• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    68d 3h 35m 6s

Community Reputation

173 Excellent

About omikoron

  • Rank
  • Birthday February 12


  • Location NY


  • ITS PIN T8720

Recent Profile Visitors

706 profile views
  1. I enjoyed DA:I myself, and there were things about it I preferred (such as the discussion wheels clearly telling me that a given option was going to be for romance), and some I didn't (mash that button to find them resources, 24/7). ME could use some of that stuff and make it better, but I do hear yah on the worry about them taking too much from DA:I and making it essentially just a sci-fi flavored clone. Still, the multiplayer is supposed to be really similar to ME3, and I spent a ton of time in that, so it'll probably be worth the entry fee alone. I question frequently if anything they did while creating Long War 2 had anything to do with balance (like when you the map is large enough that if you ran in a straight line you might make it to your objective before it ran out, right before finding out they spawned 3 pods of 7 dudes right in the way). I love the multiple units at the same time aspect (finally a use for some of those other soldiers besides being temp fodder while the main teams wounded), and the idea behind infiltration is somewhat neat. Not a huge fan of the enemy grunt type that can move, shoot, and then overwatch all in the same turn or sectoids reviving guys they don't even have line of sight to from out in the fog somewhere, but at least (as much as I hate graze) with the more frequent grazing it always feels like your at least landing some hits. Still, haven't gotten far into it yet, so I've got some time to spend to see just how much I end up liking it.
  2. I didn't play the quickstart, but it seems to discuss it right in the sidebar for the Lifepath file where they go over dogface as an alien race.: Transform: When a Dogface suffers a Wound, they must succeed on a Discipline (D1) test. On a failure, they transform into their dog-warrior form. The Dogface can choose to voluntarily fail this check (although this does not count as a failsafe test).
  3. Yeah, I did notice a bunch of people were playing almost consistently from the QuickStart - I was always just waiting personally for the gear and adversaries chapters to get ironed out to make my life easier as the GM (also why I made some "card format" backings for Adversaries in another thread). I mean, I've been playing with the character creation app since they put it out - the stuff that comes out of that thing's pure gold sometimes, although lately it's been bugging out on me (not actually filling out the character sheet, not letting me save or print the finished sheet, etcetera).
  4. I mean, if you know someone who is a backer, the previews are to the point where it's actually rather playable I think. After I come up with some ideas I figure on getting some friends together, filling out some of my adversary cards to make my life easier, and seeing if we can figure it all out using the previews I've got. From our December update: "Working to our current timetable we expect to be printing the core book in late January (allowing time for final proof reading checks and error corrections) and shipping end of February. With the new resources we have available to the team we believe we will complete Wave 2 by the summer and Wave 3 by the end of the year. Those are not fixed dates though..." and from Jan 13th we have "We are still aiming to get the core book PDF ready by the end of the month but it's likely we'll have to go to print mid February..."
  5. You know, seems like it would have been a lot easier for them to just make Mount a short skill that must be used as a first action (only during the player's active phase) instead of just rolling it into "any movement action" land tagging the whole-order change as is. I originally took it as "TAG is activated by the order, spawns out the pilot" until everyone in one of these threads started correcting me with "previously determined" (although it would have been nice to actually get a link or something pointing to where it got determined by CB for future reference when it comes up again) info. I like to think I'm pretty decent with common sense, but sometimes this stuff seems like it's only common sense if you have insider knowledge. I figure really, the reason it's worded that way is probably just so you can dodge out of your TAG or whatever as an ARO - but even then that means you should be dodging with your Pilot, which is silly since you need to pass the dodge in order to get the movement to get out of the TAG anyways. I mean, either way Remote TAGs now have a little specialist that can stay on the table and be used even after the TAG itself gets blown apart and removed as long as it got out before hand (which almost makes me wonder why the Manned Pilots don't function in the same manner, since to me that would be common sense), and still doesn't count as a specialist kill IF the TAG is killed first. So, effectively this is where it currently stands (please correct me if I'm wrong, because this seems to be the most confusion I've had in this rule set thus far, probably do to not having reasons to eject from my TAGs or playing armies with access to Transmuting): 1a) You've spend some orders getting the Tag into position to block LoS between you and the objective. You use an order on the Pilot to activate the Move skill to disembark - since your opponent can't see you through the big'n, no AROs are generated (unless units are within ZoC, in which case any non-LoS ARO for such could be performed), you then use your second action to either activate the objective (if your contacting it) or move to it still covered. Okay, simple enough - you decided to dismount, so the entire order is considered pilot. 