Ares Games
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 311

Thread: The Big thread of extra Maneuver Decks

  1. #101

    Default

    I'm gonna be the opposite of Kev: "You Missed Out So Screw You" games tend to really cheese me off; this was part of the contribution to my falling out with WizKids Pirates.

    I wouldn't mind setting up a rotation of "only available once every few years", or a pool of repaints that are dedicated exclusively to certain retail channels (say a group only offered by Kickstarter that only runs if it meets funding/numbers goals, or maybe a group exclusive to museums and war memorials)--the important thing is, that it may be a while between runs but there'll still be a second chance.

    The only thing MORE annoying than One-And-Dones is OVERPOWERED Gamebreaker Cheese One-And-Dones like Wizkids Tournament Prizes and Convention Exclusives. (Yes, I have supported the idea of Con Ex's before, but I proposed a dedicated Con Ex group from each series, keeping each four-pack available for two years before rotating them for another.)

  2. #102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diamondback View Post
    I'm gonna be the opposite of Kev: "You Missed Out So Screw You" games tend to really cheese me off; this was part of the contribution to my falling out with WizKids Pirates.

    I wouldn't mind setting up a rotation of "only available once every few years", or a pool of repaints that are dedicated exclusively to certain retail channels (say a group only offered by Kickstarter that only runs if it meets funding/numbers goals, or maybe a group exclusive to museums and war memorials)--the important thing is, that it may be a while between runs but there'll still be a second chance.
    It's already happened. Again, game wise, there is no consequence that one particular set of letters on the side of a Camel has been replaced by a different set. A Camel is a Camel, and they will be available to future players on the regular schedule Ares has planned. Do you really feel that Ares is saying 'SCREW YOU' because they gave us the Saschenberg D.VII instead of reprinting the Udet D.VII forever? 'Cause new paint schemes is the thing keeping me buying the same old model again and again, and giving me far and beyond the number of any one particular aircraft that I could possibly need, or even play in a game, while also making sure that the old models keep coming around for whatever newbies spring up.

  3. #103


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenalfonzo View Post
    I would really go for a new 'starter' 4 plane set with all new paint schemes (There are even a couple MVR Dr.I schemes not yet produced!). Also I would be in for the duel sets if they went with unique schemes. I know a lot are opposed to 'limited' paint schemes, but virtually all paint schemes, and consumer products generally, are limited production to some extent. Everything stops being made sometime, so best take advantage of the situation by putting out more variety to hook collectors and garner those extra sales. Anything that helps keep planes 'in print' is good for the game.

    Agree – I'd go with a new four plane box set. As you write all the planes are essentially limited editions (especially the SE5s!) and I think ARES could tap into the hardcore collectors market once they have the option to release individual planes.

    MvR flew the Fokker F1 and Dr1 Triplane in at least eight different paint schemes that we know of so I can't see ARES running out of options! I think they were all different airframes except for 425/17 that carried two slightly different schemes – before and after the national markings got changed. The airframes were 102/17, 127/17, 141/17, 152/17, 161/17, 477/17 and 425/17.

    He was shot down in 425/17.

    ARES Have made 161/17 in the duel pack.

    The original and reprinted ARES model sits somewhere between 141/17 and 425/17 but actually isn't either. However, I think recent research is suggesting that there was another airframe that was a MvR plane which does match this ARES scheme, however, I can't recall the airframe number and think this is an Alex Imrie theory based on an unidentified photograph that was previously thought to be a poor image of F1 102/17.
    Last edited by Timmo UK; 11-19-2014 at 01:45.

  4. #104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FarEast View Post
    A freind of mine that worked in Vegas was telling me why that is,they remain so expensive is also because there are 52 unique cards in each deck.... they are an utter pain in the arse to manufacture and each one must meet a very high QA.
    I know the paper and finish put on them are top notch and in high school I worked for a publishing company so have some insight into what all goes into the production process and the machinery need to do them. Add in the high quality standard and it starts to make sense. But mass production usually combats those thing pretty well... but this does not seem to be the case for cards And while each deck has 52 unique cards in it, all of those 52 cards are printed on a single uncut sheet. But I guess it is still labor intensive sort all those cards into separate decks and wrap them.

    I just dug up this video that gives a very brief overview of how they are made. It's pretty interesting, just wish they showed more.

  5. #105


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    So what would people be prepared to pay for extra decks?

  6. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenalfonzo View Post
    It's already happened. Again, game wise, there is no consequence that one particular set of letters on the side of a Camel has been replaced by a different set. A Camel is a Camel, and they will be available to future players on the regular schedule Ares has planned. Do you really feel that Ares is saying 'SCREW YOU' because they gave us the Saschenberg D.VII instead of reprinting the Udet D.VII forever? 'Cause new paint schemes is the thing keeping me buying the same old model again and again, and giving me far and beyond the number of any one particular aircraft that I could possibly need, or even play in a game, while also making sure that the old models keep coming around for whatever newbies spring up.
    Two different things you speak of, young my friend

    There is difference - perpetuum mobile Udet isn't good thing. But, D.VII new models is good thing. Same goes for Bf. And I never understood lack of 190A...

  7. #107

    Default

    I've moved the MvR discussion to its own thread.

  8. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    So what would people be prepared to pay for extra decks?
    Reading this thread gave me a frigging headache. BUT, I still read every bit and enjoyed it(the thread, not the headache). To answer your question for myself, I would be willing to pay $8 for a maneuver deck on its own. This understanding that the only way decks would ever be sold on their own is if Ares were to make an obscene profit on them. I really think that the cost would have to approach the cost of a single airplane pack. I look at it this way. I've been hunting an "official" E deck for quite some time now. To get it I would have to purchase an OOP Watch Your Back. On eBay WYB goes for anywhere between $30 to $70. So for me, I would rather buy 3 $8 packs than spend more for one deck. Personally I think the debate is moot. I see no circumstance that could happen where Ares would decide to sell maneuver decks only.

  9. #109

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prymus View Post
    Personally I think the debate is moot. I see no circumstance that could happen where Ares would decide to sell maneuver decks only.
    Well maybe... But the issue of decks is a big one as this thread can show.

  10. #110

    Default

    I would disagree, I actually think those wanting just the decks are a minority, just go count how many individuals have posted then look at the membership not really that great a percentage really.

  11. #111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FarEast View Post
    I would disagree, I actually think those wanting just the decks are a minority, just go count how many individuals have posted then look at the membership not really that great a percentage really.
    That is only true though if all wanting the extra decks have posted.
    From shows I am aware of a large number of people who wanted extra decks , I don't know if this was due to numbers or because of a specific aircraft not Ares available.
    So I agree that there may not be many posting, but I can assure you that there is a, shall we say, a requirement

  12. #112

    Default

    oh I agree there is a need, but I really doubt there is a demand that would make it viable for business.

  13. #113

    Default

    Are the original box sets (cards only) getting hard to find? I ask because it seems like I am always seeing them still at a few LGS as well a secondary markets.

  14. #114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by afilter View Post
    Are the original box sets (cards only) getting hard to find? I ask because it seems like I am always seeing them still at a few LGS as well a secondary markets.
    Whilst not as rear as Hens' teeth Aaron, they are certainly heading that way.
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  15. #115

    Default

    As stated some very interesting points have been raised and debated and all with merit. However I would just like to see ARES bring the boster packs back in production as for me these have been a valubale sorce for making custom decks especialy for WW2.

  16. #116


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    I've been sorting through my stuff and have some spare extra decks. Having had a flick flick through I find that not all of them have the dive and climb cards with the red lines on them. Were these a later addition? If anybody is interested I'll list the packs for sale in the appropriate place.

