|
Yeah, got one of those as well. Reminds me of Facebook when I pared it down to 8ish people before deleting it. Desperate.
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
You didn't break up with WizKids before moving on to your new squeeze? What the hell man!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
He did, wizkids is just like an ex that reminds you of the good times to get you back (but omits reminding you about all the bad, bad times)
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
I have updated the OP with a conversion guide. If you haven't abandoned ship for a galaxy far, far away yet, do so before it is too late.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
EdsTeioh posted:God, I'd kill for arcade mode SFB with STAW models. Federation Commander?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
"There are now 8 impulses instead of 32" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
The problem with SFB/Fed Commander, from what I understand, is it's this weird spin-off universe that imposes a MilSciFi sensibility on the TOS setting and introduces a bunch of different ships that are basically mad-lib versions of the Enterprise with different saucer/secondary hull/nacelle configurations. It seems like that would take some adapting if you wanted to do something with all your models from the NX-01 to the Ent-E, or even just any TNG-era etc. Given how notoriously complex the system is (and even Fed Commander seems pretty intense), I'm not sure how well hacking/houseruling it to work with factions and eras not represented would go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 11:10
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:"There are now 8 impulses instead of 32" Is it like a spin-off on the Attack Vector system? I played the 2nd edition of Sagami Island Tactical Simultator, which IIRC did impulse-streamlining in similar number range and that game was pretty baller for the kind of wargame one will never get a chance to play with another human being.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
Yeah going from Starfleet Command, it's basically TOS-era ships with a whole lot of new factions added that don't exist in Star Trek canon. And there isn't any TNG-era stuff at all. I didn't know that they were two different meta-verses so I was pretty confused when I bought SFC. Still, Hydrans own!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
SFB also includes a bunch of stuff from the animated series, which explains that thing about Klingons having stasis field generators and stuff. And the Kzinti.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
Someone sell me their undiscovered country and wrath of Khan ships for cheap?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Huh. I didn't even know this was a thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
I like the new OP. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 11:44
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:I like the new OP. Kai Tave posted:Before it dies I just want to point out how incredibly prophetic the tag for this thread turned out to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:Is it like a spin-off on the Attack Vector system? I played the 2nd edition of Sagami Island Tactical Simultator, which IIRC did impulse-streamlining in similar number range and that game was pretty baller for the kind of wargame one will never get a chance to play with another human being. No, it's a spin off of itself, going back to the late Seventies. (I don't go far back as the original Pocket Edition--mine came in a box.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
I love everything about this article. Oh cool, a 1 attack, 2 agility, 3 HP ship with a lovely dial and expensive upgrades, I'm sure that's gonna do well in the meta. Also paying five points for something that will shave either 1/3 or 2/3 of your HP if you use it. In a game with 6 dice 360 turrets. Holy mother of god.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
That named ship ability is amazing. Just think how demoralized your opponent will be when you cancel one of his hits and are only over killed by 4 instead of 5!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
The end of the article is the best, it basically says "the ship is really loving lovely but im sure you are going to make it work with your pro piloting skills" *does a 3 forward and a sphere blows it up*
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I love everything about this article. Oh cool, a 1 attack, 2 agility, 3 HP ship with a lovely dial and expensive upgrades, I'm sure that's gonna do well in the meta. Also paying five points for something that will shave either 1/3 or 2/3 of your HP if you use it. In a game with 6 dice 360 turrets. Holy mother of god. That ship would be hot garbage in X-wing, and the numbers there are infinitely tighter. What the hell are they doing throwing it into the land of dice bloat? Maybe if they made it 1 point, so you could just take a hundred shitships and hope that you could eventually plink them down through force of numbers, it would work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:That ship would be hot garbage in X-wing, and the numbers there are infinitely tighter. What the hell are they doing throwing it into the land of dice bloat? The basic tie fighter would be 16 points while the X-wing would be 20 under WizKids system. Balance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Hahaha what the gently caress is this? 12 points for that, assuming Attack Wing is built on 100 points (idk if it is I'm just spitballing here) that puts it in the ballpark as a TIE Academy Pilot or a generic Headhunter, which have 2-3 red dice and 3-2 green dice respectively, the Headhunter has more HP, and the TIE has better action options. Seriously, why would you ever, ever purchase a ship with 1 attack die? The only ship in X-Wing which does that is the HWK where it's pretty much assumed that you'll be putting a turret on it, no other ship in the game has fewer than 2 attack dice and 2 red is considered kind of bad without any way to either pile the numbers on or significantly enhance the output somehow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:That ship would be hot garbage in X-wing, and the numbers there are infinitely tighter. What the hell are they doing throwing it into the land of dice bloat? (1 attack + 2 evade + 3 hull) * 2 = 12 points this is obviously balanced and furthermore
