CSMason26 said:

Oh please tell me that was a tongue in cheek comment, because otherwise you completely get the quote of the day with that one.

blkdymnd said:

CSMason26 said:

Ok, thank you, I was so afraid you thought 40k would really solve their issues for a second there

blkdymnd said:

The pricing is something I like about Dust Warfare. The miniatures are inexpensive compared to other miniature lines, which means I can collect 2 factions and don't have to worry about having other dedicated Dust Warfare players out there to play against - I can just invite friends to my home who don't even have the game and play with them.

Hee, hee. Sorry, the momentary comparison of the "don't compare games; it's not nice" idea just struck me as very similar to the Victorian "don't say anything that might be related to sex; it's not nice." Both are essentially saying "I don't want to think about something that might well be inescapable."

Comparing Dust Warfare to Warhammer 40K is very natural; there's going to be a lot of crossover. And one of the things I LIKE about Dust Warfare is its logic, and cleanliness (rules-wise), in comparison. For those of you who don't know, Mr. Chambers used to write for 40K. He wrote the original Tyrannid codex (excellent work), as well as at least the 'Nid expansion for Epic Scale. And he wrote up the wonderfully consistant background for the Necrons. So I do have a high opinion of him; I'm not a frothing fan, but by comparison with the usual lot writing muddled rules and background material, with senseless, confusing, and what I can only postulate is a sort of 'mark my territory' change urge (common in writers, really), then Andy Chambers is a doggone gem.

And, yes, considering the developments in Warhammer Fantasy Battles 1 1/2 years ago, I may be exceptionally glad for Dust Warfare's existence. If GW screws up 40K the way they did WHFB, I may be storing away my armies and playing only Dust for a few years, in hopes that 40K - in which I have 20 years of hobby investment - will be unscrewed-up in 2016.

(Mental picture time: If you'd like a mental image of the fictional Warboss Krag, think of an Ork warboss in a classic Victorian reading room setting. Smoking jacket, little reading glasses, a fez, big Sherlock Holmes pipe. Bolta and power klaw hanging on wall racks.)

Warboss Krag said:

I love the models and of course I also love the fluff. I am interested in all things WW2 so it surprised me a bit when I got into the alternate history sort of thing. Instead of it bothering me I found it fascinating to think about. I also enjoy how they broke the game into phases with some with reactions. There are some issues as there is always bound to be with new games but I hope FFG stays with it and keeps improving the game. I think they will be surprised at how well this game does if they support it properly.

"fighta bombas," while crude and unciviized, are rather awesome, what?

After another game last night, I love the feeling that the units work together to crack some sort of tactical problem. There were a couple of times where my opponent had some squad in a good position. I knew that if I moved in to attack them, they'd take their reactions and probably chew up my guys. But I was able to use ineffective fire to plink away and suppress them, so that other squads could attack with impunity.

I really like it because no unit is completely worthless. Even if you can't damage someone, you can still affect them. For example, I was able to suppress a squad with some fire from a beobachter team. I knew they wouldn't do any damage, but it made the enemy put their heads down, and let a more effective squad get into position to do some real damage.

I also like it because it really makes you think through the order in which you attack, when you want to save your reactions, and when you want to take advantage of a command turn action to try and get the jump on someone.

This is by far the most "tactical" game I've played, and the choices and options it gives you are great.

This is by far the most "tactical" game I've played, and the choices and options it gives you are great.

Hear, hear.

One other signal feature of the setting (and thus the game): For the most part, the models are portrayed in more-or-less WWII gear and uniforms. Now, for the decorative among us, camouflage is a perfectly acceptable option. For those of us bone-tired of painting Warhammer Empire figures, with their ever-greater insistance on Reniassance fashions (and ever more outrageous examples - check out the new Empire General model), the drab of WWII uniforms is welcome, and so easy…I just finished painting a command squad, a Fliegerfaust squad, and Stefan, in a matter of less than an hour. Delightful.

Played again last night, and am finding yet again that mechanics that don't seem quite right on paper work extremely well in practice - you really have to get a couple games of this in to see how it all works - reading through the rules definitely isn't enough.

For instance, after reading through the rules and realizing that the initiating player got "free" reactions (i.e. reactions that did not take away from any later activations), I thought that meant that having initiative would be a massive advantage, perhaps too much of an advantage.

In the end, though, it really didn't, for two reasons:

1) We got into the habit of laying down suppressing fire with weaker units before charging in with the heavier, more powerful units. Generally this meant that the opportunities to react were occasional, not constant.

2) The responding player has a nice advantage as well with the Command Phase. Not only do they get more orders, but any units they suppress during the Command Phase cannot be regrouped. If the initiating player orders a unit to fire, any suppression tokens can usually be easily sluffed off by a regroup order by the responding player. The responding player can then with other units suppress the initiating player's units, and the initiating player is stuck hoping the units will be able to shake off the suppression in the unit phase.

So yeah - the way the mechanics all interact and balance out is extremely cool. Getting the initiative is definitely an advantage, but so is having more orders in the command phase and being able to suppress the enemy before they can do their unit phase.

I like the models. Alot.

I love the whole initiative phase, command phase, unit activation with reactions play style. I absolutely enjoy the angst it gives me as a seasoned game-table general!

I love anything that has the word Schwer in it.

I love trying to say "Weiderbelebungserum" with a straight face.

I like the special rules for the medics, mechanics and so on.

The Battle Builder is SPOT on and a welcome addition to games, especially after being accustomer too the static scenarios that most games have. The same army has to do different things and play differently in order to accompish the goals of the mission. You can only pre plan so much and it reinforces the saying that nothing ever goes according to plan.

Re: felkor's notes in initiative. Verrrry interesting, to quote an old comedian dressed as a grenadier, lurking behind the potted plant. I shall have to make use of that information…(Since I see that a regroup action does not give the receiving unit a Reaction marker!)

Seriously, i do like that this game actually awards the real-world tactic of pinning fire. So nice after the charge-happy idiocy of 40K