  17. #117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    I've been sorting through my stuff and have some spare extra decks. Having had a flick flick through I find that not all of them have the dive and climb cards with the red lines on them. Were these a later addition? If anybody is interested I'll list the packs for sale in the appropriate place.
    I will have to check my collection, but my guess is these are from the original box games before altitude was introduced.

  18. #118


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    Ah yes very possible. I think these decks were bought before the miniatures became available.

  19. #119

  20. #120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    Ah yes very possible. I think these decks were bought before the miniatures became available.
    Spot on Tim. I just arranged for my pack of spare climb and dive cards, released from Nexus to make up decks, to go to a needy cause.
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  21. #121

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    When I bought my SE5a there was a little card showing climbing- and altitudestats for the aircrafts used in the game up to that Point.
    I guess that's when climb- and dive card arrived. (around the release of series 4) Am I right?

  22. #122

    Default

    Altitude came with Burning Drachens in 2005 Per - the miniatures came a couple of years later so they always had climb/dive cards - however Famous Aces and Watch Your Back sets released before that date had card sets without hence the discrepancy.

    "He is wise who watches"

  23. #123

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    Altitude came with Burning Drachens in 2005 Per - the miniatures came a couple of years later so they always had climb/dive cards - however Famous Aces and Watch Your Back sets released before that date had card sets without hence the discrepancy.
    Did series 4 introduse some new models then? Never used in the game before?

  24. #124

    Default

    All the models were new in series 4, though the Br14, Pfalz D.III's, had been mentioned in the altitude charts prior to this and cards/charts were included in the Boosters that came out after BD but the altitude charts were not exhaustive. Think they were included with models for those who hadn't bought boosters, or RDS etc. Changes were also made, aircraft were added as time went on too. Best resource now is the 'Unofficial Stats' list.

    "He is wise who watches"

  25. #125

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    All the models were new in series 4, though the Br14, Pfalz D.III's, had been mentioned in the altitude charts prior to this and cards/charts were included in the Boosters that came out after BD but the altitude charts were not exhaustive. Think they were included with models for those who hadn't bought boosters, or RDS etc. Changes were also made, aircraft were added as time went on too. Best resource now is the 'Unofficial Stats' list.
    Do you know why they changed the DVa from 3 to 4 cc? I know it was a slower climber than, say a Camel but that must have been taken under consideration from the beginning?
    I know that many still use the old 3 cc rule. That extra cc makes a big difference especially when flying against a SPAD or an SE5a.

  26. #126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOOP View Post
    Do you know why they changed the DVa from 3 to 4 cc? I know it was a slower climber than, say a Camel but that must have been taken under consideration from the beginning?
    I know that many still use the old 3 cc rule. That extra cc makes a big difference especially when flying against a SPAD or an SE5a.
    I agree.
    I simply ignore the change. I suspect many people don't mind because they either don't use altitude at all or don't use the official climb rules. The underlying problem is trying to achieve realism with a limited range of climb rates. The Alb DVa was definitely a worse climber than a Camel so it's unrealistic to have the same climb rate but it's just as unrealistic in making the climb rate the same as much earlier planes - and in terms of game play and game balance it's much worse.

    I have noticed that in other games (such as Blue Max\Canvas Eagle) the climb rate is the same as the Camel.

    So, IMHO (for game purposes) I recommend just ignoring the change. For me WGF is meant to be fun first and realistic second.

  27. #127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicola Zee View Post
    I agree.
    I simply ignore the change. I suspect many people don't mind because they either don't use altitude at all or don't use the official climb rules. The underlying problem is trying to achieve realism with a limited range of climb rates. The Alb DVa was definitely a worse climber than a Camel so it's unrealistic to have the same climb rate but it's just as unrealistic in making the climb rate the same as much earlier planes - and in terms of game play and game balance it's much worse.

    I have noticed that in other games (such as Blue Max\Canvas Eagle) the climb rate is the same as the Camel.

