What, would you rather that they bankrupt the company sorting out the QA snafu?

 warboss wrote:
I did. In the past, the one thing they were good at was fixing their mistakes like miscasts.

Seconded. I'm absolutely floored at the change in customer service. I understand why - they aren't the ones responsible for production anymore - but it's so night and day different than DP9 of even 4 years ago that I'm stunned.

 IceRaptor wrote:

 warboss wrote:
I did. In the past, the one thing they were good at was fixing their mistakes like miscasts.

Seconded. I'm absolutely floored at the change in customer service. I understand why - they aren't the ones responsible for production anymore - but it's so night and day different than DP9 of even 4 years ago that I'm stunned.

I know, right?

And even if they cannot afford to fix/replace/etc., the overall 'tone' of that update was...not good.

Nomeny wrote:
What, would you rather that they bankrupt the company sorting out the QA snafu?

Who accepted those defective sprues? The Pod.

In theory, the Pod bears some responsibility for not doing proper QA/QC prior to acceptance.

Just as, in theory, the Pod is supposed to be accountable for the overall project and delivery.

So remember when I had noted that the Pod had altered the deal, and that backers should pray they don't alter it further?

Well, that just happened.

Now STFU, peasants!

 IceRaptor wrote:

 warboss wrote:
I did. In the past, the one thing they were good at was fixing their mistakes like miscasts.

Seconded. I'm absolutely floored at the change in customer service. I understand why - they aren't the ones responsible for production anymore - but it's so night and day different than DP9 of even 4 years ago that I'm stunned.

It was the one thing they still were good on, so... yeah, stunned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Nomeny wrote:
What, would you rather that they bankrupt the company sorting out the QA snafu?

Who accepted those defective sprues? The Pod.

In theory, the Pod bears some responsibility for not doing proper QA/QC prior to acceptance.

Just as, in theory, the Pod is supposed to be accountable for the overall project and delivery.

So remember when I had noted that the Pod had altered the deal, and that backers should pray they don't alter it further?

Well, that just happened.

Now STFU, peasants!

Basically, yeah.

As to the original question of "What, would you rather that they bankrupt the company sorting out the QA snafu?"... Why would I care, one way or another? I would rather have non defective sprues. If that makes them go into the red, well... next time they'll know better I guess. Or not. Anyways, buyers beware.

EDIT: Oh, yes, Robert. Do keep digging

@ Peter and All Backers. We are sorry and apologize to everyone for not noticing the small issues with a some of the model sprues. Its been an insane last few weeks at the office trying to get the all the backer reward packages shipped out as fast as possible. We were trying to explain the issues to everyone in the text above and forgot to say we are sorry.

 Albertorius wrote:
Oh, yes, Robert. Do keep digging

@ Peter and All Backers. We are sorry and apologize to everyone for not noticing the small issues with a some of the model sprues. Its been an insane last few weeks at the office trying to get the all the backer reward packages shipped out as fast as possible. We were trying to explain the issues to everyone in the text above and forgot to say we are sorry.

The Pod "forgot"?

As if.

If someone is really sorry, then "I'm sorry" are the first 2 words that come out, they take responsibility, they make amends, and they repeat it as last thing.

Nomeny wrote:
What, would you rather that they bankrupt the company sorting out the QA snafu?

possibly?

if the contractor failed to produce the goods that should be castable from the mould it's them that should be paying for a replacement run (unless of course it's the mould that's the problem and DP9 signed off on it as OK_

so DP9 needs to go and get them to sort the issue out and make a bunch more sprues

(I would however accept being asked to pay shipping on the replacement sprue though since i'd end up with stuff most modellers could fix If they said finances were tight)

@Mmmpi.

Are you in the Terra Nova DMZ group?

Because one Backer already pointed out half of his FLAIL missing, and Robert responded that emailing him would see the Backer receive replacements.

BrandonKF wrote:@Mmmpi.

Are you in the Terra Nova DMZ group?

