Jump to content

Gimp2

Members
  • Content Count

    559
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Gimp2

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Tucson, Arizona, United States
  1. Selling them when they are set up as LE figures is not a 'bad' thing. It's simple economics. I have no issue with people using the system when it's there. What I have issue with is the companies that decide to go with LE figures. The company made their choice, and they get to deal with the negative consequences. As to why: LE figures cost as much to produce as regular figures, or even more, so they are an equal or greater drain on the company's resources to produce, and so have to be priced higher to offset that cost. Anyone buying the figure has to pay more, or the company has to be able to absorb the loss. The return may be higher per piece if priced high enough, but each piece is a higher risk with a greater cost per piece for it to be economically viable because the cost was just as high as for a regular model with a much greater run to generate income to make it profitable. LE figures sold by scalpers do not generate any more money for the company than their original selling price, while draining the purchasing gamer's budget far more. The scalper might turn around and invest their money in the game, but if they don't turn around 100% to the original company, the company winds up losing money that could have helped support their game. If a fan scalper reinvests 90% of their scalping funds to the game, the company still loses that 10%. There are a lot of scalpers that are not fans, so their lower reinvestment is a bigger loss. LE figures are available for a limited time, so anyone coming into the game late is stuck with scalper prices, or not being able to get the figures. That engenders both the negative aspect of the 'haves' sticking their figures into other players' faces, and players who can't afford the scalping prices or find the figures getting frustrated because they can't get a figure they want to be able to play with. LE figures causing frustration are a source of negative advertising, as every player who gets frustrated is likely to complain to the other gamers they know, and so can reduce the player base. Someone telling friends they got a LE figure that's no longer available is going to have far less positive effect. I have no issue with the characters being sold as premium painted figures, and far less for characters sold for general release with a different pose than a limited release figure. The first allows anyone who feels the premium paint job is worth the price to buy them, and the second allows any player to get at least one version of the figure to play with. I've still seen the second create bad feelings, but nothing like a figure only a 'special' few can ever have. Creating characters, and then making it so players who are trying to support the game can't get them is a disservice to those players. Creating characters that are harder to have pay for themselves while possibly driving customers away from frustration is not a good recipe for the producing company. I've seen a lot of hard feelings through the years from this, and never have I found the overall positive feelings for the company increased. One player who is happy they got an LE figure and keeps buying is not worth even one that stops or reduces purchasing because they got frustrated by the LE figure's availability. The first would keep buying anyway, so even one who leaves is all loss.
  2. Major Mishap said: Nothing stopping the pilot from controlling it's descent once released from the chopper in the same way a pilot does with ejector seat and parachute. Sure you could have a die roll to see how successful the operator is, but not really neccessary for game play. Assuming such a device is rigged, which would be doubtful because chopper wash and parachutes don't function well together, the issues of how close to the ground is the release, how good are the landing capabilities of a non-Jump capable walker unexpectedly falling from a height, and how badly damaged is the chopper that was destroyed while carrying the walker all remain. Air assault troopers don't have a lot of extra safety gear when they fly into combat because they expect to have enemy activity soon after landing, if not on the way in. A walker would have the same issues, and a harder time freeing itself by itself from any safety attachments, especially the SSU walkers without hands. There could be the possibility of a safe landing, but why acknowledge infantry can have a rough time of it, but do nothing to acknowledge walkers could, too?
  3. scorpnoire said: Since there is no definite wording of shooting LOS and spotting LOS beeing the same thing, this is really a loophole. I tried to keep my opponent in the german championship from spotting from the 'backroom' but wasn't really able to do so, even though I am still sure it should not be possible. To bad, the rules do have so many inconsistencies and loopholes. I know of another game with such errors: AT-43. It's producer rackham suffered with going out of business… There is no loophole, as line of sight is simply defined as line of sight. While it is listed under the combat rules, it has its own, very specific section. With nothing stating spotting line of sight has different rules for line of sight, the regular rules for line of sight would apply. Artillery Strike is also within the Combat Rules section, so there is no need to reiterate the rules for line of sight. Indirect fire spacifies the observer must have line of sight, so the standard rules for line of sight would apply unless there were a printed exception. There are plenty of wording issues with DUST, but this is only an issue for people who are trying to make up alternate rules.
  4. Loophole Master said: Major Mishap said: Definately your fault, what did you do? On my PC it said Loophole was the last poster but wasn't and the forum showing the thread as unread again - somethings going wrong :? Yeah, the same thing happened both times: I was the penultimate poster, but was displayed as the last poster, and the thread got stuck. The system was in awe of your post, and wanted to ensure everyone noticed it, perhaps?
