Spartan Games Neuigkeiten

Neueste Inhalte Folgen Zitieren
Status
Für weitere Antworten geschlossen.
#82
Da es noch niemand hier gepostet hat, es gibt inzwischen Bilder der 4 Starter Armeeboxen und der Träger die es seperat in Blistern zum Vorbestellen gibt.


prussian_empire_battle_group_740.jpg


FSA_battle_group.jpg


EBS_battle_group.jpg


britannia_battle_group.jpg


Und als kleine Info von jemanden der bereits in das Regelbuch schauen konnte:
In the book I see: (and hopefully these are all accurate)

Brittania: 10 naval, 7 land, 4 air
Prussian: 9 naval, 8 land, 4 air
America: 10 naval, 8 land, 3 air
Japanese:10 naval, 7 land, 4 air

This does not count the small aeroplanes, of which there are 4 types per faction, nor does it count variations of the same model.
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

Bis auf die Amerikaner gefallen mir die Minis sehr gut.
 
#84
Naja, gibt schon einiges was im offiziellen Forum gepostet wurde, oder geht es dir um etwas spezielles?

EDIT:
Vielleicht noch sehr interessant. Es wurde kürzlich gefragt ob die Regeln ins deutsche übersetzt werden sollen, die Antwort auf die Frage war folgende.

Right now we are looking at language options for translating our core rulebooks. But we have made no decisions about which languages or when this will happen. So the answer right now is no.
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....
Ich würde also sagen, früher oder später werden die Regeln auch in deutsch kommen, wohl für alle Systeme, aber eher später und nicht in nächster/absehbarer Zeit.

EDIT 2:
Hier mal die Preorder von Wayland:
http://www.waylandgames.co.uk/spartan-games/dystopian-wars/cat_779.html
 
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
#87
Wow, das ist ja komplett an mir vorbeigegangen...

Schaut ja echt schick aus. Und das Setting liegt mir schon mehr als die Fantasy-Seeschlachten der Uncharted Seas. Ich denke wir können wohl davon ausgehen, dass das ganze dem bekannten Spartan-Ruleset entspricht und sich nur in den Feinheiten von Firestorm oder Uncharted unterscheiden wird.

Ich werde mir wohl mal ein Regelbuch und zwei Starterflotten besorgen und schauen, ob ich meine Spielergruppe in Versuchung führen kann. Fürs erste werde ich mit wohl die Starterflotten von Preußen und Briten besorgen, da mit die beiden Flottem am ehsten zusagen. Die Amis finde ich nicht so hübsch mit den tiefergelegten Schaufelradschiffen und die Japaner sehen mir etwas zu sehr wie "gewasserte" Sorylians aus - und deren Träger ist der hässlichste der 4 Stück - da finde ich den Zeppelin-Carrier mit Teslaspulen-Nase am geilsten...
 
#88
Folgende Infos aus dem offiziellen Forum sind zwar schon etwas älter, dürften für Dystopian Wars Interessierte aber trotzdem interessant sein.

1) I've read that you can do air vs air, sea vs sea, etc or mix. So can you have three players on one side each controlling each type at once so its a 3 vs 3 game?
Sure, if that's what you fancy doing.
2) Is there the potential as well to use this as a sort of "Mighty Empires" game whereby you can use the world map to identify which areas you control and then build these areas up to provide resources/bonuses to build bigger armies? Thus turning it into an epic campaign game as well as a simple single conflict game.
Not in the initial rule book. We're looking at a bigger campaign system.
3) Is it all about machines and vehicles or will there be infantry and such? Or will these elements be handled by game mechanics rather than miniatures?
The idea of infantry at this scale is an interesting one. At this scale minis would be almost invisible so they are viewed as a mechanic. But that doesn’t mean we will not look to embrace infantry in a greater way. I talked a few days ago about the idea of a PDF download with more infantry-based rules. But I don’t have much more to give you than that right now.
4) I also read that the first releases will be naval. Does this mean that land-based armies will not be available for some time yet?
You’ll get that answer over the next two weeks.
5) Will there be different rules for different sorts of weaponry or will it use the same mechanic as FSA whereby all different weapons are basically just AD.... whether its lasers, ballistic, etc.... ?
The mechanic is AD, but how those AD impact models depends on what generates them, be it Ballistic, Tesla weapons, Generators, Ack Ack, Concussion Charges, Torpedoes, Rockets, Boarding Parties and so on.
6) How many models is it anticipated that a player will need for an effective army? Is this a game whereby LOADS of mini's are required?
You can play a game with a Battle Group (which is 15 models plus fighter tokens) or you could put a lot more on the table. Your call....
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....
 