    So, IMHO (for game purposes) I recommend just ignoring the change. For me WGF is meant to be fun first and realistic second.
    There have been tweaks to the climb rates of several planes. If I recall correctly, the Camel went from a 2 to a 3 as well. I've always played the D.Va as a 4. It sucks, but it is what it is and should be. Since the D.Va would probably never be flown with the early war planes, them having the same climb rate is not really an issue. Within their historical groups, everything lines up much better now. Just my opinion of course.

  28. #128

    Default

    Don't use the old cards with the ceiling and climb rates. Out of all the planes on the card only 2 have not changed!

  29. #129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberst Hajj View Post
    There have been tweaks to the climb rates of several planes. If I recall correctly, the Camel went from a 2 to a 3 as well. I've always played the D.Va as a 4. It sucks, but it is what it is and should be. Since the D.Va would probably never be flown with the early war planes, them having the same climb rate is not really an issue. Within their historical groups, everything lines up much better now. Just my opinion of course.
    I agree it's official that it's 4 - but whether it is what it should be is debatable. The DVa was not great but I just don't believe it sucked as much as it does in the game. If it did, I doubt the German pilots would not have chosen to fly it . They'd have switched to other planes such as the Pfalz.
    I, also, agree that the DVa is the exception - I've no objections to the other official climb rates.

    I suspect part of my issue with the plane is if the plane is in the scenario (and as I run the game) I end up flying it. No one else will touch it with a 10 foot barge pole. With the official climb rate, this does indeed suck. I had two choices - get rid of all the DVa's or use the old climb rates. As the models look great and it was one of the most popular planes of the war, getting rid of it would be annoying.

    But if you're happy with playing with a plane that sucks that's not an issue for you and I can understand this. Many on this forum are primarily into the history and winning and losing is not important. I'm more a board gamer and the people I play with are board gamers. Consequently we tend to regard game balance differently. As the saying goes - different stokes for different folks.
    Last edited by Nicola Zee; 12-05-2014 at 09:56. Reason: grammar\spelling

  30. #130


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicola Zee View Post
    I agree it's official that it's 4 - but whether it is what it should be is debatable. The DVa was not great but I just don't believe it sucked as much as it does in the game. If it did, I doubt the German pilots would not have chosen to fly it . They'd have switched to other planes such as the Pfalz.
    I, also, agree that the DVa is the exception - I've no objections to the other official climb rates.
    A lot of them hated the DVa including MvR – they regarded it as inferior to the DIII that it was supposed to replace. By the time the DVa was made available it was already outclassed by allied fighters. Those that flew it didn't have any choice in the matter, until later in 1917 when the DR1 became available to some. Paul Strahle (leader of Jasta 57) was still using a DIII in the spring of 1918 even though he had been flying a DVa the year before.

  31. #131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    A lot of them hated the DVa including MvR – they regarded it as inferior to the DIII that it was supposed to replace. By the time the DVa was made available it was already outclassed by allied fighters. Those that flew it didn't have any choice in the matter, until later in 1917 when the DR1 became available to some. Paul Strahle (leader of Jasta 57) was still using a DIII in the spring of 1918 even though he had been flying a DVa the year before.
    I agree it was a disappointment but I don't agree it was inferior to the DIII. Over 2,500 were built. If it really was so inferior to the DIII and Pfalz why did they keep on making so many? Why did they not switch production?

  32. #132


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    You might not think so but the guys who flew them would disagree with you, if what they write and are quoted to have commented is to be believed ; )

    I suspect just as now once an order and been placed with the contractors they have fulfil it for all sorts of daft reasons that make no sense to us retrospectively but then what else was available during the summer of 1917? The Pflaz DIII and the Dr1 didn't come until the autumn and in limited numbers.