  5. Major Mishap said: I don't see why it has to take damage. It's not actually in the vehicle when shot at and it has its thrusters to be able to drop to the ground safely. But it isn't a controlled drop, as the vehicle is falling from a destroyed chopper. Add to that the limitation that SSU walkers do not have Jump, so all of the force of the fall has to be absorbed by the walker that could be falling at an awkward angle. The chopper could also be flying at a much higher elevation than the walker is designed to be dropped from. If you have equipment for a safe drop from 10m, but are shot down at 100m, there's a lot of force with no design constraints to offset the possible damage. If the chopper is assumed to autorotate down, ther is far less force on the walker from the landing, but it then has a chopper crushing down on it after it lands, with possible fire and other elements to cause further problems. There's no consideration for the chopper having a catastrophic destruction, either, and being thrown out of an exploding chopper should cause some chance of damage. Rolling a dice for each damage point sounds like a logical way to handle the force of different walkers hitting the ground when they weren't supposed to.
  6. Dakkon426 said: Karl-Gerät, that is all. Yes, they had really big guns mounted on tracks. They had really big guns mounted in turrets on warships, as well. Those guns needed support just to carry the ammunition, and many were limited traverse weapons because of the problems in handling the recoil. Warship turrets were huge compared to ground vehicles, and had the advantage of a full sized ship to carry rounds for the guns. Ground guns faced far bigger problems. Those guns were also of limited tactical capability at the front because of the time it took to load each round. They fired from far away, and prayed they weren't overrun by enemy units, bacause they had little they could do about it. This is a big gun with no support to carry the rounds, mounted in a turret too small to handle the recoil or have room for a crew to man the gun. That makes it a far bigger problem than any of the big land guns. The Sturmtiger would be a better example. It mounted a bigger gun than this, at 380mm, but had to mount it in a fixed mount instead of a turret, and could only carry 14 rounds in the extra space the lack of a turret gave them. It also fired rockets instead of standard rounds, so recoil was not an issue. The Brummbar was a closer example, as it fired normal rounds, but it was limited to a 150mm gun and carried 38 rounds. Turrets are harder to design for bigger guns. Turret problems slowed the issue of the Sherman, and led to the development of the Grant/Lee as a stop gap vehicle with a 75mm gun. The turret on any 155mm self propelled howitzer is huge to give room for the crew during recoil. Recoil is a problem for any gun. Physics is physics unless you want magic added to cancel it. Recoil dampers can help, but the vehicle has to handle what's left. Howitzers dig spades into the ground behind their tracks, and I've seen a 26 ton howitzer lift off the ground onto those spades when firing. If the gun is mounted in a turret, the turret has to handle the recoil, which makes the task much harder, because the turret also has to be able to turn freely.
  7. I have no problem with people liking collectible figures. I have several I've bought through the years because I liked the figure, and could get it when it was released. I'll pay MSRP for a figure if I like it, but I won't pay more when it doesn't support the company I'm theoretically trying to support by buy products from them. I dislike companies that go the LE figure route because they screw the gamer who likes to buy everything for the game they are pasionate about, and they threaten themselves by running increased cost to produce the LE figure while causing themselves problems by selling it. Add the attitude you get from some of the players who got the LE figure, and decide it makes them special, and it gets less appealing. Companies are free to produce LE figures. Scalpers are free to invest in them to sell online. People are free to pay whatever they want to get what figures they want. I have no problem with the system. I have nothing against the scalpers for using the system. I simply have problems with the short-sightedness of companies that go the LE route when I see the results it can cause. I haven't stopped playing any game that went the LE route, but I have stopped doing official support for any game company that does, as well as being slower to purchase more for their games. I'm also a completionist, so I tend to collect every figure possible for many games I really enjoy. I don't bother for companies that go the LE route, even if I'm there and buy the LE figures when they are released at MSRP. Another game had most figures available as single set figures, but some models were available with multiple configurations. When the company released LE figures, I stopped working to buy every possible configuration for those, as well as every other figure, and dropped back to only collecting the figures I really liked. I see no reason to give extra support to a company that shafts players who would want complete collections and are stuck with scalpers to get it if they aren't one of the lucky few. The bad taste that gave me still impacts my gaming purchases, because I haven't worked to collect complete sets for any games since that time. I'd been starting to for DUST, but Warfare and some of the new SSU stuff has given me pause.