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
#90
@Iceeagle85: Hast du dir das ampibische Landschiff der FSA angeschaut? vielleicht sagt dir das mehr zu.

FSA_samples_2.jpg


Zum FSA Träger, ich glaube da gibt ein ein Missverständnis, es sieht ja so aus das die FSA einen fliegenden und einen schwimmenden Träger hätte, das stimmt aber so nicht, die beide Teile gehören eigentlich zusammen, laut Neil wurde das zweite Flugdeck nicht auf den Träger gesetzt, um zu zeigen wie das untere Flugdeck aussieht. Die Konzeptzeichnung des Trägers sieht eigentlich so aus:
FSA_samples.jpg
 
#92
Auf tabletopforum.de hat der User Oberst Montan in der letzten Zeit einige Infos über Dystopian Wars zusammen getragen. Das dürfte doch den einen oder anderen interessieren:

Erstmal ein wenig was zum Gelände bzw. Geländeaufbau:

„Yes, range bands are still 8" each.
How big an island/landmass depends on the type and amount of land forces. In general, land models can turn tighter than comparable sized sea models, turn in place while stopped, can probably go in reverse if necessary, and have a 0" minimum movement. So, they can maneuver in a much tighter space than an equal sized naval vessel. Most of them are more compact as well, rather than stretched out in length, so that also helps.
At a minimum, even a very small island could suffice for placing a few bombards but you'd want something bigger if you plan on doing tank battles. I think half & half style boards will work out nicely. These don't have to be strictly halves though, I think more of a cove shape could be very nice because it doesn't impact your naval space much but it gives the land guys some ability to circle around to different angles.
There are also some ... hrm... WAYS to get land models into certain positions even if there is not a continuous land bridge extending there. One method is that certain models have an advance deployment ability that lets you place them upfield where you expect to need them. Another is that you can ***CLASSIFIED*** and ***CLASSIFIED*** through a **CLASSIFIED*** right where you want them to go but there are certain ***CLASSIFIED*** you need to take into account with this option.”

“Some of the board setups that I think may be common for mixed games:
1. Half & Half: Doesn't have to be exactly 50% on each side, but this is the simplest way to set up a land/sea board and should be pretty effective. You can ALSO run this with strips of land along both edges of the board and the water in the middle.
2. Half & Half w/ Fingers: Same thing, but with narrow bits of land jutting out at the rear of the deployment zones. Works with either sort of H&H.
3. Central Island: A large island (maybe like 2'x2') in the middle splits naval action into two theaters while allowing interaction between the land force with both of them
4. Split Central: Two central islands, with a channel between them that smaller ships may be able to maneuver in but not so good for bigger ships
5. Split Central w/ Bridges: Same thing, but bridges so that land models can cross over. One possible rule is that only Medium and smaller (or diving) naval models may pass under bridges.
6. Bridge Networks: Smaller islands (say 8-12" diameter"), but with bridges connecting small sets of them together to allow land models to travel around. Be sure to leave enough space between networks for the bigger ships to get around.
If you want to build terrain I think the most versatile things you can build for the least effort are (assuming a typical 4x6 table):
Two strips of 12"x48" land with at least one straight side. You can put these together or apart
A roughly 2 foot round/oval island, then cut it in half. You can use it as one big island, two with a man-made channel, or to enhance your board edges.”

“It depends on your terrain setup I think. With just a box, you can do an water board like you'd have for Uncharted Seas with all water and some islands and that should do fine on a 4x4. The ranges are similar to US.

Besides, there's no reason to have large amounts of land in an air/sea battle.

If you had land involved as well, say a box plus some tanks or whatever, then I think you'd benefit from a 4x6. You could probably get away with 4x4 doing a naval box plus some artillery/shore batteries since they don't really need to move much.”
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

Nachtrag aus einem anderen Thread, der sich mit derselben Frage beschäftigt:

„An interesting one to formulate what a gaming table will look like. By embracing land, air and sea the idea is to give flexibility to a player, but that doesn't mean we're trying to tell you to game all three at the same time, even though this is great fun.
For most players they will gravitate to something like a naval board with aerial units, or a land board with aerial units. Few simple ideas for a combined arms board:
1) Island Invasion - Naval and Aerial assault on a heavily fortified island - possible use of amphibious vehicles. Defenders on the island with tanks, some naval support and air cover.
2) Table with a wide river estuary at one end, wide piece of land to one side. Coastal defences in place. Attackers coming from one end of the gaming table, but behind the coastal defences a tank battle is also taking place. Would work well with an L-Shaped table.
3) We're starting a table sometime in December (Christmas festivities permiting!) that is basically Sword Beach from the D-Day Landings. Good old fashioned beach landing and break out style game.”
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....
Diese Infos kann man auch in folgenden Originalthread nachlesen:
http://forum.spartangames.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3918.0

