MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop Decisive Action
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 »
After Action Review.
Join to comment
 Group admin 
All,

DA was my third group effort here on MOCpages. Like the two before, it was designed to accomplish a specific mission:

“Our mission is to help all group members to improve BUILDING and COMMUNICATION SKILLS, and to have FUN.

To accomplish this mission, I set three specific goals for this group:

One. Stimulate the production of NEW MOCs on MOCpages.

Two. Incentivize QUALITY in building (and presentation) as well as RATING of other players MOCs.

Three. ENTERTAIN all team members.
For the first time, I feel that we have achieved all three goals admirably.

One. Stimulate the production of NEW MOCs on MOCpages.
Level of achievement: Good.
Discussion: I start from the basic assumption that the most effective way to improve building skills is by building. Building equates to experience, and experience informs and guides future builds. 240 MOCs have been built specifically for this group. That they are built specifically for this group is MOSTLY ensured by enforcing specific criteria (specifications in the rules). Some MOCs were not built for this group, but rather were effectively cannibalized from pre-existing efforts… but for the most part, the MOCs in DA were built for DA.

Two. Incentivize QUALITY in building (and presentation) as well as RATING of other players MOCs.
Level of achievement: Good.
Discussion: Again, my starting assumption is that repetition often (but not always) leads to improvement. The use of yellow heads as a source of player power has consistently been a hotly debated topic. Many equate the use of reviews to a popularity contest. In some cases, popularity has certainly played a role. However, I believe it is folly to deny either correlation between yellow heads and quality, or the causal link between the two. It is of course true, that popularity CAN and often DOES effect the yellow head count. But this is immaterial for two reasons. First, it is an occasional factor, not a consistent or defining factor. In other words, sometimes a popular builder gets more yellow heads than a hated builder. The fact remains that beautiful MOCs pull in yellow heads. This truth is not diminished by the fact that some yellow heads are pulled in by other factors. The second reason that popularity is immaterial in this context is that the popularity dynamic DIRECTLY SUPPORTS the GOAL of IMPROVING PLAYER COMMUNICATION SKILLS. Popularity and or political power are usually derived directly from a players on-line communication efforts. Active, talkative, socially engaged players will draw more yellow heads and THAT is intentional. The point being that communication becomes ENCENTIVISED. Want more yellow heads? Learn how to talk to your allies. It is not a flaw in the system. It is the very intent of the system. In the end, well built MOCs generally earned their builders more power in the game… and that is the point.

Three: ENTERTAIN all team members.
Level of achievement: Good (I guess…).
Discussion: Nobody comes to MOCpages for study, or work, or anything else but fun. No fun = No dice! So…18 attack windows, 240 task built MOCs, almost 3K in conversations and I don’t know how many reviews… I conclude that the participants must have enjoyed it. The incentive of winning the prize is really only relevant for the players who spend most of the game in the lead. Most players know that they will not actually win… after all, there can be only one. So again, I can only conclude that you were all motivated by the entertainment factor.

So for my part, I am completely satisfied with the performance of this effort. DA, my third MOCpages group has worked better than either of it’s predecessors. It would not have been possible without Keith’s encouragement, and more importantly without his ferocious application of mathematical competence (a competency lacking on my part!). And of course, all of the players. I truly belave your efforts have made MOCpages a more vital and interesting place.

On this thread, I ask you all to leave your recommendations for DA 2.0. Tell me what you liked, what you did not like, and what you think we should try to add in DA2.0.

I thank you all in advance for your feedback.

Attack!

Permalink
| September 30, 2013, 10:55 am
First off, what you created here blew my mind. I have never pushed my building, communication, and tactical skills like this before. This was my first helping of your cuisine and I'm happily sated.

