Well, I was impressed in spite of myself.
(and it was nice to finally meet Aaron Teske in the flesh, a rather handsom
tall gentleman)
First off, the miniatures are gorgeous! They were not much
like the the cardboard punch-outs in White Dwarf #225,
they more resembled the concept drawings and ship miniatures in the article.
You can see one in the illustration at
http://www.games-workshop.com/newreleases/battlefleet.html
Like Aaron observed, they were just *made* for drybrushing. Lots of very deep
detail, with raised fretwork. We figure that given Pudding Workshop's history
of pricing, some people will by the boxed set and throw away the rules, so
they can get a price break on a set of minis.
All the Imperial ships had that Greek trireme nosepiece ( for ramming) and
actually have some minor customization built in. The sides of the ships can
accept different panels: broadside turrents, fighter launching bays, etc.
The cruisers were fairly large, I estimate they were about 3.5 inches long.
What do you think Aaron?
For the game, they had the chaos fleet painted black with
dark red dry-brushing, and the imperial fleet was black
with dark green dry-brushing.
The actual game is due to come out in Easter, for about
$50-$60. It will come with 4 imperial ships and 4 chaos
ships.
The gameplay was pretty fast. With a crowd of 8 novices
who had just heard a quick run-through of the rules,
they managed to play about 3 turns in 30 minutes, and were playing faster
after that as they got the hang of it.
The game had some chrome added to it, but the basic system is as specified in
White Dwarf. The game has a fleet book with lots of ships, and rules for Eldar
and Orc vessels. There are rules for fighters, boarding actions, and teleport
attacks. Eldar ships are flimsy, but their holographic projectors make them
hard to hit. As are their missiles. Orc vessels are clunky, with slower speed
and abyssmal command control. On the other hand, their weapons are much more
brute force powerful than the others. On the third hand, since they are not
what you'd call "organized", the force of each volley is random.
There are also rules for space stations and mine fields.
I did like the illustration of hundreds of slaves dragging a missile into the
launch tube. The missile was about fifty feet in diameter.
There was a "naval" feel to the game, with a lot of attempts to "cross the T".
Heading straight at an enemy gives the enemy the most favorable chance to hit
you. This is why Imperial ships have stronger nose armor.
I don't know about GW! If you hate the way their futuristic game miniatures
look, think they are unabashed price-gougers and have immensely
over-inflated
opinions of the value of their game systems, and an overly belligerent
attitude toward the products of other companies and the rights of other
companies to presume to produce game products at all. It's just hard to work
up any enthusiasm for them in the first place. I've met some nice people who
play their games, but I only watch politely and then go find a game more to my
tastes.
I STRONGLY agree.
IAS
> ScottSaylo@aol.com wrote:
> I don't know about GW! If you hate the way their futuristic game
(MASS Snippage!)
Could you answer one burning question concerning the new Battlefleet Gothic?
Does it still use the "Square map spaces"?
I never got to see that issue of white dwarf....
> At 04:25 PM 1/24/99 -0500, you wrote:
<grin>
> (and it was nice to finally meet Aaron Teske in the flesh,
Well, tall anyway. ^_^;
> First off, the miniatures are gorgeous! They were not much
Just to note, those punch-outs are all based aroudn the Space Fleet
Emperor
Capital Ship, with various wingy-bits added for the Imperials, and
spikey-bits added for Chaos. <shrug>
> they more resembled the concept drawings and ship miniatures
Yup. That is, by the by, the box cover, though without the "Special
preview day!" sticker. ^_^
> Like Aaron observed, they were just *made* for drybrushing.
Mmm, I think I just said it a little, um, juicier. ^_^;; But that's
what I said at the store, yes.
> Lots of very deep detail, with raised fretwork.
I'm actually curious how this'll work; if the boxes are $60, then the minis
have to be at least $8/cruiser, which isn't all *that* cheap. (Okay,
it's not too bad, they're big, but....) I'd guess the battleships (huge masses
of pewter!) are going to end up being $30 each or thereabouts... maybe be
worth it, too. ^_^; At least for one or two, anyway.
> All the Imperial ships had that Greek trireme nosepiece
Yup-yup. Forgot fighter bays; means there's prolly a fourth "basic
cruiser" out there. The battleships may have the side panels, too, since
there is a carrier-varient battleship for both Chaos and the Imperium.
> The cruisers were fairly large, I estimate they were
Sounds right, yes.