Hier in paar Infos zu den Schwerpunkten der ersten 4 Flotten:
“Britannia:
Favors torpedoes and willing to pay for good repair crews. A bit slow, but not bad. Prefers turreted weapons and shield generators.
Prussia:
Enjoys Tesla weapons, and packs extra assault crew. Above average speed, prefers one big gun over multiple medium ones.
America:
Tend to carry sharpshooter squads, and have some extra armor against minor damage. Some ships also feature rocket batteries.
Japan:
Combines solid speed with better critical armor. They like Rockets, especially incendiary ones.“

„Torpedoes are best up close like most weapons (perhaps they can only fight the water resistance so long before running out of fuel?). Rockets on the other hand do well from a distance and may not be able to target extremely close enemies.
It's actually hard to draw too many general conclusions because there are often exceptions. But, it gets quite awkward to keep saying things like "Theses guys are average speed except their Cruisers are faster for some reason and their Frigates are on the slower end" or "This faction favors broadsides but their Destroyer and Corvette both feature exclusively front firing weapons.
So, you try to extract some very general points as best you can. I hope the information is helpful, but don't try to read too much into it.
For one thing, turrets are FAR more common on DW ships than either Firestorm or Uncharted, so having them doesn't really make you unique. Some factions may use two big turrets while another uses four smaller ones for a similar class, but they're fairly common throughout.
Other factions can pack Shield generators too, they just may feature more range of choices. Britannia seems like whenever they have a generator option one of them is likely to be Shield, where other factions may be able to take Shield on one ship but another one has a choice of Speed or Jamming for instance.
Anyway, whoever you pick there will be some leeway to choose the models that fit how YOU want to play that faction.
Edit: Repair crews in this instance is referring to them being better than average at fixing critical effects, not hull damage, which still typically requires a card to achieve.”

“To expand on part of this a little. Three out of four factions may have some route to additional toughness.

FSA has above average DR ratings
EBS has above average CR ratings
KoB has more potential to mount Shield Generators (although they may not choose to take that option)

Prussians have none of these, but tend to feature slightly more offense to make up for it.

Something else I'd like to mention is that unlike the current Wings in Firestorm, there are factional differences in the Fighters and other tiny aeroplane types in DW which is quite exciting to me! So, you may be more likely to face Dive Bombers against a Britannian opponent, while a Blazing Sun opponent will generally favor Torpedo Bombers or Fighters instead. You'll get to read more about whose planes have what sort of perks when the book arrives.”

“All factions have access to a similar set of small aeroplanes consisting of:

Fighters
Dive Bombers
Torpedo Bombers
Recon Planes

However, each faction has their own individual set of perks to differentiate their small planes.
Tesla weapons are fairly short ranged, and the bigger ones can kill enemy crew in addition to hull damage. Just remember that these are secondary weapons in addition to the main turrets or broadsides, not the only thing Prussians have!”
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....
Zum Abschluss wieder der entsprechende Thread:
http://forum.spartangames.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3953.0


Ergänzed zur Liste, die Desaster im ersten Post gepostet hat, wurde diese heute im Forum etwas spezifiert:

"Frigate
Cruiser
Gunship
Corvette
Battleship
Dreadnought
Escort
Fleet Carrier
Sky Carrier
Aerial Model (Airship or like)
Small Tank
Medium Tank
Land Ship
Bombard
Special (Robot or Mechanical Squid or Submarine)
Airfields
Mobile Airfields
Bunkers
Coastal Defences
Flak Towers
Tesla Towers

I’m sure I missed stuff, but the web site updates we have coming will pick up what I missed out."
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

"Instead of trying to formulate a set of vanilla rules for Specials/Named models we took the decision to handle them on a model by model basis. Our logic was that we could try to make sure that something super-cool wouldn't break things. So with each model will be its rules in its blister.

An example is the Prussian Dreadnought, the Emperor Otto. It is different to the standard Prussian Dreadnought, so it has rule tweaks to give it flavour, but at the same time not break things."

"1) We've got a Dreadnought Class

2) But some Named models are also Dreadnoughts. They're not the same model, they are different (could be weapons, superstructure or both) and they will have rules that also make them differ to a standard Dreadnought. So the Emperor Otto is a Dreadnought but the model differs from a normal Prussian Dreadnought.

3) Other named models could be Airships, Submarines, Battleships, Land Ships and so on."

On top of this we'll also be creating/releasing background and rules for what we call 'Units of Valour'. The idea being that they are something you can use to add flavour and character.

