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.
Really looking forward to this getting released, even though I can't explain why!
That's why people study marketing for years - to make you feel you want something even when you weren't even aware it existed.
You don't have a specific need and go on a search to satisfy this need. You start with no need, but have people who are well versed in psychology manipulate you into believing that you have it.
More on topic - I remember having heard this game has a narrative focus but so far I have seen no further information on this aspect. Do you know how this focus will manifest in Warcrow? Is this going to be old-school randomapalooza with checking tables and roling dice aplenty, or something player-driven, smarter and more modern?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2024/07/16 10:41:23
So some of the models do feel very bland, a good many of the infantry feel like they are dull because its a skirmish wargame and there's only 12 or so models on the table. Whereas if you had 20 infantry to a unit and multiple units the "bland" nature for them would work and then you'd have monsters/machines/characters for the big solo interests and focus.
The idea and artwork look very good and inspiring, but between art and model something has been lost. It might just be the paint scheme and presentation and that real world models will be far more impressive; but yeah I find I'm looking at each army and seeing a few I really like but a total force just doens't blow me away
It's a generic setting but I feel like the actual characters have some unique charms that can help them stand out. There is a bit of "we sculpted these to sell to DnD players" going on with it overall though.
The models are nice enough but they've been the focus of everything I've seen. I haven't heard of a gameplay gimmick or world narrative hook to really pull me in. I might just be missing it, but I need to know what makes the game really stand out to be more interested.
I actually really like the look of these minis. The starter seems on the pricey side though.
I fell out of the hobby a long time ago - but I've been looking for something to pull me back in and this is checking a lot of boxes for me.
1. Low model count
2. Easy to paint (you can call them bland)
3. Not metal
4. Game looks OK (low priority for me)
5. Should have good availability
6. Distinct factions
I've never really cared for Infinity - but how would people that are familiar with it say that Corvus Belli do on creating fluff/background?
Ok, so I watched the CB's example of gameplay video and what I saw was a lot of compulsory, non-interactive steps and very few ("no" would be closer tbh) interesting and not obvious choices and decisions.
So, a lot of upkeep, not much gameplay. Not too impressed so far.
I like the small size board and the scions concept. everthing else is extremely unappealing.
tbf, I was never interested in anything corvus belli did.
hope it does fine though, I can see it doing well in the modern wargame landscape.
OTT's presentation here seems very bland. No sense of what units do to stand out from one another. I'm still not feeling a gameplay hook here, though it sounds like maybe something with the Stress and Reaction mechanics. Really hard to say, though it does feel like its far more of a campaign game in the vein of something like Frostgrave or Silver Chalice or something.
I like the models better than the artwork. I like muscular woodelfs, but then again I always like woodelfs.
I really like their infinity range as long as they are well painted and shown on close up photos, but models for infinity looks really uninspiring irl, in my oppinion. Im afraid these guys will have the same problem.
It's probably just an intro simpler ruleset/scenario but models moving to the middle objectives and push themselves for the rest of the game is a bit boring. All units seem too similar too.
Maybe the game has more shooting for flavour because as it stands all is just too samey.
I like small tables and small model counts though.
I like the look of this. I think the more generic looking fantasy actually helps it as I can see a use for the minis in multiple things if the game ends up not appealing to me. The Game play videos look interesting.
No interest from me personally but I have to give them credit for trying to drum up interest over the past year (at least with their youtube presence). I don't believe anyone can say that the game suffered from a lack of promotion or enthusiasm on the part of the developer IMO. I don't think the art style translates over as well from scifi-cyberpunk and doesn't appeal to me personally as I get more Warcraft vibes from it. To each their own I suppose.
We Munch for Macragge! FOR THE EMPRUH! Cheesesticks and Humus!
NAVARRO wrote: It's probably just an intro simpler ruleset/scenario but models moving to the middle objectives and push themselves for the rest of the game is a bit boring. All units seem too similar too.
Maybe the game has more shooting for flavour because as it stands all is just too samey.
I like small tables and small model counts though.
Same here!
I love smaller tables and skirmish games - now more than ever...
I also agree that the actual miniatures look a lot better than the artwork.
Now, it would be good to get a gameplay video that maybe shows a bit more, or shows it in a better way, or something?
The OTT videos to date that I've seen have not been great - and not just for this game.
Pity they couldn't use these in the gameplay video, the Pioneers especially seem to have a bit more going for them tactics-wise, probably would have made a better impression.
I recently put together the caskuda vs maximus box, and both were perfectly fine.
As for the game itself, the more I learn about it, the less enticed I am to be honest. There are a handful of neat ideas buried under a pile of tokens and stuff to keep track of.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/07/21 16:40:25
Angronsrosycheeks wrote: I recently put together the caskuda vs maximus box, and both were perfectly fine.
As for the game itself, the more I learn about it, the less enticed I am to be honest. There are a handful of neat ideas buried under a pile of tokens and stuff to keep track of.
I've never played a Corvus Belli game before. Is Infinity as mired in tokens as Warcrow seems to be? It looks more like an FFG creation.
I did pre-order it and will give it a try though.
I did get a little confused by their youtube statements of "you can only use what is in the faction box, you can't buy another and add models to your army", yet the (free starter) rules show an 'availabilty' stat allowing you to add multiple units of the same type, or more troops to a unit.
Is this going to be a game I can play with 5-7 models per side, or is it going to end up some massive game with far too many rules and tokens to have fun?
Thoughts?
Currently most played: Silent Death, Mars Code Aurora, Battletech and currently trying Warcrow and Infinity.
Angronsrosycheeks wrote: I recently put together the caskuda vs maximus box, and both were perfectly fine.
As for the game itself, the more I learn about it, the less enticed I am to be honest. There are a handful of neat ideas buried under a pile of tokens and stuff to keep track of.
I've never played a Corvus Belli game before. Is Infinity as mired in tokens as Warcrow seems to be? It looks more like an FFG creation.
I did pre-order it and will give it a try though.
I did get a little confused by their youtube statements of "you can only use what is in the faction box, you can't buy another and add models to your army", yet the (free starter) rules show an 'availabilty' stat allowing you to add multiple units of the same type, or more troops to a unit.
Is this going to be a game I can play with 5-7 models per side, or is it going to end up some massive game with far too many rules and tokens to have fun?
Thoughts?
Corvus Belli said that an army for a standard game (250 points) will comprise about 15-20 models.
The availabilty stat indicates the maximum number of the respective unit per army, i.e. you can include a unit with AVB 3 up to three times in your army.
However, the number of models per unit is fixed, i.e. you cannot add models to increase the unit size.
For example, you can take 0-3 units of Orc Hunters which always consist of 4 models each.
Warhammer CE the definite ruleset for Warhammer veterans
