Yes, 40k is very absurd at times. It isn't immune to criticism.

But let's wait and see. I'm ok with them working on the rules, but they need to let us know now if they've done so.

Gimp said:

Thinking about the works of Chambers I cannot see this come true. Warhammer 40,000 second edition is a great game, Starship Troopers (now dead but living in Battlefield Evolution) is the best game I played so I know that DT will be a great game too.

Yes, Andy always does best in games which involve totalitarian communist(ish) factions. Go figure....

alien said:

I think you mean Dust Warfare will be a great game.

You know, your glowing report of Andy Chambers record of game designs isn't necessarily so wonderful. Besides 40k (general rulebook + separate army books required to play), Starship Troopers (miniatures) also ended up in that GW style hole of requiring multiple book purchases to field armies and it is on the scrapheap. It doesn't matter how good the game system is, the only reason GW gets away with it is because GW achieved a relatively massive market penetration back in the days when White Dwarf published how to scratch build stuff and paperhammer was perfectly viable on the tabletop. You know, back in the day when lots of gamers got WD because GW had some nice products and excellent articles in WD.

yes, I mean dust warfare, sorry for the typo

Beside this in my opinion the game system is a great part of the game.

Army books/sourcebooks are from my personal point of view very usefull to add background to the factions.

The thing to remember is that Any Chambers designed the core games, but very probably did not fill in all of the details, nor did he necessarily design the games to require the obnoxious purchase of every book to keep up with all of the additional rules.

I liked Starship Troopers, so I'm willing to go with a reactive mechanic instead of alternating activations for Warfare because I can understand how that could speed play.

I don't blame Mr Chambers for the ridiculous additions to Starship Troopers, nor do I know if he was at fault for any of the rules SNAFU's that caused issues at the start, because I know game design is normally a team process, and others would be handling peripheral ideas so he could concentrate on core mechanics. He was lead designer, but probably not rules editor nor in total control.

I would expect things to be the same with Warfare, with Mr Chambers creating a core rule set, and someone else adding to it to finish the product. That would be where problems were most likely to occur, because it adds another cook to the kitchen that may not really have a clue about what Mr Chambers was working to create.

A 40K fanboy could take an excellent product and turn it into a 40K clone that wasn't worth playing. That is my greatest fear for Warfare, that it goes to hackneyed mechanics borrowed from 40K to add 'polish' to the core game, and turns Warfare into a travesty instead of a glorious tapestry.

There is a lot from Tactics that can be polished to create a solid mechanic for Warfare that is quite playable, yet unique instead of a clone of 40K. Time will tell, and hopefully it will tell a good tale.

I only wish they will support it, looking at what's happening with expansions, they are going wrong direction, I hope they will release heros that came with all expansions separately as well as buildings, and some terrain. I am not willing to buy an expansion that adds useless tiles and 3d cover's that I allready have pleanty, just to get 2 heroes... They were supposed to separate those two things, why won't they release expansions just like terrain tiles now with rulebook and new tiles???

....Terrain tiles? What is he talking about? 3D terrain?

Are we talking about Dust Warfare here or Tactics?

Sorry if I wrote it in confusing way, english is not my native.

Let me explain, you get 2 heroes in every campaign expansion for DT, as well as some 3d cover (crates and tank traps) and tiles. Now those heroes at the moment cant be obtained in other way than buying those expansions. There is Rosie and Manfred in Cyclone, Ozz 117 and Markus in Seelowe, and Angela and Chief in upcomming Cerberus, there are rummors that Cerberus will come with 3d buildings as well but don't know if its true (seen it at beast of war).

What you get in heroes (miniatures only) expansions is : Action Jackson, The Priest, Johnny One-eye for allies, and Granadier X, TotenMeister, and Stefan for Axis.

I just hope all miniatures be released as an separate miniatures only expansion because its crazy if I would have to buy expansions full of stuff (tiles, and cover) I don't need just to get miniatures, also if there are plans to release 3d buildings in cerberus why not selling buildings alone as well?

My point is ... why arent they selling campaign expansions just like they've released terrain tiles expansion, just a book and tiles? If they are serious about serving both miniature gamers and board gamers, why forcing the first ones to buy stuff they won't need just to get miniatures?

I also hope they will release 3-d terrain in a box, like walls, and buildings, could be used in both games, and in other miniature games as well, so should sell well.

Ah, so you're saying they shouldn't force DW players to buy DT-only stuff alongside the miniatures. Well that's a definite in my book as well, good for pointing that out. Better to bundle those with the scenario books only. Or alternatively at least release the miniatures independently alongside the DT bundles (Again, if they're serious about DW).

They do have two "hero packs" on the way, though I believe they are mostly the game nights figs. But it's a sign that they are making at least some heroes available individually. I would guess more of those may be in the works, especially since Joe and Sigrid are now out of print.

Official Dust Warfare page now says 1st Quarter 2012. Well, that's an update anyway!

BlackKnight1917 said:

Next Week then

Yes please! Let's go!

At least that's something, though I'll have to take your word as I can't find it. I guess they decided not to let us know what's going on besides that, though.

Sami K said:

It's an official announcement, on the official site. There is no requirement for them to explain anything to us.

I'd rather they go with that then post here, and then either have to waste development time answering all of the 'why. oh why?' responses, or getting people upset because they posted and went back to work on Warfare instead of hanging around for the complaints.

It's been pushed back, and they've told us so. Now we can wait to see what they give us, just as we've been doing since it was originally announced. They are certainly not the first nor the only company that had to push back the release on a product.

I meant that you have to go to the "upcoming products" page to find that it's been changed there, the "official Dust Warfare page" says nothing. There's no "announcement". But luckily we have people here spotting the change for us.

I totally agree that the few who moan about missed release date estimates need to be ignored, it happens.

I prefer it spend more time in development if it needs it.

Gimp, I don't agree. It would have been trivial for someone from FFG to come here, pin a topic about the change in street date and lock the thread. Polite to us, minimal time outlay for FFG.

Probably a pre-release at GenCon 2012.

Algesan said:

They could, but they did place the information out for both forum and non-forum uses to have available, and then perhaps went back to work on a behind schedule product and Holiday shipping and production issues in the hope of being able to get enough done to have a less stress filled Holiday.

A forum message would have been nice for forum users. I simply don't see reason to villify them at one of the busiest times of year for taking a simpler approach that put the same information out to everyone in one place with one action.

There are enough forum users that prowl the rest of the site for information that it wouldn't (and in fact, didn't) take long for the rest of the forum to get a direct quote of the update on the forum, as well.

FFG's forum presence is not as good as some games I've dealt with, but still far better than many others. Nobody should ever push for perfection from anyone but themselves.

There were changes that needed to be made after the outside playtest is all. Sometimes, that changes layout options and all kinds of other issues. I am sure it will not be too much longer, but again, rather have a stellar product later than a bad one sooner.

This is good, I can hugely appreciate a company that chooses not to launch a product during Christmas (and later on sell a revised edition fixing the problems) in favour of making changes based on playtesting and feedback.

Gimp said:

FFG misses alot of deadlines and release dates that they themselves set.

I really think that they do the right thing by taking their time- especially when you are working out things like play balance. I have to admit that this is the only gaming related thing I am really excited about in 2012!

Peacekeeper_b said:

Yea, it happens. And I'm definitely in the "make it balanced and playable even if it takes longer" camp. Hate to use a video game for reference, but remember Fallout New Vegas?