    As an example of bizarre procurement procedure: during WW2 DeHaviland had a contract to build a given number of Mosquitos. The war ended before they were all built but DH still had to finish the order to get paid. To say that an aircraft had been completed the aircraft had to be tested and signed off. Each time this was done the engines were removed and the brand new airframe scrapped. Utter madness but it had to be done to meet the requirements of the contract…

    The pilots weren't gods who controlled the purchasing. Only the likes of MvR had a strong voice in the selection of new designs and could have two or even three planes available to them at any given time but that luxury wasn't afforded to most pilots who flew what they were given, just as Verner Voss flew the Pflaz when the Albatros DIII might have been his preference.
    Last edited by Timmo UK; 12-05-2014 at 11:20.

  33. #133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    You might not think so but the guys who flew them would disagree with you, if what they write and are quoted to have commented is to be believed ; )

    I suspect just as now once an order and been placed with the contractors they have fulfil it for all sorts of daft reasons that make no sense to us retrospectively but then what else was available during the summer of 1917? The Pflaz DIII and the Dr1 didn't come until the autumn and in limited numbers.

    As an example of bizarre procurement procedure: during WW2 DeHaviland had a contract to build a given number of Mosquitos. The war ended before they were all built but DH still had to finish the order to get paid. To say that an aircraft had been completed the aircraft had to be tested and signed off. Each time this was done the engines were removed and the brand new airframe scrapped. Utter madness but it had to be done to meet the requirements of the contract…

    The pilots weren't gods who controlled the purchasing. Only the likes of MvR had a strong voice in the selection of new designs and could have two or even three planes available to them at any given time but that luxury wasn't afforded to most pilots who flew what they were given, just as Verner Voss flew the Pflaz when the Albatros DIII might have been his preference.
    These are good points. As this debate is really a historical discussion, I've started a new thread in historical discussions.

    http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...or-at-climbing

    On a similar note to your point, the BE2 was unsuited to combat but large numbers were made long after it was obvious it was obsolete.
    Last edited by Nicola Zee; 12-07-2014 at 09:53. Reason: PS Added

  34. #134

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicola Zee View Post
    I agree it was a disappointment but I don't agree it was inferior to the DIII. Over 2,500 were built. If it really was so inferior to the DIII and Pfalz why did they keep on making so many? Why did they not switch production?
    I think I have read somewhere that the Albatroses was built in Bavaria and the Fokkers in Prussia. And the airforce was forced to place equal sized orders for planes from both places
    to keep everyone "happy" Don't know if this is true or not but I know that Prussia and Bavaria had ......... some disagreements ...... during the war.

  35. #135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicola Zee View Post
    I agree it was a disappointment but I don't agree it was inferior to the DIII. Over 2,500 were built. If it really was so inferior to the DIII and Pfalz why did they keep on making so many? Why did they not switch production?
    Quote Originally Posted by LOOP View Post
    I think I have read somewhere that the Albatroses was built in Bavaria and the Fokkers in Prussia. And the airforce was forced to place equal sized orders for planes from both places
    to keep everyone "happy" Don't know if this is true or not but I know that Prussia and Bavaria had ......... some disagreements ...... during the war.
    Pfalz was built in Bavaria, and many of the Bavarian Jastas were equipped with them for this reason.
    There really wasn't a better plane than the Albatross during most of it's production life; while the Palfz D.IIIa was a better diver, and a good plane, it was regarded as inferior in some aspects. The Dr.I had speed issues, and, being a rotary engine plane, was having engine failure issues due to the castor oil shortage.
    When Fokker brought out the D.VII, it was so superior that Albatross was forced to produce it under license, and then made a better (i.e. better QC) than Fokker did!
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  36. #136

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    When Fokker brought out the D.VII, it was so superior that Albatross was forced to produce it under license, and then made a better (i.e. better QC) than Fokker did!
    Karl
    But they still built Albatrosses. The only reason for that must be political?
    Well some shortage of sertain items may had some affect on production but not to that extent.
    I don't say you are wrong. I'm just arguing....