  8. I like the look and idea of underground tiles, as well as the facts they are adding tracked vehicles (with the Soviet propensity to risk soldiers by riding them into battle). Of course, if the soldiers are supposed to be inside and protected, it adds to the frustrating elements of the new announcements. The first disappointment is not a big deal for those who have other tastes, but I liked DUST as an alternate history moderate sci-fi game. Adding super heroes is not something I'm interested in. A Soviet Iron Man does not impress me. If he's Armor 4, I'm less impressed, because that leaves nowhere for the Vrill to go with what should be more advanced technology. The heavy walkers being Armor 7 was the same disappointment. It works, but it doesn't leave anywhere for the Vrill to show better technology. Consider the difference between a WW2 tank and a modern tank only 70 years ahead on technology. A King Tiger is a joke compared to an M1 Abrams. The heavies work within the game, as will Armor 4 infantry, but the Vrill get shafted for whenever they show up. I can play without Iron Man, and I'm glad there are people who like him for the game, but not me. The vehicles are both a good thing, and a very bad thing. One of the things I hated about 40K was the stupid proportions on their vehicles. One of the things I find silly in DUST is the decision that guns must be bigger to be better, because bigger guns were frequently less effective against vehicles. The new DUST vehicles address both issues. The quad 85mm AA mount I have no problem with other than imagining the hell it would cause a crew to keep it loaded. The Soviet 85mm gun was originally an AA gun, just like the German 88mm, so that's fine. Mounting four of them together, even with auto-loading, would be an incredible ammo hog, as each round, without propellant, would be about 10kg (22 poinds). Ammunition supply and weight was one of the reasons they used small guns in multiple mountings. There were good reasons to go with quads on small guns, duals on slightly bigger guns, but single mounts for the biggest guns. The 252mm mortar is the mount that really disappointed me. 40K was the first game where I saw vehicle models that were completely ridiculous, but this one is a perfect match. The gun is huge, and looks impressive, but guns recoil, and there is nowhere for the crew to be in that turret and survive when that gun fires. Considering a 155mm HE shell is 95 pounds (43kg), and an 8" (208mm) shell increases that to just over 200 pounds (91kg), a 252mm shell would weigh around 400 pounds (182kg) just for explosive and casing to hold it. The 155mm & 8" weights are from actual HE shells, to give an idea of the weight increase with larger guns. None of those weights includes propellant, and are just the explosive and the casing. How many rounds that size would you expect that vehicle to carry when it needs room for the crew, the vehicle power plant and controlls, the turret mechanism, and propellant for those shells. The KV2 had a 152mm gun in a turret, and it only caried ten rounds on board the vehicle. These rounds would be far larger, with a gun that was both larger, and had more recoil. Add to that the idea of the crew having to load those big rounds. Big rounds normally use a hydraulic ram to load them, which is that much more space. Even if you assume an automated loader, which the turret size gives no room for, the vehicle is fantasy instead of something that belongs in science fiction. I like them adding vehicles, and look forward to seeing more. I just wish the vehicles looked like actual combat vehicles intead of a silly kids toy.
  9. I see it as an illusion of cash on hand, following the old 'penny wise but pound foolish,' adage. If a company puts out a LE figure for $20, with a hefty profit margin, they get a hefty profit margin on each $20 purchase. Let's call it a $10 profit for simplicity's sake. If a scalper buys 20 of those, the company gets a $200 profit. If the scalper then sells each one for $200, they get an $1600 profit on their $400 investment. That $1600 dollars came from people who were interested in products from that game company, and so from their gaming budgets. The game company made $200, but lost the profits they could have made from the $1600 that went to the scalper. Even if they only recieved a $5 from each alternate sale (again, as a quick example), they lost $400 in profits thay could have made with other sales. Getting $200 to lose $400 more is not really good business. If they'd done an early release, with a later general release of the same figure, the scalper could still get something, though less than from a LE figure, but the company would not lose as much. Add the bad feeling generated for players who didn't get the LE figures, and they not only lose profits that go to the scalpers, but also could lose continued revenue by having frustrated players leave the game.
  10. As written, walkers have no mechanic for being damaged, which is rather silly, but all we have for now. Jump capability is not specified as helping infantry, nor would I expect it to help walkers. They aren't making a controlled descent, but rather being flung about with shrapnel from the destroyed transport and the difficulty of exiting during a crash landing. It would be nice if they specified the 'just like Carry Capacity' for Carry Capacity: Vehicle included a damage roll, but we'll have to see if they accept it as a gaff, and add errata, or pretend a carried vehicle in a crash is somehow completely unaffected and fully capable after the crash.
