Signals from the Frontline #392 Interview with Mini Wargaming!

unnamed

Show Notes

11-30-15

11-30-15

Intro

  • Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Twitch, and YouTube!  Join our Forums, too! If you would like to be a guest on the show, email Reece at Contact@FrontlineGaming.org
  • We sell tabletop games and supplies at 20% off! Hit us up for your next gaming order at Orders@FrontlineGaming.org or visit our webstore at FrontlineGaming.org.

News

Cyber-Monday

  • Cyber Monday! Last day for our Black Friday week sale!
    • F.A.T. Mats 20% off today!
    • ITC Terrain Series still going strong with buy 2, get 1 free deals!
    • Warzone 45% off!
    • 40k 25% off! And we still have 30k Betrayal at Calth box sets left and the Formation deals and Archaeon!!
    • Toughest Girls in the Galaxy!
    • X-Wing and DzC at 20% off!
  • Lots of Hawk Wargames news: DzC releases two new kits, the Resistance Sappers and Scouts!

dzc1 dzc2

  • Dropfleet Commander is finishing up the KS strong! Pushing 700,000 and more images to enjoy!

dfc1 dfc2 dfc3 dfc4 dfc5 dfc6 dfc7

  • Forgeworld shows off Garro, the latest in their character series and he looks awesome.

garro

  • ITC poll results are in!

tank shockcoordinated firepower shared rulescoordinated firepower and split firedarkstridercheap stompabuzzgob as an ally

Upcoming ITC Events

itc.logo.01.1

Rumors: The Rumor Section is gathered from the web and is not in any way information we receive from  any manufacturer nor is it necessarily accurate. This section of the podcast is intended for entertainment purposes only.

  • Thousand Sons upgrade kit spotted!

1ksons

  • Images floating around of the new Chaos Knights for AoS and wow…they look spectacular.
  • Duardin, aka Dwarves, to be out later this year.
  • Rumors that we are indeed getting Deathwatch vs. Tyranids in a box set! Cool.
    • Lichtor character only available in the box.
  • Rumors of Space Wolves coming in February?

Rant Session

Tactics Corner

Rules Lawyer

Completed Commissions

List For Review

LVO Khorne Deamon Kin 1850 List

Blood Host Detachment

Core (Slaughter Cult) 563pts

Chaos Lord

– Power Armor, Aura of Dark Glory, Juggernaut of Khorne, Bolt Pistol, Kor’lath the Axe

of Ruin (Blood Thirster Axe)

Chaos Cultsit x8

– Champion w/ ccw, auto pistol

Possessed Marines x5

Blood Letters x 8

Blood Letters x 8

AUXILLIARY DETACHMENT(S) x8  1287pts

GorePack

CSM Bikers x3

– Melta Gun

– Champion w/ melta bomb

CSM Bikers x3

– Melta Gun

– Champion w/ melta bomb

Flesh Hounds x5

Flesh Hounds x5

AUXILLIARY 2-8

MaulerFiend – x 5

Soul Grinder

– Warp Sword

Soul Grinder

Tags:

About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

22 Responses to “Signals from the Frontline #392 Interview with Mini Wargaming!”

  1. iNcontroL November 30, 2015 12:23 pm #

    Good show as always guys! Looks like I will be buying that Deathwatch box… must have all the nids…

    • Reecius
      Reecius November 30, 2015 1:55 pm #

      Thanks and yes, that Lichtor (if it indeed does come out) will be pretty sweet!

    • Adam
      Adam (thediceabide.com) November 30, 2015 2:21 pm #

      Ugh, more boxes! I finally just got my Assassin game, haha.

      • Reecius
        Reecius November 30, 2015 2:47 pm #

        Hey, after the desert of 5th ed releases schedules, I am excited for the faster pace we have now!

  2. theAlliance November 30, 2015 3:06 pm #

    On the show you said that the old votes were very permissive (allowing for the super-un-fun to play against superfriends tournament domineering lists.) while the new votes are much more conservative. Don’t you think that is related to the new voting format? If you had a vote on superfriends now, and asked if players wanted to play against it as it is and only allowed one vote per person, the outcome would be quite different.

    • Reecius
      Reecius November 30, 2015 3:28 pm #

      Perhaps? I can only speculate as to what impact the change in voting methodology had this go around, honestly. My guess would be that it would impact those votes where the folks that were cheating the system were most active (obviously) and where that bias occurred, I do not know. I would assume it was evenly distributed between all factions.

      • Adam
        Adam (thediceabide.com) December 1, 2015 8:12 am #

        I can tell you from experience that a change in wording like that can easily change the results. When asked how people interpret something, people tend to want to be more technically correct, but when the question is based on opinion, it’s not surprising that the answer will be different.

        To put it another way, if you ask what flavor of popsicle is more popular, you may look at sales numbers and distribution, but if you ask what flavor of popsicle you like, you’ll give your own personal choice.

        • Adam
          Adam (thediceabide.com) December 1, 2015 8:14 am #

          And with that, I can say without a doubt, if you had asked, “do you want to play against death stars or battle companies” it would probably be a resounding “no”, haha.

    • TinBane November 30, 2015 5:14 pm #

      It’s not really helpful to speculate, because at the end of the day, nobody knows who voted for what, and what they play with any great accuracy, in the old votes.

      Perhaps the eldar wouldn’t have got some things through. But actually, I think a lot of people vote fairly independently. I’ve been impressed with the ITC voting results in the past, even the ones I’ve disagreed with.

      • Adam
        Adam (thediceabide.com) December 1, 2015 8:21 am #

        I disagree about how helpful it is to speculate on this. When you’re analyzing user data, how you ask the question is often times more important than the question you asked.

        Slightly changing a question can easily cause drastic shifts in the data, the difference between voting on what you think is correct vs what you want it to be would be considered a massive difference in the world of user studies. One you’re asking someone for their unbiased opinion, while the other, you’re essentially asking how they feel about the rule, which will probably be negative if they’re on the receiving end.

        If you want a little anecdotal evidence of this, look at the questions of “How do you want to _______” vs “How does ______” in the poll results. The questions that are asking opinions are very divisive, while the questions asking for a literal interpretation of the rule are not even close.

  3. Hotsauceman1 November 30, 2015 5:35 pm #

    Will you guys release like update sprues for the terrain? Like Chaos, Nid, Imperial logos?

  4. NotreDameGuy November 30, 2015 10:35 pm #

    Random question:
    Your ITC rules allow Stormsurges in units even though they are a LOW, which you can normally only have 1 of. What about the Heavy Retribution Cadre? It is an official formation in the Hunter Contingent Detachment, and it has 2 Stormsurges (but as separate units)…

    • tiberius183 November 30, 2015 11:00 pm #

      I’d say it isn’t allowed simply because it has two stormsurge UNITS, not a single unit of two.

    • iNcontroL December 1, 2015 9:12 am #

      they spoke on this a couple times.. they aren’t allowed individually but was voted on and agreed to be allowed as a unit (up to 3 even)

      • NotreDameGuy December 2, 2015 12:43 pm #

        So you aren’t even allowed to use a legal formation presented in the codex? That seems really dumb

        • Reecius
          Reecius December 2, 2015 12:57 pm #

          No faction in the game can use more than 1 unit of Super Heavies/GCs in ITC.

          To my knowledge, the only big GT allowing more than 1 unit of Super Heavies is Adepticon, although due to their points restrictions on them, you still couldn’t take 2 Stormsurges.

          If in your local area you want to use that Formation and the rest of the ITC format, go for it.

  5. Weidekuh December 1, 2015 12:08 am #

    Am I the only one here drooling over the absolutely gorgeous Dropfleet Commander models?

    • Reecius
      Reecius December 1, 2015 10:57 am #

      No, us, too! Can’t wait for this game.

  6. brent (nimrod451) December 1, 2015 6:12 am #

    I respect the vote..

    ..but i’m sad tanks can’t run infantry over – I feel like its a valid battle tactic. I just wish there was more rules for it..

    ..then again my gaming group has suggested maybe Monstrous creatures should be able to leap up and grapple flyers out of the air..

    🙂 good signals sirs!

    • Reecius
      Reecius December 1, 2015 10:57 am #

      Yeah, Tank Shock is a sticky one.

  7. tag8833 December 1, 2015 8:08 am #

    Tank Shock is still an incredibly powerful weapon. Lots of ways to Crunch stuff remain. It just doesn’t auto kill everything that is tank shocked like your grammatical reading.

  8. Gunfex December 1, 2015 7:18 pm #

    For when you get to it, as it was asked on the podcast. In the “When little Timmy builds his army” flavor text providing an example of how to use the Farsight detachment, it clearly states that the models included in that detachment get the command ability, and those models in the CAD get obsec. Yes, it is not a “rule”, but when it is fairly clear what the intent is when compared to how other command benefits tend to function, and when supported by the crystal clear example, it barely needs a clarification. No harm in throwing it in the FAQ though!

    And yes, this is the more conservative approach.

Leave a Reply