gold power die to Captain Bones' attacks (in the final battle) when he is playing the organ? In other words, do my canon attacks benefit from the upgrade or does the upgrade only apply for Bones' regular attacks?
  16. When a hero with the Necromancy skill kills a monster on his turn, may the hero immediately resurrect the monster AND activate the monster? For example, on his turn, Battlemage Jaes kills a beastman, "necros" him and then orders him to attack another monster. Is this allowable or must the hero wait until his following turn to activate the necroed beastman?
  17. I searched the forums but could not find an "official" answer to this question: Can multiple ship upgrades be purchased in one game week, one per hero training in the shipyard? Page 31 of the rulebook under, "The Shipyard" heading in the second column states: "A hero who visits a shipyard while his party is training in a city may purchase one Ship Upgrade or cannon." Okay, what about a week in which one member of the party trains and the three remaining members purchase ship upgrades. Can they each purchase an upgrade? Is there a consensus on this question?
  18. Corbon said: . What on earth gave them that idea? Certainly nothing in the rules. They deserve a friendly telling off (tease/wind up) for "making up rules out of nothing to suit yourselves". My thoughts exactly. My group is made up of four hard-core, veteran role players. They just can't seem to fully understand that I am not their GM and have no responsibility to balance the game for them or otherwise make things "fair." They believe that, in the absence of a specific rule on point, any ambiguity should be resolved in their favor. That's why I didn't feel sorry for them when I wiped the party on the final level of the last dungeon before they made it to the secret training site. I earned enough conquest to push us to silver so they basically missed out on an opportunity to boost health/fatigue in the copper campaign level. I had to argue that rule with them as well but, fortunately, it's clearly stated and their is no wiggle room.
  19. The hero players in my group believe that once they complete training in the secret training area at Gray's Vale, they may immediately return to their home port as if they had completed the final level of a dungeon (via the portal). As there are no portals and no glyphs of transport at secret training areas (at least none that I can find in the rules), I think not. Am I missing something? This is a big issue for us as it is a 4 game-week slog back to Garnott and my lieutenant is laying siege (actually breaking the chains binding the beast) at Cerridor Sea.
  20. We are about to go to silver level in our campaign. I am using Captain Bones as the OL and have already upgraded my eldritch to silver. Once the campaign level goes up to silver, should I upgrade humanoid and/or beast monsters to silver as well or should I immediately push eldritch to gold? The campaign has swung back and forth with the heroes having an early advantage in conquest, the OL roaring back after the eldritch silver upgrade and, lately, the heroes have had a slight advantage (though I still have a 10 point lead in conquest). What's the general consensus - full speed ahead with Eldritch or balance?
  21. zombipuppy said: Yup, they sure are.. 99 cents or $1.99 depending on whether it's a small or big box expansion. Maybe I've gotten spoiled with the proliferation of high quality apps at 99 cents with free updates but, to me, charging extra for updates to use existing expansions is a deal-breaker. I was about to download the app when I came across this thread.
  22. tundrra said: also players enter a dungeon when they end their movement on a dungeon, so when the dungeon is finished they no longer have any movement left (aside from telporting to their home port). So they will not have any movement until the next game week to continue traveling. That clears it up - thanks!
  23. My OL is using the Leviathan plot and my Lt (Siren) is laying "siege" to the chains located at the Narrows of Gracor. The party travels to the Narrows of Gracor and an encounter ensues. Siren elects to flee the encounter. Per the rulebook on p. 18, in the event a lieutenant flees an encounter, "the overlord immediately moves the lieutenant one trail away as if it had moved." Does that mean I can move Siren to either the Torrents of Deadpeace or Orris? Or, does that mean I move Siren onto a water trail between the Narrows of Gracor and either the Torrents of Deadpeace or Orris?
  24. Per the SoB rulebook on p. 20, when the heroes go through the portal on the 3rd dungeon level they may elect to return to their home port or remain at their current location. If the party returns to its home port, "it may not visit that city - its turn is over." Does the party's turn also end if it elects to remain at its current location? This question arose after the party completed a dungeon at the Narrows of Gracor after traveling their from Orris. Upon completing the third dungeon level, they decided to remain at the Narrows and continue on to to the Torrents of Deadpeace. Since they had Elven Sails, they insisted they could travel a second water trail and, as such, could run through the dungeon at Torrents - thus completing two dungeons IN ONE GAME WEEK! Someone tell me this is not possible. Doesn't the heroes' turn (and thus game week) end upon the completion of a dungeon?
  • Create New...