  11. The rules say artillery needs to reload on page 14, and refernces the rules for special weapons starting on page 24 regarding the Reload action. [Weapon]: Reload on page 21 specifies artillery often requires Reload, which indicates not all artillery does require a Reload. That contradicts the rule from page 14, but in theory, page 24 would work to clarify the disparity. Reloadable Weapons on page 24 specifies weapons that are Reloadable are specified on the bottom of their card. If an artillery weapon requires itself to be reloaded, and does not have the [Weapon]: Reload ability, then the rules as written would mean those artillery weapons without [Weapon]: Reload could not Reload, and so become effectively limited ammunition weapons, as they could not use the required skill to Reload. The Lothar has the required skill. The Steel Rain has Reload for the Petard Mortar, but not for the 4.2" rockets. The fluff regarding the 4.2" rockets indicates they are too large to be reloaded during a battle, but now the NCO Command Squad contradicts that fluff, by allowing a full reload without requiring a Reload action. The Artillery rules, as written, with the suggested requirement for always needing to Reload even when [Weapon]: Reload is not listed, do not negate the need for the Steel Rain to spend a Reload action if it does not fire all of its 4.2" rockets in one attack. The Artillery rules, as written, do not give any exception, nor do any of the rules for the Steel Rain, as they only reference its inability to reload its limited ammunition supply, so ably contradicted by the NCO Command Squad. While many players use the 4.2" rockets for a massive strike, I have seen players use it successfully for multiple attacks, as well. The Artillery rules do not specify why the Reload would be required, only that the Reload is required, as referenced starting on page 24. If the rules from page 14 are combined with the rules from page 21 and 24, the Steel Rain can fire its 4.2" rockets as it wishes, without the need to Reload, as it is not an artillery weapon that requires Reload per page 24, and is excepted from requiring a Reload by page 21. That consideration would make the inclusion of Reload on the Lothat's Nebelwerfer appropriate, but also show any new artillery class weapons as needing [Weapon]: Reload, or being able to fire every turn without Reload, or only once even without limited ammunition due to their inability to Reload. Tie that with reality, where automatic loading artillery exists to match other, slow loading artillery. Fast loading artillery that is hand loaded also exists, and has existed since before WW2, so having other artillery weapons that do not require Reload would make far more sense.
  12. Loophole Master said: If that's the case, then I'm proud not to be a wargamer… Your view is that of a mature wargamer, as opposed to a fad wargamer that has to have new and shiny to enjoy their toys. I prefer your style of wargamer. I'm also disgusted by the collectible mentality for wargame figures. There are people who love the elitist "I've got a rare figure you don't have," capability, but I see every LE figure that goes to the secondary market as damaging for the game. If players are spending more money to scalpers so they can get the LE figures, it means that money is not going to the game company producing those miniatures at more than their far lower MSRP for the initial release. If someone buys a $20 LE figure, and sells it to another player for $200 on the secondary market, that additional $180 that might have gone to the game company has disappeared into the scalper's pocket, and does nothing to support the game or game company. I've seen people ask for LE figures on other game company forums, and companies decide to go that route, and it always disappoints me. I've seen players frustrated by not being able to afford an LE figure, and blaming the game company for it, frustrated by other players that act like their LE figure makes them special, and not enjoying the game because of it, and several other instances where the LE figure causes friction and frustration. The only marginally positive thing LE figures does is stroke the egos of elitists that can somehow feel they are better because they got to buy a figure other people couldn't. Anyone who can feel that way needs to do some serious growing up. Any game company that wants to cater to that mentality is little better.
  13. Gimp2

    Moo?

    You guys' thoughtful considerations have truly mooved me. Add some boots, and they could be resistance fighters a la "Top Secret." The LC's stat card could really fit. Or add a mine to the goat's back, and use it as a second generation SSU anti-tank animal (they decided to give their their dogs a break, because they'd had it so ruff).
  14. 35mm would be 168cm (5'6"), which would still fit the time frame, where the average person wasn't 6' tall. It can be harder to chack models due to posing and equipment, but all of the models I've checked fit within an appropriate range for the acknowledged 1:48 scale. If a model is 34mm tall, but is crouched down, the actual figure would be representing someone taller crouching down. Crouching down 50.8mm (2") lower than full height shifts the height of a miniature in scale by just over 1mm, and most people crouching down, and with a wider stance with their legs, will be far more than 1mm shorter and still be in scale. The only place I've ever seen people mention 28mm is on the forum, and not in anything official. 28mm isn't a scale, and there are too many ways 28mm is used for reporting model height to call it any single scale. If you take a range from 160cm (5'3" the average height of a Japanese soldier in WW2) up to 198.1cm (6'6" for a tall, but far from the tallest soldiers around then); you get a model range from 33-41.3mm to fit that range. All of my models are within that range. DUST models aren't great for scale when you look at the different sizes of what are supposed to be the same weapon on vehicles, but the infantry are all fine when considered as 1:48 and actually measured and compared to real sizes.
  15. One section mentions artillery needing to reload, but the specific rules for artillery and Reload specify that not all artillery has to reload, and weapons that require Reload have it listed on their card. The rules on Reload also state artillery weapons may follow the reload rule, which means it is not an automatic addition. Limited ammunition artillery weapons can also be added that do require a Reload action, or that follow the Steel Rain's multiple single shot construction Otherwise, the nebelwerfer would not need Reload printed on its unit card.
×
×
  • Create New...