Wow... Lara, the Axis hero for the upcoming Revised Core set, is a BEAST:

You can very well exchange a whole squad for her and not feel a difference! With Health 4 and Damage Resilience, she should last longer than a normal squad. With two MG 44 zwei that do 5/1 against normal infantry each, she's deadlier than your average squad. A little burst of Assault is just icing in the cake.

Oh, and nice figure.

Yup, the decline of the game seems to be coming. I hate it when special characters just get more and more stats and bigger guns. She can fire every weapon she has in one round. So she is lobbing around 10 dice. By herself. And the allies will get something to compete and it will escalate until everyone has glitterboy armour!

Course, I may just be panicking!

You might be panicking, but she does seem quite overpowered.

And I noticed there's a rules mistake in the last paragraph of that hero article:

"For example, the Axis hero Lara could join with the Heavy Laser Grenadiers to help them rush safely past Allied walkers into an occupied building. If they remain joined inside the building, Lara continues to add her health points and firepower to the squad, but if she splits from the Heavy Laser Grenadiers, both units gain the benefits of both cover and their Damage Resilient armor."

A hero on her own wouldn't get the benefit of cover, even inside a building. Hero's don't hide!

Peacekeeper_b said:

Glitterboy...that brings back memories!

Yup, powercreep's a #@$%!

Still looking forward to zombies...many...that's enough for me for now.

She does seem overpowered, but I hope they balance it out somehow. The dual MG is pretty nasty.

She does seem a bit undercosted. love her model.

Peacekeeper_b said:

How is this an indicator of the DECLINE OF THE GAME? Really, you have had plenty of other indicators of its decline. I would have thought total lack of support for many people would have been the first sign. I for one always like to see new figures come out, regardless of how overpowered they seem to be. At least FFG hasn't decided to make the boxes collectibles with a random mini in every box. HOWEVER, that would be sort of cool. Maybe I could get my Panzer Killer officer this way.

FYI When I spoke to FFG customer support today, they told me they had issues with Parentes people putting out things which did not seem to work, like the Panzer Killer box, and FFG is given a FAQ list from Parentes people warning them of possible complaints they will run across, this Panzer Killer issue being one of them.

I also contacted the Dust people to see how to get the figure or just a few different heads, and was informed they do not sell them.

NOW, I do not like GW, but whenever I had a product issue, they jumped on it and fixed it for me. So if FFG wants to go in the direction of GW, lets hope they go in the BETTER CUSTOMER SUPPORT direction. GW does a great job with that.

Lara certainly looks like an early case of stat creep to me, don't know why they need to do this its not like anybody is not goint to buy the set anyway as its all original stuff. The points don't seem to bad though, maybe a bit low as she would probably be my first choice hero every game. Do we know what her squad is like yet?

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

Decline of the Game. As in playability and fun. If it becomes a game where everyone just starts fielding the next biggest baddest thing and suddenly stnadard rangers and grenadiers are only used by "newbs" then the enters into a GAME DECLINE, as in quality of the game.

By January I could logically field a 300 point force of Heavy Grenadiers, Lara Walter, 3 or so Walkers, Gorrillas, Zombies and a Tank Killing Squad. Taking the field from a slightly sci-fi advanced WWII feel to pure Sci-Fi. Who will I be fighting? 300 points of OZZ 117 and the Buzz Lightyear Brigade (Red Devils, Tank Busters and Grim Reapers Oh My).

The game not having support or releases or anyone playing it is GAME DEATH, not Decline. Decline just refers to the quality of the game. This September we get an Axis character that is Infantry Armour 3, has two 5/1 attacks against normal Infantry Armour 2 folk (meaning, with sustatined fire she had a decent chance of killing 1 squad a turn) who has special skills to make her more of a killer. And she is only 21 points.

So I assume the allied hero in the box will be on par.

Base set: Joe and his grenade launcher, Sigrid and her laser pistol.