Because one Backer already pointed out half of his FLAIL missing, and Robert responded that emailing him would see the Backer receive replacements.

Thanks for the update. Hopefully mmmpi will get the same response. On a side note, shouldn't that flail have self destruct exploded to leave no evidence of the miscast?

IceRaptor wrote:

 warboss wrote:
I did. In the past, the one thing they were good at was fixing their mistakes like miscasts.

Seconded. I'm absolutely floored at the change in customer service. I understand why - they aren't the ones responsible for production anymore - but it's so night and day different than DP9 of even 4 years ago that I'm stunned.

If someone buys an iPhone from Apple that is defective, it's immaterial to the end consumer that Foxconn manufactured it for Apple and doesn't excuse Apple from their responsibility. It's up to Dp9 to get *their* money back from the caster as their customer after replacing defective backer sprues. I know you're not defending their actions but figured I'd point out how ridiculous that line of thought would be when extended to other products.

Nomeny wrote:What, would you rather that they bankrupt the company sorting out the QA snafu?

No...but I expect them on an almost year delayed first kickstarter reboot of their flagship product to QA the sprues better in order to save themselves money and face. Proactive trumps reactive.

Mmmpi wrote:
Yeah I just emailed them a few minutes ago.

If they tell me to mold my own missing parts than technically they're giving me permission to make any DP9 model I want on the grounds of "I don't have it" (and yes I know they won't agree with me on it)


As for the QS rule book, so far what I can see is that it only has model rules for what's availible in the KS (and starter boxes). So for north there are no Wiesel or razorbacks for example, just hunters, ferrets, cheetahs, jaguars, grizzlies, and kodiaks. They do have all the sublists for north/south/CEF/caprice.
Rules wise it looks mostly the same as the HGBLRBB, though they added a "learn the rules" scenario that I don't remember from the HGBLRBB. It's just a quick play learn how the rolling and stats work demo mission.

Good to hear and hopefully Brandon's related experience proves prophetic. Thanks for the info as well. Does the quick start book have better diagrams and/or more color pics?

As far as diagrams of the models, no, the Quick Start Rulebook is just basic rules of 5.0 Blitz. Each model is shown in color where they are painted, but that's it.

BrandonKF wrote:
@Mmmpi.

Are you in the Terra Nova DMZ group?

Because one Backer already pointed out half of his FLAIL missing, and Robert responded that emailing him would see the Backer receive replacements.

I'm not part of TN DMZ, but Robert already emailed me saying that the bits would be mailed out to me soon. He got back to me rather quickly too. I was quite pleased with him on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrandonKF wrote:
As far as diagrams of the models, no, the Quick Start Rulebook is just basic rules of 5.0 Blitz. Each model is shown in color where they are painted, but that's it.

It's also both fully colored, but feels like a lower quality production (granted it's "free").

I wasn't really bothered by the small defects I noticed in my stuff, but that update got my nose right out of joint. I would have rather they used the $400 I gave them on a customer service pro to do their communications.

Quality Control is somewhat of a misnomer. My job involves inspection, and the mantra is "100% inspection is 80% effective." The likeliest scenario is that a person at Models LLC pulls a random sample and looks it over for flaws every once in a while (read: hourly at best). The person packing it is probably supposed to glance at each part to check for missing pieces. That vent is 2x3 mm in size, no way is an inspector catching that unless it's a test sample.

However, I can tell you that the end customer should/does not care if the subcontractor produced a substandard part - that's an issue between the retailer and the customer, period. It's the retailer's job to go back to the subcontractor for replacements - this sort of thing should be outlined in any contract. Robert really should have said "I'm going to talk to Models LLC about this and see what we can do, if you wish replacement parts, e-mail me and please be patient with us."

One more thing that will hang like an albatross around their neck come the next Kickstarter, I'm sure.

Oh, nobody should be expecting absolute perfection across the board in a mass production process. But neither should anybody be accepting mass defects, either.

When I backed KD:M, there was a massive feth-up with sprue picking for Spidicules. Probably close to a 100% mispack rate. For those who didn't arrange L-R trades of LLX with RRX, Adam had more parts run off and shipped. I'm sure it cost somebody a pretty penny, but the problem got fixed. What Adam didn't do was to get defensive and claim it wasn't really a problem. Nor did he throw somebody else under the bus. He took responsibility and worked to get the backers squared away.

I wonder what Models LLC thinks of the publicity the Pod is giving them.

I don't pass the buck on Models LLC.

It is what it is.

No reason for me to get my feathers ruffled.

And I don't understand why someone who offered 1 looney out of 150,000 is complaining.

Imagine if you'd been 1 in 2,000,000, like Palladium?

Gee, with a 75 percent effectiveness, what does that say of Models LLC and Dream Pod 9 compared to Palladium?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

Oh, gee. Guess it makes them, I don't know, better?

Robert just posted an apology for his apology.

Here's a link: http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17650#entry304296

Not taking sides on this one.

I don't even understand where the 'sides' began. Anyway, I'm off to get some rest and finish up some more writing for the future.

BrandonKF wrote:
No reason for me to get my feathers ruffled.

And I don't understand why someone who offered 1 looney out of 150,000 is complaining.

No reason to get your feathers ruffled, eh? It seems you got them anyways, by that comment.

Do you need to have spent a specific amount of money on something before you're allowed to comment about its problems, and about the way the company chooses to comunicate and/or (not) fix the aforementioned problems? It's a "you need to be THIS tall to enter" problem, now? No, it is not. And if you don't understand why people complain about this, no matter the amount of dough invested on it... well, I can't help you there.

Imagine if you'd been 1 in 2,000,000, like Palladium?

Same difference? I mean, have you even looked at the RRT's thread? A defect is a defect, and an donkey-cave "communicating with their backers" is an donkey-cave all the same.

Gee, with a 75 percent effectiveness, what does that say of Models LLC and Dream Pod 9 compared to Palladium?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

Oh, gee. Guess it makes them, I don't know, better?

Do not take the name of the lord in vain, Brandon, you of all people . I assume that 75% quote is pulled out of somebody's ass, isn't it? Because I don't remember having it seen quoted anywhere.

Also, what does it mean, in this context? That only 25% of the sprues have defects, like missing details or blobs of plastic covering other details? Because if that's the case, and you're comparing with PB's RRT sprues... they got the ones they actually did 100% right. Yes, right to their stupid requirements of "1000 pieces or it won't do", but the sprues don't have defects, or lost details, so... what were you arguing about, exactly, there? I mean, if what you're saying is "well, only one in four of the moulds are defective, that means they got 3/4 of them right!" it's not exactly a ringing endorsement...

So, I've finished up several gears, and customizing them turned out to be super easy.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5GcXTf7FNC9MEV3X2hhQk83ZmM
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5GcXTf7FNC9WkdLeGl1VTlidUU
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5GcXTf7FNC9V2xMeVFrUVNDZGM
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5GcXTf7FNC9OEs2dzBkX3BITnM

The only pinning was when I had to rebuild a few arms on the Iguanas, and a leg for the running Kodiak (not including the optional weapons, which are all drilled and weapons pinned, but not glued in place).

Tools were superglue (I use locktite gel), an exacto knife, clippers, a razor saw, and a pin vice for the weapons. Each conversion took about 10-20 minutes, mostly on whether I needed to use the saw. While people have been complaining about mold lines, for the most part they've been cleaning off very easily and bases aside, the only flash has been from where I cut it from the sprue, nothing anywhere else. On the jacks larger than Recon the pegs connecting the hips to the legs are too long and need to be trimmed down (I've been taking off about half)

Not pictured: Jogging Hunter, two ferrets, posing cheetah, gangsta' cheetah (running firing weapon to side)

The links work, but you have to cut and paste them. Too lazy to fix right now.

Never mind, fixed them.

Great to hear, although you'll probably get easier results using plastic glue.

Seeing the couple of comments about a communications director (or what have you) sure make me glad Nyguen left to go work on Assault.

That turned out well for everybody.

BrandonKF wrote:
I
And I don't understand why someone who offered 1 looney out of 150,000 is complaining.

We're more accurately described as commenting on/lamenting the regrettable situation, Brandon. No one is personalizing the miscasts except Mmmpi who has that right as a non-trivial amount backer. If a politician does something stupid but I'm not in his or her district nor voted for them, that doesn't mean I shouldn't or am not allowed to comment on the stupidity of the act in question. The amount pledged in no way diminishes the validity of the commentary and, in a way, the one looney pledges by dedicated fans of the IP are a statement on prior questionable acts by the company in question.

 warboss wrote:
The amount pledged in no way diminishes the validity of the commentary and, in a way, the one looney pledges by dedicated fans of the IP are a statement on prior questionable acts by the company in question.

Or in other words, the "you don't get a free pass anymore" clause. Other people that pledged 1 buck, though, like JohnHwangDD, did it to allow them to pledge later, with the hope that the actual materials would be up to snuff, but ended up not being sufficiently wowed by the show displayed by the company.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Robert just posted an apology for his apology.

Here's a link: http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17650#entry304296

Not taking sides on this one.

Thanks for the link. It looked like he apologized for the tone of the message but not the content that remains unchanged. If you're unhappy with dipples and v-engine grating miscasts that results in miscast but usable models, you're still SOL. It does look like they're replacing UNUSABLE models at least. Since Caprice is one of the factions with some minor miscast issues, I might hold off on buying a faction pack until I can do so in person (and return it immediately if needed). One of the benefits to plastic models is supposed to be the uniformity of the models with a lack of miscasts. In 25+ years of modelling, I've had a single plastic sprue that was miscast and even then it wasn't visually noticeable but rather thicker in height by less than a quarter of a millimeter (and only evident when I had to assemble several layers of tight fitting movable parts).

Also bullet's comments on backers PAYING to internationally ship back defective sprues worth a few pennies is both predictable and ridiculous.

I'm only interested in Caprice, and only if I can find them cheap... is the problem mentioned repeating in every sprue, or it's more limited?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warboss wrote:
Also bullet's comments on backers PAYING to internationally ship back defective sprues worth a few pennies is both predictable and ridiculous.

Wow, really? They're expecting international backers to send the sprues back on their dime, knowing that it will cost them more in shipping than buying the minis again? I suppose that's a way of avoiding to do too many replacements...

Just to clarify, that's the response NOT from dp9 but rather their most vocal white knight of late (and the one that you sparred verbally with before getting the boot) who ran a DP9 endorsed terrain kickstarter.

Because clearly the response to getting a defective product worth a few pennies is to pay roughly $10 out of pocket yourself. Ughh... it worries me that he ran a kickstarter himself with that attitude (and that's not a complaint, Brandon, since I didn't back it but rather commentary). You got a miscast building as one of your rewards? Too bad. Either resculpt a bunch of windows yourself after filing down the blob of resin due to a mold tear... or pay $10-15 to ship the entire piece back to them as punishment for wanting what you actually should have received in the first place.

As for caprice, I'm not sure but it is mentioned in the known defects. The problem is that I'm not confident that DP9 will check FUTURE shipments of product like remaining rewards as well as product to the retail chain for the known issues. They might take the "feth it!" approach and decide it's not worth the trouble to check EACH sprue and just continue to pack things as they did previously. I'm not a plastics expert by any means but it sounds like a warming up, timing/injection pressure issue since it didn't happen when the company was actually paying attention during the test sprue pops.

I was not aware of the terrain KS creator making comments of that sort, so I apologize.

However, since others were pulling comments out their own, I figured I could, too.

My 75 percent is a gross and very undeveloped estimate. Fact is, the minor defects for me, as a Backer who wanted to see this kick off, are an endorsement for both Models LLC and the Pod. Because with 1/13th the amount of money, those two companies delivered almost the total product promised to 1/5th the total number of Backers, in comparison. No, they're not as detailed as the pewter models. But what I've handled, I liked.

