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.

The 'A Call to Arms: Star Fleet' minis are now up for preorder: LINK

The special offer is this;

Pre-Order more than £100 or $150 (not that hard if you are doing the rounds with the squadron sets, or looking at the fleet sets), and we will send you a Federation Command Cruiser for free.

This is not a model we are looking to put into production (indeed, with most variants you can use the base model - in this case the Heavy Cruiser), and as it is not 'essential' we are going to be offering it to collectors on a promotional basis. In fact, we are likely to do one model a year on this basis.

Don't worry if you cannot take advantage of the deal now - there will be plenty of opportunities to pick one up throughout 2012, probably for free, so don't panic.

As I said, it is not an 'essential' ship, as most players will simply use the Heavy Cruiser. But it is something a little bit special, and there may not be many of them flying about (relatively speaking), so if you want a unique touch to your Federation fleet, it is there for you!

Don't worry if you cannot take advantage of the deal now - there will be plenty of opportunities to pick one up throughout 2012, probably for free, so don't panic.

Implying Mongoose can carry a product line for a whole year

The minis are handled through ADB, not Mongoose.

10 GBP for one Federation Battlecruiser? Sheesh.

I honestly feel sorry for the people who are still into this garbage... the ships are ugly and the setting is one-sided and pointless.

Aside from that the minis look the job. they resemble the designs well enough, although i don't see them selling...

Brother SRM wrote:10 GBP for one Federation Battlecruiser? Sheesh.

As opposed to GW prices for single Finecast minis?

tarnish wrote:I honestly feel sorry for the people who are still into this garbage...

This is what I get from you.

Brother SRM wrote:the ships are ugly

Brother SRM wrote:and the setting is one-sided and pointless.

If you are going to say something this silly you should at least back it up, as on it's face it makes no sense.

If you were to throw your money into a blender, you'd at least get to see some action as opposed to throwing it to mongoose.

They are the one you want if you don't want the real game.


How's that B5 going for them? They still making minis that are 95% better then other people can paint?

Finecrap is rare form Picasso compared to anything mongoose can put out.

Ahtman wrote:

Let me meet the person who is going to pick these ugly miniatures over something like BFG, Firestorm Armada, and the new ST click game.

well, your free to like it ofc.

like the hell out of it...
but for the record... its sad.. really sad.

i dont need to justify picking at this crap. like other garbage, id rather just be done with it then have to rummage through it again and again...

sweet, now if only they did a Babylon 5 space game

Dice Monkey wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Let me meet the person who is going to pick these ugly miniatures over something like BFG, Firestorm Armada, and the new ST click game.

Come to Adepticon then.

As I have little to no interest in BFG, don't care for Spartan's games systems, and have no desire to buy WizKid's LOLSCALE models, Mongoose/ADB's Star Fleet models are welcome. While I'm more a fan of Next Gen/Ent era ship designs, I do have a place in my heart for TOS's designs. I'll be buying the hell out of the Tholian fleet box once that hits in a few months, and have already preordered the Klingons for my Husband.

I have ordered the book and will be getting Klinks for me and Feds to get other people in to the game.

The actual models look like the old Harlequin ones from about 15 years ago...

Mick

A Call To Arms... is this still the hyper-detailed Trek game or am I thinking of something else?

H.B.M.C. wrote:A Call To Arms... is this still the hyper-detailed Trek game or am I thinking of something else?

I thought that was the old Starfleet Battles game, but I could be mistaken.

Mick A wrote:The actual models look like the old Harlequin ones from about 15 years ago...

Mick

That is becuase due to licensing issues ADB is allowed to make Star Trek stuff set in the original series but not other time periods. Many of the designs come from the official (at that time, not so much anymore) ship manuals that came out during the 70's. The retro nature of it is part of the charm for many.

H.B.M.C. wrote:A Call To Arms... is this still the hyper-detailed Trek game or am I thinking of something else?

A Call To Arms is the name given to the Babylon 5 system that is used now for Noble Armada. The original Star Fleet Battles (not ACTA Star Fleet Battles) is the chit based haxmap game with 32 impulses a round and obscenely detailed rules and options. Here is a sheet for just one Federation ship.



