wminsing said:

Now this is a winning statement . Its so clear when you put it like that . Sure beats the lawn mower example. Wish I could remember the point I was trying to make with it.

I'm with Algesan.

I have the base Dust Tactics set and I like the rules system, but I don't think, at the moment, I will buy something else until I have a clear idea of the future of the background and the direction FFG is going to take.

I have bought less and less games in the last years by FFG just because I have not a clear picture of their intentions, being it one of the most inventive publishers on the market anyway. I started to collect FFG stuff when it was still a new-born company and almost unheard, and I advertised it a lot with my friends.

Today I feel is going in another direction. Anyway I do not like the obvious "germans=bad and ruthless" and "americans=good and braves" approach, is clearly outdated. A more grey shaded approach coul be better than that.

Anyway... I'm on the window.

mostrojoe said:

Really? I am pretty sure the fluff of the game tries to make the Axis less evil, and the Allies more ruthless. You want grey areas make them yourself.

And correct me if I am wrong, but didnt the Axis start the war? And who killed all those ethnic minorities (besides Uncle Joe)?

mostrojoe said:

Trying to figure out why everyone thinks FFG steers the direction of this game. You all realize this was a comic book series that contained pretty much all the weird war stuff we have seen, that Dust Games are for the most part the creative brain behind the game, and all we have seen and what we will see at least in the near future was predetermined a couple years ago when AEG originally released the first 5 or 6 release phases of the game when they were going to distribute it?

wminsing said:

This means you can make up your own little rules for your own little games and you don't care what FFG does or when you go on a trip out of town if your army is even playable at the LGS, right?

wminsing said:

Gee, we are actually in agreement if you had read anything. New units and new content? Great. So why should they bother taking the time and effort to develop plastic models of items that already exist for the World War 2 genre. All it takes is cards that would be quick and easy and they could charge relatively higher prices for. Whee! It would be over and they can go back the glacial process of releasing walkers, gorillas, zombies and rocket rangers.

As for any "delay", they could probably lift these cards straight from the website, polish them up and the set would be ready to go.

Understand the discussion: It is about having formal stats for models that already exists from model companies. It would be economical to do since despite low gross profit, it would be extremely low expense also. Then you could have **** and Soviets and Brits and Chinese and whatever fighting battles. Walkers and rocket rangers could come later as FFG took the time to finally get the models made up.

1

Dust studio is releasing lots of vehicles and units, the logic is that you build an army based on the products they release rather than historical made by other cmpanies. Also the scale of battle is not so big as to include all the options so, even less chances that regular units would ever be released by them, what for?

Posted by Aldarion

2

FFG has a policy to not post on its fourms any comments on rules, future ip, policy, etc; they're really only allowed to say "hey that looks cool," or other lawyer neutral statments. I used to get annoyed at FFG fo never commenting on the fourms, but then they told me they just arn't supposed to. So I don't worry about it these days.

Posted by MIah999

3

The point isn't to make up my own rules for my own little games that can never be used elsewhere, the idea is to keep a cohesive set of rules so that if I show up at your FLGS with my Dust minis, you and I can play a game with the same set of rules instead of having to argue over which of your made-up-rules-for-your-games and my made-up-rules-for-my-games we are going to use.

Posted by Algesan

The answer to 3 is the simplest of all . Use the Dust Tactics rule books that come with the game or are available to print out for free .

These seem to be the questions that keep coming back up so I just summarized . The focus of the Game is not massive land battles of tanks and artillery and air support . It is small deadly battles between elite forces. Flames of War seems to do a pretty good job of large tank battles.

Katman said:

I do agree to a certain extent. For tournaments and pick up games at the local game store, use the core rules as are. Official miniatures and all that jazz. But there is room to expand, and do so cheaply. Releasing a set of "standard issue" cards allows players to build there armies beyond the super soldiers and science divisions or use them as support units. And, believe it or not, my elite unit of troops are not only going to be used against elite units of troops. Think of Dust: Standard Issue as kind of like Forge World. You are free to use them if the opponent agrees in your own games, but official sanctioned tournaments will not permit their use.

And why have a Armor 1 is it is never going to be in the game?

Peacekeeper_b said:

I pity the Armor 1 soldier, when he does show up. Most weapons do an insane amount of damage against it...

Loophole Master said:

I imagine, or hope, they are dirt cheap or are at least large squads (6, 7 maybe 10 troops, for the extra health)

Granted, Armor 1 guys and extra factions and normal vehicles would have more use in a Table Top version of the game then its current incarnation. Still would be nice though.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Maybe thats what is going on. Table top rules will be for the massive tank on tank battles and the grid will be for the core game. Tank on Tank can sound so dirty if you put the right spin on it !

As well as being a cheap and easy way to expand the game system profitably for FFG.

