View Poll Results: Would You Participate in a Kickstater for a War of 1812 Expansion?

Voters
146. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    81 55.48%
  • No

    25 17.12%
  • Not sure

    40 27.40%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 101 to 118 of 118

Thread: Would You Participate in a Kickstater for a War of 1812 Expansion?

  1. #101

    Default

    Maybe it's just me. I was brought up to think that when you said you would do something, you do it.
    The promise of exclusives is what brought many people & $$ into the KS. I contributed because I didn't want to miss those four ships.
    Their use of the molds for any other ship of the same class is up to them as long as they don't use the same name or color scheme.
    What people missed out on is just a part of life. Help your friends, but don't support them.

  2. #102
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    3,156
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    Ed, the other thing is I also had to take several law classes as part of my abandoned-on-completion Business major, so I know very well how to parse the words in a document. Think of it as like a Marine enlistment contract that promises you training in aviation--you may end up a line grunt in a rifle platoon in Cuba or Korea, but they don't even have to send you to flight school because as long as they send you to some school involving airframe repair you've received "training for a career in aviation" and they've fullfilled their end of the bargain, so your ass belongs to the Corps for the duration of your enlistment contract.

    EDIT: I just had another devious thought about something Ares could pull and stay within the letter of the Kickstarter offering's terms...

    Given that the KS terms were about each KS exclusive ship-pack as a "package deal", they could also split the Side 1 and Side 2 of each KS ship and pair them up with a new counterpart--example, Fougueux with a new Side 2 and Redoutable with a new Side 1, which means new arrivals have four ships to buy in the reprint while completionists who were in from square one only need one of each.

    I'm not advocating it myself, but I could see their lawyers telling them they could do it without breaching the *letter* of the KS terms. (Now, the *spirit* of 'em, you know and I know it's a clear End Run... but I'm just trying to read things like a lawyer might and see what kind of cards they could plausibly have up their sleeves.)
    Last edited by Diamondback; 03-25-2014 at 18:28.

  3. #103

    Default

    The subject of the Humphreys frigates mentioned in another thread brought me back to this thread, which was rather enjoyable re-reading I'll admit. So, knowing that fairly soon we'll be seeing a US frigate on the game table I'm wondering if Ares will address a War of 1812 set of ships or stick with the British and French focus for another year or two (whether Kickstarter or not)?

    What might be the balance to one US frigate (Constitution) and one US sloop (Thorn/Atalanta) versus all the other ships from wave 1 and 2? Smaller ships for the Great Lakes has been discussed above, but I'm wondering if we'll see any US SOL's like the USS Independence or USS Washington? I realize these ships didn't see glorious historical action, but they served for years on station in the Mediterranean and elsewhere.

    I honestly don't expect Ares to do this so which of the existing ships could one possibly modify on a ship log to fill in as a US SOL (keeping in mind this is from a modelers perspective, not a naval historian or architects)?

    What really started this 'speculation' was my viewing of some of the great photos and illustrations from the "Old Navy" section of http://www.navsource.org. After looking at the USS Constitution images I then found all these other ships I never knew of, or recall reading any reference to. I guess that shows how much the six frigates dominated history and public awareness?

    Name:  usswashington.jpg
Views: 244
Size:  108.0 KBName:  ussindependence.jpg
Views: 232
Size:  36.3 KB

  4. #104
    Admiral of the Blue.
    Baron
    England

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Notts
    Log Entries
    12,710
    Blog Entries
    22
    Name
    Rob

    Default

    Much as I would like to see a range of U.S. ships, it would be a few too many for me to find room for.
    My priority has to be filling the gaps in my present fleets.
    After that, who knows?
    Rob.

  5. #105
    Former Admiral of the Fleet
    United States

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago/Bloomington IL
    Log Entries
    5,095
    Name
    Eric

    Default

    With the recent conversations, this is a "timely" poll to revisit.

    I would like some of the smaller ships to do lake battles, e.g. Battle of Lake Erie. If such a KS set was launched, I would definitely support it.
    “You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation.” ― Plato

  6. #106
    Vice Admiral of the Red.
    Admiral
    UK

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Norfolk
    Log Entries
    5,095
    Name
    David

    Default

    I would be happy to see some more U.S. ships.

  7. #107
    Midshipman
    Australia

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queensland
    Log Entries
    217
    Name
    Alastair

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naharaht View Post
    I would be happy to see some more U.S. ships.
    Likewise!

  8. #108
    Admiral of the Blue.
    Baron
    England

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Notts
    Log Entries
    12,710
    Blog Entries
    22
    Name
    Rob

    Default

    Well what a difference a couple of years and reading two books about the American Navy can make.
    I am certainly up for a small American fleet now!