This is an attempt to make it into something more akin to Battlefleet Gothic where you remove the hexgrid, SSD's, and about 7000 instances of "if 1.2.4a happens refer to 4.2.11 in the Captains Edition, unless Y, than refer to 1.2.6c". For example, as I understand it, homing weapons such as drones (big space missiles) and plasma don't require separate markers to keep track of them on the field, but the process is now abstracted a bit in that the person firing them declares launching them and how many attack dice they equal, then after the firing phase and in the defense phase the defending ship can use anti-drone racks and phasers to weaken them. Instead of keeping track of the slowly dwindling drones and plasma (they degrade over time and you have to determine which impulses they move in) and cluttering up the board (Romulans can launch a lot of plasma, Kzintz loves them some drones) it essential comes down to "I launch 6d6 of damage at you" and "I use my defensive phasers to weaken the plasma and anti-drone to remove two drones, so 2d6 damage gets through". Player 1 rolls damage and laughs maniacally as the Federation scum's hull lights on fire and burns.

And a shame that they have made the same mistake on those models that most do. The :TOS era ships did not have those whacking great panel lines all over the saucer section, the outer skin was smooth. The lines refered to the deflector grid that was not visible on the outer skin.

Therefore £10 for a model I will have to spend time filling and sanding before I even prime it to remove the error. Sadly, no.

Otherwise I may have bought a couple just for display, Constitution class, Klingon D7, Romulan Warbird, and the Klingon hulled Romulan Warbird at least.

Conrad Turner wrote:And a shame that they have made the same mistake on those models that most do. The :TOS era ships did not have those whacking great panel lines all over the saucer section, the outer skin was smooth. The lines refered to the deflector grid that was not visible on the outer skin.

The panel lines were there on the original ships, just nowhere near as obvious.


At least these models don't appear to have them as raised ridges... they look to be indented, as the original ships were. So they would probably look a lot better without the heavy wash applied to them.

No, they were not there as a physical feature, they were painted on, and not in the pattern of the deflector grid, which is what is shown on these models. I have seen the original model of the Enterprise, and have the auction catalogue to proove it.

Yes the old AMT/Ertl kit of the Enterprise had the deflector grid as a raised pattern, but that was not that hard to sand off. If you fill the massively over-scale trenches visible on these models then sand, you'd better be using a really easy sand filler or you risk loosing some of the symetry and shape of the saucer.

It is not that difficult to paint the panel lines on, and I just don't like the deflector grid to stand out that much, therefore I would have preferred a smooth saucer. YMMV.

Conrad Turner wrote:No, they were not there as a physical feature, they were painted on, and not in the pattern of the deflector grid, which is what is shown on these models. I have seen the original model of the Enterprise, and have the auction catalogue to proove it.

Painted on or not, they're still there, and visible:


That's the studio model of the Enterprise.

insaniak wrote:

Conrad Turner wrote:No, they were not there as a physical feature, they were painted on, and not in the pattern of the deflector grid, which is what is shown on these models. I have seen the original model of the Enterprise, and have the auction catalogue to proove it.

Painted on or not, they're still there, and visible:

Thank you for proving my point.

Those panel lines are clearly painted on, not engraved on the model.

Count the rings and radial lines and you will find that they do not match the ones on the models we are talking about, the studio miniature has more of each.

Now on a model that otherwise I feel is very good, I would have preferred that the saucer was smooth. The engravings are a representation of the panel lines on the studio model, and I doubt they could have done much more on that size of model, but it is still my preference for a smooth saucer so I can make my mind up as to whether I want to add them or not - all of them or my own representation of them.

I am not saying that my opinion is 'better' than yours, just that that one fact is stopping me from purchasing. I am not stopping you from purchasing, nor am I stopping anyone else, but I have other things I would currently prefer to spend my hard-earned on.

As I said previously,

YMMV

As I play federation commander (star fleet battles lite) I own like 15 fed ships and the grids are raised. They are no where near as dark as those lines.they must have painted those lines on. FC is a great game and I hope thay they are not replacing it.

Dice Monkey wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Let me meet the person who is going to pick these ugly miniatures over something like BFG, Firestorm Armada, and the new ST click game.