Cyclone: Rosie and her bazooka of instant walker kill and tank repair skills, Manfred and his 5 wounds and unlimited panzerfaust

Seelowe: OZZ Lightyear and Gorilla Grodd! (errr OZZ 117 and Marcus)

Revised Core: Lara Walter and ???

That is why the game is released in waves, so you go OOOOOH COOOOL and buy the next thing. But 2-3 months later a even cooler squad comes out.

GW can sell lots of minis cause the game has inherit requirements in it, for example in 40K, you have to have at least 2 troop choices in your army and 1 HQ choice. So matter how boring a normal squad of Imperial Guard troopers are, you have to have two choices of them (or two choices of Veterans who are now also troops, but to kit them out you have ot buy several sets to get all the special guns you need).

So if you decide to go normal platoon you have to have a minimum of 2 squads ($25 each) and a HQ ($25) and then you dont have any heavy weapons in that platoon ($18, each) when you can field up to 3. And you only have acces to flamers and grenade launchers in your core troop boxsets, but if you want a melta gun or plasma gun you have to buy yet more.

You can make a vet squad with 1 box of guardsmen, but to kit them out in their special guns and gear you need to buy a HQ set, so its cheaper but barely. And you still dont get a heavy weapon.

So if you would break Dust down into the 40K style of army builds, you would need 1 HQ (Command Squad) and at least 2 troops (Recon grenadiers/rangers and so forth) before you could get into the elites (red devils, heavy grenadiers) or fast (honey, special troops that have higher movement or the fast or agile ability?) or heavy (tank killers, walkers and so forth).

I for one would welcome army books for dust, set up with all the squad stats (not necessarily cards), fluff, examples, strategy and so forth.

But they would probably sell that as a expansion box with two ammo crates, 2 tank traps, a axis hero, a ally hero, a operation (scenario) book and then the army book LOL.

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

I wish Parente would just go away. He is like George Lucas. Thanks Paolo we got the idea and we are running for it. Please stop f'ing it up!

The Lara Model is great (You can't beat the style)- yep fine example of power creep. This was going to happen - lets face it how many different balanced units can you make for a game with rules this simple. My concern is cost. She is a hero, but if we start to see power creep in units and they cost the same then the game becomes power play and thats no fun. Who ever can affford multiples of the latest power unit wins (pure power play). It sells models, but destroys the game ultimately (it along with other things totally killled at-43 - which unless you house rule is basically unplayable). The zombie card is another good example of power creep. They are basically the monkey's just much better for your points. (thats right folks 20 Dice against infanty type 2 and 10 against tanks type 4) Dont get me wrong I love them and they help balance out the game as a single supporting unit (how we play is 1 unit of each type allowed) as the germans are the under dogs at the mo stats wise (They are also a terriffying unit that the allied play has to stop at all costs - they will be great fun in sealowe). But if you got lots and lots of these - well it kinda unbalances the game. I agree with Peace maker - some sort of army structure system is required. One that allows different army build list for different campaigns and avoid the game becoming all about power play. Oh - and whats a panzer killer that so upsetting. What Parente done? I'm confused?

Peace maker - I meant peacekeeper.

And cost means cost in points. If lara was 35 points - it would be a difficult decision. But at 20 you will always take her.

Indeed. They CAN make more powerful units, they just need to keep the costs consistent. At 21 points, Lara is certainly a bargain. You don't even have to pair her with any squad, she's powerful enough on her own.

Compare her to the Heavy Flak Grenadiers from the same set. They cost 25pts, and yet I think Lara is a much better deal. Let's compare:

Flak - Armor 3, Health 3, Damage Resilient, Range 4, 9/1 against infantry 2, 9/1 against tank 2, burst weapon that needs to reload.

Lara- Armor 3, Health 4, Damage Resilient, Range 4, 10/1 against infantry 2, 6/1 against tank 2, assault.

And remember that, like a vehicle, the Hero has the advantage of retaining the same amount of attack dice even if it loses health points.

