Expansion into a WOTC Set VII

waratsea4
Forumini Lieutenant

Posts: 839

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 2, 2018 23:25:57 GMT

Quote

Post by waratsea4 on Jan 2, 2018 23:25:57 GMT

Reading mnnorthstar's interesting post about the market and how it excepted each set;;
Came to thinking; what would a Set 7 look like using expansions units and WOTC set guide lines
16 rares, 8 uncommon and 16 commons with at least the average amount of types and mold remakes.
I believe they averaged about 7+ BB's, 4 CV'S, 2+ subs, 7+ DD's, 2+Aux.Installation,PT, 8+ Cruisers, 7- planes + 8+ remolds
Everyone has the favorites but i thought these brought Iconic units, smartly redone units and something the Navies lacked
and Fantasy only were deeded * remold

SET VII

AUSTRALIA 1- DAP BEAUFORT MK.VIII UC
CANADA 2- HUDSON MK.III UC
NETHERLANDS 3- HR.MS. JAVA UC
FRANCE 4- ALSACE R
5- LEOPARD C
6- BEVEZIERS C *
7- LATE 298 C
UK 8- HMS VANGUARD R
9- HMS INDEFATIGABLE R
10- HMS RENOWN R *
11- HMS LEGION C
12- HMS SALMON C
13- WELLINGTON GR MK.VIII UC
USN 14- USS RANGER R
15- USS TEXAS R
16- USS WICHITA R
17- USS HELENA UC **
18- USS WAINWRIGHT C
19- USS SILVERSIDES C *
20- P-51D MUSTANG C
RUSSIA 21- KRONSHTADT R
22- BAKU C
GERMANY 23- PETER STRASSER R *
24- VON DER TANN R
25- HE 111 H6 UC
26- JAGUAR C
27- U 25 C
28- ME 262 C
ITALY 29- MARCANTONIO COLONNA R
30- IMPERO R *
31- Z 1007 ALCIONE UC
32- RE 2001 FALCO II OR C *
IJN 33- HIRYU R
34- HIEI R *
35- MAYA R **
36- ZUIHO UC *
37- FUBUKI C
38- KI 84 FRANK C
39- HARUKAZE C
INSTALLATION 40- FORWARD AIRSTRIP R

Last Edit: Jan 3, 2018 3:00:44 GMT by waratsea4

ticat1 Moderator "Ready, Aye, Ready" Posts: 1,363	Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 2, 2018 23:32:12 GMT via mobile Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by ticat1 on Jan 2, 2018 23:32:12 GMT In one of his blog posts, rb posted the list he had made for set 7
	To you from failing hands we throw the torch be yours to hold it high. -In Flanders Fields. John McCrea

waratsea4
Forumini Lieutenant

Posts: 839

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 2, 2018 23:38:22 GMT

Quote

Post by waratsea4 on Jan 2, 2018 23:38:22 GMT

Jan 2, 2018 23:32:12 GMT ticat1 said:

In one of his blog posts, rb posted the list he had made for set 7

The intent here is how best to put a set together with expansion units in mind and WOTC limitations
I posted that a wile back i think most would be disappointed in RB set 7 no Hiryu or Ranger for one
too iconic not to have in game

flakstruk
Deck E developer

Posts: 8,316

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 3, 2018 0:25:27 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by flakstruk on Jan 3, 2018 0:25:27 GMT

Jan 2, 2018 23:38:22 GMT waratsea4 said:

Jan 2, 2018 23:32:12 GMT ticat1 said:

In one of his blog posts, rb posted the list he had made for set 7

The intent here is how best to put a set together with expansion units in mind and WOTC limitations
I posted that a wile back i think most would be disappointed in RB set 7 no Hiryu or Ranger for one
too iconic not to have in game

Iirc, in RBs blog he explains he wouldnt have likely put hiryu in set 7. More of the same. He was going to do shinano

weedsrock2
Administrator

Posts: 4,524

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 3, 2018 0:53:07 GMT Fear God & Dreadnought! likes this

