OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

Charax wrote:
changing the boxed set wcontents after already taking money for preorders? not cool Spartan...

Yup poor show

if they've been told a change is needed (speculation) then they should give people who pre-ordered anything removed from the original pre-order contents in addition to the new set they're offering now

 warboss wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

Charax wrote:
changing the boxed set wcontents after already taking money for preorders? not cool Spartan...

Yup poor show

if they've been told a change is needed (speculation) then they should give people who pre-ordered anything removed from the original pre-order contents in addition to the new set they're offering now

While I agree that it's poor form to change the contents last minute, I don't think freebies are in order. They should however (if they haven't already) email/write/telephone everyone who preordered to inform them of the changes and offer a full and unconditional refund on that preorder.

We included Bunkers because of their universality of use, and (if I'm honest) their ease of manufacture. Reach is a defended human colony, so bunkers seemed appropriate. I believe the plan is to show them soon, as well as making the assembly instructions available too.

In the month following release we should be releasing the 'Scatter Terrain Sets' with bespoke terrain designed to allow players to stylize their battlefields. The bunkers are intended to tide folks through until then . The decision was made not to overload gamer's wallets/purses on release day by giving them too much to buy, also it takes the weight off our manufacturing team too - the advance orders for Halo: Ground Command are incredible I'm told B)

We had a long chat about Warthogs and Ghosts, and their possible upgrades when we were setting the core box contents. The additional Gauss Weapon, Missile System, Spartan Gunner and Spartan Driver will be included in the Warthog Box to be released slightly later. Same too the Elite Driver/Gunner for the Ghosts.

We felt that the contents of the 2-player set should stand alone long-term, and the mix of weapons at present best compliments the game balance for the mini-game within it. Of course once the upgrade boxes come our we will have upgrades to our heart's content!

Fortunately, the Warthog armed with Chaingun and the Ghost piloted by a Grunt are very cost efficient in the 2-player set. The Warthog gives excellent AP+AA Cover whilst the Grunt Ghost gives solid AP+AT cover. Both work well with (and against!) the contents.

We do have a Pelican and Phantom in the box!...... OK, so its not the actual Pelican and Phantom models :blink:....that would be bonkers, taking the cost to well over £200!

Instead, to give everyone a chance to play with flyers we have put in some 'shadow templates' into the core box that allow players to replicate the flyers on the tabletop. The Pelican and Phantom Flyers (and of course the others that are coming) are a vital part of the gameplay in Halo: Ground Command, but it would be entirely unfair for us to strong-arm folks into buying them, just so they could play the whole game - Spartan Games simply isn't like that....we are gamers first and foremost.

So the intention has always been to give folks a 'free card-flyer' for each side in the box set (and a nice acrylic one each in the Deluxe Token Set that is released at the same time), and leave the Pelican and Phantom models for true collectors and fans to own. This seems fair as not everyone wants to buy a £75 model as a requisite for competitive gameplay..... and rather than act as a wallet-bleeder that everyone to be 'forced to buy', we wanted the Pelicans and Phantoms to be an aspirational model fans want to have and admire - I have advanced ordered 2 of each so I can have one each in the Flying-Mode and one each in Landed-Mode (the landed ones I want to use in a diorama)....but them I'm a bit of a fan-boy (...just in case you hadn't noticed...) :rolleyes:.

Tournament levels are very difficult to predict. Everyone plays at different paces, so setting suggested-points is tricky.

Most of the games we play, we time on a stop clock to measure framing of phases, rules execution, rulebook interaction, statistics referencing, casualty removal... etc and their impact on the Game Length. But our timings are based upon a fluid and intimate understanding of the rules..... predicting what the rest of the gaming community will play within a set time frame is probably impossible.:blink:

However, were I to step into my Punxsutaney-Phil alter-ego for a second, I would suggest that players in a competitive arena will likely play about 2500-3000pts in a 2hr Time-block.... but again, that's guesswork.... we can play 4000-5000pts in the same time frame, as we blitz through the stop clock....taking more time when were are focusing on testing rather than blowing stuff up!....by the same token I have watched a 2-player game with folks who have never read the rules take 2hrs.....

I guess its really down to game-familiarity and player skill. In truth I'll be interested to see where the community set the points for their own Tournaments. I am always uncomfortable in writing rules that lean gamers into levels of gaming they should play (competitive or otherwise). I far prefer it (as a gamer myself) when games find their own points-levels within gaming groups - some folks play slow and some folks play fast, but so long as everyone plays and has fun, that's all that really matters.

We're working on a Halo: Ground Command board for a scenario we've done called 'Pelican Down!' and just before we took a hammer to one of our prototypes (don't tell 343!) we snapped a shot. You can't see his face, but it was hard to tell if our painter was excited or close to tears!