1b) You are ready to bug outta there, so you spend an order to get back to your tag, and then just Idle - because you can't mount up on a second action, as it would invalidate your first action and that's a no-no. You then use a new order to mount, thereby provoking any AROs available against the TAG whose treated as using a move itself because it's now all-Tag, allowing you to do whatever with your second tag action in response to those AROs with the exception that should you decide to Dodge, it cannot be a Dodge involving the dismount option (from movement typing), as it would invalidate the first action and also all the AROs that happened because of the first action, which again is a no-no. 2) An enemy trooper pipes hot lead at your TAG during his active phase. You decide to ARO with dodge, and in so doing dismount the tag to place you in a safe spot next to the objective for your upcoming turn. This roll is done with the (Pilots?) PH, as stating the dismount means the entire action is based of the new profile (pilots), however if you fail your dodge than you remain inside the tag due to not getting the movement necessary to actually leave the tag. If the opponents attack has beaten your dodge, the attacks are resolved against the (TAG?) since you failed to move and thereby dismount. All of this is completely reversed if someone were to attack a pilot in b2b with his vehicle, and they wanted to get IN the tag with a dodge. That all right? I'm understanding this correctly now?
  6. Alrighty, I'll go ahead and hold off for longer then. It doesn't seem like it'd be a lot of work (most the changes seem to be pilots and maybe an alteration of the skill text... like the ones that removed the term Manned despite being Manned), but I'm certainly one to avoid doing more work than I have too.
  7. So, I've been holding off on a while since there's been some wonkiness with the whole Tagline thing (such as "Everyone gets a Scarface, but only for ITS!), but now we have revised skills for near all the TAGs my question arises: Anyone know if this stuff is just for ITS (where I won't really bother to update the cards, since ITS proper requires you use lists anyways), or are these new TAGlines permanent and I should take the time to update the cards?
  8. Well, I stand corrected then. Seems a bit doofy to me, but it's hardly the only strange decision when it comes to some of the rules out there (Manned units still being at a disadvantage to their remote counterparts since both have dismountable specialists but only one suffers from forced ejection). Ah well, learn something new everyday.
  9. I'm no more knowledgeable than most the other people in this thread about anything, but my main question is "since when did declaring Move and Dodge become the same thing"? By declaring Move, a trooper may Mount or Dismount a Motorcycle, TAG, Vehicle, etc. at the start of his Movement at no cost, the new troop profile will be applied during the whole sequence of the Order. Move: Common Skill that allows the user to move about the battlefeld. Dodge: This Common Skill allows the user to attempt to evade an Attack against him. It also gives the user the opportunity to move a short distance as an ARO. Dodge is it's own thing that results in some movement, it's not actually Move (the skill). Through that, I would gather that no, OP, you could not dodge into or out of your TAG. If you were to follow 1a - get shot, aro dodge - then you would just be dodging with the TAG (TAG's PH -6), which in return would provide that Dodge skill movement distance if successful. In 1b, the Pilot would be dodging (PH) and gain the movement if successful but could not enter the TAG since move isn't a valid ARO.. For question 2, I'm not entirely sure. The TAG moves, the opponent AROs, and then you move again to get out - I would assume that your pilot gets a free run to wherever they were moving to, but your TAG is going to eat un-opposed normal rolls from the AROs. However, if the attack for some reason follows the pilot (I don't know why this would be the case or be intended), a unit that has moved does not block line of sight, and would therefore mean the pilot would eat normal shots. For the bonus, straight from cancellation blurbs of Camo: » The Camouflaged trooper enters base to base contact with a model. I'm taking that to mean that by dismounting, you are then canceling your own marker state. Again, these are all just my interpretations according to how things work based off of my current understanding of the rules. I could be wrong, I could be right. The best I can do is try and use logic to apply to these things.
  10. Thanks, glad you are getting use out of things. Personally, outside of making a full-page variant for people to download and print off, I think I've gotten the adversaries cards to where they are going to rest (unless more critique comes in, as usual). You're more than welcome to throw any weapon art stuff around here for people who might get some use out of it though, as it's all about helping each other out as I see it.
  11. There you go, posted jpg/gifs of the different weapon line arts from the dossiers I have.
  12. I've gathered a decent number of the Dossiers, so I could go through and and muck around with them a bit to get some linearts of them done up. Gotta admit, might not have all of the different weapons in this game though, what with each faction having their own take on the weapons. I can do some up and throw up a JPG or something of it though.
  13. CorelDraw - It's what's on the computer. Could be done on anything - even paint I imagine - but since I reused some assets from the old profile cards (that I had also done in CD), just kinda made sense to go with the flow. Any idea's for improvements?
  14. Altered all the weapons to be more similar to the secondary block from V2 (and in turn managed to squeeze in a fourth weapons box). I haven't tried printing any of these off yet, but at some point I should check and make sure that pencil (or pen) shows up on all these colors before I settle in on them (such as the orange) for the backgrounds. Not that people couldn't just slap the blanks when I get them all settled in into paint or photoshop and add some text on pre-print or whatnot, but figure it's nice to cover all the bases.
  15. Any preferences on the weapons fields or other general things you think could be cleaned/bettered up?