Dystopian Wars.

[jack da greenskin]

Just to pop in and say, it's cost me £60 to get what I hope will be a reasonably competitive 1k brittania fleet, but with enough models for 1.5k.


Very pleased and enjoying painting up the models. <3 Spartan games <3

[cornonthecob]

Anyone tried any land battles yet ?

[Steam_Giant]

Had my second game of land and air last week.

Its good.. very good! Cant wait to get more on the table in a fortnight.

[Orangecoke]

I've been seriously considering buying in and trying to get into this game because of the lovely models. However, Ironmongers post about the rulebook has put the brakes on for me. I have trouble learning games as it is (lots of rules details to remember) so a bad rulebook is a non-starter. I hope they issue a new one soon and then I'd take a fresh look at getting into it.

[Hicks]

I've been seriously considering buying in and trying to get into this game because of the lovely models. However, Ironmongers post about the rulebook has put the brakes on for me. I have trouble learning games as it is (lots of rules details to remember) so a bad rulebook is a non-starter. I hope they issue a new one soon and then I'd take a fresh look at getting into it.

Spartan Games announced that they are working on an updated version of the rulebook, general game balance and point costs. These updates will be in a future print of the rulebook as well as in PDF for.

I think it's great that the company responds this quick to it's consumer's concerns about balance and rules quality.

I just ordered my first fleet along with a couple friends and if it's half as good as Firestorm Armada, it'll be money well spent.

[orkmiester]

I've been seriously considering buying in and trying to get into this game because of the lovely models. However, Ironmongers post about the rulebook has put the brakes on for me. I have trouble learning games as it is (lots of rules details to remember) so a bad rulebook is a non-starter. I hope they issue a new one soon and then I'd take a fresh look at getting into it.

well its not THAT bad... to be fair i think this is the first edition of the game so i wasn't expecting rules that are as 'polished' as GW to be frank how the rules are set out is a bit 'clunky' but it does its job well enough.

though when you play they work rather well but thats the way it works, its better to play games and clear up muky bits as you go along rather than sit there in a black hole.

how can i put this... this game is 'easier' to learn than 40k/whfb as the rulebook is all you need! (well if you start the antarticans you will need the little booklet for them) and the factions are 'unique' but fit in well and are balanced (shock horror) though there are a few issues here and there.

other than that with the basics mastered your tactics etc become very important, pre-measuring is a little gem allowing a bit of leeway when you want to line up those torpedo shots

simple really

I just ordered my first fleet along with a couple friends and if it's half as good as Firestorm Armada, it'll be money well spent.
30-10-2011 16:21

indeed it will be- there is rather a large rules overlap with a few glaring differences still when you start rolling 6's = fireworks

of course if you ever get the chance to use a dreadnought in dystopian you will never look back. My KoB one has done some crazy damage, while not taking much. Pity last friday along with my first victory (my 4th ever game btw) against the CoA the cheeky sod had the nerve to put two damage points on it Though i did pretty much wipe him out and left him with his carrier and his battleship with half damage when we called time.

its a great game overall, a real blast after the stalemate that 40k has become, but that as they say is another story

[cornonthecob]

Dystopian is an amazing game with some really nice models , I can't wait until it reaches the same size as games workshop games.

[Orangecoke]

Ok - I picked up a Britannia starter box and Carrier, I'll get started on those (the rulebook was sold out). I hear really good things about the game, that's for sure.

[Pokpoko]

And I got the CoA starter. Blown out of water, pardon the pun, by the quality, much, much better than my F:Armada models!

[jack da greenskin]

This may seem like a stupid question, but has anyone found any decent ways of transporting their dystopian wars models?

Land forces seem easy enough to pack in foam, but some of the ships are weird shapes :L

[cornonthecob]

Some use KR Skirmish cases , others use foam.

[Hicks]

And I got the CoA starter. Blown out of water, pardon the pun, by the quality, much, much better than my F:Armada models!

Agreed! I got my Prussian starter in the mail with more coming and the quality is way above my Dindrenzi.

[Poseidal]

I pack mine in an old GW case, the ones with the textured foam rather than troop slots they have now.

I might cut some out for my bigger ships though, but the smaller ships and planes fit well.

[Xelee]

We've just got into Dystopian Wars

We were hooked by the models after a local got some painted up. How could you not like Zeppelins with Aircaft Carrier decks on top? Our floating Aircraft Carriers have yet to arrive but we both have starter-fleets painted (minus the battleships) and gave it a go last night:



The game can be pretty brutal but even frigates have a fair go vs larger ships.


Full report is here: http://roughwotr.blogspot.com/2011/1...coral-sea.html

Probably not a 'tournament' game but great models and lots of fun for an evening after kids are in bed. I found that a bait-box and tissue paper safely transported all models lol

[Steam_Giant]

Great bat rep. I really like your damage markers!