I think that everyone will agree that the play, although complex at first, was straight forward and exciting. Once we got the hang of the scoring and strategy, as well as the attack time ;), it became a wonderful game of tactical positioning. The alliances proved to be more important than anything else. The make up therein was the dynamic that determined the winner. At the point when the TOs were voted out, the game changed only in defensive power. I don't know if having a lifespan for the TOs would be prudent, or having total defensive power of the TO divided by the number of attacks against the entire TO just as it is for individual Generals.

This would be my first thought to get the ball rolling. A second thought would be regarding timing. Having the final attack occur before the MO starts would likely attract more participation. Either that, or continue until there is only one. (that might get self indulgent after a week or two, but at that point more battles per week wouldn't be a stretch.)

Just a start.
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 12:03 am
 Group admin 
Quoting matt rowntRee

King and CGF rowntRee GN.

Thanks for the initial feedback. I think I botched the timing of this thread! Once the fight was over, the fans left the building in a hurry!

Keith and I are about to link up at Brick Con in Seattle, so we will both be off the net for the next few days.

After that, I think I will simply start pinging the individual players for thier feedback over the weeks ahead.

Thanks Again, and well played!
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 9:45 am
Quoting Michael Rutherford

Have fun up there!

I think you'll get quite a bit of detail as how to refine the game. It is absolutely worth continuing and perfecting.
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 10:11 am
DA 1.0 was brilliant! Thankyou. Thoughts on DA 2.0:

TOs: These may have been more powerful than you expected, hence the necessity to abolish them. A game without them would be over too soon, probably, but if they appear in DA 2 their influence needs to be reduced. Emperor And Overlord Of All The Earth matt's suggestion is one way; I reckon if each ally adds a fixed amount of defence related to their territories it might work better.

MOCs: The mix and number of builds required was supremely well judged and this shouldn't change; however I would change some or all categories so DA 1 players won't (say) start building a super-awesome tank right now that'll take six months and blow everyone away.

Map: Don't change a thing!

The CCCP will be back!
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 10:59 am
Great ideas.

I would say the only change to the map should be to make Antarctica at least 3 territories. That way Hayden won't get trapped there again (cheap shot. =]) and it will be more like a continent to conquer and position from rather than making it an island.

The rest of the map is perfect.
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 11:42 am
Michael, I haven’t "flown the coup” yet! I sat down once to seriously write some things, but every time I had a suggestion I began overanalyzing it. I think I need to step away for awhile and think. Also, right now my focus is wrapped up in whether I will get to proceed on to round 3 in the MO. So perhaps, when you guys return from Seattle I’ll be in a more rational frame of mind and have something for you.
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 11:58 am
Personally, I would like a more complex game with more required builds! It was nice to have one item to provide for an entire range of defense or offense but that is not reflected in real war as you well know. More teams, more builds with ground support, aerial supremacy, ground supremacy, special use infantry and infantry support, ground and air logistics as well as sea logistics, bases, forts, rules on how they can be used to overcome huge threats/fortifications...helicopters. Everything built has a weakness, a player could build a team/weapon to put a stop to the powerful smiley powered tank, build an anti-aircraft system to remove the bacon dropper. More later...
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 4:09 pm
Watch this space over the coming days, I'll be writing something or other...
Permalink
| October 1, 2013, 4:11 pm
Dear all,

You know how annoying it is when you write a really long comment, but spend so long over it that MocPages times out and loses it? Arrgh, I just did that...

Anyway, I think I owe it to Mike and Keith for all their hard work to write it again!
First off, the plaudits for DA 1.0 - for me personally it certainly achieved its goals. I was hooked by the game; I built more MOCs, left more reviews and got more involved in the social aspects of MOCpages than any other group or contest I've joined before. I think the game was a great idea and a great success!

But what first got me interested in DA was the strategy aspect - I love games and strategy, so my suggestions for DA 2.0 will be to do with game mechanics.
Obviously the TOs became a dominating feature of the game, and a number of good suggestions have already been made for giving them some role in DA 2.0 without being so all-powerful. Here's one more idea that I don't think has been mentioned: have a single, defensive MOC category that contributes its MPs to everyone in your TO, and that you have to have built in order to benefit from others' TO MOCs. Something to do with artillery, or communications, maybe?

