Captain Spud

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    1284d 9h 26m 30s

Community Reputation

1292 Excellent


About Captain Spud

  • Rank
    Maker of Things
  • Birthday 10/01/1984


  • Location Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

2,161 profile views
  1. Basically they're suggesting that you have each category of options behave like radio buttons instead of checkboxes, so that only one of each category can be selected at a time. I would also suggest doing it that way, and also add a default "all" option to each set which would be selected by default. I spent an hour trying to figure out how to do this on your files last night, and it's difficult to do using only CSS. I thought I was onto something by reversing your row display logic-- starting all rows revealed and then hiding ones that match unchecked boxes-- but this doesn't work because rows can be tagged to more than one device, and any inactive box will "win" over the active one that's selected. I'm still convinced that there must be a way to do this with only CSS, but the solution isn't jumping out at me. If you don't mind including some JavaScript, however, it's fairly straightforward to have the system narrow the selection each time you pick an extra option. Off the top of my head, I would have the function (1) hide all rows, (2) store the current selection for each option set in JavaScript variables, (3) use getElementsByClass() to list all elements that match all of the classes, and finally (4) show all rows that matched all of the criteria. If you wanted to get really fancy, you could then loop through the array from #3 and re-set all of the odd/even row colours so that it looks pretty after each sorting.
  2. Their SSL certificate expired a week ago and needs to be renewed. It's not a big deal. You can bypass the warning and look at the site anyway.
  3. Not sure if anyone's asked this yet, but have you given any thought to adding troop classifications (Line Troop, Veteran Troop, Elite Troop, etc.) to the app since Hunting Party and the new Classified objective now reference them?
  4. Posting without reading most of the thread: last summer, I did a dive through all of the releases from April 2014 and July 2016, and counted the number of distinct male/female/neither sculpts CB had released. My results are here: At the time, the count was 157 male/55 female. Since I was only reporting on monthly releases, my sheet doesn't include older models. I'll go through this evening and add the next year of releases in case anyone finds it useful.
  5. Right, and I'm not arguing that it shouldn't be played that way. I'm just saying that the rules don't currently say that, and so if that's their intention, the "Hunting Down Objectives" section needs some additional text to cover it.
  6. That seems... messy. To illustrate, let's create an extremely silly scenario: ****** Group 1 LT 9 Chain of Command models Group 2 9 Doctors 1 Chain of Command model On my turn, I take a series of incredibly unlocky AROs. Enemy does 1 wound to the LT to render it unconscious. First CoC model becomes LT, and the mission reveals to the opponent who it is. Enemy then does 1 wound to that model, and the next CoC model takes over. Rinse and repeat until all 10 models in Group 1 are unconscious, and Group 2's Chain of Command model ends up as my final LT. Next, I activate my 10 Doctors, and put all of the wounded people back on their feet. Finally, a Ghazi walks up and E/Marats the entire group, and they all go Isolated, and then the game ends. In that moment, do 10 Lieutenants become Hunted Down for scoring purposes, even though none of them were the LT when they became isolated? ****** I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that 1) the current rules don't technically say that (though it's fair to argue precedent if Decap has an existing FAQ entry to cover it); and 2) that interpretation creates some weird corner-case interactions unless some additional text is added to the mission rules.
  7. I'm reading over the new Hunting Party mission, and I think there may be a problem with the detailed timing of one of the objectives: Hunt Down more enemy Lieutenants than the adversary (4 Objective Points). Intuitively, this seems fairly straightforward-- if you Isolate the enemy LT every round, you'll have three Hunted Down LTs at the end of the game. However, this doesn't actually work in practice. Unlike Specialists, who never lose the Specialist tag, "Lieutenant" is a temporary state that can be lost if a model is Isolated. This is relevant because of the timing of the Hunt Down Objectives rule: A Lieutenant and a Specialist Troop are considered Hunted Down when they are in Isolated or Immobilized (IMM-1 or IMM-2) state at the end of the game. Note, "at the end of the game". You can never have two LTs at the same time, so strictly as written, you can never count more than one model for this objective, even if you isolated three LTs during the game (because the first two are no longer LTs at the end of the game). The obvious response here is to say that the game "remembers" that three models who were LTs at the time lost that status by being Isolated, so they would still count. But this introduces some timing problems. If my LT is isolated and stops being the LT, but then is later cured of Isolation by an Engineer, does she still count at the end? Remember, the rule says "they are in the [...] state at the end of the game". If curing the model removes it from scoring, how do you reconcile using "memory" for one part of the rule but "current state at end of game" for the other part? You can come up with some even sillier scenarios, too: Steve is your LT at the start of the game. On turn 1, he becomes Isolated. On turn 2, Mary becomes your LT, Steve's Isolation is cured by an Engineer, and Mary becomes Isolated. On turn 3, Steve becomes your LT again, then becomes Isolated again. How many "Hunt Downs" does your opponent score? Can Steve be Hunted Down twice? If curing the model doesn't remove it from scoring (basically, "Once you're Hunted Down, you remain Hunted Down"), then it seems to me that another paragraph needs to be added to the Hunt Down Objectives rule to explain the different timing model for Lieutenants. Something like... A Specialist Troop is considered Hunted Down when they are in Isolated or Immobilized (IMM-1 or IMM-2) state at the end of the game. A Lieutenant is considered Hunted Down if they lose their Lieutenant status by beginning any turn in the Isolated state, or if they are in Isolated or Immobilized state at the end of the game. All those Lieutenants and Specialist Troops that have not been deployed on the game table at the end of the game will be considered to be Hunted Down by the adversary. I feel like the "memory + models can't become un-Hunted" interpretation was CB's intention, but as things stand I don't think the rules in the mission pack really support it. Thoughts?
