So the big FAQ for deadzone 2 is being worked on by Jake Thornton and the rules committee. So no FAQ yet.

Just realized that I can probably make a hoverboard for a guy. Though I do like the unicycle model. Hmm.

File: IMAG0662.jpg (133 KB, 815x506) Image search: [Google]

133 KB, 815x506

>>47447679
The monocycle model is pretty cool looking, but the material is a really brittle resin. Hopefully when they release it again they will do it in a different material.

At least it's not restic I guess. Or even worse, metal.

So how does 2nd edition Deadzone hold up? It looks interesting, but the whole TLoS thing does put me off a bit.

>>47448142
Compared to 1.0, it's vastly superior. They've slimmed the game down and kept all the good tactical elements that made it unique, while getting rid of some of the junk that didnt need to be there and didnt make any sense.

As for the TLoS, this game is one of the few games that does it right. The way it works with this is ALL shots you do, assume the target is in cover. Meaning the basic dice roll is shooting a target in cover. So when you can see a part of the model, you can shoot at it. But if you can see the entire model, then you get a bonus to the the shot. That's pretty much it.

The game's movement is abstracted to help with this, and it's less maths when determining higher of structures, height of models, height obstacles, etc.

This game was made for extremely dense terrain setups, and doesn't punish gameplay for it. I highly recommend it.

>>47448527
That's good to know. I'm debating grabbing the new starter box, and all the other mechanics look solid enough. I just have such a hard time with TLoS. I've seen otherwise amazing games marred by it too often.

>>47448759
The starter set is good and cheaper than ever, but it just doesn't have enough terrain in it it play an ideal game of deadzone. If you like it I would recommend buying more terrain to bolster it. A District set (ruins or urban for $40) should give you a decent amount of cover for a 2'x2' map.

>>47448142
I can live with the TLoS system they use, since it comes into play only if you can see the whole model, and I mean the WHOLE model, base included.

Its still a bit annoying, but it does take into account the idea of ducking and weaving through cover in the core rules, where seeing the whole model is an advantage to represent being completely out in the open.

>>47448527
I got to say, there's a lot in 2.0 that I like a lot. Especially the way things are resolved. Thinking of stealing some of the ideas for my own brewed game.

>>47447753
Ah, well, fuck it, not getting the official one then. Thanks for pointing that out.

bump before bed

Anyone else feel the Warpath beta is going not well?

>>47451785
Not followed it closely, but Warpath seems to be going OK, if a little behind schedule, Firefight has the bigger issues, unsurprising giving it's a far "younger" game. Seems very likely that release will be pushed back by another month or two. Which may cause some ructions from whinging Kickstarter filth, but that kind of trash need telling to STFU every five minutes anyway. The final product is important, not when it turns up.

The mantic blog put out a few interesting posts today about the asterians and veermyn. I've been following their blog and over the last month has been a ton of interesting deadzone stuff.

https://manticblog.com/2016/05/26/deadzone-asterian-faction-starter-unboxing/
https://manticblog.com/2016/05/25/deadzone-veer-myn-strategies-tactics/
https://manticblog.com/2016/05/25/deadzone-veer-myn-first-strike-teams/

Wish they'd get the other dossiers up on the Warpath Universe site. Looks a bit bare right now, needs improving sharpish.

File: Exham IV.jpg (26 KB, 368x368) Image search: [Google]

26 KB, 368x368

>>47448840
Getting the Exham IV expansion might be the quickest and smartest solution to increase terrain quality. Comes with a nice rubbery mat rather than the paper one the game ships with.

>>47451895
Its already been pushed back to July.