On the more general game dynamics, the growth of attacks with territories owned gave a fairly slow start but with the potential for runaway leader(s) late on.
To give a pace that would hopefully keep more players' interest for longer, how about a sequence something like the following:
1 territory = 1 attack
3 territories = 2 attacks
6 territories = 3 attacks
10 territories = 4 attacks
15 territories = 5 attacks
21 territories = 6 attacks and so on.
The idea is to make an alliance of several players with a few territories each more powerful than one player with a lot of
territory, which would hopefully encourage more cut-and-thrust, generals getting knocked down but then making a comeback, etc.
For a thematic justification you could cite the increased costs and inefficiencies of running a large empire compared to a small one.

That's all for now, thanks again Mike & Keith for a great game!
Permalink
| October 2, 2013, 4:01 pm
I have rather a long list, in no particular order:

1. Let all players who join before AW1 pick their own color, first come first served with a reasonable difference between colors.

2. Make the border lines thinner so small islands can be seen better.

3. For the Infantry moc, allow a brick-built national flag as the backdrop or part of the backdrop.

4. Allow ONE brick-build hardsuit per squad, must have some minifigure parts (head, helmet, etc).

5. Not hopeful, but can customs (BrickArms, etc) be allowed?

6. Limit TO's to 4 people and a player can only be in one at a time, or remove them entirely.

7. Possibly make some of the territories in Africa larger and fewer of them, there are quite a few in that continent.

8. New build categories:
* Land Logistical - truck
* Air Logistical - transport helicopter
* Air Offensive 2 - attack helicopter/special aircraft (V22 Osprey, etc)
* Air Defensive 2 - drone
* Land Offensive 2 - jeep/truck/wheeled vehicle
* Land Defensive 2 - artillery (on wheels, not self-powered)
* Long Range Tactical Offensive - cruise missile launcher (truck-mounted or diorama), can launch across oceans without losing attack power to bolster trans-oceanic invasions.
* Anything Goes Defensive - ANYthing; mech, frog car, snowball launcher, etc., but must have weaponry and be mobile.

I like Lucas' attack change suggestion and I agree that Antarctica should be three territories.
Permalink
| October 5, 2013, 7:33 am
Hey guys! I came (back) here on the word of the victorious Matt Rowntree; so don't shoot :-p


Anyways, I do also wish to add a few changes/additions that should be made, as I aim to do DA 2, when it comes out next year ;-)

So, I would like to see a few more categories; the ones above were some nice suggestions, so.

I feel that you all should space out the builds some; it seemed like as if the opening month and a half for DA were frantic builds, and then thats it.

The three point extra FP shots were great, so do keep that. Maybe we can also have a couple of other "extra credit"

I REALLY admire General rowntRee's generosity; so I say that in the next DA, we, of course have the winner get a prize (or give it to another player) and also, maybe have a set donated to a charity decided upon by the winning general. I know it may up the stakes, and possibly the expenses, but this is an international game; pretty cool if we could reach out and help someone get into the hobby of LEGO.

The LDD rule, upon long thought, I think, should be kept. I know that I helped moderate a dispute over the thing, but the thing is, I don't want "old fashioned" building to die away. But even so, Keith and Michael, give that some serious thought.

Now, groups and military alliances should be kept, but more regulated. For instance, I say max number of parties in alliance be kept at 5. Of course, I don't the role/power they had in here so.

I like that some of the "larger/more popular" builders signed up; I do hope that we can preserve that.

Map? Good, mostly.

Hmm, I guess that covers it. PHS out!
Permalink
| October 6, 2013, 9:13 pm
There are already plenty of ideas generated. Not much to add, but I do support having TO's without defensive powers. Each would have to fend for themselves, but the TO would serve as a consultation of coordinated attacks.

Peace!
Permalink
| October 11, 2013, 5:26 pm
Sorry for the delay in posting my ideas. Here they are, such as they are…
#1 Moc categories do not necessarily need to be changed, but specifications on each moc of a category need to be changed each year. If not, people will begin building far in advance of the game. One easy spec change could be a size limit or color to a moc.
#2 No new gamers should be allowed in after the 2nd attack. I think enough people have heard/will hear about the game now that there will be more than enough people next year wanting to play at the start.
#3 Subtraction of the miniscule number of points for each sea boundary crossing that was done in DA1 is pointless. It was of no real deterrent, and you guys really do not need superfluous calculations. You have enough to do! Besides you forgot to do it sometimes! ;)
#4 TO’s do help build friendships between builders not just in the game but on mocpages which is a noble function! So I would hate to see them done away with completely. BUT…
#5 Under the initial power point calculation method, TO’s had too much defensive power. But now I really question whether calculating offensive points by NOT dividing by two would really be enough to deflate them?
#6 If powered TO’s ARE allowed, assuming a better way of power calculation can be found, generals should only be allowed to be a member of 1 TO at a time. And, although trying to limit membership numbers within a TO, ie only 6 members to a TO, might be an idea too, it would become a numbers and policing nightmare for you guys!

Permalink
| October 19, 2013, 1:16 pm
Quoting General X (aka SuperSpyX)
8. New build categories:
* Land Logistical - truck
* Air Logistical - transport helicopter
* Air Offensive 2 - attack helicopter/special aircraft (V22 Osprey, etc)
* Air Defensive 2 - drone
* Land Offensive 2 - jeep/truck/wheeled vehicle
* Land Defensive 2 - artillery (on wheels, not self-powered)
* Long Range Tactical Offensive - cruise missile launcher (truck-mounted or diorama), can launch across oceans without losing attack power to bolster trans-oceanic invasions.
* Anything Goes Defensive - ANYthing; mech, frog car, snowball launcher, etc., but must have weaponry and be mobile.

I love this idea, DA was a fantastic group but at times felt a bit restricted in what type of units to create.
Seeing this group is also for helping improve building skills, and have people branch out it seems natural to add a few new unit types to spice things up in DA 2.
Permalink
| October 20, 2013, 6:20 am
When do we start up again?
Permalink
| December 8, 2013, 9:05 pm
Quoting Michael Rutherford


I'm curious when Decisive Action 2 will start. I definitely think it should be sci-fi themed with the empires launching space campaigns after the conquering empire(s) rule Earth in an uneasy balance.

PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH, STRENGTH THROUGH WAR.
~ General McLegofreak
Permalink
| March 19, 2014, 6:37 pm
Quoting ~ McLegofreak

I'm curious when Decisive Action 2 will start.
~ General McLegofreak

Me too! I really enjoyed it last time and I'd love to do it again.
Permalink
| March 19, 2014, 7:30 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting ~ McLegofreak

~ General McLegofreak


Mr. McLegofreak, rest assured, when we start up the engine of destruction again, you will be invited to tear your share. It will be a few months yet however. Mr. Goldman and I are both pretty busy with other stuff right now (earning a living, raising children, mostly non-lego distracters…). The next DA probably won’t be space themed. Glad you remember the group, and we look forward to watching your decisions in action in the future.
Permalink
| March 24, 2014, 3:44 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting SuperSpy X
Me too! I really enjoyed it last time and I'd love to do it again.


Mr. X. Dont' worry, your on the short list for when we re-start the wood chipper!
Permalink
| March 24, 2014, 3:45 pm
Quoting General X (aka SuperSpyX)

8. New build categories:
* Land Logistical - truck
* Air Logistical - transport helicopter
* Air Offensive 2 - attack helicopter/special aircraft (V22 Osprey, etc)
* Air Defensive 2 - drone
* Land Offensive 2 - jeep/truck/wheeled vehicle
* Land Defensive 2 - artillery (on wheels, not self-powered)
* Long Range Tactical Offensive - cruise missile launcher (truck-mounted or diorama), can launch across oceans without losing attack power to bolster trans-oceanic invasions.
* Anything Goes Defensive - ANYthing; mech, frog car, snowball launcher, etc., but must have weaponry and be mobile.

I like Lucas' attack change suggestion and I agree that Antarctica should be three territories.

Land and air logistic MOCs make sense, maybe having them can reduce the power loss from moving offensive units by half the likes the logistic MOCs get(unless they get so many likes they increase offensive power). I also like the idea of more variety of defensive and offensive MOCs. The Long Range Tactical Offensive might be nice, but maybe you can only use it when you have the main 3 types of Offensive Power. Its power could be changed from adding more power to reducing power loss, though(unless it gets so many likes it will actually increase offensive power).
The Anything Goes Defensive sounds like a good idea, could see what people come up with without restrictions.
Permalink
| March 25, 2014, 4:35 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Sam Sanister

Mr. Sanister.

Changes to the rules in DA2 will almost all be aimed at simplification.

There will not be any radical increase in the number of build categories. Most (if any) new categories will be swap outs with old categories. Increasing the number of build categories increases the complexity and raw effort required for battle calculation immensely.

Stuff that may change:

1. There will be at least one digital build category, and maybe several.

2. There will be no treaty organization rules. There will be no combining of player combat power, either offensive or defensive. Cooperation between players will be possible, but it will not be restricted or supported by rules. (This will probably result in rapid elimination of weak nations).

3. It will be harder to attack other players across oceans. Penalties for distance will be greater.

4. Build criteria (the specs for each category) will be changed up.

Stuff that probably won't change:

1. DA2.0 will take place on earth (no new continents). New territorial boundaries however are likely.

2. Antarctica shall remain 1 territory. The island at the bottom of the world.

3. Build criteria will remain highly arbitrary and will be enforced to the letter. Anybody who is building ahead right now is probably wasting effort.

But nothing will happen any time soon. The DA staff is currently not able to support the requirements of the job. We will wait until we can give the game the focus it needs.

Without the daily communications, the ability to answer player questions quickly, and to conduct all battles quickly, DA would be like so many other groups on MOCpages: A chat room pretending to be a war game. A debate club. A mutual admiration society. There is enough of that stuff on MOCpages already. We won't start DA again until the whole staff is able to commit their time and attention to the task, and to do it right.

Until then... Build! Post! Review!

Permalink
| March 26, 2014, 9:31 am
Quoting Michael Rutherford

How's it coming along?
Permalink
| July 29, 2014, 4:17 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting ~ McLegofreak
How's it coming along?

Super!
Permalink
| August 6, 2014, 10:16 am
Quoting Michael Rutherford
Super!


Great!
Permalink
| August 6, 2014, 10:20 am
 Group admin 
Good reading!
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 4:25 pm
 Group admin 
I agree!
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 4:26 pm
Do my ears hear the soft rumblings of a war on the way?
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 4:44 pm
*Begins moving battalions and armor to border*
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 5:09 pm
Can't wait to see what we are able to build this time!
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 5:23 pm
I would be happy if they just added Land Logistical (jeep/truck) and Air Logistical (helicopter), let you have one hardsuit on your squad and also remove the hangar requirement for aircraft, I could build far better planes without having to building a huge hangar to cover it.
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 6:28 pm
Hello..... Will the CCCP rise again ?
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 6:33 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting matt rowntRee
Do my ears hear the soft rumblings of a war on the way?

How fitting that the reigning god of war would hear the siren's song of battle first.
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 6:57 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
How fitting that the reigning god of war would hear the siren's song of battle first.

Pavlovian. Mind the drool.
Permalink
| November 13, 2014, 11:37 pm
 Group admin 
We are now working on the overhaul in earnest. It will still be weeks before we roll out DA2,but we are now moving forward. rowntRee, check your sub-space...
Permalink
| November 14, 2014, 5:29 pm
Quoting Michael Rutherford
We are now working on the overhaul in earnest. It will still be weeks before we roll out DA2,but we are now moving forward.

Yesssss!!!!
Permalink
| November 14, 2014, 8:18 pm
?
Permalink
| April 5, 2015, 9:35 pm
Quoting Lord Bacca
?

Dude, dedication.
Permalink
| April 5, 2015, 9:46 pm
Well, you replied, addicted much?, lol, we pea's with no pod.
Permalink
| April 5, 2015, 10:32 pm
??
Permalink
| May 26, 2015, 7:43 pm
We have waited weeks, we have waited months, we have waited seasons, where is DA2.0??
Permalink
| May 26, 2015, 8:01 pm
Agreed, I wait ever so patiently for my invite to DA2.0
Permalink
| May 26, 2015, 8:25 pm
 Group admin 
Things have become complicated by Mike's deployment to Germany. We're still waiting to see how his new assignment shakes out before we can begin. The new rules are finished and the map(s) are mostly done. I'll speak to mike and get you an update as soon as I can.
Permalink
| May 26, 2015, 9:05 pm
Keith, let me know if you need admin help, due to my bricks being stored, I am not able to build but would like to help.

Permalink
| May 26, 2015, 9:10 pm
Ye-haw!!!
Permalink
| May 26, 2015, 11:27 pm
 Group admin 
All, I fully recognize and appreciate the dedication and patients you guys are showing. A few short months ago, Keith and I were almost ready to pull the trigger and start DA2.0 We have even gone so far as to select an additional DAS member to help with the work load (a surprise celebrity!). But my work related move has forced me to place this effort to the back burner. I chose the delay because there is no way I am going to give my players and my staff a half hearted effort. When my situation stabilizes and the DAS and I are finally able to start the mother of all games... you guys will get the very best game we can give you. It might be a whole year longer however. Thank goodness it's a game and not a business... otherwise I would go broke! Now, if you guys are really chomping at the bit... you know... you could always just start a game of your own under a different name (yea, I'm possessive about the name). I cant play... and I can't even staff... but I could certainly cat call from the bleachers. Again, I'm stoked that you guys are still up for the game, and believe me when I say that I would rather run DA2.0 than what I am doing right now. Right now, moral support is the best my staff and I can offer. Until I can change my tune: Build! Post! Review!
Permalink
| May 27, 2015, 8:57 am
Quoting Michael Rutherford

Appreciated. DA was a fun game and a good thing for the community as a whole. Its revival could mean a lot of good stuff for a lot of people.
Permalink
| May 27, 2015, 10:58 am
Quoting Michael Rutherford

Take your time, can't rush quality.
Permalink
| May 27, 2015, 5:35 pm
 Group admin 
Since Michael put the idea out there, I'm seriously considering running a version of DA with a name-change (of course) and a few altered rules. Would anyone here be interested in such a thing or would you prefer to wait until Michael has the free time to be involved again? I would need at least 6 players to make a go of it.

Let me know and I'll either put the idea in motion, or put it to rest.


Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 6:48 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Since Michael put the idea out there, I'm seriously considering running a version of DA with a name-change (of course) and a few altered rules. Would anyone here be interested in such a thing or would you prefer to wait until Michael has the free time to be involved again? I would need at least 6 players to make a go of it.

Let me know and I'll either put the idea in motion, or put it to rest.


I would be willing to give you a hand with it I you want...I have no place to build right now but am remaining active as much as possible...
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 7:37 pm
I'll play.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 8:46 pm
I really shouldn't, but DA was the most fun I had since being on the Maersk Blues in the MocAthalon. Maybe more. I can wait, but if Keith starts one I'll play, and I'll play another if Michael has time the next year. As long as the witty commentary and world-building updates are around, I am too.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:26 pm
I'm in. After my two defeats in this one, I could do with a little practice before the next one.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:28 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Ron L. Mitchell
I would be willing to give you a hand with it I you want...I have no place to build right now but am remaining active as much as possible...

