swiftdraw

Members
  • Content count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2

About swiftdraw

  • Rank
    Newbie
  • Birthday
  1. One of my Dictators is going under the brush first and it will be Clear Purple (primary color), Lava Orange (Secondary), and Sapphire Blue (canopy). The gun barrels and odds & ends will either end up black or some form of grey, still haven't decided on that. The staff painter at the paint club commented that I seem to like using colors that are difficult to work with, I think I have to agree the more I think about how I'm going to paint the thing. Still have to decide on what the two Vanquishers, Conquerors, and the Emperor are going to be. I've a good idea what the Khan and second Dictator color scheme will be. After that I'm going to figure out what to do with the Terrans.
  2. I've most of my KW CAV's cleaned up and ready for priming. Before I get started with painting, is there any 'official' colors that KW CAV's tend to be? I looked at the few painted ones on the store page and there doesn't seem to be, but I'm asking just in case. Also, anyone have a particular color scheme they're fond of? No camo mind you, I'm not that good with these smaller models. Just color combinations. I think I’d go cross-eyed trying to attempt a digital camo pattern.
  3. Dictator
  4. Smallish stuff just bounces off of modern (2270) armor. I was thinking more like a counter-measure/smoke launcher or something. Even the Tiger I (which I assume the Tiger CAV is based off of) had track cleats and tools hanging off the flat surfaces. Probably could just kit bash or green stuff something on it if I ever get a Tiger CAV. IFM and DFM? Was ist das? Anyhow, I was assuming the Vanq B was going to be the equivalent of the '74 and was also assuming the missile launchers would be roughly the same on the model. Personally, I prefer low profile weapons and the the Vanq's stood out to me because it's one of the few that I can actually remember the name of. So, in general, I like my missile launchers to be more horizontal than vertical, just not on the current rendition of the Vanquishers (both models have the ML, the '74 had two so it stuck out to me.)
  5. I've seen a lot of call to keep the system simplified like in CAV 1 during my 'net trawl for information on the game. This post on The Miniatures Page forums probably summed up the general consensus I got from various post in the forums I looked (I.E. DakkaDakka, CoolorNot, RPG.net.) Though I will readily admit there were not a lot of threads and/or post on game mechanics themselves, it was mostly about the mini's (which are fairly well regarded, the Dictator being a favorite.) The other two more common complaints I saw was; 1) CAV was pretty much abandoned shortly after CAV 2 and there is a lot of skittishness over CAV 3 (SO), but some willingness to see how it goes if/when it comes out. 2) The lack of a printed rules book was a detriment to the system. This point on is just my personal opinion in no particular order: I can definitly see were stream lining the rules could be a plus. In my one game I played and the one I watched, the most common trip up was the modifiers (WSO, Targeting Computer, etc) and what they affected. However, if thats not what you're going for, thats not what you're going for. I would, however, try to solidify the rules a bit more and maybe release an 'Alpha' build of rules during the run up to the kickstarter. This will potentially help with two areas; 1) Getting wider play testing in before final release is probably going to be needed, I agree with Sgt._Crunch on this 2) Act as advertisment for the Kickstarter and to say *in best Monty Python impression* "WE'RE NOT DEAD YET!" But, again, I'd try to solidify the rules a bit more first before doing so. Advertisment and positive word of mouth is going to be big for the success of the Kickstater, because like I said, there is quiet a bit of skittishness over the long term support of the game. Also, I think there is quite a bit of little to no awareness of this game. I'm not a marketer, I don't play one on TV, and I didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn last night so I've little idea how you could or want to go about that. But I think putting the kickstarter up and relying on word of mouth isn't going to get a desired result from my experince following and supporting various KSer's. Also have a clear, concise plan going forward with CAV on the kickstater page will help allay some fears. The d6 vs d10 thing... I'm not at all a numbers guy. At. All. It hurts my wee lil' brain. The tabletop war games I've played have all been d6, so I really don't have a issue with it. I've also got a ton of d6's from WH40k and maybe 4 d10's total, so there is that going for d6's too. I did buy 8 CAV mini's today based off of what was at the Con and I'm going to do little mock battles to get a better idea and see if I can suss out any tendancies one way or another (other than @#!$ the Thunderbird.) Also I'll see if I can drag people into a match or three and get some intresting going at the local shops (Area 51, Gen X, Reaper.) Frankly, I enjoyed the game I played and would like to see more of it. I think keeping the price low(ish compared to metal) on the mini's will be a HUGE selling point. There was some concern about the ability of the plastic mold to hold hard edges well (something some, or the dakkadakka people at least, found important in BSR aesthetics), but the prospect of reduced cost seemed to turn people on to it. But if the qualitiy can get very close or match the metal mini's, I think they could be popular. Again, the majority of the post I've seen like the CAV design, which is a big plus. Also if you could add a printed rules book to the stretch goals, I think that'd really help gain intrest in some additional players. Thats about all the thoughts I have atm. Hoped it helped.
  6. I know, as I said the Marauder was an Unseen. But it was FASA's argument that it was only heavily based on, not a direct copy, I was trying to be a bit facetious and put it in italics to convey that. Probably should of put a smiliey in for good measure. :P
  7. I agree that the Conqueror, though I like the look, doesn't quite fit in with the rest of the lineup looks wise. I think the [post=http://www.reapermini.com/Miniatures/CAV:%20Strike%20Operations/latest/24520]Specter[/post] fit better aesthetically, though it belongs to another faction. The Tiger has a lot of wasted space on the body imo. I realize is supposed to be this big bulky CAV, but all the open, flat surfaces could mount something smallish on them. I don't know what variant it is, but it’s called the [post=http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/CAV:%20Strike%20Operations/sku-down/24591]Vanquisher 74[/post]in the store. Anyhow, I think if you could make the missile racks horizontal instead of vertical, it'd be better. The Nightshade is a bit to close for comfort, imo, to the old Unseen version of the Marauder/Marauder IIc from Battletech and the Macross Zentraedi "Glaug" Officer's Battle Pod on which it was heavily based. Edit: I can't get BBCode to work for crap here. :(
  8. A pity that, the quadruped CAV's were intresting to me from a design standpoint. A potentially more stable weapons platform that could carry a heavier gun than usual, ala WWII tank destroyers. Probably would need new rules for it though.
  9. I was the tall lanky blonde guy with glasses. I'm still not convienced the Vanquisher should be that low of a threat level compared to the Starhawk. Especially when its 'light' auto fire guns do more damage (while undamaged) than the medium auto fire guns of the Starhawk and has twice as many. That being said... I love that CAV so much, it saved my game. Mixed with the Dictator-A or (to a lesser extent) Tyrant, the thing is outstanding striker.