"A simple example being a Unit of Medium Tanks (or Land Ships, or Airships etc.) that do not make Bravery Tests. They are veteran and experienced in many a campaign, so the idea of running away before the enemy is simply not done old boy. They'd be a bit more expensive points wise and could be something that appears as part of a Campaign or Scenario setting. or just something you factor into your force."
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....


Ansonsten lohnt es sich noch einmal auf die Homepage von Spartan zu schauen, dort gibt es seit geraumer Zeit neue Hintergrund Infos, unter anderem auch zum Covenant of Antarctica, welches unter anderem im zweiten Buch als eine der neuen/zusätzlichen Fraktionen ins Spiel eingeführt wird.

http://www.spartangames.co.uk/dystopian_wars.html
 
#93
Hmm, das hört sich ja alles nicht schlecht an. Mal kurz in Deutsch zusammengefasst, was die 4 Startfraktionen so können:

Briten:
Die defensivstärkste Fraktion, vor allem dank Schildgeneratoren. Langsamer als die anderen, dafür aber dank vielen Geschütztürmen auch größere Feuerbereiche. Haben mit Torpedos aber auch eine "Nahkampfbewaffnung".

Preußen:
Die "Boarding"-Fraktion: schnell und die höchsten Werte für Entertruppen. Haben weniger Kanonen als andere, diese aind aber stärker. Besonderheit: Teslawaffen (mit kurzer Reichweite) - haben die Chance auch Crew zu töten.

Amerikaner:
Stabiler gegenüber Einzelfeuer dank besserer Grundschadensresitenzen - zwingt den Gegner, Feuerkraft für Verbundschüsse zu opfern. Scheinen dank der Sonderregel "Scharfschützentrupps" und Raketenbatterien die "Reichweitenfraktion" zu sein.

Japaner:
Zweitschnellste Fraktion. Setzen auf Raketen, die Feuerschaden verursachen. Bessere Resistenzwerte gegenüber kritischen Treffern. Haben die Option auf Schildgeneratoren. Modelle erwecken den Anschein, dass dies die Fraktion mit den stärksten Breitseiten sein könnte.
 
#94
So einen Monat und nen Haufen bemalter Bilder später:

Ich bin bisher doch ziemlich begeistert. Wenn ich vom lokalen Ladenbesitzer, wo viel US (aber eher wenige FA) gespielt wird, das Feedback kriege, dass die Resonanz für DW da ist, oder es in ertragbarer Nähe nen potentiellen Spielerkreis gibt, dann bin ich dabei.

Volk kommt zur Zeit nur noch Preussen in Frage. Auch wenn ich bei Strategiespielen (Hearts of Iron, etc) immer gerne Japan genommen habe, so kann ich mich für diese schwimmenden Lokomotiven nicht begeistern. Ich glaub ich hab bei sowas zu sehr immer die Musashi und Yamato vor Auge, als das ich mich mit dem Design anfreunden könnte.

Die amis gefallen mir mit den Schaufelraddampfern gar nicht, die Briten sind okay. Bei den Preussen rockt der Zeppelin einfach alles weg optisch. :lol:

EDIT: Lego for the win!
 
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
#98
Es gab heute eine ganze Menge anneuen Bildern von den Bodeneinheiten auf der Spartan Games Seite. Hier also mal:

Preußische Panzertruppe
prussian_ground_vehicles.jpg


Das britische Pendant:

britannian_battlegroup_morocco.jpg


Detailansicht der Preußischen Landschiffe

prussian_landship_close_in.jpg


Japanische mittelschwere Panzer:

blazing_sun_medium_tanks.jpg



Meine Meinung dazu:

Die kleinen Panzer der Preußen gefallen mir leider so gar nicht. So gut mir die Schiffe gefallen, so schlecht sehen die Panzer aus. Einzig das Landschiff weis zu überzeugen.

Die Briten sehen mit ihrem WW I Stil da deutlich hübscher aus. Auch ist ihr Landschiff durch die HQ-Option deutlich schicker als der preußische "Sturmpanzer".

Die Japaner sehen ok aus - mal was anderes aber nicht so abgedreht wie die deutschen Panzer mit ihrem "Schiffsdesign"....
 
#99
Ich finde die preussischen Panzer super, es ist eben eine weiterentwicklung des A7V also passt es auch sehr gut von der Form.

Aber was ich nicht verstehe, jetzt gibt es ja Panzer und Schiffe, sind es dann zwei verschiedene Spiele oder ergänzt sich das? Sprich man spielt beides in einer Armee oder nur Panzer oder nur Schiffe?
Wird es zu den Panzern auch Fusstruppen geben?
 
Status
Für weitere Antworten geschlossen.
Oben Unten
Neueste Inhalte Folgen Zitieren
Neueste Inhalte Folgen Zitieren
Menü