My sons and I love the look of these minis. we are longtime Star Wars miniatures and Gamesworkshop Lord of the rings Gamers. Would we like this game? Is Dust tactics a better game to get into?. What are the differences? We were also loking to get Tide of Iron instead. What are your thoughts?
|Page 1 of 1 (8 messages)||1|
The minis are cool, rules are pretty easy and intuitive, you get two games for the price of one. The revised set is $60. If you don't like it, sell off the set for a profit. Do it.
Cry Havoc! And let slip the hogs of war!
Tactics and warfare are both great and easy to get into. Tactics is played like a board game, Warfare is like a regular tabletop wargame. Its just as easy to get into both as it is to get into one or the other. The both game are great but play very differntly.
*2012 Dust Warfare North American Champion*
Download my Army Builder at:
Looking for Dust Tactics players In/near:
Agreed. Tactics has been around for a little over 2 years, Warfare for about 8 months. Both are two of the best tabletop games I've ever played. Tactics can be the 'easier' entry game, there is less to think and worry about. But the first rule of Warfare is forget everything you know about Tactics ;) if you get the Revised Core Set, which will step you into Tactics, you can buy the Warfare PDF for $20. So two games for less than $100 and you can figure out if you enjoy one or the other, or even both.
Tactics is essentially something of a board game using minis. Warfare is a table-top game like LOTR; you can use some of the same terrain, although the Warfare scale's a lot larger…
The two major differences with Warfare from other table-top minis games are A) When a unit acts, if it attacks, it can fire every weapon that's in range, at different targets! After years of 40K and similar games, that was a surprise, and B) Unless a unit has done something to use its reaction, each unit can blast a target while that target is trying to do something, giving something of a overwatch mechanic. The increased offensive capability of A and defensive capability of B make the game quite different from most out there, leading to very different and frankly more realistic tactics, like softening up enemy formations with suppressing fire in order to work more lethal units closer to do the real damage.
Frankly, Tactics turned me off when I discovered that a single walker (the Pounder) was so lethal that only an anti-tank walker could touch it; otherwise, it would stride across the map vaping infantry and walkers alike with impunity. Warfare doesn't have that problem…
thanks guys, my sons are excited, i think we will give it a go. I saw the pdf, is it alot nicer in color though.
Ummm… Warboss, I've played Tactics since its inception, as allies, and I have NEVER seen a Pounder walk around with impunity. There are a ton of checks and balances between the units of both games. And it's only a board game in category. It plays nearly as much as a tabletop game as almost any other.
In fact, walkers are much more dominant in Warfare as they are way more survivable between cover and armor rolls
Wanted to reply to this post earlier this week but wasn't able to because of forum troubles.
I got into Dust Warfare about the time it was released and enjoyed it from the start, although it took a couple of games to get into the mindset. The rules are easy to grasp and quick but allows for a lot of tactical flexibility. While some lists are better than others the disparity isn't as great say 40k (although not as small as Infinity).
One thing I can say is that I'm always filled with ideas and inspiration after each Dust Warfare battle. Both for how to construct my next army, but also for painting and modelling. I've yet to feel tired of the game as I always have a blast with it. :)
All kinds of gaming on my blog. From Infinity to WFRP to Diaspora. Have a look at Fire Broadside!
|Page 1 of 1 (8 messages)||1|