MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop DA3: Beyond Thunderdome Military
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
Conversation »
QUESTIONS? 4: Ghost Protocol
Can we name the second attack window "Attack Window 2: Electric Boogaloo"?
Permalink
| April 9, 2018, 8:40 pm
Quoting Zach Sweigart
Can we name the second attack window "Attack Window 2: Electric Boogaloo"?

Or how about "Oh my giant blue head!"
Permalink
| April 9, 2018, 8:42 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
I didn't know there was a sequel to Watchmen.

Huh? That was from the movie Megamind xd
Permalink
| April 9, 2018, 8:50 pm
For CAT2, Is it okay if I build a round wall which encircles the whole room, or does it have to strictly be only three walls? Also, may I add a ceiling?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 1:29 am
For CAT3, can I build a city with my capitol building too? Or can it only be the building?


Also, I believe this was asked before, but can I build it on a 32x32 baseplate, where the extra is just border?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 1:37 am
Heyy the next attack window should be "AW 2: Tilted Towers"
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 2:13 am
For me, next atack window will definitely be called - the battle for B1 )))
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 2:47 am
For category four APC may we have wheels mixed with tracks?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 7:46 am
 Group admin 
Quoting W Navarre
For category four APC may we have wheels mixed with tracks?

I'll quote Goldman just to be safe: http://www.moc-pages.com/group_conversation.php?id=26364&topicid=107544#comment-1757657
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 8:30 am
 Group admin 
Quoting * Joey4026 *
For CAT2, Is it okay if I build a round wall which encircles the whole room, or does it have to strictly be only three walls? Also, may I add a ceiling?

A round wall would look cool, but it should just be 3 walls. A ceiling is fine if it doesn't obscure your photography.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 8:31 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Daniel H.
For CAT3, can I build a city with my capitol building too? Or can it only be the building?


Also, I believe this was asked before, but can I build it on a 32x32 baseplate, where the extra is just border?

I will let one of the other two get back to you on the first question.

I can answer the second question though, and you're right on track. Just leave a 1-stud border empty to effectively reduce the MOC dimensions to 30x30 and you're good.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 8:38 am
I have one question:

Earlier I asked whether it is acceptable to build multiple MOCs to satisfy a particular category and switch them into the ORBAT depending on which one garnered the most likes. The DAS at that point said that not only was it allowed, but it was encouraged. I am wondering, though, whether the flag is one exception to that rule. Can a nation re-build their flag without declaring a regime change? Heck, Canada did it in 1964.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:03 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Mark B.
I have one question:

Earlier I asked whether it is acceptable to build multiple MOCs to satisfy a particular category and switch them into the ORBAT depending on which one garnered the most likes. The DAS at that point said that not only was it allowed, but it was encouraged. I am wondering, though, whether the flag is one exception to that rule. Can a nation re-build their flag without declaring a regime change? Heck, Canada did it in 1964.

Good question, and good clarification. As far as I know, any flag change is subject to a regime change, so that is indeed an exception to the earlier discussion. At least there are 14 other categores you can iterate. If you want to reply to a different DAS member directly to get their input, I wouldn't mind, and you might get a different response.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:48 am
Another question:

I think it was stated earlier that the attacks are resolved sequentially, although MILPO is determined once, at the beginning of an attack window. Suppose, though, that a player gets wiped out before its first attack is resolved. Is that attack cancelled, or is it still resolved, with the player potentially regaining a territory after losing everything?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 10:53 am
Quoting Keith Goldman
1.) You can add whatever you want to the build, so long as the basic SPECs are met and you don't exceed the established dimensions of the category.

2.) Yes, so long as youj leave a 1-stud border of the 32x32 baseplate empty to effectively reduce the MOC dimensions to 30x30.

Wicked! Thanks!
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 11:56 am
And one more question:

For the purpose of satisfying requirement 2 for CAT 10 (wings at 2 distinct angles), would deploying dive brakes be sufficient?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 12:48 pm
Um... why did Ruthford delete his account..?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 12:53 pm
Who's gonna be the stand in for Rutherford?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 4:48 pm
Quoting Zach Sweigart
Can we name the second attack window "Attack Window 2: Electric Boogaloo"?

I love'd Break'n 2
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 4:50 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Go read the Priority Coms thread. This is really the wrong day to annoy me with a bunch of questions. I've said all I care to on the topic of Rutherford.

Sorry boss man.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 4:52 pm
Is it still possible to exclude naval power from both players's MILPO when attacking adjacent coastal territories?
(like if the attacker says they attack without their navy, or if they don't have one)
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 6:32 pm
1. Can we reuse minifigs from previous MOCs like, say, Metal Legion?

2. DoD uplo figs pass as minifigs?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 7:22 pm
It got a no go for not having wings? You only say wings, and many times you say the rest is up to the builder, in my opinion the V shape wing form in flight mode is wings. If I remember correctly Oliver becker has hover jets not wings, but that got a go. I just really dont see how those aren't wings, they aren't conventional or normal wings, but they are wings. I do hope you reconsider. To quote you "your Ground Attack Aircraft requires wings that must be photographed at 2 distinct angles. (up/down, straight/swept back, etc.)" that doesn't say it requires conventional or normal wings. I just simply do not understand those do not qualify.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:00 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Oliver Becker's airplane clearly has wings, in my opinion yours does not. Its one thing to push these categories to be as special and creative as possible, its' another to completely ignore the spirit of the thing you're trying to build. I thought it was a boat or APC when I first looked at it, thus my initial confusion. I don't accept those as wings and your model will remain DQ'd until you fix it.

:(

Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:24 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Oliver Becker's airplane clearly has wings, in my opinion yours does not. Its one thing to push these categories to be as special and creative as possible, its' another to completely ignore the spirit of the thing you're trying to build. I thought it was a boat or APC when I first looked at it, thus my initial confusion. I don't accept those as wings and your model will remain DQ'd until you fix it.

May i ask, did you think it was a boat by first looking at its hovercraft mode? And would would have to be done to make it specification accurate? Because i can no longer trust my own judgement on what is and what isnt
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:26 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting General Gunn ~
May i ask, did you think it was a boat by first looking at its hovercraft mode? And would would have to be done to make it specification accurate? Because i can no longer trust my own judgement on what is and what isnt

Trial and error is always a decent option. One possibility is to do a web search on "airplane", "wing", or something similar. You probably know what you'll end up seeing. Not to be rude to you, but CDR Goldman at least gave you pretty specific improvement suggestions. It shouldn't be a difficult change.

I would think about it this way. Wings are used for lift. Lift requires surface area. Maybe that helps?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:30 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
The confusion started with you title, which was very close to APC, then my confusion increased when I saw what you called wings, then even moreso when it's a mech and then some kind of boat. It's an airplane. Make an airplane.

are you saying i couldnt fix this into an airplane..?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:31 pm
Quoting VAkkron ™
Trial and error is always a decent option. One possibility is to do a web search on "airplane", "wing", or something similar. You probably know what you'll end up seeing. Not to be rude to you, but CDR Goldman at least gave you pretty specific improvement suggestions. It shouldn't be a difficult change.

I would think about it this way. Wings are used for lift. Lift requires surface area. Maybe that helps?

It does help, but if you look at Oliver Becker/Zach, those are thrusters. Now i may be wrong, but i have never seen a plane that can fly with just thrusters.

Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:33 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Yes, by all means add some wings and I'll be happy to evaluate it again.

I will add wings, is it allowed to transform though?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:35 pm
Hmmm, maybe it's not the right time to ask, but with my APC, can it be a mix of wheeled and tracked? Or just wheeled or just tracked. And if it wheeled and tracked is allowed how many wheels and tracks are required?
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:35 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Zach Lucia
Hmmm, maybe it's not the right time to ask, but with my APC, can it be a mix of wheeled and tracked? Or just wheeled or just tracked. And if it wheeled and tracked is allowed how many wheels and tracks are required?

A mix is fine. A couple people have asked this already, I know W. Navarre did already today, but just to abbreviate, you have to meet both specs if you do treads & wheels. That means 6 wheels, treads, and a spare tire plus a spare length of tread.
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:38 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Keith Goldman
Sure, as long as it has wings.

Would the wings still be allowed to have a few holes? But not fully Hollow
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:38 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Your timing is fine. It's been established that you can use both but you still have to include 6 wheels and you have to include spare tire and a section of spare track. The size of the tracked section is up to the builder.

Darn, that's on me for not asking sooner. Time for a rebuild!
Permalink
| April 10, 2018, 9:50 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
No. The “no navy” rule from DA2 is NOT in effect. If a defender has naval units, he or she is always entitled to use them. Fighters launch off carriers, PT Boats zip up rivers, etc.

What if the two coastal territories have separate SZs?
e.g. Player A has 1 coastal territory, A7, and attacks Player B, in A5?
They have separate Sea Zones, and Player A doesn't have the CTs necessary to cross those.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 12:26 am
Quoting Keith Goldman
Gunn you are wearing me out, and you really have no situational awareness to pick this fight today. I'm not going to answer that question, either try something new and figure out what wings are, or skip the category. We're done with this topic until you have something to actually show me.

Where was all this fight when you were so intimidated you said you were going to quit before the game began? Where was it when you were too overwhelmed to pick a starting territory? Look, I'm glad you finally found your stones but you're picking the wrong hill to die on.

My apologies, I over reacted. I will hopefully get a new version up tomorrow. As i said before, my apologies, you already have enough on your hands running this (and i thank you very much for running it) and you definitely dont need me being a pain in the rear
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 1:06 am
For Category 10; must all the weapons systems be attached all at once or can their be differing loadouts?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 2:53 am
Regarding speed and milpo during attack.

Does milpo change in any way during attack?

Say Tom and I each have 2 territories and milpo of 100.

If he attacks one of mine first (and let's assume he'll take it despite the even numbers) will his milpo go to 105 and mine drop to 95 before my attack? Or do the milpo changes take effect only after attack phase is done?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 4:18 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Ron L. Mitchell
For Category 10; must all the weapons systems be attached all at once or can their be differing loadouts?

There must be 3 weapons systems featured at any time. You can have more than three that you swap out, but then make sure to identify them, otherwise some pictures will look not up to spec.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 8:58 am
 Group admin 
Quoting P. Andrei
Regarding speed and milpo during attack.

Does milpo change in any way during attack?

Say Tom and I each have 2 territories and milpo of 100.

If he attacks one of mine first (and let's assume he'll take it despite the even numbers) will his milpo go to 105 and mine drop to 95 before my attack? Or do the milpo changes take effect only after attack phase is done?

There is no MILPO degredation during an attack window due to a elapsed time. Your attacking MILPO is always divided based on how many times you attack and your defending MILPO is divided based on how many times you are attacked. Besides that and sea range penalties, nothing else changes your MILPO. I don't remember who wins in the event of a tie, but I'm pretty sure it's the defender. I think the rules specify that.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 9:04 am
 Group admin 
Quoting P. Andrei
Regarding speed and milpo during attack.

Does milpo change in any way during attack?

Say Tom and I each have 2 territories and milpo of 100.

If he attacks one of mine first (and let's assume he'll take it despite the even numbers) will his milpo go to 105 and mine drop to 95 before my attack? Or do the milpo changes take effect only after attack phase is done?

Oh and if you were referring to territory bonuses? I'm not sure how that works, let's ask Keith.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 9:05 am
Yeah, I was asking about territory bonuses. As Keith said attacks are done in the order they were initiated, so if Tom attacked me first by the time my attack happens, I'd have one less territory and he'd have one extra.

Basically the question is whether speed plays any role other than being unable to attack a territory that was already attacked.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 10:50 am
When exactly is the next Attack Window? I think I heard that it happens on Fridays at 1:00, and I would guess that's EST? It lasts 24 hours right?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 11:24 am
Here's another question. When you say Machine Gun Turret what all does this involve? Is an anti-aircraft gun turret valid? Sorry, this is mostly just my lack of familiarity with these military terminologies.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 11:50 am
This question is kind of odd, and the answer probably won’t affect my builds, but I was just thinking, only category 3 specifies being built at nanoscale, and the other categories require figures, meaning they can’t be nanoscale. But are other categories required to be at minifigures scale? Like could you use Lego Games microfigures or build everything at the scale of bionicle/hero factory figures? I was just wondering, as I thought an army of microfigures would be downright hilarious.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 1:43 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
If the SPEC requires minifigs then there is no wiggle-room except for minifig scale droids that have appeared in some MOCs. This round of SPECs was extremely minifig-centric but that won't be the case with the next round. I predict you'll get your chance eventually.

Okay, thanks. Now all I need to do is get a lot of microfigures...
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 2:19 pm
Can the first territory a person tries to inhabit be an occupied one, or must the first territory always be a blank territory? Thanks for all the answers!
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 2:40 pm
If there is DA4,can we do away with the WC?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 3:52 pm
Copy that
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 4:16 pm
Sorry boss, one more, can we get a bigger map if there is a next time?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 4:39 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Without Rutherford I'm not sure there will be a next time but sure, that's something we can look into. When planning DA3 we thought we would be lucky to get 25 players and probably more like 20 considering the state of MOCpages. The turnout this year has been very surprising.

I'm willing to help. Can you imagine, Me, on DAS.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 4:44 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Without Rutherford I'm not sure there will be a next time but sure, that's something we can look into. When planning DA3 we thought we would be lucky to get 25 players and probably more like 20 considering the state of MOCpages. The turnout this year has been very surprising and the map became crowded more quickly than we anticipated. On the upside, early aggression will be rewarded and this time around friendship will not be so magic.

If there's something I can do to help for DA4 let me know. I'd like to lend a hand if I can. This experience of DA3 is a treasure and if I can "pay it forward" as it were, I'd be glad to.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 4:58 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
I really appreciate the offer Zach, and I'm sure when enough time passes I might have a different outlook about DA4. I'd hate to see you off the battlefield though, we were hoping for some new blood to really take the veterans to the wall, and you've provided that in spades.

Whenever a game ends we typically have a debrief where interested players talk about what went right and wrong, and suggestions for next time. If you're still interested we'll talk about it then and see what kind of team we could put together for DA4. That way you have a full picture of what it's like to see a full game unfold and I'll have a better idea of my own situation. I don't mean to be dismissal or non-committal but it feels like this marathon just got started and we've already had some rough spots. It's difficult for me to fully engage with the idea of the next iteration.

Again though, I do appreciate the offer.

No problem. I totally understand. I'll be here!
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 5:16 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman

I and (I believe) plenty of us fully understand too.

I wanted to encourage you for THIS iteration of DA. Even with those rough spots, it's been a wonderful experience so far once again and I can not thank you enough for the time and commitment you put into this.
You rock man, hang on!
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 7:39 pm
What if my buddy icon refuses to work? Has it by any chance changed for anybody else, because for me it hasn't, even though I changed it three hours ago... might give it another try now.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 7:46 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman

I thank you as well, Goldman. My motivation to build with LEGO was waning, but Decisive Action brought me back. It's certainly stressful, but not unenjoyable.
Thanks for that, and for putting up with my questions.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 7:49 pm
Try clearing browser cache, should do the trick.
Quoting W Navarre
What if my buddy icon refuses to work? Has it by any chance changed for anybody else, because for me it hasn't, even though I changed it three hours ago... might give it another try now.


Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 7:54 pm
Quoting Pico van Grootveld

Try clearing browser cache... sorry, lost me there, haha! I'm not too techy I'm afraid.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 7:57 pm
Quoting W Navarre
Try clearing browser cache... sorry, lost me there, haha! I'm not too techy I'm afraid.

If you're on a mobile device, clear browser history.

https://www.zyxware.com/articles/3678/how-to-clear-cache-on-various-browsers-and-their-key-board-shortcuts
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 8:02 pm
Quoting W Navarre
Try clearing browser cache... sorry, lost me there, haha! I'm not too techy I'm afraid.

On Chrome + Windows : hit ctrl+F5
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 8:05 pm
Thank you guys! Made it super easy for me.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 8:41 pm
Goldilocks, love you too man, but get on the stick...we the players are here to have fun and we got your back! So...questions thread?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 9:05 pm
I get the feeling the answer is no, but since I've made a capital but I don't have a territory on the map yet, could I place it on the map anyways, thus claiming a territory without going through the AW?
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 10:44 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Black_Wind 8319
I get the feeling the answer is no, but since I've made a capital but I don't have a territory on the map yet, could I place it on the map anyways, thus claiming a territory without going through the AW?

No. :) Good guess.
Permalink
| April 11, 2018, 11:10 pm
 Group admin 
If I get killed early, I'll be at your disposal Keith. I can't thank you enough for putting in all the effort. Caleb too.
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 3:16 am
So all do the restrictions given in the rules for “attacking over water,” (that one must have a logistics craft, that one must have three coastal territories per SZ crossed, and that MILPO is divided by the number of SZs crossed), apply in the case of naval support of a land attack, or only in the case of an amphibious assault on a noncontiguous territory?

Example: If a player held only E10 and wished to attack E9, would he be able to use his naval MILPO?
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 2:30 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Yes those rules apply to any time water is involved. Not to make excuses but I didn't write that rule, nor am I a big fan of it, but that's the rule Rutherford made when designing the game and we will stick with it for this iteration. We can look at changing it for any subsequent games.

So in the case of your example, the player who only owns E10 and wants to attack E9 would not be able to use his navy in the attack.

Well, that's a revolting development. I was thinking that that only applied to moving land troops over water, probably due to the landing craft requirement. I think that could use a bit of clarification in the rules, but then again maybe I was just being dense.

Thank you for the quick clarification!
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 3:13 pm
Not sure if this has been asked already, so apologies if it has.

Are there only 9 available nations left (as on the colour chart) or can people join until the map is free of empty territories?
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 6:10 pm
Actually, now that I see the above question I have a related query on sea zones and attacking. Does the sea zones crossed thing count the one you start on? For example, if a player owned C33, C32, and C31, would they be able to attack C21? And on a related note, why do C21 and C31 not share a sea zone? They're so close together.
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 6:51 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Black_Wind 8319
Actually, now that I see the above question I have a related query on sea zones and attacking. Does the sea zones crossed thing count the one you start on? For example, if a player owned C33, C32, and C31, would they be able to attack C21? And on a related note, why do C21 and C31 not share a sea zone? They're so close together.

If a player was to start on either C33, C32, or C31, they would be stuck there. Yes, the sea zone that your land territory or island sits in counts as one sea zone when crossing zones. Therefore an "island" player needs at least 6 coastal territories to cross a single sea zone border.

There are several reasons they don't touch. The first is because the map has lots of variety. Lots of opportunities for players to start on an island that do border a mainland (F15, F16, and F17 for example), but also opportunities for a player to get stuck. So close, yet so far away. Think about a dozen rounds in: players who are winning will find these water-locked islands to be decisive launching-grounds for crossing oceans, yet inaccessible to other players. They will be the strongholds of the strong nations and the terror of the weak nations.

This is Decisive Action, and what I love so much is that means the map will develop its own strategy. Watch and seize opportunity, or else learn the hard way.
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:09 pm
Quoting VAkkron ™
If a player was to start on either C33, C32, or C31, they would be stuck there. Yes, the sea zone that your land territory or island sits in counts as one sea zone when crossing zones. Therefore an "island" player needs at least 6 coastal territories to cross a single sea zone border.

There are several reasons they don't touch. The first is because the map has lots of variety. Lots of opportunities for players to start on an island that do border a mainland (F15, F16, and F17 for example), but also opportunities for a player to get stuck. So close, yet so far away. Think about a dozen rounds in: players who are winning will find these water-locked islands to be decisive launching-grounds for crossing oceans, yet inaccessible to other players. They will be the strongholds of the strong nations and the terror of the weak nations.

This is Decisive Action, and what I love so much is that means the map will develop its own strategy. Watch and seize opportunity, or else learn the hard way.

Thank you. I’m glad I cleared this up now, because I was gonna start on C33!

Gotta find a new starting place...

On that note, do A5 and A7 border on sea zone Z8? It kind of looks like they do...
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:28 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
They do not. General Barrett was trapped last turn because he made that very mistake. I've clarified that border several times, but it's been lost in old Questions threads. I'm glad you're asking now, as opposed to getting caught flat-footed tomorrow. Keep the good questions coming.

okay. Darn it, if the world court wasn't on A4 the A islands would be viable... okay, so attacking overland does not include the MILPO score of PT boats and Logistics Landing craft, right? Sorry that i'm asking so many questions that probably have been asked, I really don't want to mess up. I think that's all my questions for now.
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:38 pm
How many coastlines does E6 have?

Does D21 touch SZ65?
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:38 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Please don't be sorry, you're new and there is a significant amount of information to absorb in a relatively short period of time. That's what we're here for, so I'd much rather have you ask even redundant questions now than be upset or disappointed later.

If you're attacking a land-locked territory your naval units are not included in your MILPO. In addition, if you don't have 3 coastal territories you can't attack over water at all. If you don't have a Logistics Landing Craft you can't attack over water either. Hope that helps, let us know if you still need clarity on any aspect of the game.


okay, so if a player attacked from, say, C1 to C2, neither of which are landlocked, but are both adjacent, would the PT boat/Logistics landing craft add to the MILPO due to their adjacent coastline, or would they not?
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:49 pm
Question regarding position on the map and tactical awareness in the DAS.

Will I get banned from the group if I call you Goldilocks? Asking for a friend. XDDDD
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:55 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
In that example, if a player only owns C1, he or she would not be able to use naval weapons of any kind, only land and air. HOWEVER, the defender (C2) would be able to use their naval units to defend, even though they lack the number of territories required to use that same navy offensively. PT boats and landing craft can go up rivers, fighters can launch off of carriers and battleship guns can be turned inland for example)

so C1 would be able to use it's Mechanized Infantry and Ground Attack Aircraft.

C2 would be able to defend with both of those, plus the PT Boat and the Logistics Landing craft.

When designing the game, Rutherford wanted to make it very difficult to attack across water.


Okay then. That clears up a lot. Time to go stare at the map again.

If I may ask, why did Rutherford leave?
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 9:58 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman

Don't do it roonTree. Don't roll the dice if you can't pay the price...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HNWhVXcjV8

And if Ron calls me that again, I'm gonna put the Kaiju right on top of A1.

Keep your eye on the sparrow.

Kaiju, meteors, hazmats...oh my!
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 10:53 pm
Sorry Alex, can I convert that to a question?
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 10:54 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
That's a fair question, but it's not one that I really care to get too deep into because I don't really know the full story yet, I don't want to speak for Rutherford and I'm already tired of the topic.

Michael's departure is unfortunate because he's funny, as the creator he has the best understanding of the rules, and he brought some authentic (if occasionally exaggerated) military flavor to the group that is impossible to duplicate. DA3 is not better for his absence and if it were up to me, he'd still be here.

As for why he left, all I can tell you is that he said he was no longer willing to support the way I was leading the group and quickly made it apparent that he wasn't even willing to communicate in any way. He mentioned some other frustrations with group members that don't merit going into detail, it serves no constructive purpose. That's it, that's all I know. The ending was abrupt and it was final, and I have yet to communicate with him since his departure. TLDR: he rage quit and factors outside the game no doubt played a part but I can't say what those might be.

So...It is not my intention to minimize Mike's exit but this topic has lost all interest to me. He left. Caleb and I chose to stay because it seemed like the right thing to do for the players who have already invested time and energy (149 MOCs and climbing) and we would like to see the game played, it can be a lot of fun.

This is the last time I will address this topic unless I have some new information. I don't have any contact info for Mike that I'm at liberty to share, and his Flickr account is also gone.

The way is forward.

Okay. That's unfortunate, but i'm glad you and Caleb are all for it still, this has been really fun so far and i seriously look forward to the next few months of conquest-I mean mutually diplomatic treaties...
Permalink
| April 12, 2018, 11:55 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman

so C1 would be able to use it's Mechanized Infantry and Ground Attack Aircraft.

C2 would be able to defend with both of those, plus the PT Boat and the Logistics Landing craft.

When designing the game, Rutherford wanted to make it very difficult to attack across water.


First of all, thanks Keith & Caleb for keeping things going in spite of the backstage drama. I think I speak for all the players in saying that we really appreciate the remarkable time and effort you are investing.

Secondly I do actually have a question related to the answer above. So, if a player 1 on any land-locked territory attacks player 2 on a coastal territory (e.g. F7 to F10, to give a hypothetical example) does the same apply - i.e. Player 2 includes naval power in their defensive MILPO?

Secondly, what about if said Player 1 also controls F2, F3 & F4, so they have 3 coastal territories but none are adjacent to F10. Does that mean their naval power still cannot be used in attack?

I think the answer to both of these questions is yes, just clarifying.

Permalink
| April 13, 2018, 2:49 am
https://brickset.com/sets/4297-1/Lightning-Streak
Is the drivers body considered a mini figure? Is the orange part the head is attached to. I have two black ones of those sitting around just waiting to be used
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:24 pm
Is C15 considered a coastal territory?
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:31 pm
So, for CAT #10, the wings have to be able to move, correct?
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:31 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting General Gunn ~
https://brickset.com/sets/4297-1/Lightning-Streak
Is the drivers body considered a mini figure? Is the orange part the head is attached to. I have two black ones of those sitting around just waiting to be used

No, that wouldn't qualify as a minifigure. Haven't seen those before, neat find!

I'm sure that part could be used for angles and shaping many ways. I look forward to spotting it in your MOCs!
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:44 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Zach Sweigart
Is C15 considered a coastal territory?

Yes, it touches SZ37. I do not believe it touches SZ38.
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:46 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting The Supreme Soggy Overlord of Moist Melons
So, for CAT #10, the wings have to be able to move, correct?

Yes, that is the easiest and best interpretation of the rules. Be sure to visibly show the wings in different positions though. The ability to move must be complemented by photo evidence.
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:48 pm
Quoting VAkkron ™
No, that wouldn't qualify as a minifigure. Haven't seen those before, neat find!

I'm sure that part could be used for angles and shaping many ways. I look forward to spotting it in your MOCs!

May i use them as little figures? Not as apart of the minifig specs
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:49 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting General Gunn ~
May i use them as little figures? Not as apart of the minifig specs

Of course. Satisfy the specs and you are fine. Unless there's something really weird, but I would accept seeing those as supplementary characters.
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:51 pm
Quoting VAkkron ™
Of course. Satisfy the specs and you are fine. Unless there's something really weird, but I would accept seeing those as supplementary characters.

Woot woot! I also have this wacky piece i wanna use :D
https://brickset.com/parts/6092821
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 6:56 pm
Two questions. First, we can make dioramas for our vehicles, correct? And second, if I make a small update to my APC, for example, am I not allowed to edit that into the already posted build?
Permalink
| April 14, 2018, 9:29 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
E6 has access to SZ82 and SZ88 only.

D21 does not touch SZ65.

Does this mean E6 has 2 coastlines?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 6:25 am
Are we placing our attacks in the same Attack Window thread we used for the first AW?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 10:19 am
Once someone is knocked off the map, assuming there are still some white territories left, can they join back in the he next AW without a regime change?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 10:53 am
Question:

Are the number of territories and number of coastal territories owned by each player locked in at the start of an AW, like MILPO, or are they evaluated at the moment of each individual attack? To put it another way, suppose that a player starts an AW with 3 coastal territories and commits to an over-the-water attack (1 sea zone only). If he loses one of those coastal territories before his attack is resolved, is his attack null and void?

Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 12:28 pm
For the pt boat, must all minifigures be present on the boat in one picture? Or can i just show 1-2 minifigs each pic?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 12:44 pm
MILPO is based on the likes at the beginning of an AW, correct?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 3:50 pm
 Group admin 
For the aircraft, would a pod-mounted Jet engine (like on the wings of a 747) count as an air intake ?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 5:14 pm
Did you move the SPECs release dates when you moved up the first AW?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 7:29 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Sam Sanister
Did you move the SPECs release dates when you moved up the first AW?

No, purely because we don't know that it won't happen again. Obviously we will never run an AW early, but we might delay them in the future due to outages or staff availability. So if we were to stack all those missing days up, it would just get confusing. The dates in the spec thread stand, unless MOCpages is actually down during one of the mentioned days.
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 7:39 pm
Can MOCs be re-pictured if the previous similar MOC had bad picture quality?
Permalink
| April 15, 2018, 11:30 pm
Rules say that MILPO is halved in any attack across water, so an attack from an island to a territory one water place away divides the MIPLO by two, correct? Even if the island is the starting place and thus exempted from the three territories rule?
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 7:43 am
Another question. If one starts on an island one can attack across one sea zone without the three coastal territories, but what happens after the person gets a second territory? Like they now have an island and one normal coastal territory; can they attack from the normal coastal territory across one sea zone? Can they only across sea zones attack from the island (until they get a third coastal territory)? Or are they then subject in full force to the three coastal territories rule?
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 8:48 am
Quoting Northern Imperial AKA-Lord Bacca
W Navarre, has an incorrect ORBAT.

What, do I have a comma where there shouldn't be one? (Sorry, belongs in the smack thread, but hey it was a question too, haha!) Seriously, what's wrong? And why did you say this in the questions thread?
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 9:02 am
I just wanted to confirm something that seems a little screwy to me:

Consider the following situation: Player Alpha occupies C32 and can defend it with a total effective MILPO of 2. Player Bravo occupies C31 and can attack C32 with a total effective MILPO of 1. Player Charlie occupies C33 and can attack C32 with a total effective MILPO of 1,000,000. As long as Player Bravo succeeds in declaring his (ineffective) attack on C32 before Player Charlie does, Player Charlie is shut out and cannot attack C32. In essence, this tactic allows a weak player to be defended by an even weaker player against an attack by an arbitrarily powerful player. I'm pretty sure that I've applied all rules correctly, but that seems really counterintuitive to me. Is this scenario, as I've described it, correct?

Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 9:47 am
Quoting Keith Goldman
A players MILPO is divided by the number of sea zones crossed when attacking. This is the number of sea territories between the nearest attackers territory and the territory they attack. The exempted islands still have to adhere to this rule if they cross more than the initial sea zone. If you want to give me a specific example it might work better because I'm not sure I understand the question.

Yeah, you answered my question. I just hadn't caught on before, but now realized that if the MILPO is divided by the number of sea zones across which I attack then attacking across one sea zone divides by 1. Wow, I'm such a math whiz. Thank you!
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 10:41 am
Quoting Keith Goldman
You've got it right, but I've never seen that situation arise in previous games. That's not to say that it couldn't but I don't see it as being a big problem. As you've no doubt noticed the game is not perfect and not every contingency is planned for. The solution to the problem you described is for Player Charlie to get his attack in first. Screwy or not, I'm not going to change the rules at this point to address your concern.

I wasn't expecting a rules change. I just wanted to make sure I had it right, since it seems to place a disproportionate amount of importance on the timing of attack declarations. I can see rules applications like this, along with the many adjacent coastal territories that do not share the same sea zone, creating logjams and stalemates all over the map - which might actually be the intent.
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 10:54 am
For the PT boat, do sea mines count as a secondary weapon system?
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 2:52 pm
Quoting Sam Sanister
For the PT boat, do sea mines count as a secondary weapon system?

Ooooh good idea. How about surface to air missiles and the boat is the surface
Permalink
| April 16, 2018, 2:57 pm
Group moderators have locked this conversation.
Other topics



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop DA3: Beyond Thunderdome Military


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2018 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use