> For the game, they had the chaos fleet painted black with
Other way 'round, actually, but whatever. *Moat* of their minis -- the
well-painted ones -- followed that scheme; the minis they gave us to use
on
the baord were reversed. So helpful.... ^_^;
> The gameplay was pretty fast. With a crowd of 8 novices
Yup. Of course, with slow ship speeds (though a narrow map, 3' or so) and
fairly short weapons ranges, that still means not a whole lot of damage was
done. In the second game, people started closing so more damage was done,
which was kinda stupid of Chaos 'cause they had those nice 60 cm(!)
lances....
[snippity]
> There are also rules for space stations and mine fields.
Oh yes, forgot the stations, though I didn't read that section. Two types of
bases from what I remember, military and shipyards....
> I did like the illustration of hundreds of slaves dragging
^_^ They do have the Dominator battleship... complete with, come to
think of it, the Nova Cannon. (Instead of the Inferno Gun.) Hmm. High
explosive, area of effect template, but only around the detonation point
instead of a continuous wave like the FT Nova Cannon....
> There was a "naval" feel to the game, with a lot of
Yup. Not that we got to use it much....
> The naval feel comes from the fact that most weapons
Though, to be somewhat fair to Andy, he does mention alternating squadrons as
an alternate method in the back of the book. Although I'm not sure where the
ordinance phases would fall, then....
> They played the demos on a huge table, with handfulls of
Yup. I think Indy would have a fit at the asteroid "belts", but whatever.
^_^ No-one ever accused GW of trying for realism... the scale on the
game is *very* screwy; given the distaces involved (i.e., fit a planet and
it's moon on the table) turns have *got* to be taking a long time, but the
ships *still* maneuver like cows. <shrug> Still and all, though, it follows
the background very, very well....
> At 10:25 PM 1/24/99 -0500, Donald Hosford wrote:
Not as massive as you'd have to snip my report... at least Nyrath's was
actually brief. ^_^;
> Could you answer one burning question concerning the new Battlefleet
Not at all. Free ranging, though bounded both in borders and max thrust of the
starships.
> Aaron Teske wrote:
> At 10:25 PM 1/24/99 -0500, Donald Hosford wrote:
> Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
You should make an effort to come to GenCon... quite a few of this list
members make an appearance.
> First off, the miniatures are gorgeous! They were not much
Excuse me... <Click.... connection made.... loading.....>
Droooooooooollllll :-)..
> Like Aaron observed, they were just *made* for drybrushing.
Makes sense, given the dark, "gothic" nature of the universe. So, you would
recomend a coat of black and just drybrush the various colors on, yes?
> We figure that given Pudding Workshop's history of pricing,
Even if no one plays the game in my neighborhood (see my rant on
rec.games.miniatures.misc on this topic) the ships and the info presented will
be great for FT.
> The actual game is due to come out in Easter, for about
Only eight ships? Metal or plastic? How about other components like fighter
and torpedos?
> The gameplay was pretty fast. With a crowd of 8 novices
Well, that a good indication. K.I.S.S.
> I did like the illustration of hundreds of slaves dragging
Did they have Charlton Heston below, pulling oars. ;-)
"Number 569,241... what is your name?"
> There was a "naval" feel to the game, with a lot of
> The naval feel comes from the fact that most weapons
That's what I do like about BG, and even Space Fleet. The whole
Sci-Fi/Greeco-Roman feel to it.
> Aaron asked Andy Chambers (the designer) about Full Thrust.
Did he say why he didn't care for pre-written orders?
I wonder if GW would ever had considered re-doing BG if FT and
the boom in starship combat games hadn't come about? Oh well, better now than
never.
> ScottSaylo@aol.com wrote:
Personally, I have never had that many problems with GW customer
service-wise. When I my belligerent mother throw out my Epic rule books
during my parent's recent divorce, they sent me a new set. I've only just
started playing WH40K myself (I admit that the 3rd Edition is a MAJOR
improvment over the 2nd), and when there was a pack of space marine backpacks
missing from my boxed set they were on only too happy to send me a new sprue.
I know... I know... the price. That is something I don't really have to worry
about. I purchase all my Epic an 40K supplies from a store that gives a 30%
discount on all GW merchdise. A $20 dollar Vyper Jetbike only costs me $14.
Lead minis are only 4 bucks a blister.
I'm looking forward for BG for one primary reason: THE SHIPS!