    Rob.
    The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.

  9. #109
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    3,156
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    If we can get a Peacock and a Cruizer sculpt, those give us some of the bigger unrated Lakers too. Most of the rest both up and down are gonna be challenges to shoehorn in, though, and we've already discussed my idea of doing the too-smalls as two-per-base pieces integrally cast with the top-plate. (I'm thinking a combined log, where each ship on the base has independent fire/repair actions, damage, etc. Left half is Ship 1, right Ship 2.)
    --Diamondback
    PMH, SME, TLA, BBB

  10. #110
    Admiral of the Blue.
    Baron
    England

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Notts
    Log Entries
    12,710
    Blog Entries
    22
    Name
    Rob

    Default

    Sounds a great idea to me DB. I am just reading a series of novels about the War of 1812 from the American perspective, and it has awakened an interest in the period for me. I quite like the idea of pitting myself against the might of the British Navy for a change.
    Rob.
    The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.

  11. #111
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    3,156
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    Thinking such an approach would probably be six boxes or less per ship (middle box each row marked as a divider), probably gunnery of 1-1-1 tops to 0-1-0, maybe 1 Musketry and 1-2 Crew Actions.

    Something like, (this is a representational example not a serious Stat Committee proposal)
    HMS Sir Sidney Smith Bur: 2 Veer: 7 X HMS Lord Beresford Bur: 2 Veer: 7
    12-gun lake schooner Box 1 2 3 4 5 6 X 12-gun lake schooner Box 1 2 3 4 5 6
    Gun 1-1-1 1-1-1 0-1-1 0-1-0 0-1-0 none X Gun 1-1-1 1-1-1 0-1-1 0-1-0 0-1-0 none
    Crew 2 2 1 1 1 1 X Crew 2 2 1 1 1 1
    Musketry 1 1 1 1 1 1 X Musketry 1 1 1 1 1 1

    Thinking is, damage gets applied to whichever ship on the base (one top left, other bottom right, or top right/bottom left, whichever) is closer to the firing ship. These guys would only fire at B-range--high maneuverability, middling speed, low firepower, broader fire arcs, possible immunity or significant reduction of grounding in Shoals, subject to Weather damage from wind alone unlike bigger ships, basically shallow-water specialists otherwise only useful for Zerg Rushing.

    Fire arc notes: a Top Left ship would have its starboard stern quarter blocked for firing until the Bottom Right ship is destroyed but be able to shoot in any other direction; similarly the Bottom Right ship would be unable to fire to Port Bow quarter.
    Last edited by Diamondback; 10-02-2017 at 03:38.
    --Diamondback
    PMH, SME, TLA, BBB

  12. #112

    Default

    probably gunnery of 1-1-1 tops to 0-1-0, maybe 1 Musketry and 1-2 Crew Actions.
    TBH thats all a bit pointless. Change the stat range for small craft actions. The alternative gives a rather boring , stale and "samey" experience

  13. #113

    Default

    I REALLY cannot overstate how much I would like to see this happen -- earlier this year I emailed Ares and suggested in their next release they should include the USS Essex and the HMS Shannon as a step in this direction. I sincerely hope they do not ignore the substantial North American market for War of 1812 ships.

  14. #114
    Admiral of the Blue.
    Baron
    England

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Notts
    Log Entries
    12,710
    Blog Entries
    22
    Name
    Rob

    Default

    Despite the statement I made about never supporting another Kickstarter, after the Tripods farce, I would still support my American cousins if it meant them getting a fair crack of the whip re US naval units.
    Rob.
    The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.

  15. #115
    Captain of the Fleet
    Master & Commander
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    South Glos
    Log Entries
    1,659
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    Nope, sorry such a kickstarter would not interest myself in the slightest.
    Especially as the sizes we are talking about may suffer the same size debate as waves three and four.
    So nope afraid not for me, still want some Spanish 80s

  16. #116
    Admiral of the Blue.
    Baron
    England

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Notts
    Log Entries
    12,710
    Blog Entries
    22
    Name
    Rob

    Default

    Do you think they could get the Spanish 80s to the right scale Chris?
    Rob.
    The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.

  17. #117
    Captain of the Fleet
    Master & Commander
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    South Glos
    Log Entries
    1,659
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    To be honest, nope

  18. #118
    Landsman
    Spain

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Almeria
    Log Entries
    17
    Name
    Ferrante

    Default

    I prefer some expansion about pírate age , or more about Spanish Main era
    But not about 1812

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •