Switch Theme:

BFG around 2023?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




So last I read there was a rumor that GW was planning on releasing some BFG “in about five years” and that was back in 2017.

For those plugged in to the rumor mill, are their still rumblings about BFG “in a few years?”
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut






Nah. The GW line is that if they were to make it, it would take years, which the fans then take as "BFG confirmed in a few years, woooo!" despite there never being anything substantial to it.

#ConvertEverything blog with loyalist Death Guard in true and Epic scales. Also Titans and killer robots! C&C welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/717557.page 
   
Made in gb
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM




United Kingdom

I'll see if I can dig out the original rumour(s) - if was something like "to do BFG justice would take years of work, so for now we're going to do smaller things and grow the team". This was just before AI was released IIRC.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I also think the Specialist Games team is at the limit of it's capacity as it is, supporting the games they already have running.
Aeronautica is only getting an update like once a year now I think?
   
Made in no
Longtime Dakkanaut






 kirotheavenger wrote:
I also think the Specialist Games team is at the limit of it's capacity as it is, supporting the games they already have running.
Aeronautica is only getting an update like once a year now I think?


That game is a mystery so i would not put too mutch toughts to it.

But yea, we dont know how big their team is and they are running 6 games that needs regular updates and releases.
BFG remake has sutch a huge hype to it that they must hit it right on first attempt, and that someone from GW suggested they needed 5 years to do the remake is a good pointer that they know this.

They might be working on backstage but i doubt it is more then cosept stage now.

And covid has basicly paused the planet for 2-3 years...

darkswordminiatures.com
gamersgrass.com
Collects: Wild West Exodus, SW Armada/Legion. Adeptus Titanicus, Dust1947. 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

Its nice to dream, I wouldn't expect it anytime soon though. We know there is a desire to do it, but we don't know if they've even started working on it.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut




Couple of years ago GW were asked about BFG and they answered that they do have some plans to bring it back but it is in 'very long haul' at best. Ie. they have ton more projects more urgent.

Personally I'm not looking forward to it, they'll probably just ruin it with Death Stars, crappy rules and new uberMarine faction.

Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker! 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

I mean, tbh BFG is a horrendously overrated game to begin with and most of th elove seems to be driven by rose-tinted nostalgia goggles.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

How about BFG NOW.

I mean the rules are easy enough to find and there are plenty of 3rd parties making 3d printed ships. and the game rules as of the final 2010 update are the best the game has ever been and need NO changes.

We don't need GW for this, the community can self promote.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
chaos0xomega wrote:
I mean, tbh BFG is a horrendously overrated game to begin with and most of th elove seems to be driven by rose-tinted nostalgia goggles.


Except those of us who still currently play it know everything you said is completely wrong. it is one of the best games and rule sets that GW ever made. it fits the lore, has a clear rules set and even Andy Chambers considers it one of the best games he ever wrote.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/31 18:39:33




GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in no
Longtime Dakkanaut






chaos0xomega wrote:
I mean, tbh BFG is a horrendously overrated game to begin with


vanilla rules yes, community edited rules, not so mutch.


darkswordminiatures.com
gamersgrass.com
Collects: Wild West Exodus, SW Armada/Legion. Adeptus Titanicus, Dust1947. 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection



Except those of us who still currently play it know everything you said is completely wrong. it is one of the best games and rule sets that GW ever made. it fits the lore, has a clear rules set and even Andy Chambers considers it one of the best games he ever wrote.



Just because you have poor taste doesn't mean I'm wrong

Likewise "best GW ever made" isn't saying much. Their minis are phenomenal but for a company with the word "games" in their name they are pretty meh when it comes to game design.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/01 01:53:44


 
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut




It's not perfect, even the current fan-developed version (which at one point was meant to be official IIRC) has bugs and holes. But I find the basic mechanics extremely workable and fun.

Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker! 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




I don't mind the original rules. Just make them a little more streamlined. Then do a balance pass and adjust a few points. Even Necrons with their current rules, before the game was abandoned, would be fine if they had an increase of points.
   
Made in ie
Auspicious Skink Shaman




Louth, Ireland

They originally intended to only release BB with 2 initial plastic kits (orcs + humans). However since it got such a great reception they figured they were able to do other specialist games in plastic such as AT and Necromunda. So hopefully that if they do decide to BFG it will be mostly plastic, probably with FW add-ons/upgrades.

 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

Jarms48 wrote:
I don't mind the original rules. Just make them a little more streamlined. Then do a balance pass and adjust a few points. Even Necrons with their current rules, before the game was abandoned, would be fine if they had an increase of points.


Just no, the rules are fine as is, you risk doing what GW did to the chaos 3.5 codex with those ideas. the game is what 40k was meant to be-every faction fought in it's own unique way in accordance with the lore. the "imbalance" is on purpose. necrons are already way overpriced and the one thing they are good for is to punish eldar, as it should be.




GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Haha I was going to say about Eldar..

Otherwise it's a bit clunky but I think good fun as a game. I have read that people that have played a lot of naval warfare-type games take umbrage with some of the BFG rules as there are apparently far more elegant ways and mechanics of reflecting that style of warfare, although I haven't played a lot so am blissful in my ignorance!

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

 Pacific wrote:
Haha I was going to say about Eldar..

Otherwise it's a bit clunky but I think good fun as a game. I have read that people that have played a lot of naval warfare-type games take umbrage with some of the BFG rules as there are apparently far more elegant ways and mechanics of reflecting that style of warfare, although I haven't played a lot so am blissful in my ignorance!


Kind of. Naval wargaming as a genre is a complicated and difficult beast to tame, as it isn't just a question of design elegance and streamlining, but also one of capturing nuance and the technical details of the subject matter.


Its very easy to design an incredibly clunky and inelegant complex simulation masquerading as a game. Harpoon is the gold standard here, its not even really masquerading as a game as its very much intended to be a simulation, but the term "wargame" means different things to different people I suppose. Theres lots of obscure and less well known naval wargaming titles, principally of the historical/real world simulation variety, that fall into this category, and these games are often very reliant on charts layered upon charts and lengthy lists of modifiers, etc. to capture every sort of variable imaginable. There are some scifi type games in this cateogry as well, Star Fleet Battles probably being the poster child for them (and though I haven't played it B5 Wars seems to be in this category as well). I've purchased and read through many of these types of rulesets over the years, and to be frank I would probably struggle to play or comprehend any of them, let alone enjoy them.

Its also very easy to design an overly streamlined but still entirely inelegant game that completely misses the mark in terms of capturing any of the nuances involved with the subject matter. Many naval wargaming enthusiasts accused Victory at Sea of this, though I think VaS though perhaps overly simplified was an incredible step in the right direction when it was released in the mid-2000s. Personally I think this accusation is more applicable to the Spartan Games trilogy of naval wargames, i.e. Uncharted Seas, Firestorm Armada, Dystopian Wars. Cruel Seas and Black Seas are also similarly streamlined but inelegant, though I think they do a better chance of capturing nuance and flavor rather than being uninspired dice chuckers ala the Spartan trio.

There are also quite a few games in the genre that are streamlined and elegant, but fall flat in terms of capturing the feel of naval combat - A Billion Suns (as much as I enjoy it) falls in this category for me. Its a great game, but not necessarily a great "naval" game per se.

And then you have the rare few games which are streamlined and elegant rulesets which actually do capture the nuance of the subject matter - I think Star Wars Armada is the only game that I've played that has really managed to nail the key aspects of the genre without getting lost in specific mechanical and technical details. Its far from perfect but I think it serves as a good baseline for future development in the genre (much the same as how BFG did years ago).

Then you have the games that kind of fall "in between" these categories/have a more mixed placement on the spectrum defined by the various axes mentioned previously (elegant/inelegant, streamlined/clunky, nuanced/unnuanced) - Battlefleet Gothic, (Babylon 5) A Call to Arms, Dropfleet Commander, and I would put Victory at Sea here as well.

Battlefleet Gothic I think was the first of these types of naval wargames (I've never played Man o War or looked at its rules, so I have no idea what that was like), as it came about during a time when the naval wargaming market was largely dominated by the simulationist games that were inelegant, clunky, and highly detail-oriented to the point that the emphasis placed on attention to technical detail essentially overrode concerns about playability or enjoyability of gameplay. I think this is part of why BFG became a bit of a cultural phenomena within the naval wargaming scene and has attracted so many devotees to it and why it inspired so many follow-on games (B5: ACTA, VaS, Dropfleet Commander, etc.). Of these I generally prefer B5:ACTA to the others, and I think Dropfleet Commander is head-and-shoulders superior to BFG (and the ruleset was in fact based on the work Andy Chambers did for an unreleased 2nd edition of BFG - so I would assume he would agree with me).

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

B5 wars is nowhere near as bad (clunky) as starfleet battles, but it is designed as a skirmish game so the rules are much more complex than BFG.

It has charts but they are just for system damage. the big thing that makes it a great system is the focus on neutonian physics allowing full control of ship play by the players(not fixed maneuvers like fantasy flight games). it has also been converted into just about every other scifi universe. our group uses the SW armada and old collectible mini game ships with the B5 wars rule set. Same with star trek attack wing ships or the mini scale battlestar galactica ships.



GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in fi
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






I never played BFG, but the idea of simulating a 3D space on a 2D board sounds already so kludgy that I dont know if I'd enjoy it. I dont know if any ruleset can overcome this simple obstacle properly.
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

 tauist wrote:
I never played BFG, but the idea of simulating a 3D space on a 2D board sounds already so kludgy that I dont know if I'd enjoy it. I dont know if any ruleset can overcome this simple obstacle properly.


"3D space" is a lie.

It matters in aerial combat games (and undersea as well) because altitude is finite, there are physical and technical limitations to the ability to climb and dive, hard service ceilings and floors, etc. etc. etc. In space, unless you're very explicitly playing an orbital combat game that attempts to simulate real orbital dynamics and gravitational physics - of which I only know of maybe 1 or 2 games that make any attempt at simulating that, not including dropfleet commander which is kind of an odd duck which features it only a very limited sense.

In terms of space, particulary the "deep space" combat games like BFG, absolutely none of these factors matter or apply:

- Space is infinite, and as such altitude is also infinite, and also relative - what are you measuring "altitude" in terms of? Is it the orbital body you launched from dozens of star systems away? Is it the nearest planet? Is it the start at the center of the solar system? If its a binary system is it the orbital center? Are you and your opponent both measuring "altitude" with the same object as your common reference point (probably not)?
- There are no rates of climb or dive to be concerned with, traveling "up" or "down" are no different than traveling in any other direction - it just occurs on an arbitrarily different plane from what you have referenced as the "normal".
- Likewise there are no service ceilings or floors, no crush depths, etc. beyond which your vessel cannot climb or dive - space is infinite and homogenous in terms of your ability to travel through it.

etc. etc. etc.

The only respect in which 3D space really applies at all is in terms of relative directional orientation between two objects, but even this can be abstracted away onto a 2D plane as its safe to assume that combatants would orient themselves in a manner conducive to combating one another. As all vessels in BFG and most other sci-fi space naval games are largely designed using real world wet navy design paradigms (i.e. planar design schemes) in terms of their theoretical armor schemes and weapon placements (typically replicating Trafalgar, Jutland, or Midway/Guadalcanal/Philippine Sea/Leyte Gulf in SPAAAAAAAAACE!!!!), this would mean the combatants would naturally reorient themselves along what is essentially a planar 2D battlespace rather than operating at odd relative angles where bringing dorsal/ventral armor or gun batteries specifically to bare against an opponents exposed flank or something matters. You could certainly design a game like that, some dabble with it in different ways (Firestorm Armada had a special order that let you essentially rotate your ship upside down relative to your opponent, i.e. reverse your port and starboard facings, in the event that your weapons/armor on one side was disabled, etc.), but that sort of more "realistic" design style is generally not what scifi fleet combat games are lookign to simulate or model, and its really not the game that most space naval wargamers seem to actually want to play.

In that sense, space gaming is abstracted in a manner thats not much different from ground combat games, when was the last time things like armor facings, firing arcs, or gun elevation mattered in a game of 40K?

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

when was the last time things like armor facings, firing arcs, or gun elevation mattered in a game of 40K?


Every single time i play normal 28mm 40K which is almost every saturday.....but then again we play 5th ed not 9th.




GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Facing seems to have dropped in and out of 40k through the years and editions.

Was quite amusing coming into Infinity from 40k (which I will say now is such a well designed game system, in terms of the basic mechanics) and had a bunch of my guys facing the wall as though teacher had put them there for doing something naughty. Air-dropped unit came in behind them with an HMG, that was the last time I made that mistake

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

 aphyon wrote:
when was the last time things like armor facings, firing arcs, or gun elevation mattered in a game of 40K?


Every single time i play normal 28mm 40K which is almost every saturday.....but then again we play 5th ed not 9th.



That gets you armor facings and kind of sort of generalized firing arcs (if you ignore the part where the genericized firing arcs allow certain models to fire through themselves at a target that the weapon would not otherwise be able to engage). Elevation has always been meaningless.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in gb
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






The best thing about BFG is that it’s mechanics are based on the age of sail, rather than super wooper “wot’s physics?” SciFi.

Manoeuvres were ponderous by design, not by error. And much like 2nd Ed Epic (which I will never tire of praising, and you can’t make me!), the differences between the main forces were relatively small.

Most fleets specialised in something, but importantly weren’t excluded from any particular tactic. Even Eldar could ram. You may not necessarily want to, and it may be absolute last resort, but it still remained an option.