Hehe, given the grim discussion going on here, it's ironic that the article that started it is entitled "One Hero Can Make a Difference" .

I don't understand the hostility towards Paolo. It seems rather ungracious to demand he not be involved in his own creation. As far as Power Creep goes, I think it is a might bit early to worry about the sky falling. I can see Lara being too good a bargain, but I will reserve final judgement until I've played with her a bit (hubba hubba).

I kinda like the idea of a hero almost being a squad unto themselves. They are a hero after all.

Hanomag said:

Well its simple really. I have no real hostility to the guy imself, but he is a fine **** and great artist. He is a lousy writer and has little to no knowledge of game design or balance issues. If you just let him continue to add more and more to the game/setting then you run the risk of losing the focus of what made the setting interesting.

Hanomag said:

Its never too early to prepare for the falling sky. And if you see it early enough, and you talk about it enough, it may lead to the point where the sky is fixed so it doesnt fall or it is delayed. We do not know what will be in the Revised Core rules. Maybe there will be army lists/structure rules (limited 2 heroes and so forth) we dont know. But when I see a new unit (Zombie or Lara or what not) that can obliterate most other units (well, she is useless against real walkers) it kind of detracts from the game.

Hanomag said:

I agree heroes should be heroic. Not dominating. Give them the ability to use cover, give them the ability to pilot walkers, give the unit they join a benefit other then just the extra health (like say, improved reactive fire) but dont make them 20 dice monstrosities.

Winter79 said:

Sure, 20 against Infantry type 2, but each time they take a loss it is reduced by 4. Currently there is no hero to join them and they are a major target. Damage resilient is nice, but these guys are far from instant win. If Totenmeister is ever made public, then we may have bigger issues. I say a simple rule of 1 zombie squad unless you have a character with the Blutkeuz zombie trait in your army, in which case you can have an extra squad of zombies per character with the trait.

Same with Blutkreuz apes.

There will need to be some sort of limit to some units, otherwise the basic set figures I am painting will be useless.

I still do not see this as the end of the game. I think the end came when the FFG failed to attempt to grow a fan base.

The Zombies will be nasty. Do they have a possibility of turning on the player who played them?

Has anyone set up a separate site for a dedicated fan base to create better rules and so forth? I would definitely be interested in a site where solutions can me discovered as opposed to an orgnanized minging festival.

All I can say is . . . Sigrid for 20 or Lara for 21? No Brainer

Yes, I'm hoping this game doesn't expand faster than it should. I'm just now getting into it. Having bought 2 base boxes and the command troops. I'm prepping for paint and getting ready to dig in! If this game blows up out of hand I might just be content w/ what is available and be good w/ it. I do love me some zombies tho. I'm hoping for the best. I'm already scared enough thinking about more factions to come, with more and more units.... T_T.

CombatRanger said:

Sigrid is still comparable in a lot of cases. Lara probably should have been about 28-30 though

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

I don't see why, all units have theri strengths and weaknesses and are costed to suit. Even when we play with the original point system my first choice on infantry are my Recon Grenadiers and are even better value with the new system.

Major Mishap said:

Really, Sigrid 20 Lara 21? I dont think that represents "costed to suit" their respective strengths and weaknesses. Sure, Sigrid has berserk and laser weapon. Technically SIGRID COULD KILL Lara in one shot, but that is about a 1 in 81 chance. Lara on the other hand casts 10 dice to kill Sigrid giving here roughly a 33% chance of killing Sigrid in one round. Sustaned fire and berserk of course alter these chances some.

I just think Lara should be at least 30 points maybe 33.

Loophole Master said:

Wow, they've corrected the article! Now it reads:

"...but if she splits from the Heavy Laser Grenadiers, both units gain the benefits of their Damage Resilient armor while the Heavy Laser Grenadiers also benefit from cover ."

Could it be that they are actually reading the forum?!