Also, have you all seen the new Halo Wars 2 trailer? Looks fantastic, we're so looking forward to seeing this game roll out. Awesome stuff indeed from the guys at 343 Industries.

You've all been more patient than kids at Christmas, so we decided it's time to finally let you in on the secret... The Halo: Ground Command, Battle for Reach 2-Player Set will be shipping to distributors from 20th July, and direct to customers from 27th July. Also shipping in July are our spectacular Pelican and Phantom Dropships, and Deluxe Acrylic Token Sets.

2 - Coherency in a massed battle game needs to be tight, otherwise models simply get 'lost in the mix'. In Hali: Ground Command Infantry Elements must be in 1" Coherency where possible, Armoured Elements must be in 3" coherency where possible and Hover Flyers and Emplacements must be in 6" coherency where possible. That way infantry remain together in their Units, Armoured Units have a bit more freedom to roam, but are close enough to be visibly considered to be a Unit and Hover Flyers/Emplacements have a far wider coherency distance to represent their looser formation.

3 - No. In tumult of combat, the death of a Spartan (or is it MIA.....) does not have a detrimental effect..... folks are too busy shooting at the Covenant to notice!

4 - All Force Commanders are an ethereal element, posting their orders from on high without having to appear on the battlefield...... heroes on the other hand are almost always present on the battlefield....and inevitably end up at being considered 'target priority#1'.....at least they are when I'm up against them!:angry:

5 - We considered a token to assist the signifier, but in truth, its much more cinematic to simply put the Spartan to the side/Behind the vehicle, so we went that route.

6 - Pelicans that 'land' do so for a very short period of time, then they 'dust off' to return 'on station'....an aircraft not in flight is a dead aircraft to use the old Luftwaffe maxim. We did not want to clutter the flyer rules with any prescribed rules for Flyers that are landed as this complication does not really happen in the visuals associated with the video games. Flyers fly, and don't act as bunkers if they land.

1+2 - Elites in Halo: Ground Command perform a multitude of roles and duties, but taking your list as a starting point:

Ultras lead specialist Elite-only Battle Groups and tend to have a good mix of Melee, Ranged and Command skill-sets
Generals are likely to come out a bit later and can be expected to lead larger Infantry and Armoured Battle Groups. They will tend towards string Command+Control gameplay (although as an Elite at the core, they tend to be pretty vicious in melee too!)
Zealots are focused upon in the Fall of Reach because of their presence in the first few waves of assaults. They are fearless and driven towards a melee focus (..,... Elites gaining honour and prestige when they take down enemies in hand to hand...)
Field Marshals are likely to be kept in reserve by Spartan and 343 for use in specific scenarios and campaigns. As you correctly point out they are a tier above the expected operational space of Halo: Ground Command, but there are many documented occasions in the video-gameplay where such lofty individuals get their hands dirty, so I reckon its a good idea to keep our options open.

3 - Long term, the UNSC will definitely get more Officers levels, with sub-ranks and high ranks being permitted to lead Battle Groups. For now however the UNSC are very much on the back foot, defending with their last breath against the invader, and so a command structure does not need to be present in the game..... further down the line however, we have lots of options to broaden the sphere of C+C for the UNSC. B)..... the instances you describe sound like fantastic scenarios waiting to be played out

1 - As I mentioned in previous posts, the nature of artillery is very difficult to manifest in any wargame, with designers treading a fine line between what people THINK they want, and what can be achieved on a tabletop for the good of the game. Artillery is great in principle, but given the scales of the battles that are fought, we have to be careful the rules don't descend into a model-removal exercise! (...I'm not going to cite a certain WWII game here as an example.....)

We DO have artillery in the game, and it IS effective, but its not going to dominate, The Halo Universe is far to close-quarters-battle in its focus to allow that to happen.

2 - I don't know what you are getting at here....lol.... maybe a lost in translation.... I'm a dopey-Scotsman you know...:rolleyes:.

3 - Indirect Fire is really easy....If a weapon has the Indirect Fire Loadout, it can use IDF (...obviously!)... provided another element from the same Battle Group can see the target enemy you want to barrage with fire. All IDF firing uses Firepower Rating 2 and cannot be modified by any reason (Weapon Loadouts, Terrain, etc)

Movement - All movement in the game is free-360-degrees, with the exception of Air Support Flyers which move in a straight line at all times. The original first draft of the game design had a more complicated turning mechanic (very similar to Halo: Fleet Battles actually) but when we tested the game proper we found it detracted from the FPS-feel we were aiming to create. Now with a freer movement system, the game flows much better and is more action-focused. The exception to the free-360 move method are the Air Support Flyers as I mentioned, which strafe across the battlefield at 'full-tilt' and so are governed by different rules.

