This might have been answered, if so, I missed it. What is on the reverse sides of the Victory and Constitution ship cards :question:
Or your best guess.
Printable View
This might have been answered, if so, I missed it. What is on the reverse sides of the Victory and Constitution ship cards :question:
Or your best guess.
Same ship different year?
Maybe the USS United States. Could use it all the way up to the ACW.
Not sure about the Victory but I would expect United States to be on the reverse side of Constitution. She carried 42-pounder carronades on her spar deck, as did President, instead of the 32-pounders of Constitution which I would expect to give her higher firepower stats. She also had the reputation of poor sailing characteristics which may or may not be reflected. But foremost I would expect her she would be chosen mostly because of her victory over Macedonian while under the command of Stephen Decatur.
I personally have been strongly advocating for different variant armaments--save the other Humphreys 44s for a main-set release. As it is, we're looking at a five-side release there if it happens: USS President, USS United States, 1814 USS Guerriere, 1814 USS Java, and HMS President with a blank back-side. Lumping Chesapeake in with them I already know a number of people here myself included will throw a s***-fit over, and the only other near-sisters are a group of 1830s Russian frigates built from the British drawings of captured President.
Victory alone has like SEVEN different known armament loads, so I suggested they crunch numbers and do a few of those as different Ship Logs.
Beyond the wealth of material waiting to be implemented there's also the time frame for public interest and competition for gamer dollars to be considered.
There have been several posts on Facebook recently specifically asking Ares about the Victory and Constitution. I think folks are getting antsy for some 'official' update?
Since they are special releases, I would not put a different ship on the reverse side. I would, however, ensure the mast problem reflected in the Wave 2 first rates is corrected, and that not being simply a matter of packaging. These ships need to be truly special as promised.
I hope the make for the "special ships" a bit better look. Maybe that would be a good way to make them Raelly special! :clap:
This is the answer I got from Ares,
"the two side of these Cards have the same name (Constitution /Victory) but different stats and dates."
Anyone know when these ships are supposed to be released (if to the general public)? Being in the Northeast, I really would like to get a Constitution for my collection.
It will be interesting to see what the stat changes will be on Constitution. The 44's were to have 24-pounders on the gun deck and 12-pounders on the FC and QD but it was decided to use 42-pounder carronades in place of the 12-pounders. Constitution received 32-pounder carronades instead, probably due to availability, and she retained these throughout her career. Except for the minor addition or subtraction of guns at each Captain's discretion, Constitution's armament never changed.
We don't want USS Constitution looking like HMS Guerriere!
Attachment 10966
However, Guerrierre was a Leda-class frigate, a desendent of the Hebe-class. Some Hebe models with broken masts could come in handy for repaints.
Bobby, Guerriere was not a Leda--Java was, but Guerriere seems to be a one-off by Lafosse that was originally ordered as a Romaine mortar-frigate--plan changed when the idea of mortar frigates was discredited. Trying to run down data on her engineering and draughts has been my personal Hell ever since Constitution was announced...
Yes, thank you for catching me--the Pallas class was the final development of the Hebe line, though the Virginies were actually bigger. (Consolante and Armide were both by other designers, but were variations on the basic Sane Medium/Heavy Frigate design family.)
Lengths in meters (fullsize)/mm (miniature), On Gun Deck:
47.75 1800 FR Consolante 44 (8 built)
47.4? 1794 FR Virginie 40 (10 built)
46.99 1804 FR Armide 40 (11 built)
46.93 1808 FR Pallas 44 (37 built)
46.77? 1803 FR Hortense 40 (7 built)
*41.90 1782 FR Hebe/UK Leda & Cydnus (6 Hebe; 30 Leda/Cydnus built - Leda vs. Cydnus difference is wood used)
Ares posted a small update on the KS site. Still a good bit of waiting to do, but at least things are moving forward, and the mast issues are being handled properly.
Quote:
I am waiting to post the update until I have firm news on the production delivery. We had to solve the problem on the masts, and as you know, this is something we worked on through June and July. We could not go forward with the production of V&C before we were sure what the problem was, and that it was fixed.
We've now in place two big improvements - one of the packaging, one on the structural design of the masts from now onwward - that will be applied to future productions, including V&C. With the production just started, we expect early production samples in about 4 weeks from now, and the mass production to be done around the end of October to early November. But we'll provide more accurate news going forward.
Sounds like we won't be getting them until next year, taking in consideration shipping.
My money is on time for a Christmas present to myself.:drinks:
It's good they decided to address the mast issue beyond a fix on the packaging. But that really moves the receipt of Victory and Constitution, as well as any progress on Wave 2 reprints and the Wave 3 ships, way back.