Quote

Post by weedsrock2 on Jan 3, 2018 0:53:07 GMT

I would have very much preferred Shinano instead of Hiryu and Lion instead Vanguard. Vanguard is a "mongrel" compromise ship that just reused the old Glorious/Furious main guns and turrets, and wasn't even completed until 1946. (In fact, I don't like Vanguard being in the game at all.) The Lion class with its 16 inch guns is far more useful game-wise. And RB would have no-doubt given it a flavor SA in addition to the standard equipment SAs. I understand the desire for Hiryu, but again, it would just be a repeat Soryu with the island switched and not add much game-wise. Shinano is a much more unique addition to the game. The Forumini Shinano is also very close to what RB said he was going to do with it. I was very glad he got USS Wasp into the game, but Ranger was pretty much a failure as a carrier and was mostly used for training. Even so, I would have preferred Ranger over another Essex class. I know I am definitely in the minority on that one! I am sure RB would have done another Essex if the "mold puzzle" would allow it. I actually liked his list of new sculpts. It would have been an awesome set!

That said, your proposed set would have certainly been a very good one! I would certainly have bought lots of it.

I remember someone posting a PM with RB asking him for a Fubuki. His comment back was he thought it would be too close to a Kagero in appearance to make a unique sculpt.

I definitely like that you didn't add any additional minor nations. There would have been no point if the assumption was it would be the last set. And I know RB planned for it to be the last set.

Last Edit: Jan 3, 2018 0:55:55 GMT by weedsrock2

The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!

weedsrock2
Administrator

Posts: 4,524

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 3, 2018 1:03:07 GMT

Quote

Post by weedsrock2 on Jan 3, 2018 1:03:07 GMT

It's also very unlikely RB would have done the Airstrip Installation. He let me know he didn't think it was a good idea when we played at GenCon after our first deck had come out. When I told him some people wanted it to be Cap 2 he just rolled his eyes. He wasn't real keen on Installations anyway, but I think he thought the land-based aircraft costs and the number allowed per build with the land base was already calibrated the way it needed to be.

Last Edit: Jan 3, 2018 1:03:39 GMT by weedsrock2

The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!

dracos42
Forumini Captain

Posts: 1,311

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 3, 2018 2:27:37 GMT

Quote

Post by dracos42 on Jan 3, 2018 2:27:37 GMT

Jan 3, 2018 0:53:07 GMT weedsrock2 said:

I would have very much preferred Shinano instead of Hiryu and Lion instead Vanguard. Vanguard is a "mongrel" compromise ship that just reused the old Glorious/Furious main guns and turrets, and wasn't even completed until 1946. (In fact, I don't like Vanguard being in the game at all.) The Lion class with its 16 inch guns is far more useful game-wise. And RB would have no-doubt given it a flavor SA in addition to the standard equipment SAs. I understand the desire for Hiryu, but again, it would just be a repeat Soryu with the island switched and not add much game-wise. Shinano is a much more unique addition to the game. The Forumini Shinano is also very close to what RB said he was going to do with it. I was very glad he got USS Wasp into the game, but Ranger was pretty much a failure as a carrier and was mostly used for training. Even so, I would have preferred Ranger over another Essex class. I know I am definitely in the minority on that one! I am sure RB would have done another Essex if the "mold puzzle" would allow it. I actually liked his list of new sculpts. It would have been an awesome set!

That said, your proposed set would have certainly been a very good one! I would certainly have bought lots of it.

I remember someone posting a PM with RB asking him for a Fubuki. His comment back was he thought it would be too close to a Kagero in appearance to make a unique sculpt.

I definitely like that you didn't add any additional minor nations. There would have been no point if the assumption was it would be the last set. And I know RB planned for it to be the last set.

I think I would have preferred Vanguard over Lion. Maybe not, the Vanguard's much later year does make the Lion more attractive. But Vanguard has a certain mystique for me.

Waratsea4 has an interesting list - I would buy a case. The RN/Commonwealth needs a cruiser though. Perhaps one of the Arethusa's or one of the C-class. Small, weak cruisers, but both are RN cruiser classes that hadn't appeared in earlier sets.

Personally, I would replace the P-51 with the P-38. The P-38 is more of an icon of the Pacific war for me.

waratsea4
Forumini Lieutenant

Posts: 839

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 3, 2018 2:56:01 GMT

Quote

Post by waratsea4 on Jan 3, 2018 2:56:01 GMT

The intent of the thread was not what RB would have done but what The Teams have done;

and how you would put it in to set 7.

Hiryu done by the Teams was no "me to" Soryu ; to me one of the best done left out Iconic units.
My choices are subjective of course; but I added for example a Ranger instead of another Essex,
because it was different not because it was a usless unit. As with Texas over a more powerful BB the USN as plenty of those
but not a 30 point BB;; I'd add a third Essex most definitely but after the Ranger and a Shinano after Hiryu
Not a big Fantasy player so to me a Nation like The UK can get by without it. France Germany Italy need the help
P-38 probably should be in the deck but i think more players use the P-51 to greater advantage it's a toss up.
Forward Airstrip is to well of a done and useful unit not to add; WOTC did do an Installation so its not an anomaly

When i tried to do the fit its a lot harder than you'd think; doing it WOTC way 16-8-16 remolds and all;; try it

One of the hardest thing i tried was not adding as many PB and more Cruisers; to me the good Cruisers are just not there
and the PB are just to good; wanted to add more.

I believe every unit i added the Teams gave something useful and different to each navy and more balance to the game;
they may not all have that wow factor but they are well done and most at a careful look something new

Last Edit: Jan 3, 2018 3:05:16 GMT by waratsea4

weedsrock2
Administrator

Posts: 4,524

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII Jan 3, 2018 5:01:41 GMT

Quote

Post by weedsrock2 on Jan 3, 2018 5:01:41 GMT

My apologies. I misunderstood that you were taking what the teams had done and selecting down to a 40 unit deck that would fit WotC cost criteria. Interesting idea and I agree not easy at all.

I would still do Shinano over Hiryu and Lion (even vanilla) over Vanguard. If the P-38 were selected it would definitely need a re-cost, if not a re-think IMO.

The P-51, and especially the Me-262 would be absolutely out of any deck I would do. Neither fits historically very well, and the Me-262 is just plain broken in any way you want to define it IMO. The P-51 is simply something the US doesn't need in the game. US air is already busted and doesn't need to be worse. Thankfully, the team P-51 was done with some restraint. But I can think of many, many units I would rather have than the P-51.

I agree the Forward Airstrip was a good add despite RB's hesitation. If it was lower cost (as some people have wanted) it would be broken, but I think we gave the right cost and I think the SAs ended up being brilliantly thought out so as not to require a page full of clarifications. (No, I didn't come up with them.) I think it would also be broken if it allowed Patrol Bombers or had a capacity greater than 1. In other words, I think that spot in the game if nicely filled and done.

Ranger and Texas are "meh" to me, but overall I like the list.

The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!

Gallery Title:
Image URL:
Image Title:
Comment:
Tick this box if you would like to allow other members to add images to your gallery.Add Image

Forumini

title

Expansion into a WOTC Set VII

Post by waratsea4 on Jan 2, 2018 23:25:57 GMT

Post by ticat1 on Jan 2, 2018 23:32:12 GMT

Post by waratsea4 on Jan 2, 2018 23:38:22 GMT

Post by flakstruk on Jan 3, 2018 0:25:27 GMT

Post by weedsrock2 on Jan 3, 2018 0:53:07 GMT

Post by weedsrock2 on Jan 3, 2018 1:03:07 GMT

Post by dracos42 on Jan 3, 2018 2:27:37 GMT

Post by waratsea4 on Jan 3, 2018 2:56:01 GMT

Post by weedsrock2 on Jan 3, 2018 5:01:41 GMT

Quick Reply