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Wave 21 holy balls.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
I thought that was some dumb ship that was made a couple years ago, giving them the benefit of the doubt. But nope, that was a December preview for a new ship. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Yep, just been released, which is why I got to know about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:Wave 21 holy balls. They're previewing wave 23 now. They release a 3-ship wave every.single.month. There are 13 factions. Some with only 2-3 ships.  this is not a good game http://www.startrek.com/article/first-look-u-s-s-montgolfier-for-attack-wing-wave-23 They've started aiming for "Agressively Average" with the Feds. One of the few remaining "loyalists" who gainsays me when I poo poo talk this at the FLGS (and nontheless seems to prefer playing Armada on Flightpath League Night ) said that they learned their lesson and are releasing ships that are more "balanced" and "thematic" which even taken uncritically, you know, all the old ships are still things that exist. There's not really been any rebalance or retirement. (not that WK should be given any ideas)LOL that they keep including these Silver Borg Bullets almost a year after they over-corrected and nerfed them from Obvious Solution into obscurity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
"...fan favourite Wesley Crusher..." 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
So a local FLGS is having their bi-yearly auction and im considering putting in my ST:AW poo poo because why not at this point. Maybe if I play up the SPECIAL PRIZE SHIPS I can squeeze a few more bucks out of it but im not expecting much. If I can get enough to cover an X-wing or Netrunner expansion or two ill prob be happy. Maybe I'll keep a couple of the decent looking ships like Changs BoP and voyager. gently caress this game was a waste of money 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Alright, going through some of the wave 23 stuff, I noticed this article. Now, it's kind of funny that they are just making you buy ships for models that already exist, but that's something that has happened in X-Wing as well. What I really love is something that I hadn't noticed before and I'm not sure if it is universal, but encapsulates the design philosophy of STAW perfectly. The non-named ship is 22 points, and the named ship has 24 points. But the 24 points doesn't fit The Magic Formula(tm), so just bump up the shields by 1 and now it fits!  Is this true for all ships? Why isn't the cost of the ability taken into account? The last thing I noticed about the article is that the ship model on the top banner is backwards. Attention to details!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
I wonder what effect (if any) this news will have on STAW. http://wizkids.com/blog/2016/02/03/zev-shlasinger-joins-wizkids-to-head-new-board-game-unit/ Finster Dexter fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Feb 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:But the 24 points doesn't fit The Magic Formula(tm), so just bump up the shields by 1 and now it fits! Yep! The ship ability has always been "free." On ships with no shields, the cost is the same between the named, and the blank generic. quote:Why isn't the cost of the ability taken into account? Probably the same reason the Borg ability to fire turreted with 6 PWV and move othagonally wasn't factored into their point value: Wizkids is, actually, super bad at this. quote:The last thing I noticed about the article is that the ship model on the top banner is backwards. Attention to details!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Otisburg posted:Yep! The ship ability has always been "free." On ships with no shields, the cost is the same between the named, and the blank generic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:So in those situations, why wouldn't you take the special ship? What's the point of having the smaller ship at all? The smaller ships are non unique, for the times when you might want to fly multiple versions of ships such as
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 11:17
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:So in those situations, why wouldn't you take the special ship? What's the point of having the smaller ship at all? I mean within the dumb constraints of this game, sometimes there are reasons. For example:  That is a useless ship ability on a ship with a 5 primary, because Photon Torpedoes in STAW are no better and in fact probably worse than Proton Torpedoes in X-Wing have been. The standard format caps the total you can spend on a ship at 50. There are a number of upgrades that will give you more general utility for two points than a single shield, particularly when you're working against a per-ship cap. So taking a generic Sovereign Class over the Enterprise E would definitely be a good thing to do sometimes, depending. You know, this isn't even the stupidest thing about generic vs. named ships in STAW. You know how in X-Wing, no matter who is flying a ship it has the same upgrade slots? If they're a skilled pilot, maybe it has an EPT, but other than that the ship is the ship. Makes sense, right? In STAW, in addition to the shield and the text ability, the unique ship typically has one more upgrade slot. For example the original Enterprise has one more crew slot than a generic Constitution class. Okay, a little weird and arguably not