Makes me think we wont see anything new until next year. Trying to get stuff out during the Holiday Season just doesn't work, as we learned all too well with the KS product releases. Bummer. :sad:
Mixed news. I am glad they are correcting the masts; I am saddened at the low prospect of new ships anytime this year or even the first quarter of next year. I hope this game does not slip because of it. I fear folks will move onto other games. I did a KS for a mini-based game, and am still waiting for the remainder of the components to arrive. I was pretty excited about the game, stretch goals, etc. Now, I am not even thinking about it. Similar feelings to the Conflict of Heroes series by Academy Games. Bought the suite at Origins 2013, but the promised new releases haven't been released, while the company has been putting out other game lines. I wonder about CoH's future. Like many, I have started looking at other WWII tactical game series. I don't plan on dropping SoG, but I fear others will.
Agreed. If you don't continue to 'feed the beast' the public quickly moves on to other things. I hope some solo campaigns help carry us through, but I'm not convinced that helps with the general public?
Eric, I just saw this on the BBG GenCon Preview. You might want to check it out?
http://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/16...n-2014-preview
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1...solo-expansion
At this stage, between this, the _Robotech Tactics_ debacle, and Steve Jackson flat-out lying about the _Car Wars_ reboot: Pretty-much the only person whose KS projects I will support is Howard Tayler.
Your probably right about needing to "feed the beast." I was talking to some guys at the local game store about Star Wars X-wing vs Star Trek Attack
Wing. Both games basically use the same system. Star Trek Attack Wing was preferred with the main reason given being that the models for the game came out a lot faster and X-wing production was too slow. I had noticed at one time that X-wing had models coming out at a rate of about 4 every six months. I don't think SOG would win them over.
Crack addicts, gotta have regular fresh fixes... they never woulda made it doing AAM or WAS.
Well, not with the release schedule that they currently have. But then, we are talking about a relatively new game in Sails of Glory.
I have played Sails with some of my X-Wing players and they do like it, even if the pulling chits out of a bag did not work well for them (we were just learning the game).
And for the record, I lean more towards X-Wing than Attack Wing. The last of scale in Attack Wing bugs me.
I am impressed with X-Wing's minis. I am doing everything I can to refrain from jumping in. My Buddy has the complete collection thus far, so I keep telling myself I don't need these.
I looked at some Star Trek minis, and if they are from the series mentioned here, I think they sacrificed quality for speed of release. That is not something I desire with SoG or WoG.
It's helped me to resist temptation that WizKids, FFG, ST and SW are all dead to me, other than my Star Destroyer collection. If FFG starts releasing the various members of the SD family tree (from Acclamator up through Venator, Victory, Imperial I, Imperial II and SSD) they might get a bite out of my budget, but not until.
WK ST, though... a lot of the figures look like straight re-uses of the old Micro Machines I collected as a kid. I'd say if they were truly serious, they would have licensed one of the various either 1/2500 or 1/7000-scale Japanese "gashapon" Star Trek lines' tooling as a source of miniatures...
I got bugged with the Star Trek ships in attack wing when I saw that the classic Enterprise was smaller than the Reliant. Supposedly the saucer sections are standard, which means that there is no way that the smaller Reliant should overshadow the Enterprise.
The Star Wars ships are to scale (at least until you get to the transport and the Tantive IV), which is why you probably will never see a star destroyer in that series.
Case in point, one of our X-Wing players built a second Death Star scenario. The typical play area is 3 feet by 3 feet. This layout was at least 12 by 3 and represented only a very small part of the Death Star surface.
I was never much for sci-fi games but your comments and my son's love for the Star Wars movies made me think about trying it out.
Would picking up the Star Wars X-Wing Miniatures Game Core Set be a good way to get my feet wet??
I am not much of a Star Wars person, but I found the game to be enjoyable. It is close enough to WoG that either game can be learned in minutes if one plays the other, but there are enough differences that they have different feels. The minis are rather nice, and for me, it is another opportunity to get folks to the table that might not be interested in historical games like SoG or WoG. Again, one of my hopes is that it can serve as a gateway game into WoG and SoG, as well as being a good game in its own right.
If I do ever start collecting the game, the Core Set would be in my first purchase.
I play entirely to many of these games I have x-wing and attack wing, along with SoG, WGF, WGS. Each one gives me something different when I play it, so I have room for each one.
Absolutely, Ed. Two tie fighters and one X-Wing in the core set will definitely give you a sense of play. Movement is very similar to SoG. One big advantage which has already been mentioned is you roll dice, no chit drawing.
Be warned, however, it's a slippery slope. You'll soon want more than one x-wing, and then there's the Millennium Falcon, tie bomber, tie defender, b-wing, etc. I don't play it a lot, but it is great fun. And I hear rumors that we might see Rebel Aces at GenCon and maybe some more hints at future releases.