I personally got into the game because of the look and theme of the miniatures. I have no interested in buying or supporting any kind of regular tanks or vehicles. The alternate timeline tech is where it's at imo.

zuggzugg said:

+1

zuggzugg said:

-1

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

Well, yes I can correct. The war was started by Germany and Soviet Union that invaded Lithuania, Estonia, Lettonia and Poland. Finland was submitted by Soviet Union too despite heroic resistance.

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

And who bombed Dresda?

And who burned in nuclear fire hundreds of thousands of innocent japanese civilians, women, childs, polluting generations of persons? Just to show some muscles to the Soviet Union?

Who committed the most great mass **** of the history as soon as arrived in Berlin?

Who raped hundreds of women in Italy with Patton looking the other side?

War is Hell do not go in this discourse.

The idea of having mundane soldiers aside the advanced Dust ones is very interesting.

Why include "armor 1" units if they never show up on the table. I think that FFG can put rules for mundane units in the game, it will open up the horizons of the game. And obviously FFG will not fear, as many of yours say, that it will be a economic problem.

Most of all, if I want to play Dust I am going to buy Dust. So I will just put some other mundane troops aside the Dust items that I am going to buy. Rules for using normal soldier and vehicles can be sold and again, the normal soldiers would be there just to spice up the game not to substitute the super soldiers of the background. If someone wants to play a normal WWII game will buy Flames of War not Dust. So using official rules to use normal soldiers will not in any way diminish or damaging the Dust franchise.

Well we just may be in luck haven't seen the contents but heres the new rulebook

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite_sec.asp?eidm=173&esem=1

Dust Warfare Table Top miniatures game.

I had a pretty long reply to this, but then I realized that I am dead certain that FFG is 1) not going to produce their own plastic normal WWII models and 2) they will not produce cards for models that they or Dust Studios don't produce. So not worth arguing over- it's just not going to happen.

-Will

Algesan said:

From the point of view of the game maker that can hardly be considered cheap coin. The brunt of work in introducing a new model for a game is playtesting it against the existing range of models for balance. And the profit from doing this work is when they sell the models. It would be ludicrious for FFG to do the work and let other companies take the profit. That is why this seemingly simple thing just won't happen.

There are game companies that just produce the rules and let players use models from other companies but it's evident FFg's business plan ain't like this.

Corinthian said:

So why put in the rulebook statistics about amor 1 units?

If the intention is not that of producing regular troops and vehciles, why considering it in the main rules?

mostrojoe said:

For completion a chart starting from 2 would look a bit silly You need A1 for comparrisson, completness and you never know, their might be A1 on its way.

mostrojoe said:

In all likeliness there are plans to release Armor 1 infantry and vehicles. I just think that it will be for units that they produce not any exisiting range of models. We may see some overlap (jeeps, trucks, possibly halftracks, etc.) with real world units but more than likely most units will be done with a "Dust" take on them (Volksturm, Japanese suicide commando, SSU Penal Infantry, Civil Defense Units, or something like that). From a business standpoint it makes no sense as the cards would require research, design, playtesting, production, and distrobution which would mean the cost associated wtih them would outweigh the benefits only to sell someone elses models. From a fluff standpoint many of the real world vehicles most people would want to use simply dont exisist or didnt enter production as the timeline begins to radically change in late 42/ early 43 at stalingrad (this was originally in late 44 in the old fluff which would make sense to keep more real world vehicles). On a final positive note I do see some normal vehicles being possible in the future:

You guys act like this is a real, real complicated game system . It's not.

BTW, if FFG doesn't produce the "regular" WW2 units as official cards, then you will never see them playing in the game since the real capital outlay is in the sculpting, designing & producing of the models, especially when they have to avoid possible copyright issues. Plus balance in the high cost of a short run vs the possibility that you won't sell enough of a long run. So, if FFG won't commit to making high priced cards for generic "regular" units, they darn sure won't commit to re-re-re-making 1/48 models for them. Some of you think that is wonderful, some of us don't.

Algesan said:

From a player perspective, I want regular unit information. I dont care if its on a card or if its in a PDF that cost $10 and I have to write the info down on a index card when I use them.

FFG loses nothing but the little bit if time it takes to have some of their interns run around do a little play testing and write up a PDFn like when they redid edge of darkness for Dark Heresy from a word codument to a full layout PDF that felt like a real book.

From a retailer perspective I also want FFG to release the same product. I will still sell lots of Dust Stuff to the Dust crowd, but they will also pick up some of 1/48 models to add to their games.

From a FFG perspective, players play Dust for Dust. They will still field lots of core Dust figures and Dust Tournaments are still for Dust figs only as the tournaments represent key struggles and battles of major importance. And it is fairly simple to go to a WWII model making company and go "you put on your product "Dust Compatible" and we link to each other sites. No one spends anything extra, but both gets extra advertisement."