Some of the later fleets I recall being a bit wonky. Necrons for instance were just outright rock hard, and Nids I remember to be quite easy to deal with provided you kept them at range.

But the core mechanics are pretty straight forward to learn.

It’s a great game, and is fun to play. The sooner its back the better if you ask me. Yes, even if like AT it has to be Heresy specific to begin with to stretch a budget.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Pfizer vaccine administered 13:40pm 18 Feb 21. Still no second head. Second jab 13:35pm 6 May 2021. At the Masonic Hall. 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The best thing about BFG is that it’s mechanics are based on the age of sail, rather than super wooper “wot’s physics?” SciFi.


The irony here is that Andy Chambers was very deliberately (in his own words) designing the game around fighting Jutland in space rather than Trafalgar.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




chaos0xomega wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The best thing about BFG is that it’s mechanics are based on the age of sail, rather than super wooper “wot’s physics?” SciFi.


The irony here is that Andy Chambers was very deliberately (in his own words) designing the game around fighting Jutland in space rather than Trafalgar.


Instead he got Midway, back when BFG was first released when the number of attack craft a ship could launch was really only limited by how long it could keep passing Reload Ordnance orders.
   
Made in ro
Stalwart Tribune




Bath

 tauist wrote:
I never played BFG, but the idea of simulating a 3D space on a 2D board sounds already so kludgy that I dont know if I'd enjoy it. I dont know if any ruleset can overcome this simple obstacle properly.


as others have said, in a zero-g environment, where height conveys no advantage of energy, moving to a 3d game system would just add a awful lot of mechanical bookkeeping for what basically boils down to a range modifier. its just not worth the hassle. In true air combat games like Aeronuatica, it is tracked, because can have great significance via the transition of height into speed and visa-versa.

Star Fleet Battles was designed from the outset to simulate the sort of combat seen on TOS era star trek, ie single ship duels or two or three ships each side. It was a game of energy management, of cunning decisions by quick-thinking captains of the Kirk mould, juggling power between speed, protection and firepower to outdo an opponent. a game wear diverting power form life support to shields was the sort of order a rational captain might be giving.



The irony here is that Andy Chambers was very deliberately (in his own words) designing the game around fighting Jutland in space rather than Trafalgar.


see, i get that, and what he was trying, but i feel it still came across as a more age of sail than age of steam, at least in fleet composition. the fleets at jutland were mainly 1st rate battleships, and a swarm of destroyers with a very few cruisers supporting them, for scouting and screening. but the Trafalgar fleets were mostly made of a medium-heavy ship of the line, with a few much heavier ships for flagships, line-breakers etc, and few smaller frigates and such for scouting and screening. the rules of BFG fleet organisation lean towards this later "medium combatant" fleet compoistion, not the "Go heavy or go home" style of jutland.

the addition of strike craft, torpedos etc does change the dynamics away form a purely age of sail style, but thats both expected and desired.


but onto the creation of a new BFG, i dont hold much hope in the mid-term. the Armada video games showed thiers still some intrest, but im not sure if its enough to actually support a boxed game release, espically with so many other projects on the go.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, 'ow's yer soul? "
But it's " Thin red line of 'eroes " when the drums begin to roll
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's " Thin red line of 'eroes, " when the drums begin to roll.
"Tommy", Rudyard Kipling
Exporitor force kappa-Tercia 500pts Coven of XVth 500pts
Western Host 1000 pts
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

Iracundus wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The best thing about BFG is that it’s mechanics are based on the age of sail, rather than super wooper “wot’s physics?” SciFi.


The irony here is that Andy Chambers was very deliberately (in his own words) designing the game around fighting Jutland in space rather than Trafalgar.


Instead he got Midway, back when BFG was first released when the number of attack craft a ship could launch was really only limited by how long it could keep passing Reload Ordnance orders.


Yeah, hes discussed that as well in interviews. He didn't really want to put carriers or strike craft in the game, but he felt there was such a strong expectation within the sci-fi genre that space battles be fought with carriers and fighters that he found their inclusion unavoidable. His intent was to limit them to being a side element of the game that would act in a minor supporting role to the main action centered around the fleets slugging it out, but during playtesting he received overwhelming feedback that carriers and strike craft needed to be equally viable to battleships and cruisers and their guns/missiles/torpedoes, and basically felt forced into raising their level of prominence within the game.

xerxeskingofking wrote:



The irony here is that Andy Chambers was very deliberately (in his own words) designing the game around fighting Jutland in space rather than Trafalgar.


see, i get that, and what he was trying, but i feel it still came across as a more age of sail than age of steam, at least in fleet composition. the fleets at jutland were mainly 1st rate battleships, and a swarm of destroyers with a very few cruisers supporting them, for scouting and screening. but the Trafalgar fleets were mostly made of a medium-heavy ship of the line, with a few much heavier ships for flagships, line-breakers etc, and few smaller frigates and such for scouting and screening. the rules of BFG fleet organisation lean towards this later "medium combatant" fleet compoistion, not the "Go heavy or go home" style of jutland.