  37. #137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOOP View Post
    But they still built Albatrosses. The only reason for that must be political?
    Well some shortage of sertain items may had some affect on production but not to that extent.
    I don't say you are wrong. I'm just arguing....
    But they stopped making the Albatrosses after the Fokker D.VII went into production; there were still Albas on the front lines, but not new ones.
    The Albatross company went over to making Fokker D.VIIs (and there own 2 seaters) by directive.
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  38. #138

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    But they stopped making the Albatrosses after the Fokker D.VII went into production; there were still Albas on the front lines, but not new ones.
    Karl
    You're right... When I doublechecked my sourses it said that production stoped early spring -18. As I remembered it they built it straight through the summer but no.
    I bow my head for your bigger wisedom

  39. #139

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    One thing though that comes to my mind is the question of which Ac was the better, the DIII or the DVa?
    From what I have read here on this forum, the Dva meant a very, very little improvment in speed but in nearly every other aspect the DIII was the better plane.
    Is this the general view? Was this the general view in 1917/18 and if so, why did they build the DVa? It must have been better to with the DIII and perhaps do some improvments in Engines.

    Or was the DVa a desparate way to cope until better planes were at hand?

  40. #140


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    I suspect the theory was that the increased speed of the DVa should have made it much better but I'm fairly sure I've read that the DIII had a lighter wing loading which has all sorts of advantages. It does seem so odd to us now that they stuck with the DVa for so long but there might the other reasons beyond pure performance that made the DVa the preferred aircraft overall. Perhaps it was easier to maintain. I'm just guessing here…

  41. #141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    I suspect the theory was that the increased speed of the DVa should have made it much better but I'm fairly sure I've read that the DIII had a lighter wing loading which has all sorts of advantages. It does seem so odd to us now that they stuck with the DVa for so long but there might the other reasons beyond pure performance that made the DVa the preferred aircraft overall. Perhaps it was easier to maintain. I'm just guessing here…
    I provide a possible answer to this in the last post of
    http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...715#post324715

    I've also read that the DVa was heavier than the DIII but please can you provide evidence for this? If you just compare empty weights it seems to me it could be a myth. It seems to me the wing area is the same or slightly bigger on the DVa. Then factor in by late 1917 the Alb DVa was been produced with a 180/200 hp engine (rated 200hp by British standards) and it just does not stack up.

  42. #142


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    Nope I don't have the works manual to hand that has the precise weights you'd have to dig deep to find that information but again I refer you to those who might be able to help you. I don't know how much research the Rise of Flight people put in but if they've done their homework then the DIII remains the better climbing aircraft.

    I'd do some historical research with a wider scope beyond looking at engine power figures. That's only one part of it.

    I'd stick to what the guys who flew the real thing in combat say about the two types as the best source of information that has any relevance in our games because they are the only people who got to compare them in real terms using the fuel and lubricants of the day and flying at combat weight.

    As per the other thread – bigger engine for more power needs more fuel thus more weight when loaded…
    Last edited by Timmo UK; 12-09-2014 at 12:06.

  43. #143

    Thumbs down Losing business

    Quote Originally Posted by steel_ratt View Post
    I do think that they are losing money by not offering just decks. Those that just want the cards and not the minis will go elsewhere, or will come up with other solutions. But... how much money are they loosing to that?
    Well they just lost my money right there: I'm a long time WWI player and thought I would take a crack at WWII because I have nine B.17 models and dozens of fighters to oppose and escort them, all in 1.144th scale. So I bought the Fire from the sky set and discover I wasted my cash because the maneuver decks for my models don't exist and they don't make the booster packs that used to be available for the old Wings of War WW1 game. They don't even make the minis for half of the stuff, never mind maneuver decks!

    The game flits from theater to campaign and back again, never completing anything so if you want to play Battle of Britain for example there is no Do-17 or JU-88. We now have a B-17, but no B-24 and no FW190A to attack it or P-38 escort at least halfway to Berlin...... I'd love to recreate the actions between Sunderlands and JU88's over the bay of Biscay but that ain't gonna happen in this game.

    I would gladly pay $10 for a deck and plane cards, but not going to fork out big $$$$ to replace my existing plane collection. Even if I wanted to go that rout it could be years or even decades before Ares comes up with the right models. THIS, ladies and gentlemen of the mess is the thing that will turn off new players the quickest of all - and is terribly short sighted marketing strategy: if you don't make it available, we can't buy it. Period.

  44. #144

    Default

    Interesting thread.

    Took a while to read it through but noticed a few interesting points.

    First posts from almost 2 years ago were talking about Lack of SE5a's. DH 2's, and a few other models. 2 YEARS ago...and no models in sight for at least another year. Same with some of the other iconic aircraft that seemed to have vanished. Not sure of the company plan but their current model is forcing newer players to go to other sources for supplies. All they need is one deck of maneuver cards, a printer, and sleeves and they can mass produce their own decks. Same with aircraft, Shapeways is producing some fair models that have been long out of production for the game. Protecting your copyright and business is one thing, but the lack of entry level kits for newer players is nuts. I have been doing a lot of looking around and E-bay shopping and it is very difficult to find certain Air frames. I still can not find any DH 2's, but I did score a Halb DIII so have the proper deck. Unfortunatly this is forcing me to look at Shapeways for a replacement. Never done it before and am a bit reluctant. But seriously looking into getting a couple. Not because I want to cheat the company but because I refuse to wait at least 2 more years to fly the plane. I am also a figure painter running a small basement business so have no issues painting my own.

    Problem is from a new players point of veiw (also when players spend the most to buy in to a new game) About half the airframes are unavalible in any paint job, some of the major A/C types are long out of print and not even on the horizion, 4 plane starter sets are very rare, 2 plane sets just plain do not exist, and the box set you can find is not a playable game in it's own right. There is no one box with everything needed now and not sure when it will return. My interest right now is looking for the old card decks and box sets from the last company for the maneuver decks and plane cards.

    Being one of those new players and also a experianced E-bayer in the last month I have already scored 40 aircraft covering all maneuver decks except I, J, R, X, Y?, Z?, and have at least one type of all but 8 aircraft (not counting series 9 yet though) 6 out of 8 of those mising airframes are seasons 3 and 4 but may have a line on one of those. Also included is the second(tail) box set with decks E,F,G,H, and spare planes cards, one of the balloon boxes with the Nieu 16 plane and cards and balloon (green.brown one), and 2 boxes of the new rules (OK...bought a made up set of the starter with rules and 4 planes, just not the 4 prints sold in the real starter). Still can fill a lot of missing A/C from this site, a few On Line Game sites, and fishing on E-bay.

    Point is though I have made great strides there are gaps that have to be filled by other means. I am also by far not the only one in this position, some of the E-bay auctions are just plane (pun intended) nuts. Things have to change or the game WILL fade away. Catering to the older players is good, but newer players with the starting buy in are where your profit margins are. There needs to be basic sets With planes avalible at all times. Be it the 2 or 4 plane sets it does not matter. The rules only boxes are unusable on their own and need other componants to play. This is not a good entry point for new players.

    whew...getting late and the soap box is making my back hurt again...so will leave it off with this thought

    Most of this thread was written almost 2 years ago......not really seeing any changes yet.

  45. #145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zoe Brain View Post
    However, if the decks are for aircraft they have no plans for ever releasing, as they're never going to be commercially viable, then this argument doesn't hold water. Having more kinds of aircraft in the game increases sales of the ARES ones, especially since the non-ARES ones will be more expensive.

    For customers to whom exact kind of plane doesn't matter - they'll choose ARES. They're cheaper, and require no painting or preparation.

    For those who it matters to, the more different kinds of aircraft they have available as opponents, the more likely they are to buy matching types. If a BE2 is available, ARES Fokker E.III sales will increase.

    If the production of card sets is licensed, they don't even have to put any of their own money in it. A Kickstarter would be perfect. I'm sure there are volunteers here to do artwork, and the OUSC (Stats committee) have done a lot of the work making the stats.