I,
being both financially desperate and a fool, sold my old Space Fleet figs.
(Though I'm going to see if I can buy them back.) Say what you want about GWs
practices, I still love their "gothic" ships and look forward to buying them.
> At 11:24 PM 1/24/99 -0500, Donald Hosford wrote:
Kinda-sorta. In general, cruisers & battleships are limited to one 45
degree turn per move, and escorts to one 90 degree turn. Special orders can be
issued to make up to two turns, but that cuts down on your firepower
that turn. (As do all maneuvering special orders -- Increased power to
the engines reduces the power available for weapons.)
> At 10:41 PM 1/24/99 -0600, Mark Siefert wrote:
It's an idea... dunno if I can make it this year, either.
> First off, the miniatures are gorgeous! They were not much
Hey! Clean that up! ^_-
(Lordy, I'm getting tired....)
> Like Aaron observed, they were just *made* for drybrushing.
So, you
> would recomend a coat of black and just drybrush the various colors on,
Actually, one way that I've gotten good results for painting color over
black is to drybrush dark and/or light gray over the black -- this
coats,
unlike many colors -- and then wash the whole mini. (In moderation, of
course; don't just dunk it.) The color comes out over the grayscale
underneath, looks pretty good.
Though, in fairness, I've used that more on fur & the like than a starship.
^_^;
> We figure that given Pudding Workshop's history of pricing,
One of these days, I've *got* to get back on newsgroups. ^_^;
> Only eight ships? Metal or plastic? How about other components
Plastic cruisers, with counters for ordinance.
> Aaron asked Andy Chambers (the designer) about Full Thrust.
Too time-consuming, especially in large fleet battles.
> I wonder if GW would ever had considered re-doing BG if FT and
<grin>
In a message dated 99-01-25 00:29:14 EST, you write:
<< > Did he say why he didn't care for pre-written orders?
Too time-consuming, especially in large fleet battles. >>
What I do for movement is devided the ships into thrust classes (the first to
move is the 1 thrusters, then the 2 thrusters, ect) roll for initive for the
entire fleet. This alows the DDs to get into postion behind the DNL, wave its
fingers, press the butten, and realy hert the DNL and it can't do any thing,
but the scout ship can do that, I think this is better than they way it is set
up with all of the ships moving at the same time.
-Stephen
> http://www.games-workshop.com/newreleases/battlefleet.html
Ugh - just as bad as their ground vehicles. Their old
minis were cool - especially the tyrannid bio-ships - this stuff
looks hideous. Triremes is space, well its different.
Anyway thanks for the review and warning me off this turkey (YMMV).
> "Mark A. Siefert" wrote:
Metal or plastic? Not sure.
> On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Aaron Teske wrote:
i've been pondering on gw -> gzg migration paths recently; i have a
friend who's deeply into most things gw, but is otherwise quite intelligent. i
know that if he really got to know some non-gw games (gzg being the
easiest to come by, and providing a total solution with ft/ds/sg), he
would realise how bad gw stuff (mostly) is and be much better off.
it's hard to persuade people to give one system up and start another
simply on the back of argument, testimony or one or two games - people
are to used to what they play. if there was a series of steps, where each one
was quite non-threatening, it would be a lot easier. i was thinking
something like pure epic -> epic with ds2 morale rules -> epic with ds2
morale and fire rules -> ds2 with epic units -> pure ds2. the same could
be applied to 40k/sg (maybe) and BFG/ft.
any thoughts on this? i know it's a bit off to try and evangelise people like
this, but i feel it's necessary.
oh, and munitions are also known as ordnance. not ordinance - that's to
do with priests. of course, i haven't seen BF Gothic, so i'm assuming you are
talking about munitions not priests; knowing pudding workshop (and what is the
origin of that term?), it could be either.
Tom
> ScottSaylo@aol.com wrote:
As regards Epic, the 6mm - no, I think they look both good and original.
> think they are unabashed price-gougers
Self-evidently true.
> and have immensely over-inflated opinions of the value of their game >
systems,and an overly belligerent
> attitude toward the products of other companies and the rights of
Agreed.
It's just hard to work
> up any enthusiasm for them in the first place. I've met some nice
You have obviously never built a huge army optimized to fight a certain way,
then organize a campaign, only to have all of it be a waste of a lot of time
and a lot of money because GW releases "New and Improved" rules that make your
army
un-workable,
split you campaign group into 3 factions: those who quit, those who
re-fuse to play
the old edition, or those who re-fuse to play the new edition. They day
GW goes bankrupt can not come too soon.
IAS
> "Mark A. Siefert" wrote:
> ScottSaylo@aol.com wrote:
I,
> being both financially desperate and a fool, sold my old Space Fleet
> At 11:37 AM 1/25/99 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote:
Well, hey, I really like the background (especially the earlier works), but am
not so hot for the games at the moment. Then again, I seem to go through
phases, though this *definitely* has to do with opponent
availability -- my interest in Heavy Gear has waned considerably since I
moved to northern NJ, where I played every so often against Alex Rhodes.
> i
<grin> The trouble is, sometimes peopel aren't so rational about this. And
besides, there are generally some mechanics within the GW games that other
games won't have -- they may be illogical, unrealistic mechanics
(especailly within Battlefleet Gothic, as a recent example see Oerjan's
response to my post) but they definitely make for a unique system. And they're
not all unbalancing, so long as they are applied across the board.
So.... <shrug>
> it's hard to persuade people to give one system up and start another
Exactly. That's probably one reason I haven't worked too much on Dirtside,
though I have a handful of ideas, and I've had an almost pathological
resistance to playing 25/28mm SF skirmish games even though I've got a
decent number of (unpainted) minis for 'em. ^_^
Actually, the other reason I haven't done so much with Dirtside has to do with
the minis I have painted; the Squat SHVs aren't likely to make really good
conversions, barring (maybe) the Colossus and Leviathan (though why you'd need
that large a troop transport...). And the Squats never had standard MBTs, and
I don't have many of my Marine tanks painted up....
> if there was a series of steps, where each one
Interesting approach, I guess it is different from the "full immersion"
technique. I'd actually aim for first playing an E40K game, then repeating the
game using DS2... it'd be interesting to see if the points balance out,
for one thing. ^_^ (Though Space Fleet conversions to Full Thrust
certainly do. How, exactly, I'm going to convert BFG to FT is still up in the
air. Another reason I'm likely to play both: they are fairly different games!)
> oh, and munitions are also known as ordnance. not ordinance - that's to
Oops. ^_^;; Though considering that you have things like city
ordinances, I don't think the word is confined to the priesthood.
> of course, i haven't seen BF Gothic, so i'm assuming you are
Nyrath?
> it could be either.
Too true.... ^_^
> On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
i'm on the case. if usenet provides an answer (i understand that this *has*
happened at some point in the distant past, but i was told the tale
by this guy in a bar who then ran off with my wallet :-), i'll let you
know.
Tom
> On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Aaron Teske wrote:
> Well, hey, I really like the background (especially the earlier
the background has some interesting features, and a lot of it is
consistent. it's just that a lot of it is really offensive to my hard-sf
wired brain (warp navigation, chaos gods, grrr).
> Then again, I seem to go
tell me about it!
> >i
> >would realise how bad gw stuff (mostly) is and be much better off.
that's true; gw games are really quite good at simulating the gw universe,
it's just that the gw universe is not very much like ours.
> And
well, gw's notorious newest-army-wins effect can be hard to deal with.
mind you, we did have a touch of that with smls; it is now known how to defeat
them, but you have to modify your tactics considerable in a way
beams and torps don't force you to. jon tuffley beware - gw is the ghost
of christmas future!
> >it's hard to persuade people to give one system up and start another
i was lucky - i played squat at first but switched to imperial guard,
whose tanks are vaguely realistic, if a bit world war i. mind you, the squat
iron eagles make pretty good vtols.
> >if there was a series of steps, where each one
hmm, good plan. a key factor is being able to reuse gw minis, as all my ds2
minis (the whole seven platoons...) are in a box in the loft, 100 miles away.
yes, playing the battle over with the different systems would be interesting.
one problem is speed; ds2 is a great game for company
group actions, but it is a little detailed for regiment-size stuff. e40k
is good at big battles ( as (a) the rules can be simpler and so less work and
(b) people will buy bigger armies).
there are two options here.
one, use some sort of TurboDS2 with rapidified firing (perhaps using some of
the ideas proposed for sg2 acceleration, eg rolling one defence die for a
whole unit, or using companies rather than platoons as basic units.
possibly replacing chit-pull with a roll.
two, play a small battle. this will put the emphasis on epic's lack of detail,
not ds2's lack of speed.
> ^_^ (Though Space Fleet conversions to Full Thrust
Tom