Hey Ron, I sent you a PM via flickr, we can talk about it.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:32 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lord Bacca
I'll play.

Somehow I knew you'd be in. Right on dude, we'll see if we can cook up any interest. Like I said, I think we need a minimum of 6 committed players to being. Well, 5 now.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:33 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting LukeClarenceVan The Revanchist
I really shouldn't, but DA was the most fun I had since being on the Maersk Blues in the MocAthalon. Maybe more. I can wait, but if Keith starts one I'll play, and I'll play another if Michael has time the next year. As long as the witty commentary and world-building updates are around, I am too.


Well, if you really shouldn't then although I'd love to have you onboard, you shouldn't take on the commitment. DA or (DA style) can be a grind, not something to enter into if you have reservations.

I can promise you witty banter but I'm not sure what you mean about world-building updates. I'm more familiar with the term as related to novels or movies, but I'm not sure how it applies here. To save time I would use the same map as last year, but update the time-period to something more advanced. I just don't want you to do it because of previous expectations, Mike definitely won't be around and he was the driving force behind the game. I just kept the mechanics running along. Take time and decide, I don't want to dissapoint your expectations.

Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:37 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Ian ...
I'm in. After my two defeats in this one, I could do with a little practice before the next one.

Right on Ian, that's 2 confirmed so we only need another 4. If you know anyone who would like to play you might ask around to see if there is any interest.


Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:38 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
Since Michael put the idea out there, I'm seriously considering running a version of DA with a name-change (of course) and a few altered rules. Would anyone here be interested in such a thing or would you prefer to wait until Michael has the free time to be involved again? I would need at least 6 players to make a go of it.

Let me know and I'll either put the idea in motion, or put it to rest.


I needs me some DA!

I just started in a dieselpunk group and have BW coming up, however I would love to join in after BW or at least observe. And of course make fun of Bacca being stuck in India, Ron occupying Colorado FOREVER, Ian returning from the dead, and Luke attacking himself again. XDDD

GOD this was a great game! Count me in.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 9:41 pm
Quoting matt rowntRee
I needs me some DA!

I just started in a dieselpunk group and have BW coming up, however I would love to join in after BW or at least observe. And of course make fun of Bacca being stuck in India, Ron occupying Colorado FOREVER, Ian returning from the dead, and Luke attacking himself again. XDDD

GOD this was a great game! Count me in.

I'm sure that's happened sometime in history. A Leader being beaten and fleeing elsewhere to start over. :P
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:04 pm
Quoting Ian ...
I'm in. After my two defeats in this one, I could do with a little practice before the next one.

Same here, count me in!
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:11 pm
Ugh!!, I will not be stuck in India again!!!!!
Thats 5 by my count.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:29 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Sam Sanister
Same here, count me in!

Right on Sam.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:37 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lord Bacca
Ugh!!, I will not be stuck in India again!!!!!
Thats 5 by my count.


Yeah, stay out of India dude. I only count 3 for sure:

Bacca, Sam and Ian.

I'd put Matt and Luke in the "maybe" group, so I think we need 3 more confirmed, committed types.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:38 pm
I'm sure Tops, big d and superspy x will join when they see these updates.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:42 pm
And Nick.
Permalink
| June 2, 2015, 10:43 pm
It would be pretty awesome. Could we have relaxed building requirements, a.k.a. no dioramas/hangars if we don't want to build them? That would allow me to build what I'm good at (vehicles) without having to bother with what I'm not so good at nor have tons of pieces for (dioramas and buildings). For instance I could've built FAR better aircraft last time, but the hangar requirement really put a damper on that.
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 5:51 am
Oh, this was a seriously fun game and I would love to see it happen again - either as DA 2.0 or in some other, similar form. No MOCpages group I've joined before or since has caused been more entertaining, or more detrimental to my work productivity :-]
The fact is though, I'll probably be away from my bricks for all of July & August, so I can't commit to anything... just... yet. I'll keep watching though, just in case my situation changes.


Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 7:44 am
 Group admin 
After speaking to Mike offline and giving it some thought I've decided to give it a go. Give me a little time to iron a few things out and you'll all get invites to the new group. If all goes well I should have the new group in place by next week. Thanks for the show of support!
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 1:51 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting SuperSpy X
It would be pretty awesome. Could we have relaxed building requirements, a.k.a. no dioramas/hangars if we don't want to build them? That would allow me to build what I'm good at (vehicles) without having to bother with what I'm not so good at nor have tons of pieces for (dioramas and buildings). For instance I could've built FAR better aircraft last time, but the hangar requirement really put a damper on that.


I'm thinking of a streamlined version so there is a good chance of such a development. Stay tuned, but I'm glad you're in.

Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 1:52 pm
Quoting Keith Goldman
After speaking to Mike offline and giving it some thought I've decided to give it a go. Give me a little time to iron a few things out and you'll all get invites to the new group. If all goes well I should have the new group in place by next week. Thanks for the show of support!
Awesome! I can't wait to begin my conquest of the world again. Hopefully I won't have to come back from the dead this time.

Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 2:42 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Keith Goldman
I'm seriously considering running a version of DA

Let me know and I'll either put the idea in motion, or put it to rest.



I say right on! And forget about waiting for people to say yes or no. Build it and they will come!

In the DA tradition, keep the rules hard, clear, and fair.

Let the cries of the defeated and the smoke of burning dreams fill air!

To those about to die... we salute you!

Attack!
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 4:08 pm
Quoting Michael Rutherford

I say right on! And forget about waiting for people to say yes or no. Build it and they will come!

In the DA tradition, keep the rules hard, clear, and fair.

Let the cries of the defeated and the smoke of burning dreams fill air!

To those about to die... we salute you!

Attack!

Quoting Keith Goldman
After speaking to Mike offline and giving it some thought I've decided to give it a go. Give me a little time to iron a few things out and you'll all get invites to the new group. If all goes well I should have the new group in place by next week. Thanks for the show of support!

Ave, Imperatores, morituri te salutant.
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 5:07 pm
Quoting Ian ...
Ave, Imperatores, morituri te salutant.

Gesundheit.
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 9:45 pm
Quoting matt rowntRee
Gesundheit.

Danke.
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 10:01 pm
Quoting Ian ...
Danke.

Bitte.
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 10:23 pm
Lets go!
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 10:29 pm
Quoting matt rowntRee
Bitte.

And that's about the extent of my German. Luckily I know more Latin, and even a little ancient Greek. :P
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 10:33 pm
 Group admin 
I've mad good progress on the group, we should be up and running by Sunday night, finger's crossed. Everyone here will receive an invite. Thanks again for all the support, its gonna be a blood-bath!
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 10:33 pm
Hooray Blood!
Permalink
| June 3, 2015, 10:39 pm
 Group admin 
One final note before I sign off of this group: Things have progressed faster than expected and I should have the group open this Friday 6/5, with the first attack window opening the following Friday 6/12. Invites to follow, as soon as I can get Ron up to speed.
Permalink
| June 4, 2015, 2:05 am
Brilliant. I've got a lot going on at the mo' but this I will find time for.
Permalink
| June 4, 2015, 3:12 am
Quoting Keith Goldman
I've mad good progress on the group, we should be up and running by Sunday night, finger's crossed. Everyone here will receive an invite. Thanks again for all the support, its gonna be a blood-bath!


Woo-hoo! I love me a nice bloodbath. Not too hot, with candles and a glass of chilled Sancerre.

Permalink
| June 4, 2015, 4:40 am
Other topics
« After Action Review.
student teen kid toy play lego child video game hobby blocks construction toy legos fun games



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop Decisive Action


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.
©2002-2015 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use