Jump to content

banjobenito

Members
  • Content Count

    1,088
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by banjobenito

  1. Like a bird on a wire, like a drunk in a midnight choir, I have tried in my way to be free (of Xwing). But punch me and call me Cuthbert if 2.0 doesn't get me realllly excited to jump back in to the game. 1.0 imo became a bloated, conditional, contigent rule set, staggering under the weight of the exceptions and alterations needed to keep its original small-but-elegant design space fresh. I tired of it, and fell out of love with X-wing. But news of turrets being dragged down an alley and nerf-blatted? Action economy being totally overhauled? Force as a new game mechanic? And most important of all, points being unmoored from their respective cards, allowing the desingers to balance on the fly? These are all very very (very) good signs. So I'm back in. And I suspect you'll see more players rejoining the game in the coming months. Will they equal the number of players huffing off at FFG's shameless cash grab? I couldn't say. But FFG levelling out the game and rebuilding it is great news as far as I can see, from someone now standing outside the community, for the long-term health of this game. New players and old lapsed players alike will hugely benefit from the increased pickupability of 2.0. Exciting times!
  2. Exactly what happened in my area, My set is sitting half painted with zero opponents to paly against. Zero. The release schedule has been a real problem for the game, and I fear it may have done seroius damage to its prospects. Shame because the mechanics are outstanding. Hope I'm wrong.
  3. Zero uptake in my area (Norwich, UK). I was literally the only person to turn up to the launch tournament event. Sad, but there you have it. I think the generic-feel to its lore and the slightly lower-than-average model quality have damaged the game in my area, which is rife with swanky Sigmar sculpts and is also still bossed by X-wing. A shame, as I rate the ruleset for Runewars as A+ ...
  4. Hi Jarval, that's good news, glad the /sfs are still rocking it for you! My concern for the game is a bit deeper than meta diversity, but I'm happy to hear the good word on the backdraft/quickdraw team... Having been straying to other systems recently, a simple fact has struck me with X-wing. Because the average list contains around 3 units, game balance is extremely sensitive. In most other games, unit imbalance can be somewhat mitigated by deployment, weight of force, terrain, etc. Not so with X-wing. The scarcity of tools with which to combat your opponent translates to a hard paper-rocks-scissors dynamic (less room to build in counters, less redundancy, etc). So game imbalance is amplified, and hard counters are rendered granite-hard. That, combined with FFG's stubborn refusal to recost unbalanced ships, has left me feeling rather disenchanted with the system, despite its many many virtues.
  5. It's the most efficient ship in the game, and it's been the meta ever since it arrived. I mean, run two or three of them if you want, but don't be under any illusions that you aren't playing at an advantage against your opponent. At a tournament, that's fair enough (I suppose?). With friends, well, it depends on the friend really, doesn't it? The ship is like a plague of locusts, nibbling away the biodiversity of the game. But sure, yeah, play it and have fun! Be the homogeneity you want to see!
  6. Personally, my interest in the game has really dwindled since this time last year. The design space is feeling very claustrophobic, the new wave seems uninspired, and the meta keeps coming back to turrets and big ships, stuck in a loop predetermined by the mechanics of the game. I'm even thinking of culling my collection down, to only a few key pieces, so I can still play a game if the fancy takes me. I'm actually yearning for an X-Wing 2.0 in the near future, hopefully taking the best innovations from armada and runewars.
  7. I took Biggs/Wes/Corran to my 2016 regionals. I was going in undefeated in 15 pratice games, against some pretty good local players, so I thought I'd be in with a chance of making the cut. I'd even given them a nice green squadron paintjob! I spent most of the day in the over-flow room of shame upstairs, where only the lowliest MoV children were sent to play with their X-wings. 1-5. A great lesson in expectations!
  8. This pretty much sums up exactly my feelings about the game! Right down to the balancing act that your review exhibits, between genius game design and a degree of copy/paste fluff. I even completely agree on the minis. Personally, I'm hanging in the balance right now. I've bought a core set, but despite having a few great stores in my city, with big 40k/Armada/X-Wing/RPGs presence, am seeing zero uptake of Runewars. Pretty sad really. I'm demo'ing the game on X-wing nights occassionally, but funnily enough, I'm finding that it's actually not such a great comparison to draw. The game is longer, and doesn't have the simplicity or fluff appeal to draw bystanders in to a game. The first bite is with the imagination, and with X-wing you can think your way into the story of the game very easily. What does make people's eyes twinkle is the mechanics when I explain them. More than one X'er has remarked that they see this system being ported over to X-wing when it eventually gets a 2.0 reboot. Really really hoping that the game community gets wise to the fantastic ruelset Runewars has to offer, and people start to put their toes in the water...
