question for 2E play testers

[Kosh127]

Ok so what do you guys that are working on 2E have to say now. A couple of months ago you guys some of the testers were saying that the ships were needing alot of work. what do you guys have to say now?? Good, bad, getting better, or getting worst??? Any tthoughs guys??

 

[Greg Smith]

Everything is pretty much good to go. There is just a couple of changes that have just been made, that we are still discusing.

 

[Right Hand of God]

It's good that things are being discussed, shows it isn't being rushed, but it's the end of June now, what's the chances of this being ready for the scheduled release?

 

[Greg Smith]

Mongoose now has a dedicated printing facility, so they can produce games very quickly.

In Matt's blog on Planet Mongoose he said, concerning Hawkmoon and Elric:

Still, it now means we can announce a book and, because we have our own printing facility, only keep you waiting three weeks (less if you live in the UK or Europe - even less than that if you are going to Gen Con France!) before you can get your hands on Hawkmoon, rather than stretching things out for months as the books are finalised, then sent to China for printing, then sail on the slowest boats known to man. . .

 

[H]

Everything is pretty much good to go. There is just a couple of changes that have just been made, that we are still discusing.

so say a month of proof reading to make sure things are top notch, then to print?

 

[Tankdriver]

I could live with that.

 

[Court Jester]

so say a month of proof reading to make sure things are top notch, then to print?

What is this P...R...O...O...F reading you talk of?

 

[H]

so say a month of proof reading to make sure things are top notch, then to print?

What is this P...R...O...O...F reading you talk of?

A mystical ability to check spelling and grammar that ACTA has so far failed to manage. this time maybe....

 

[Celisasu]

Everyone knows there's no such thing as proof reading. It's a myth. A legend. I've never seen this mysterious proof reading. Have you? If it existed it obviously left the galaxy thousands of years ago along with the other First Ones. :lol:


On a more serious note, I do hope that the 2nd Edition Call to Arms books get carefully checked. And that the playtesters make sure we don't have weird traits such as certain Drakh cruisers with rear facing anti-fighter main weapons or Narn warships which apparently have an older model ion torpedo that doesn't have precise. :lol:

 

[emperorpenguin]

And that the playtesters make sure we don't have weird traits such as certain Drakh cruisers with rear facing anti-fighter main weapons :

that wasn't in the final playtesting list, we got it removed several versions earlier. Somehow Mongoose ended up using an older version when it went to print

 

[H]

mistakes will always happen, lets just hope for less of them!.

 

[Burger]

make sure we don't have weird traits such as certain Drakh cruisers with rear facing anti-fighter main weapons

That AF trait was confirmed as not being a typo, but in fact some kind of amazingly advanced beam weapon the Drakh decided to put on the back of their ship... because they are errr... stupid? Strange how it's disappeared in 2nd ed.......

 

[Right Hand of God]

Very strange, anybody would think somebody was covering up a daft error with a rediculous explanation, but of course that couldn't be the case

 

[Junior]

Hey since EA doesn't really get a Armageddon ship save the Excalibur, which I bet costs a Armageddon point and a raid point for the CO, will EA Crusade Era have Upper Level War ships, I mean balance wise there are some War classes that are better then others, I'm just wondering if EA will be blessed with some very good war level choices?

 

[Burger]

Well in theory all War level ships will be equal, since they are all War level. Making sure they are equal-ish is the playtesters job

 

[CZuschlag]

I actually liked the design. I'm a Drakh player, and the vast majority of our firepower is in the F arc. ISA (Drakh historical enemies) will overfly anything with F arc that they can get. This design allows the Drakh to either deny the overflight (itself a very good option) or continue to allow the F-arc centric beam team (Light Cruiser, Cruiser, Scouts) to continue rolling forward. Without that facing, the ISA's choice would be obvious; overfly and kill. Honestly, I personally loved the design choice. Most of the things you want to fire at in F arc do not have Dodge.

I actually can't recall a Drakh player complaining about the placement or reversing the guns. I like it as is, personally. Of course, one the ship itself, it does look really stupid. But it works! At least I think so.

Well, it works for the Drakh. And given that 2nd Edition is about fixing obvious mistakes --- I might be surprised if that Anti-Fighter trait persisted. Shrug. It sounds like that property shouldn't have ever been there at all.

(Edit was fixing two stupid typos.)

 

[Tankdriver]

Is there not supposed to be some specail anti-fighter trait for everyone now? Makes playing heavy fighter users kind of dicey eh?

 

[H]

Is there not supposed to be some specail anti-fighter trait for everyone now? Makes playing heavy fighter users kind of dicey eh?

ships get AF ratings it seems (see mats starwars mod). so I suspect say EA will have fairly high ones, but other fleets might be lacking, Narn I guess for one.

 

[Right Hand of God]

Hiff, do you think 2nd ed will include a special "Hiff's very very very stealthy Drakh Mothership" rule?

 

[H]

Hiff, do you think 2nd ed will include a special "Hiff's very very very stealthy Drakh Mothership" rule?

why i aughta,,,,, :x