super balanced, but at least it sort of makes sense: In this singular, special version there's more exceptional crew, or it's been modified to carry more weapons/specialized technology, or whatever. Hopefully you're with me so far. When they added new versions of the ships, the generic versions didn't necessarily match up on upgrade slots. For example, between prizes and retail releases there have been several named Romulan D'Deridex Warbirds. Among them, there are three different GENERIC warbird loadouts: Tech, Weapon, Weapon, Crew Tech, Weapon, Crew, Crew Weapon, Weapon, Crew, Crew All of the above are simply identified as "D'Deridex Class" Depending on which unique ship the included identically named ship representing the baseline of that class card is from, the upgrade slots vary. This would be like the Dagger Squadron Pilot in Rebel Aces randomly lost his canon slot from the normal expansion for a torpedo slot, but was still called Dagger Squadron Pilot. This is even more confusing, IMO, than having 20 different cards called "Photon Torpedo" that do different things. Not that that's not stupid, considering it would be trivially easy to technobabble out of by just having some be called "high yield" and adding "Mk I, II, III" and stuff. This is not a very good game. Owlbear Camus fucked around with this message at 11:56 on Feb 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 11:54
|
|
|
How can torpedos be worse than proton torpedos in x-wing. The status of proton torpedos is still 'never take them' Otisburg posted:This is even more confusing, IMO, than having 20 different cards called "Photon Torpedo" that do different things. Not that that's not stupid, considering it would be trivially easy to technobabble out of by just having some be called "high yield" and adding "Mk I, II, III" and stuff. How exactly do you explain a ship list to someone if there are so many variations on the same name?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
kingcom posted:How can torpedos be worse than proton torpedos in x-wing. The status of proton torpedos is still 'never take them' Also X-wing protons will actually be kind of nice once Guidance chips are out as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:From the sound of it, it's due to dice bloat. 4-5 dice ships are endemic to STAW, while being relatively rare in X-Wing. So in X-Wing, taking Proton Torpedoes to boost your dice to 4 and have a special ability can be worth it, but in STAW your 4-5 attack dice ship is gonna waste a target lock to throw 5 dice at something for just a small bonus? What's the point Oh poo poo right, I forgot that everything just packs gently caress off dice anyway. Also ehh with guidance Chimps, it will make ordinance useful but I still think basic proton torps a bit of a waste. Reducing the pain from the action economy problem on Homing Missiles or Proton Rockets. 
kingcom fucked around with this message at 13:48 on Feb 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
kingcom posted:Oh poo poo right, I forgot that everything just packs gently caress off dice anyway. Yep. They tried to make the Photons included in the big attack die ships "worth it" by giving them basically the same as the PWV of the ship and a "+1 if fired from a [whatever] class ship" rider. But of course with action and squadron point economy it's better just to add dice fixing/more dice to your PWV other ways. I got into an argument with a guy about the relative merits and one of his observations was: Generally, in this game (and just about any other) so-called 'ambiguities' are usually just people trying to read something in such a way to gain an undue advantage. Heck, the shenanigans leading to the oft derided "may ruling" are a perfect example of this--I mean seriously, the amount of people who pulled the lawyering of saying it had to actually say "Action:" to be limited to once a turn...that was just plain silliness. The attendance drop-offs started basically because of people pulling that crap. Though those who didn't bother trying and just resorted to the buzz word "overpowered" with regard to the Borg didn't help. "Meta get gutted by one ship being a 6 PWV turret with 14 HP a dial that allows for omnidirectional othaginal movement like a chess rook, for 40 points? Obviously the fault of people who refuse to get gud." Also the "may" ruling was a poo poo fix, and there was zero basis prior to it to infer that passive effects couldn't or shouldn't be triggered every time their condition was met. A forward looking designer capable of technical writing would have simply included very basic "once per turn" wording and solved it out the gate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
The last refuge of the die hard brown nose is to blame the player, not the game. It isn't the rules that are badly written/balanced that drove people away, it's the players trying to take advantage of badly written/balanced rules that drove people away If it is the player's fault, why is X-wing booming and STAW dying? Does STAW just attract rear end in a top hat players for some reason? This is exactly the same excuses that people use for GWS product and it's just as much of a lovely excuse there as it is for STAW.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 08:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
Tekopo posted:The last refuge of the die hard brown nose is to blame the player, not the game. It isn't the rules that are badly written/balanced that drove people away, it's the players trying to take advantage of badly written/balanced rules that drove people away The thing to do with someone like that is to go "hey, let's play a nice, friendly, casual game" and then bring the most broken bullshit to the table you can, then when he inevitably gets pissy about it call him out for resorting to buzzwords and complaints about things being overpowered. edit; I mean don't really do this because don't play Attack Wing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 09:40
|
|