I dont see why it couldn't be a tournament game though, It seems* far better balanced than FB and 40k, and involves a heck of a lot more tactical thinking.

*My opinion after only 6 games (land/air)

[cornonthecob]

The lack of tournament is because the game is somewhat unbalanced due to exploding dice mechanic and the somewhat unequal factions.

[Steam_Giant]

I don't think the exploding dice mechanic is unbalancing enough to warrant not having tournaments. Since it is luck that cannot be predicted, which means good tactics is more important. Although I have only played over a handful of DW games, I have played a LOT of Uncharted seas, and never felt the exploding dice mechanic ruined a game for me or my opponent. I have however finished a game turn one throwing 6 Dice at the Uber-Power spells of Fantasy, and both felt deflated.

Also I didn't think the factions were unbalanced? However I would again point to the thriving warhammer tournament scenes, and ask if unbalanced armies affected them.

(I think I may have talked myself into organising a tournament )

[Pokpoko]

Eh, I just played a small tourney this weekend, and it worked fine. The imbalances in stats are less visible on board due to the dice if anything.

[Ronin_eX]

Incidentally the die-pool mechanic, even with explosive results, are very predictable. They can rarely lead to results that can cause things like double crits from a single frigate but those are so rare as to be comparable to other odd occurences (what do you mean I failed five 2+ armour saves?). In general terms you are rolling enough dice that the results are fairly predictable within a success or two. The real problem with randomness comes from the 1 in 18 chance of a ship simply dieing from a crit (a bigger problem the more HP they have).

Exploding dice are usually only swingy when you are rolling 1-3 of them or have target numbers set without taking exploding dice into account. When you are tossing 10-20 of the things and only counting based on successes then things are more manageable and predictable. The exploding dice simply allow for a common occurence in Naval battles where one side fires off a golden BB that slays a large target. Any naval game that can't represent the shot that brought down the Bismarck (lucky shot from a torp bomber) is probably not a very good ruleset at representing naval conflicts. The occaisional, exceedingly rare lucky shot isn't the problem, it is the large chance of that lucky shot resulting in instant death (due to the crit chart) that is.

The actual balance problems stem from several things. The individual army lists themselves have poor internal balance in a number of ways. Within each list air units are better than naval units which are, in turn, better than ground units. So when medium fliers become an option you tend to see cruisers marginalized. Beyond that you have most Sky Fortresses being much better than naval carriers and in several lists most Sky Fortresses are much better than the large fliers. After that it mostly depends on the faction, but every faction is loaded with units that underperform (British BB, Prussian escort, British cruiser, etc.) at tasks or are far to good for their points (American BB, American John Henry, CoA escort, etc.).

After you get over the internal list issues and start taking the good units, well, you still butt head first into the next problem. Intra-list balance is also pretty bad (though it fluctuates who is on top between land, sea and air theaters). Even when a fleet is doing everything right and not taking any of the crap units it can still be at a disadvantage because its opponent may just have better "good" units in their list.

But they have said they will be working on that so I have hopes for the future because there isn't really an alternate system to go to if they don't fix the issues, and having already spent a good chunk of change on it I am hoping that I can, one day, use my minis without feeling like I have to play at a handicap.

Either way being tourney viable and balanced are two different things. 40k is a popular tournament game and it is balanced with spit and gum hiding the cracks. Personally, I just like games with a point system to actually use that system to balance things. If you don't have a point system that represents what units can actually do then you need to bite the bullet and make it a scenario-based system like most historicals or Stargrunt II/Tomorrow's War and other systems that tend to use a GM adjudicator or pre-defined scenarios as a balancing method instead. I personally dislike tournaments but I still like my games to make an effort to either balance things themselves or not bother wasting time on a point system if it isn't actually going to measure anything useful. Hell, instead of spending time on the point system Spartan could have instead taken the time to put actual scenarios into the book instead (and maybe explain things like how much terrain is normal and how large average deployment zones are). They may have even had time left over to give a proper proof-read to the rules as well.

[Xelee]

Hi guys, my comment mainly related to the current poor intra-list balance (so you aren't going to get enough diversity IMO) and possibly the least immediately intelligible rulebook I have ever read!

I don't see the exploding dice mechanic as any kind of problem, I regard it as one of the good features of the system. If you want little potential for variance, play Fields of Glory. Mechanics like this keep players engaged.

I can't argue that less balanced and well designed games manage to have tournaments somehow. If you put in some extra rules/comp for DW it would work better too. In fact, I happily run and play in WOTR events so don't think a system has to be perfectly balanced to work in these type of contexts. The main aim of them is to get people keen on the game and play different people. I was really just comparing DW to games like FOW and Impetvs, which I also play a lot of and are balanced in a way that you always expect to see quite a lot of list diversity.

Just as a side note, based on numbers of guys actually playing, most historicals use a points or a balanced list (eg DBA, Lassalle) system.