This is likely also the result of "genre expectation", or a generalized misunderstanding of historical naval doctrine, or perhaps even confusion regarding modern naval doctrine, or similar. There seems to be a generalized expectation that battleships are/were a singular and monolithic centerpiece within a fleet or naval squadron, surrounded by a number of cruisers who were the actual workhorses of the combat formation, which were in turn supported by a larger number smaller combatants such as destroyers or frigates (seemingly dependent upon which side of the atlantic you're on). Just about every piece of fictional media I've encountered treats naval formations in this manner, especially scifi wargames (I've encountered it in historical wargames as well, though there are a rare few that seem to know better). Battlefleet Gothic was designed this way, as was its spiritual successor in Dropfleet Commander. Uncharted Seas, Firestorm Armada, and Dystopian Wars did likewise, as well as A Call to Arms (at least to some extent) and Victory at Sea (which is ostensibly historical and thus should know better).

The truth is that doctrinally speaking (though not necessarily practically speaking in many cases), during the dreadnought battleship era the core of a combat formation was a battleship *squadron* and Destroyers/Frigates (again, depending on which side of the atlantic you're on) were the combat workhorses, while cruisers were actually scouts, raiders, pickets, and outriders that more often than not operated individually on the edges of a naval engagement rather than engaging directly in combat. Few games portray these vessels in this manner, for whatever reason, and I'd be hard-pressed to explain why. Part of me thinks it might be an innate tendency amongst humans to think in terms of hierarchies, and because cruisers were more common than battleships but less common than destroyers (or frigates) it just made sense to plug them into the workhorse role, especially in light of how they have often been romanticized in various forms of media. I also suspect that in some part it was the result in the shifting roles of these vessels in the post-battleship era where cruisers (at least briefly) came to be seen as the principle surface combatant of a modern Navy with combat formations being centered around singular/lone aircraft carriers, which shared the "capital ship" categorization alongside the battleship, leading to the expectation that the battleships and carriers were interchangeable in terms of how they were employed and deployed within the context of a task force, etc. No doubt this was reinforced by the way the few remaining battleships were actually deployed through the period whenever they were brought out of mothballs (as was the case during the Vietnam War and Desert Storm). We see this thinking prevalent in several scifi naval games as well (Dystopian Wars for example, you can purchase battlefleet boxes for the various factions which contain a battleship or a carrier, 2-3 cruisers and 4-6 destroyers/frigates).

Alongside that popular misconception, you also get things like "Dreadnoughts" being a distinct category of warships occupying a size category larger than that of a Battleship (even though, in historical terms, the term Dreadnought and Battleship were basically interchangeable other than the term being used to indicate a distinction in armament and armor scheme) and Battlecruisers being cruiser hulls with more firepower. But I digress.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in nz
Road-Raging Blood Angel Biker



New Zealand

IIRC it was mentioned that when they designed BFG they thought of the 3d aspect, but came to the conclusion that it just became an unneeded range modifier.

I hope if BFG is redone Chaos and Imperial will be better balanced. In my experience Chaos ships were faster, better ranged, more firepower, and cheaper. The only advantage Imperials had was the armoured prow. And torpedoes were like weapon batteries that could be stopped by a single fighter.
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

chaos0xomega wrote:
 aphyon wrote:
when was the last time things like armor facings, firing arcs, or gun elevation mattered in a game of 40K?


Every single time i play normal 28mm 40K which is almost every saturday.....but then again we play 5th ed not 9th.



That gets you armor facings and kind of sort of generalized firing arcs (if you ignore the part where the genericized firing arcs allow certain models to fire through themselves at a target that the weapon would not otherwise be able to engage). Elevation has always been meaningless.


Armor facing, LOS from weapon mounts and although limited there elevation mechanics for fighting units on different floors of buildings as well at flying high aircraft rules (forgeworld flyer rules). Granted that is nowhere near as detailed as infinity but it is both fluid enough and detailed enough for use in 40K without bogging down the gameplay.


As for the 3rd aspect the big thing that B5 wars rules bring to the game is the abilities to slip, flip/pivot and roll ships while maintaining inertia.





GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
 
Forum Index » Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist Games
Go to: