Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Irdiumstern wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:
Do we know what material everything will be in yet?

HIPS plastic. Sprues were shown in the unboxing.

Thanks, that is good news. Now I just have to wait to see how egregious the scale is.

There's a video on their YouTube channel where they put both Legion and Shatterpoint models on the terrain to show it works for both. It's effectively the difference between Primaris and firstborn marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tokhuah wrote:
It is not logical to assess the deal based on what the components would cost individually. It is this lack of critical thinking that allows companies like GW to engage in predatory pricing because people who do this are not referencing anything outside a controlled and closed system for comparison. In this case you really do need to compare apples to oranges...

This is for sure true and I don't mean to imply otherwise. That said, I don't love the usual price per model or whatever measures of value personally. Every time I find myself lured in by a good deal, I find myself wildly disappointed with the actual enjoyment I get out of a lot of stuff. Most of the time you get a unit of models that turn into a slog to paint and transport and store. I find I get more enjoyment from the 2 MCP models I get in a box in terms of painting displaying and playing than I do from a lot of models I got for cheaper PPM and my only point is that this game does not appear unfairly priced for what you get compared to similar games that I've been quite happy with. I guess what I'm trying to say is that in spite costing more for fewer models, this looks to have more value for me than what I would get out of the Clone Wars core set for Legion.

This video, I presume:




I don't have time for the full video right now, being an hour long, but you can get a bit of an impression in the first two minutes or so. Seems decent at a glance, possibly helped by Legion's tall bases. Would have been good to have a Stormtrooper squad leader or other model that simply stands up straight, but Boba doesn't seem to look out of place next to that door. That's good.

Some initial details

https://www.atomicmassgames.com/star-wars-transmissions/why-we-made-star-wars-shatterpoint

Mostly a fluff piece. Only real details are the mention of Combat Stances and Combat Trees.

Cyel wrote:
The boardgaming forum I frequent is almost unanimous that with such a price this game is going to be dead on arrival. That's the perspective of people outside the miniature wargaming ("why should I pay so much when I had Imperial Assault for a fraction of this price?")).

I'd be inclined to agree, but I would have said the same about MCP and it did all right.

Cyel wrote:

Also, GW nowadays seem to have pretty friendly prices compared to what many other companies are trying to sell. For example I use many GW models in my Warmachine armies, because I often save half of the price doing that (and still get excellent quality).

This is the surest evidence I've seen that people have bent their perspective to conform to GW's preferred reality. When people are buying GW to "Save" money the Kool-Aid has been well and truly drunk.

I am hearing that Shatterpoint will be 40mm scale another increase to scale can't be good to keep players. but the good news isn't Star Wars Lego Mini figs 40 mm also??

In 1d4+1 years, the game will accrue enough counters that the next game will end up somewhere between that supersized prepatinted Warzone game and Inquisitor. If they have the license 2d4 years after that, it's off to playing with OG Star Wars figures from Kenner.

 warboss wrote:
In 1d4+1 years, the game will accrue enough counters that the next game will end up somewhere between that supersized prepatinted Warzone game and Inquisitor. If they have the license 2d4 years after that, it's off to playing with OG Star Wars figures from Kenner.

If it was still FFG rather than Atomic Mass Games I would definitely agree with the token number bloat/ridiculousness.

I play Marvel Crisis Protocol and there are a reasonable number of tokens in a game, but if you buy all packs to have every option there are a hell of a lot of tokens.

 Eilif wrote:

Cyel wrote:

Also, GW nowadays seem to have pretty friendly prices compared to what many other companies are trying to sell. For example I use many GW models in my Warmachine armies, because I often save half of the price doing that (and still get excellent quality).

This is the surest evidence I've seen that people have bent their perspective to conform to GW's preferred reality. When people are buying GW to "Save" money the Kool-Aid has been well and truly drunk.

Surprisingly I used maths, not gut feeling! Shock! If I can buy 10 GW undead cavalry to use as alternative for 5 PP undead cavalry (so I get2 units indtead of one) and still pay half the money is it my skewed perspective and preferred reality?

And you are the one talking about bending reality to conform to one's beliefs? That's rich.

 LunarSol wrote:
Some initial details

https://www.atomicmassgames.com/star-wars-transmissions/why-we-made-star-wars-shatterpoint

Mostly a fluff piece. Only real details are the mention of Combat Stances and Combat Trees.

Interesting article, even if it is mostly about designer motivations. Thanks.

 Eilif wrote:

Cyel wrote:
The boardgaming forum I frequent is almost unanimous that with such a price this game is going to be dead on arrival. That's the perspective of people outside the miniature wargaming ("why should I pay so much when I had Imperial Assault for a fraction of this price?")).

I'd be inclined to agree, but I would have said the same about MCP and it did all right.

No offense to boardgamers but I wouldn't heed the predictions of people who don't care what their game pieces look like and accept bent PVC laser swords if it saves them money. Without appreciation for the modeling and painting aspect of wargames they're missing a large part of the appeal, and therefore willingness to put up with higher prices. It's a different mindset.

You have to consider that someone like me won't spend less than six hours painting each model. Add some assembly and I'll get a hundred hours of fun out of the sixteen models in the core box before I even play my first game. That doesn't figure in the terrain that's in the box either. Dropping 150€ in one go isn't something I'd do without serious consideration, but objectively the entertainment per € ratio for miniatures compares favorably to a lot of other entertainment products and activities. Provided, of course, that the product actually fulfills your needs. If you slap on a quick paintjob because you want to start playing or if you only like half of the models in the box the price may be a lot less palatable.

 Geifer wrote:

 Eilif wrote:

Cyel wrote:
The boardgaming forum I frequent is almost unanimous that with such a price this game is going to be dead on arrival. That's the perspective of people outside the miniature wargaming ("why should I pay so much when I had Imperial Assault for a fraction of this price?")).

I'd be inclined to agree, but I would have said the same about MCP and it did all right.

No offense to boardgamers but I wouldn't heed the predictions of people who don't care what their game pieces look like and accept bent PVC laser swords if it saves them money. Without appreciation for the modeling and painting aspect of wargames they're missing a large part of the appeal, and therefore willingness to put up with higher prices. It's a different mindset.

You have to consider that someone like me won't spend less than six hours painting each model. Add some assembly and I'll get a hundred hours of fun out of the sixteen models in the core box before I even play my first game. That doesn't figure in the terrain that's in the box either. Dropping 150€ in one go isn't something I'd do without serious consideration, but objectively the entertainment per € ratio for miniatures compares favorably to a lot of other entertainment products and activities. Provided, of course, that the product actually fulfills your needs. If you slap on a quick paintjob because you want to start playing or if you only like half of the models in the box the price may be a lot less palatable.

Very different mindset for what people want from games, just have to look at some board games with loads of little cardboard markers, special dice and things.
Wargamers tend to shy away from all that.
But RPG players love there dice, and often have discussions of special ones.
Something that a lot of wargamers dislike as well, when even switching to a dice other than D6 for a game gets some wargamers all weird.

It’s the same as mini price above, I would rather pay more money for less minis if I like them, get the quality I desire and want to experiance the game as best, with the miniatures that represent it. Also we don’t get cheap warhammer, so that’s out :p

You are of course right and I share your perspective. Just presenting the point of view of a different group.

 LunarSol wrote:
Some initial details

https://www.atomicmassgames.com/star-wars-transmissions/why-we-made-star-wars-shatterpoint

Mostly a fluff piece. Only real details are the mention of Combat Stances and Combat Trees.

ThereTM sure areTM alot of trademarksTM in that updateTM. It's like readingTM a PalladiumTM newsletterTM.

Cyel wrote:

 Eilif wrote:

Cyel wrote:

Also, GW nowadays seem to have pretty friendly prices compared to what many other companies are trying to sell. For example I use many GW models in my Warmachine armies, because I often save half of the price doing that (and still get excellent quality).

This is the surest evidence I've seen that people have bent their perspective to conform to GW's preferred reality. When people are buying GW to "Save" money the Kool-Aid has been well and truly drunk.

Surprisingly I used maths, not gut feeling! Shock! If I can buy 10 GW undead cavalry to use as alternative for 5 PP undead cavalry (so I get2 units indtead of one) and still pay half the money is it my skewed perspective and preferred reality?

And you are the one talking about bending reality to conform to one's beliefs? That's rich.

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. My fault for going for the pithy one-liner and not being more clear.

GW being more affordable than WM on a per-fig basis is old news. If you like the figs and it makes your hobby cost a bit less then more power to you.

My point however, was that GW is wacky expensive and that the person who buys GW feeling like they're saving money is doing so only by comparison Warmachine or MCP or Shatterpoint which are even more wackily expensive.

Those buyers have bent their reality by adjusting their baseline to GW's crazy high pricing. I don't blame them for it, they're just conforming to expectations GW has slowly been pushing on them for the past few decades . Further, it's that acceptance that allows other companies to price even higher if they can convince buyers their product is better.

 Genoside07 wrote:
I am hearing that Shatterpoint will be 40mm scale another increase to scale can't be good to keep players. but the good news isn't Star Wars Lego Mini figs 40 mm also??

A Lego Minifig is 40mm from bottom of the feet to the top of the head peg, so 37mm-ish in scale.

https://brickarchitect.com/scale/

Most of the characters thus far depicted in Shatterpoint also exist as LEGO minifigs, so if you're so inclined, you could easily substitute minifigs for miniatures...

https://www.atomicmassgames.com/star-wars-transmissions/star-wars-shatterpoint-squad-building?fbclid=IwAR0lZi9klL04RTBvkYsIrbwZm--I95M4s0-8Spyr4_xkN0sDjwESlC5JBlI

Squad building article. Lots of interesting tidbits here for the future, but I do like how they have really simple guidelines for building a team.

So, blatantly trashing the lore to make the game feel like, in their own words, a saturday morning cartoon? Yeah, this dumpster fire of a game is exactly what I expected from AMG and I hope its death takes AMG with it so someone else can have the Star Wars miniatures license.

It's a weird system. Highly restrictive, yet weirdly open. It'll be interesting to see how workable it is with models with different points costs. I like it in theory, but I can't help but feel like there's tons of popular groups that just don't fit into this box. The crew of the Ghost springs to mind as something perfect for the game that just doesn't fit into these very specific holes.

I do think that like MCP, it just means that a lot of the flavor of the game is going to fall back upon the value of keyword synergies. Hodgepodge lists might be meta, but in my experience MCP's somehow struck the right balance of allowing you to build anything, but making thematic lists feel rewarding.

 LunarSol wrote:
It's a weird system. Highly restrictive, yet weirdly open. It'll be interesting to see how workable it is with models with different points costs. I like it in theory, but I can't help but feel like there's tons of popular groups that just don't fit into this box. The crew of the Ghost springs to mind as something perfect for the game that just doesn't fit into these very specific holes.

I do think that like MCP, it just means that a lot of the flavor of the game is going to fall back upon the value of keyword synergies. Hodgepodge lists might be meta, but in my experience MCP's somehow struck the right balance of allowing you to build anything, but making thematic lists feel rewarding.

Spectre Squad probably wouldn't be too hard to do. You could roll Hera & Chopper as the Primary, Kanan & Ezra as the Secondary, and Zeb & Sabine as the Support. Or if they want to stick to 4 models per squad, separate Kanan & Ezra into Secondary & Support and double up Zeb & Sabine on one base.

There's a lot of variety they can pull from to work the characters players love into the game and make it work well within the confines of the rules. I don't think hodgepodge is going to be a huge issue for this game as it also seems that hodgepodge is not an issue in MCP.

Aecus Decimus wrote:
So, blatantly trashing the lore to make the game feel like, in their own words, a saturday morning cartoon? Yeah, this dumpster fire of a game is exactly what I expected from AMG and I hope its death takes AMG with it so someone else can have the Star Wars miniatures license.

You seem upset, are you ok?

 rybackstun wrote:

Spectre Squad probably wouldn't be too hard to do. You could roll Hera & Chopper as the Primary, Kanan & Ezra as the Secondary, and Zeb & Sabine as the Support. Or if they want to stick to 4 models per squad, separate Kanan & Ezra into Secondary & Support and double up Zeb & Sabine on one base.

There's a lot of variety they can pull from to work the characters players love into the game and make it work well within the confines of the rules. I don't think hodgepodge is going to be a huge issue for this game as it also seems that hodgepodge is not an issue in MCP.

Yeah, thinking on it as long as the Support Units double up properly there's a lot you can do. Luke/Leia/Droids + Han/Chewie/Rebel Troopers or something seems like obvious packs. It can definitely work.

I think the bigger question is just point variance. Since everything HAS to be C= A+B, what can actually be paired up will be interesting. Like a 7 point primary alone messes with what can be paired up. A bit worried that initially everything will just be 8/4/4. I'm curious to see what happens when there's more 2-3 point units.

Again, its just interesting. I'm quite happy with the MCP system as a whole and I suspect this will work for my purposes quite well. Just curious is all.

Aecus Decimus wrote:
So, blatantly trashing the lore to make the game feel like, in their own words, a saturday morning cartoon? Yeah, this dumpster fire of a game is exactly what I expected from AMG and I hope its death takes AMG with it so someone else can have the Star Wars miniatures license.

When the 'Saturday morning cartoon' in question is The Clone Wars, which has multiple instances of Light/Dark Side and GAR/CIS affiliated characters teaming up or forming temporary alliances then I think the idea of them having 'trashed the lore' doesn't really count for much.

Everything is still era-locked, you're not going to be seeing Anakin teaming up with Darth Vader and a couple of Resistance troopers.

Eh, while they said that you can't mix eras within a squad, the two squads you field together could be from different eras.

I don't agree with Aecus that this is "blatantly trashing the lore", but he is right in that it's going to be a bit odd to see a team of a Clone Wars squad led by Anakin teaming with a GCW squad led by Luke, for example.

Looks like the "wide openness" of the selection system is self limited by Tags.

So you could take some really crazy combos, but it wouldn't be the best choice.

 Dysartes wrote:
Eh, while they said that you can't mix eras within a squad, the two squads you field together could be from different eras.

I don't agree with Aecus that this is "blatantly trashing the lore", but he is right in that it's going to be a bit odd to see a team of a Clone Wars squad led by Anakin teaming with a GCW squad led by Luke, for example.

The implication I took from the article (and from knowing how M:CP works) is that you would bring your Strike Team (2 squads) to a game but then select only a single (era-locked) squad for that particular battle. I could be reading too much into it and you do indeed use the entire Strike Team.

Even then you wouldn't be able to control what era of stuff your opponents were bringing but I don't think trying to maintain coherency there is particularly worthwhile in a competitive setting (and if players want to stipulate an era limit during casual play then nobody is stopping them).

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

Everything is still era-locked, you're not going to be seeing Anakin teaming up with Darth Vader and a couple of Resistance troopers.

Rebel. Resistance troopers aren't a thing yet

It is a good time for this kind of game though, since Disney has been really loving the gap between trilogies where Clones and Stormtroopers coexist.

 LunarSol wrote:

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

Everything is still era-locked, you're not going to be seeing Anakin teaming up with Darth Vader and a couple of Resistance troopers.

Rebel. Resistance troopers aren't a thing yet

It is a good time for this kind of game though, since Disney has been really loving the gap between trilogies where Clones and Stormtroopers coexist.

Rebels aren't in Shatterpoint either. Yet. Nor is Darth Vader. That wasn't really the point.

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

Everything is still era-locked, you're not going to be seeing Anakin teaming up with Darth Vader and a couple of Resistance troopers.

Rebel. Resistance troopers aren't a thing yet

It is a good time for this kind of game though, since Disney has been really loving the gap between trilogies where Clones and Stormtroopers coexist.

Rebels aren't in Shatterpoint either. Yet. Nor is Darth Vader. That wasn't really the point.

I know, just being cheeky.

JimmyWolf87 wrote:
When the 'Saturday morning cartoon' in question is The Clone Wars, which has multiple instances of Light/Dark Side and GAR/CIS affiliated characters teaming up or forming temporary alliances then I think the idea of them having 'trashed the lore' doesn't really count for much.

Everything is still era-locked, you're not going to be seeing Anakin teaming up with Darth Vader and a couple of Resistance troopers.

It's not just that characters can form temporary alliances despite their faction allegiance, it's that you can have teams which are impossible within the scope of the lore. Vader with his rebel trooper buddies teaming up with Luke and some bounty hunters to fight Anakin and battle droids paired with Jango Fett and some clones is just plain stupid. As is the entire framing of the game as a superhero and sidekicks vs. another superhero and their sidekicks, which is thematically ridiculous for a Star Wars game. This is just MCP re-skinned with Star Wars characters because MCP is the only thing AMG cares about making. It's what they turned X-Wing into and now they're making a literal saturday morning superhero cartoon game, complete with a fundamental design goal that it's all just stupid meaningless cartoon fights where the superheroes brawl in the middle of the battlefield and nothing of any importance ever happens:

But even so, just like any great animated series, there is a distinct understanding that - win or lose - we know all our heroes and villains will be back again next week (or more accurately, next game) to start the battle all over again.

I'm so glad AMG discontinued support for Armada to make room for this dumpster fire of a game.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

I'm so glad AMG discontinued support for Armada to make room for this dumpster fire of a game.

:-(

I miss continued Armada support. It took time to grow on me, but what an amazing system. Why this game exists while Armada is functionally dead is baffling.