Fire Arcs - Arcs of fire use an ordinal-compass system to create fire sectors [NE+SE+SW+NW]. These provide an easy guide for players to determine fire arcs - we use the same system for Halo: Fleet Battles. Only a few elements use restrictive fire arcs [Ghosts, Wraiths, Pelicans, .....the HMG mounted on the front of a Scorpion, etc].......most elements in the game however use 360-degree fire arcs.

As far as I'm aware the bunkers are made of a combination of acrylic and card with halo-style graphics on them. This serves to give players a great visual look and functionality without breaking the bank balance.... I have a set of renders for them but cant post them at present due to NDA sadly.

Two and a half years ago we made card+arctlyic buildings for Planetfall that were easy to assemble and looked great.... If I'm honest, the bunkers I have seen so far for Halo: Ground Command as a massive step forwards even from those excellent terrain-solutions. They are even convertible I think, (you can cut of a roof to make the Bunker a Command Post/Motor Pool) meaning that having multiples of the same building wont look out of place on the battlefield!. :wub:

The scatter terrain will likely be an assortment of battlefield debris - barrels, crates, etc....But I cant say more than that! :ph34r:

The last time I was down at Spartan HQ we were talking about a pair of bespoke Terrain Scatter Sets for each faction so that folks could build UNSC or Covenant themed battlefields using standard terrain (such as hills, woods, rivers etc. that you can buy anywhere/or make yourself easilly) and scatter terrain that was bespoke to a certain faction - this would allow you to make a UNSC urban complex, or a Covenant Muster Point for example. These will come out soon after the main games release so that we can all fuel our halo addictions in a simple 3 stage process of 1)Get Toys, 2)Make World.....followed by my favourite bit.... 3)Destroy ALL.....:angry:

Terrain such as Bunkers (or any other Building) are usually allocated special rules by the players at the start of the game such as Defensible or Garrison. Scatter Terrain might be classified by the players as being Blocking or (if arranged in a certain way) Linear Obstacle Terrain. Remember in Halo: Ground Command both players should mutually set up the terrain to make a battlefield they both want to play on (and have fun with!) so a small amount of discussion is required to get the game going.

"Shall we call all Hills Elevated Positions and treat all Buildings as having Garrison and Defensible?"

"OK, maybe not the outhouse attached to that medieval building you put down though......its only 1"x2" tall...!"

"<laugh> Fair enough......don't want to have to storm it anyways."....... and that's all you need to say really. Although I hope folks would use terrain that was a little more thematic with the universe

Its not essential that building interiors be created by gamers, although there are provisions in the rules where such things can occur.

With all terrain used with mutual consent it WOULD be possible for players to put down a whoppin'-big-building where interiors could be used - they simply use the terrain as Heavy/Light Cover and ignore the Garrison and Defensible rules for Buildings.....going their own way with the big building they put down.....

Actually there is a Mission coming in an online campaign I'm writing that allows players to play on a Loading Dock of a Space Station, with the Covenant appearing in waves via boarding craft and the UNSC fighting them off. Technically the entire game takes place 'in a building'....... The hope is the terrain rules are flexible enough to allow all players to play the games they want, rather than us dictate each and every type of terrain available in a science fiction universe!

1 - Drop pods are available as Terrain if players wish, or can be removed from play if they prefer!.... mostly because they are cool and thematic. We have left the option for players to use them as terrain (Blocking and Rough Ground maybe).

2 - Yes..... its best to make sure you drop in good order but not too close to the enemy (due to Reaction) or too close to the edge of the table (because that's the edge of the world!)

3 - No. We tested that, but it made for a far too aggressive game, where the ODST simply bombarded the enemy with ...er...themselves! :blink:.....with no return fire from the Covenant. I guess players can re-enact famous Halo missions if they choose to, but with our intention to allow massed ODST formations and so want the Drop Pods to be a strong reserve-mechanic without it becoming an artillery piece ......

4 - Yes, the ODST are very powerful with great firepower, plenty Loadouts and strong deployment methods. They also carry blasting charges, making them devastating against armour, with just 3 bases more than capable of destroying an armoured vehicle in one attack.but are tempered by existing in small, elite Units. That said they are only fielded in small Units so massed firepower will make them wilt like anything else in the game!..... And of course, the Elite Vanguards always like ripping them apart, deploying int he same fashion, with their own Loadouts and demolition charges......

1 - I don't know.... I'll get mine long after you lot get yours.... unless I pinch one when I'm down at Spartan Towers.... I'll ask Neil next time we chat about updating the store with more information.

2 - Specialist Battle Groups DO allow different rules to be applied to these unique collections of fighting men/women/aliens.... The Spectral Host Specialist Battle Group used by the Covenant for example allow 3 Units of Ghosts to be taken in a Group, giving each Spec-Ops Ghost an improved Soak Value as a result. Loads of other Battle Groups will have many different rules, but I wont give too much away here. :ph34r:

3 - Yes..... oh ....you want to see it do you......?...we will be showing it shortly!

4 - In the Open Selection category of gaming you CAN take 200xScorpion Tanks if your wallet is as bottomless as Thor's Drinking Horn..... and you can find a table big enough to fit that many Scorpions on! And your opponent has to agree to play Open.....meaning they could rock up with 343xBanshees..... Far more likely is that players will go for a Standard Armoured Battle Group giving them access to one Command Scorpion, one Sun Devil, a unit of Gauss Hogs and 2 more Scorpions on top (along with a Pelican to keep things interesting). A player could 'rinse and repeat' if they want...... but don't expect to win many Objective Capture games with no Infantry on the table...B)

5 - There will be (as mentioned previously) a number of Specialist Battle Groups, some of which will be Spartan Battle Groups.....so you should be able to buy them, take the models you like and paint them in any colours you want, giving you the Red on Blue action you crave!

6 - In the initial book I have shied away form forcing too much narrative into the rules, preferring instead to give players the toolkit to build games their own way. To that end there are no specific narrative scenarios, but it would be cool if folks took the book as a starting point and made their own! That's what wargaming is all about IMO!

The focus of the game should be on fielding multiple Battle Groups, to that you can spread out your Command elements (to bolster Reaction and Suppression effects). It is possible to play small too (indeed we wrote the game that way to give everyone a fair shot at playing from the kick-off), but I think the game really comes alive once folks start getting into 'full-flavour-Halo-mode' on the table.

Taking a couple of Infantry Battle Groups, and an Armoured Battle Group, and an ODST Strike Group, and a Valkyrie Air Support Group the other day in testing, I was struck with how easily the game scaled to larger points. This is great because I am a total megalomaniac and will always look to buying big in games I am excited about.... but I accept that not everyone is a fan-boy to the sorts of extremes I can be known to take things to..... (I have over 15,000 points of Federated States of America for Dystopian Wars you know.....) and I can honestly say I have had as many truly memorable/cinematic games playing with just the starter set. ....Spartans surviving against all odds to hold an objective and win, Grunts achieving the impossible and swarming Warthogs in melee.....etc.

Sorry, I'm rambling. In answer.... yes. You can take any Battle Group you like, provided they are taken from the same Faction (shown by its colour!). ODST, and Armoured and Mechanised Infantry and Valkyrie Air Support, etc..... they all fall under the UNSC banner and so as all available.

 warboss wrote:
No worries and sorry to hear about your loss. Most of the regular posters here that early on bought into the game seem to have dropped off and/or sold their stuff in any case so you haven't missed much. It was a bit disheartening to see the other folks jazzed about the game prior/during last summer's debut selling it this year in the swap shop without seemingly any new blood/interest injected into the game on dakka. I tried updating the news thread with HFB news for a while with little to no response and now Razor's Edge seems to be doing the same for Halo ground.

I pretty much lost interest due to a variety of reasons, the major one being that I couldn't ever get anyone to try even a demo of the game locally with my two painted fleets/terrain/spacemap. On top of that, a series of blunders (bad QA for the first massive ships, delays in getting ships out, too high a price point for the starter, web exclusive DLC that was pay to win, etc) on Spartan's part seemed to decrease interest overall online as well. And, now, a year later in typical infamous Spartan fashion, they're redoing the rulebook and stat cards for effectively a second edition already while most of their focus for a few months has been on the Halo ground battle game and they've already announced some sort of another scaled fighter scale game as well. HFB is sadly drifted dead in space and it'll only get worse when Dropfleet Commander arrives as a direct competitor for future players.

warboss wrote:Thanks. Hopefully things will continue to change for the better as Spartan have been addressing and correcting their own mistakes. They put out a leaner and cheaper starter (the value in the original starter was never an issue but rather the sticker shock). They corrected the QA issues with the original massives and were generous with how they handled the customers eventually (they just sent them a free replacement model a few months later). They started coming out with multiple new sculpts as releases instead of reboxing the same plastics this year. I just hope that it's not too late and that they can regain some of the momentum lost from last summer before Dropfleet Commander (another likely very high quality game in the same genre) scoops up even more customers. Either way, I won't whine about it anymore here.

AegisGrimm wrote:I liked seeing the game at Gencon, but two things kept me from getting it. First, a massive buy-in, and also, I just couldn't get a read on where the hell they were going with the game. Nearly all of their "tons of releases" are repacks of the same three ships for each fleet with different formation cards. I don't want to have to end up with 35 human frigates just to have more options on how to put them on bases!

This game has/had potential, but I think Dropfleet is going to eat them alive when it comes out, with greater variety, and a solid pedigree behind it to capture older gamers, while Spartan keeps on with the same old ADD.