    There's an argument to be made not to release anything ARES is planning on producing in the next 2 years. There's a lesser argument for aircraft not going to be produced in 5 years. But beyond that, their sales would increase, not decrease.
    What Zoe said.

  46. #146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackronin View Post
    What Zoe said.
    Indeed. But I would add a rider that most gamers want their product NOW, not a promise of something two or four years in the future. People who game other eras or systems, or don't game at all will see a mission being flown at a convention or game store which sparks their interest, only to find half of what they were looking at is no longer in production and won't be available to buy any time soon; anyone who has ever been involved in retail sales know you have to grab that spark of interest right there or watch your customer walk away forever.

    Many of us here started with Wings of War and stayed with it when the company went under by purchasing booster packs and sourcing kits from elsewhere, keeping the game alive while designers sorted out their legal difficulties and got back into production. The fact that we are even having this conversation going back two years speaks volumes about the regard they have for their customer base.

  47. #147


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Tim
    Location
    East Anglia
    Sorties Flown
    510
    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default

    I've never ever been able to fathom the logic of ARES. They seem to continually make very strange commercial decisions to the point that you could conclude that the game has survived in spite of itself. If anything the strategy seems to be to appeal to the collector/completist and is just about totally counter to what you'd expect of a company looking to expand it's customer base.

    When the reprint of the SE5 becomes available I suspect the entire stock will sell out worldwide in a couple of weeks, if not entirely by pre-order, that is if the game is still with us by then.

  48. #148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    I've never ever been able to fathom the logic of ARES. They seem to continually make very strange commercial decisions to the point that you could conclude that the game has survived in spite of itself. If anything the strategy seems to be to appeal to the collector/completist and is just about totally counter to what you'd expect of a company looking to expand it's customer base.

    When the reprint of the SE5 becomes available I suspect the entire stock will sell out worldwide in a couple of weeks, if not entirely by pre-order, that is if the game is still with us by then.
    Agreed. And a good bunch of those SE5's will be bought up by scalpers wanting $90 each for them six months later.

  49. #149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmo UK View Post
    I've never ever been able to fathom the logic of ARES. They seem to continually make very strange commercial decisions to the point that you could conclude that the game has survived in spite of itself. If anything the strategy seems to be to appeal to the collector/completist and is just about totally counter to what you'd expect of a company looking to expand it's customer base.

    When the reprint of the SE5 becomes available I suspect the entire stock will sell out worldwide in a couple of weeks, if not entirely by pre-order, that is if the game is still with us by then.
    thats what i thought would happen with the fokker DVII but that doesnt seem to be the case.

  50. #150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Albert Ross View Post
    Indeed. But I would add a rider that most gamers want their product NOW, not a promise of something two or four years in the future. People who game other eras or systems, or don't game at all will see a mission being flown at a convention or game store which sparks their interest, only to find half of what they were looking at is no longer in production and won't be available to buy any time soon; anyone who has ever been involved in retail sales know you have to grab that spark of interest right there or watch your customer walk away forever.

    Many of us here started with Wings of War and stayed with it when the company went under by purchasing booster packs and sourcing kits from elsewhere, keeping the game alive while designers sorted out their legal difficulties and got back into production. The fact that we are even having this conversation going back two years speaks volumes about the regard they have for their customer base.
    very true indeed. there have been quite a few people that i think wouldve gotten into wings here at the flgs. sadly ive had to watch them loose interest and move on to other games for lack of prodict available. specifically RAPs and duel packs.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


Similar Missions

  1. Extra Maneuver Decks
    By KirkH in forum WGF: General Discussions
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 01-23-2017, 11:36
  2. Extra Damage Decks
    By ktodd in forum WGF: General Discussions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-30-2016, 16:30
  3. Need Extra Maneuver Decks
    By freebird-52 in forum WGF: General Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-08-2013, 05:03
  4. extra maneuver decks?
    By pstapleton53 in forum WGF: General Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-27-2012, 08:25

Members who have read this thread: 15

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
  •