Recent Statuses

2 yrs ago
I'll be away on a trip for a few days so my activity will be low
3 yrs ago
I'll be on vacation for a few days so my activity will be low


User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

Uruk of course participates in this game.
and semi-nomad centaurs (pardon the lack of sheet link, Willy wasn't/isn't quite done)
Gotta work on to fix that.

Hello,@Flagg! How's your time nowadays?
I could easily throw my hat in with a Mongol themed orc empire.
Is it fine if I go for a heterogeneous nation with several if not dozens of provinces with their own flavor and including multiple species?
EDIT: Hmm, maybe my orcish horde variant could be more fitting. We'll see when I cook up a quick preliminary NS.
Wouldnt martians ( if everyone decides to fight them ) just wipe the floor with us since they have lasers that could prob cut our ships in half :P
The beauty of energy weapons that you have far more freedom on their interpretation.Yours assume it's a sorts of doomlaser, mine was far more reserved. Also I only had 10 original Tripods with various degrees of disrepair while the locally manufactured ones were far more modest in capabilities. That being said Duck basically hated my guts for the Martian faction, balanced or not. So even if the game would've gotten off the ground it'd have most likely went on without me.

And yeah, this game died years ago. If you're interested in a similar game I'd suggest starting a new one. If you aren't confident at GM-ing one then gather more people and brainstorm one up together.


Looks good, though I uh... naval combat in WWI took place at considerable distance. That kind of tactic might work under cover of night, if you get lucky. As a chief weapon of the navy though... if a single warship spots you at a few miles out, or somesuch, you're pretty much doomed.

Otherwise, off to a great start!
To be completely fair, ramships were a thing just a decade or two before WW1. It isn't a stretch that somebody would actually roll with it. Torpedo rams were basically small yet well armored ships with very small above waterline height and only armaments enough to ward off smaller vessels. They might've also carried torpedoes but that wasn't a requirement. I can see somebody going with torpedo rams. Heck, they might be even vindicated if say ships stomp the Uruk in a previous war. Heorot could be Japan to my Russia here.

@DarkspleenI don't wish to talk about it much because then it'd just sour moods and might even lead to antagonizing people.
We actually talked this out on discord in your absence. It seems certain people imagined my Bolters as rapid-firing siege weapons and then accused me because of their own misconception. You reacted to that and probably the result.
Also just like how you forgot about accepting my NS I didn't read about you banning said weapons when I posted my sheet. Although I kind of did ignore it after hearing the details. I apologize for that.

Anyways, please message me in Discord whenever you're online. I am working in irregular shifts, have multiple devices which might be turned on even when I am away so I am usually running Discord in invisible mode. So unfortunately you can never tell when I am up.
But I can surprise you. Especially since I have a minor case of neurosis and my sleep schedule is a mess.
<Snipped quote by Willy Vereb>

@DarkspleenJust ban clip and magazine fed weapons. Chu-ko-nu were useless at anything but extremely short range and were only ever used storming keeps. They have abysmal armor penetration. For a crossbow to be remotely useful against even lightly armored troops it needs a draw weight heavy enough that a magazine is only a hindrance when it is drawn.
I feel it's kind of redundant to ban magazine fed crossbows, too. Chu-ko-nu weren't useless, they just aren't used the same as other crossbows. Their design also had lot of inefficiencies that could've been streamlined if they became more widespread, I suppose.
Anyways, what I wanted to say is that magazine fed weapons aren't really much better than loading the next round by hand, it adds convenience and better portability. Also they aren't really overtaking an archer in terms of effectiveness.

Lastly, being afraid of somewhat higher rate of fire is an ahistorical concern. Ancient battlefield weapons couldn't afford to spew thousands of ammunition per hour or anything crazy like that. Neither doctrines of the time had much to build on increased rate of fire. It was convenient but not a game changer. In case of repeating crossbows as you said rate of fire came at the cost of power. You needed relatively light draw weight to make it feasible which of course made the weapon weaker.

@Willy Vereb We've got two problems: 1) I don't recall giving you permission to post in the character tab and 2) your military uses pump-action and lever-action crossbows, both of which are explicitly banned. You will need to remove those crossbows, or bolters as you call them, and resubmit your sheet for approval before you can post ICly.
1.) You gave me explicit permission to post my sheet on Sunday or Monday. I asked you in the chat. Discord is a bit messy to scroll back that far with the message feed but you also have the search function for a good reason.
EDIT: I actually found it. Not sure if this link format works but we'll see:…

2.) Pump-action and Lever-action are both are as old as the ancient ages, even for weapons. Your decision to ban them basically also removes Gastraphetes and Chu-ko-nu, among others. In addition neither weapons are semi-automatic, that applies to weapons that load the next round by themselves. Blowback operated action was the first such example and from that you can guess how very different that would be.
In addition there's a difference between pulling back a pump for a gun, where it only requires enough force to load the next cartridge, and for a crossbow. In a sense banning pump action is the equivalent of prohibiting bowmen to draw back the bowstrings.

© 2007-2017
BBCode Cheatsheet