  9. I like em! And I like the brave new world of the Sigmar setting ... I mean, recycled Tolkien starts to wear thin after a while. Sigmar is a lot more crazy-a$$ed surreal Michael Moorcock than hobbitses and bagginses. Now if only there was the beating heart of a great game under all that bling... I guess I'll just have to get my aesthetic kick from GW, and put RW on the table!
  10. Hi WWHSD, no, it's £25 for ten minis of that quality, vs £25 for 4 Daqan cavalry. You're right about the fiddly deatil, but if you're painting a mini, you're in 'macro' mode for a long time, staring at the little fellas, so the detail definitely hits you. The combined effect on the tabletop is really noticeable. But like I said before, even if that guy is a bit baroque for your tastes, there's nothing stopping ffg from delivering a mini of that quality with simpler and more elegant lines, for the same price, as far as I can see.
  11. "RWM is also still pretty cheap. 25USD for 8 models and their tray/cards? 40k will only give you 1 model at that price." I disagree. Here's some Daqan I've been painting up that will drop at £25 when they are out: And here's a Thousand Son from a squad of ten chaos marines, from 40K, I bought for yep, you guessed, £25: My point is that the models are much higher quality. I know they're over-elaborated for some people's taste, but that's not a necessity. The sculpts are night and day in terms of clarity, detail, imagination. To reiterate my point here friends - I agree that RW is a superb game. I love it. I'm happy that the models are beginner friendly and easy to paint - that's great. But I disagree when people suggest that they are up to top standard. They're not really, are they? They could be simple and elegant. Clean and sharp lined, yet still cartoony in aesthetic. I just think it's a shame that such an amazing game has a relatively limited table presence compared to the competition. (For the record, I take good rules over good minis any day of the week! :D)
  12. Also, your quick summary of the flaws with Infinity game balance did bring back to me a lot of its deep problems! It still has a place in my heart, even though I don't really play it any more. Perhaps that's because it's such an ambitious game.
  13. Druchii - very informative post, I really learned something, so thanks. I think I understand the reasons for your (slightly depressing!) conclusion now - namely that you can't have it all.
  14. Also, Druuchi, Infinity is balanced around an objective system, where being a specialist is often far more important than raw stats. Haq are one of the top factions, even though they have very little heavies, because they have such good doctors, engineers, etc. I like that balancing act, and I think it's much better game balance than current 7th edition 40k stuff... but I guess that's not saying much
  15. Good point Giraffe. RW minis are brilliant in terms of the old effort/table time ratio! Druchi - I don't think that's a fair assessment of what happened with Infinity. Sure, a company learns a lot in 12 years of constant production, but on top of that, printing techniques and designing programs have come on leaps and bounds. I mean, eg, take a look at Darklight - a Kickstarter game with a team that have never produced a game before... Beautiful, weird, character-full minis. Zero company pedigree. Preassembled. Straight out of the gate, these minis surpass anything in the RW line. Same with Guild Ball above - very little experience, head and shoulders above RW. Or Dark Souls... RW is lightyears behind this kind of model detail & fidelity, and both these games are minis-boardgames, rather than full-blown war games. IDXT - I feel you! I've been hacking my skellies up and drafting in some old warhammer weapons and banners to break up the sameness of their ranks. Interesting point on Imperial Assault, I didn't know that.
  16. Agreed on nearly every point, druchii. But none of that really touches on my point, though - that RW minis aren't all they could be, and are below the top tier of what the market - and modern technologies - are about these days, for no apparent reason. 'If you want a good wargame with both, excellent miniature range and excellent rules, sorry, but I'd swear that it doesn't exist yet, since more wargaming rulebooks are absolutely disappointing' - Why couldn't RWs have been that game that doesn't exist yet? There seems to be no constraint that would have stopped it...
  17. Okay, I thought I'd get this off my chest. It's strictly a problem I have with game components, rather than game ruleset. Runewars is fast establishing a unique aesthetic that helps to mark it out from its many competitors in the field of miniature wargaming. On release, this aesthetic wasn't too clear, arguably due to the skeletal features of 50% of its models. But with the new heroes and units we're seeing, there's more and more opportunities to see what the designers are aiming towards. And the answer is: cartoony. Thick facial features, oversized items, soft lines, unwieldy horns, over-exaggerated expressions, etc. Armour is simple and well designed, and most reminiscent of World of Warcraft. Now, I'm not sure how much of this is being imposed upon the sculptors by material restraints - after all, they're using a pliable pvc material, rather than hard plastics, and so we can expect to see a lower resoultion of detail. (I've also noticed a big problem with mould lines and flash with Runewars models, but that's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.) Whatever the reasons, I wanted to get other people's feedback on this, as it's such an important element to a game's success. And I worry about its effect on Runewars. Clearly, the game has a beautifully designed ruleset. It combines bluffing, maneuver, synergy, listbuilding, spatial judgement, risk calculation, and bundles up all these great aspects in a game that can be taken out, played, and reboxed in 2 hours. But the game falls short, in my opinion, in terms of its aesthetics. I know that this won't necessarily be a very popular thread topic, but it's nonetheless a really important one. As I've been plowing through painting my Daqan, I've been struck by how... old ... the figures look to me. They're reminiscent of 90s Games Workshop in their faces, poses and ratios. Now, painting an army is a serious commitment of time, and also of care. You're putting yourself into these little dudes, to some extent, and the end result is something important to you as a gamer. Finishing my phalanx of spearmen left me feeling a little ... cold? For my money, the two monster units are the only RW sculpts so far that have life, that draw the eye. The bar is so high now in the field of miniature design that I'm not sure how feasible Runewars' approach is. In short, I think this game will be held back by its sculpts. For example, here's two hero sculpts from Runewars: And here's two hero sculpts from competing miniature lines, both retailing at roughly the same rrp as Runewars hero packs : Conversely, here's an example of cartoony aesthetics, from Guild Ball, that still has definition, dynamism and character in spades... Which hero would you rather spend your money on? Which would you rather spend hours painting? Which would you be proud of, bringing out at a local games night? In closing, I appreciate that this is a matter of aesthetics, and thus a lot of this boils down to personal taste. I also appreciate that many people will love this cartoony style, as well as the simplicity of sculpt lines that allow for quick and easy paint jobs. Fair enough. But I also think that aesthetics does have some objective considerations. Symmetry, elegance, skill of design & execution, refinement, imagination. I find Runewars lacking in direct comparison to its competitors, and there seems to be no reason why it should, giving the heavyweight nature of its parent company. I'm sad that such a wonderful game ruleset is not being matched in excellence in terms of its components. It would be a much easier sell down my club if the models were competing at the level of every other wargame that sees regular table time there... and in no other genre of tabletop game is component quality of such importance. Finally, please be aware that I don't say any of this out of vindictiveness or snarkishness, but out of love for the game. I want it to be a great success, but am finding it hard to overlook such a big part of what the game is.
  18. D'oh! Thanks WWHSD, I got it in reverse. That'll teach me for trying to say something coherent at 7am.
  19. Be aware that, imo, Waiqur have a slight advantage at this level, if Daqan play into their hands. Blight/lancer/Ardus will wreck Daqan and nerf them down to the offensive power of a gerbil. Daqan will have to leverage cavalry and their initiative advantage to stand a chance (e.g. archers fire at 5, spearmen can move a distance of 4 at 7, then next round close distance and melee before archers have had a chance to shoot them). Kari is very important for scoring damage on Ardus early, so he can be taken down; if he's alive towards the end game, and mixing it up in melee with lots of blight tokens, daqan are in serious trouble. Try and keep her for ranged attacks, where her surge ability can clean whole trays of archers.
  20. Thanks Matt, inter3sting tactic, I'll give it a spin.
  21. Ardus can dial in a surge, get a surge from Fury, and quite easily roll a surge or two on his white dice. If his victim has a blight he can easily hand out three mortal wounds in one hit, before considering his actual damage. Monster.
  22. Having played another 150+pt game last night, I'm starting to see your point Drackoniss! Ardus killed 8 spearmen in one attack. Rune Golems were plinked full of arrows, then rendered ineffective by blight as they were finished off. Archers were generally devastating, setting up Ardus's killing sprees. Carrions Crawlers Lancers spat then flanked, handing out mortal wounds and generally were a nuisance. Ardus's Fury seems to be an upgrade that should be stapled to the guy: he was hitting with at least three mortal wounds every attack. Blimey.
  23. Found a 'bitz' dealer and got hold of a nice variety of round undead shields, pennants, pikes, banners and blades to sort my skellies out. Thanks for all the advice guys, really appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...