  8. I started working on a space station terrain set in 2015 for a league that ran at my store. It used a modular wall system to create variable room configurations in a vaguely semicircular pattern. I got it up to a barely playable state at the time, but it had a lot of problems (not well-designed, took forever to set up, and a lot of the larger pieces weren't very functional), so when the league was over, I put the unfinished space station on a shelf and didn't think about it again for a while. Then Wotan popped up, and there was once again a reason to want to play a space station board. I pulled out my bin of space station bits, and over the course of about two months, I polished up the terrain set with paint, more pieces, and custom papercraft to make it look a bit nicer. And after all that, even though it's a lot prettier, not a single one of the original functionality problems was solved, so it's still a pretty mediocre terrain set. Some thoughts at the end of the failure tunnel: I should have done some concept sketches before I started working to firm up the designs and make things more consistent-- i.e., coming up with a consistent set of shapes and patterns to be used across the set, instead of the hodgepodge of circles, octagons, hexagons, and rectangles I ended up using when everything was improvised. A "room set" built entirely out of individual walls isn't a great idea-- things move around (even with weights in the walls and non-stick pads on the floor), and the board is incredibly time-consuming to set up. Instead, I should have pre-built a few entire rooms (with foor walls and a floor), and then had a few separate walls just to help link them together. On the positive side, the curved layout works really nicely. The board has two four-foot-long corridors, but because of the curve, snipers have a sight limit of around 20-30 inches (depending on their position). I have a long writeup of the construction process (and a lot more thoughts about everything that went wrong) on my blog, if anyone's interested in the full autopsy. I don't recommend that anybody build this specific board, as it has more negatives than positives and I don't think it'll get used very often. However, I figured that some of you may find some of the papercraft elements useful, so I put the PDFs together in a Zip file, which you can grab here: Spud's Space Station Papercraft It includes printable patterns for walls, airlocks, and cargo tubes, all sized for 11x17" paper-- about a dollar a sheet to print at Staples or any other comparable print shop. I also included a fun little pattern that you print out on a standard 8.5x11 sheet... ...which, when transferred to foamcore and folded up, turns into an awesome slanted octagon: Because if your octagons aren't slanted, you aren't in the future. *** So, yeah. My space station may not be very good, but hopefully something useful can be harvested from its carcass.
  9. Speaking as someone who handmakes almost everything, even when purchasing would be cheaper: handmade ladders aren't worth it. Buy them from Warsenal, they're under a dollar each and look great.
  10. In NeoCanada's moment of crisis, Aleph sent an emissary to guide and inspire its people. Welcome back, Space Minister McDimplesmirk. You have a lot of work to do. Maple leafs are hard to paint that small. ;_; Photos for the head sculpting process are on my blog.
  11. Hi, I'm beloved community fixture Captain Spud, and I don't believe that height is a must-have element for all terrain sets. Top-down layouts with infinitely high walls like this one are particularly awkward to try to work elevation into. I wouldn't change anything here. It's very similar in concept to a space ship board I made years ago, and that has consistently been my highest-rated board due to the unique gameplay style its single level and tight corridors promote. Terrain-makers should strive to make every board into a puzzle that has to be worked out by the players. If every puzzle has the same pieces, then they'll all have the same solution. And I don't know about all y'all, but I get bored re-solving the same puzzle over and over again. ~_~
  12. I did some concept drawings for a set of Yu Jing city terrain last fall. I love my drawings and think the set would be a blast to play on, but real life and creative funk have interfered and left me without any progress six months later. However, I'm starting to feel the inkling of motivation again, so I'm posting the designs publicly to put myself on a clock and hopefully shame myself into actually doing something with these. A full writeup of the design process behind the drawings is on my blog, but for this thread I'll dispense with dumb words and just drop the drawings for general ogling. Again, full details and pictures of my cardboard mockups can be found here. I might start working on these over the summer, or I might curl back up into a ball of unmotivated self-pity for another half a year. Too early to know which way it'll go. If I haven't done anything useful with these by the time 2018 rolls around, someone poke me with a stick or something.
  13. The original poster is asking about ITS though.