(Maybe) HI, nice to meet you. I was around when BFG was new, and wasnt interested even then, FSA...I cant find a whole fleet I like well enough to buy, the ST clix game bothers me because the ships arent in scale to eachother.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cyporiean wrote:

As I have little to no interest in BFG, don't care for Spartan's games systems, and have no desire to buy WizKid's LOLSCALE models, Mongoose/ADB's Star Fleet models are welcome. While I'm more a fan of Next Gen/Ent era ship designs, I do have a place in my heart for TOS's designs. I'll be buying the hell out of the Tholian fleet box once that hits in a few months, and have already preordered the Klingons for my Husband.

I will agree almost completely...even down to (me) being the man of the house and likely playing Klingons...not sure who the wife will choose though.

Pipboy101 wrote:As I play federation commander (star fleet battles lite) I own like 15 fed ships and the grids are raised. They are no where near as dark as those lines.they must have painted those lines on. FC is a great game and I hope thay they are not replacing it.

Nothing has come out saying they are replacing it. This is moving further from simulation to a regular game. I really like FC as well compared to SFB.

Lightly engraved panel lines are far better from a painter's perspective - quick wash and you have a nice looking mini.

Having to paint on a web pattern of panel lines and perfect circles is way beyond the skill of most painters.

The contrast is too dark in the official pics is all, I'm sure with a lighter wash instead of harsh blacklining on the lines, the models will look great.

I'm not all that interested in the rules, but will definitely pick up some ships, which are the important thing about this release.. they look great, and it's been a *very* long time since anything like this was released in wargaming scale.

Last time was Micro Machines toys and a few niche manufacturers in the early 90's, it's nearly been 20 years before anything has been produced for the original series (proper models I mean, not that clix rubbish).

Conrad Turner wrote:Thank you for proving my point.

Those panel lines are clearly painted on, not engraved on the model.

Sure, maybe. Hard to tell from that pic, really. But what difference does it make? Whether they were painted on the studio model or engraved into the surface, they're supposed to represent actual panel lines. Unless you're suggesting that the 'actual' Enterprise's saucer was also made from a single chunk of fibreglass with all the detail painted on... That would certainly save some time in the shipyards.

Engraving them on the miniatures simply makes them easier to paint.

Count the rings and radial lines and you will find that they do not match the ones on the models we are talking about, the studio miniature has more of each.

Yeah, if it was a scale model, that might be an issue. For a gaming miniature, it's close enough.

Of course it's all academic anyway, since I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole given Mongoose's track record for supporting (or, rather, not) their miniature games.

Are these scaled appropriately for firestorm armada?

These are 1/2500 scale.

Cyporiean wrote:
As I have little to no interest in BFG, don't care for Spartan's games systems, and have no desire to buy WizKid's LOLSCALE models, Mongoose/ADB's Star Fleet models are welcome. While I'm more a fan of Next Gen/Ent era ship designs, I do have a place in my heart for TOS's designs. I'll be buying the hell out of the Tholian fleet box once that hits in a few months, and have already preordered the Klingons for my Husband.

It does not change the fact that the ships are fugly, besides terrible rules Star Fleet battles had terrible ship designs. Unless of course you are suggesting that those other games miniatures are terrible looking in which case you need an optometrist.

Ahtman wrote:
A Call To Arms is the name given to the Babylon 5 system that is used now for Noble Armada. The original Star Fleet Battles (not ACTA Star Fleet Battles) is the chit based haxmap game with 32 impulses a round and obscenely detailed rules and options. Here is a sheet for just one Federation ship.

Which is why everyone jumped ship when better systems came out. There are a few die hard sadist who care about recording toilet malfunctions after a torpedo hit but most of us have moved on. Add to that it's made by Mongoose which not only looses licenses but lies about why they loose them. Just like Babylon 5.

Mad4Minis wrote:
(Maybe) HI, nice to meet you. I was around when BFG was new, and wasnt interested even then, FSA...I cant find a whole fleet I like well enough to buy, the ST clix game bothers me because the ships arent in scale to eachother.

I was around when Space Fleet came out, I jumped ship from SFB because here were ships that did not look like they were variations of larger hubcaps with more and more pool ques attached to them.

Dice Monkey wrote:There are a few die hard sadist who care about recording toilet malfunctions after a torpedo hit but most of us have moved on.

Good Sir,

Nowhere on this forum have you found me mocking some of your favourite pastimes. Please do not mock mine. Toilet malfunctions can be very critical if we are a long way from starbase and the replicator is stuck on "ground beef and bean chili."

Thank you.