Much of this comes down to time, money, and manpower. I'm aware we say that Heavy Gear is a niche within a niche, but I'd like to break that mold, figuratively. You know that.

Constructive criticism is fine. Pointing out flaws is fine. But reading between the lines so deeply that you develop an opinion that the Pod and its constituents are saying 'STFU peasants'? That's unwarranted.

It was the Backers in the FB group who discussed fixing the issues themselves, and gave advice to fellow gamers on how to sand, file, and fill the blanks and mold lines.

So, if you want to give your feedback to the wider audience, share pictures, and help connect the community, I'll put the link here, and also in the Kickstarter comments and updates.

 Albertorius wrote:
Or in other words, the "you don't get a free pass anymore" clause. Other people that pledged 1 buck, though, like JohnHwangDD, did it to allow them to pledge later, with the hope that the actual materials would be up to snuff, but ended up not being sufficiently wowed by the show displayed by the company.

Exactly. I threw a buck in the ring to keep tabs on the project, to see how the project would be run, to keep my options open on whether I would purchase a full pledge. The more I saw from the Pod, the more I learned about the Pod. And the more certain I was that I had overspent on this KS. I was really glad that I didn't throw good money after bad. I would have been hugely disappointed by the result compared to the original metals and KS promos.

Which is why I bought a bunch of metal stuff for cheap: 1 King Cobra & a full mix of CEF Frames.

From an objective standpoint, the Pod does not deliver what they promise. They said that people would get Tiger and Sidewinder models, and they reneged on that. They showed models and renders in the KS that were not at all representative of the final product - South, in particular. The quality of the final production is sub-par.

But, hey, if somebody wants to talk numbers, RRT only pulled around $1.5M. And if we're making up percentages:

RRT
50% delivered (only wave 1)
100% cast properly
100% match looks
= 50% net delivery

HGB
90% delivered (the Pod reneged on the Tiger & Sidewinder)
75% cast properly (non-South)
25% match looks (Caprice)
= 17% net delivery

Overall, the Pod did worse than PB.

From a pure modeling standpoint, the RRT minis are clearly superior. They have more pieces, but those pieces are true to the source material, and were cast properly.

That's not objective.

They showed early on that the original CAD renders would not be able to go through, so they asked for feedback and new renders, and they went forward in that manner.

The fact that you disagree with it doesn't validate your opinion, nor does it give you a free pass.

Edit: And your subjective opinion that none of the models look right is just that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, here's the link to the Terra Nova DMZ, before I get back to work.

https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=302254736538781&tsid=0.919066166331397&source=typeahead

@warboss, As far as your fears that DP9 will say, 'feth it', I can say that the many fans in that group are holding the Pod to a standard. It's not about getting fethed over by the company, nor is there to be mudslinging. I and the others there want to see the efforts shared, and succeed in connecting the wider world audience with Heavy Gear.

BrandonKF wrote:
@warboss, As far as your fears that DP9 will say, 'feth it', I can say that the many fans in that group are holding the Pod to a standard. It's not about getting fethed over by the company, nor is there to be mudslinging. I and the others there want to see the efforts shared, and succeed in connecting the wider world audience with Heavy Gear.

I genuinely hope you're right about that first part as DP9 has a distressing history of doing exactly that when they aren't shamed into doing better going back 20+ years. It's not dredging up old grudges but rather pattern recognition. This kickstarter is supposed to be the (final) new start for the company, product line, and IP in several different ways and this is another unfortunate preventable roadblock on that journey.

If this KS has been the Pod at it's best behavior, I can't imagine how they've managed to stay around at all. Oh, wait...

warboss wrote:

BrandonKF wrote:
@warboss, As far as your fears that DP9 will say, 'feth it', I can say that the many fans in that group are holding the Pod to a standard. It's not about getting fethed over by the company, nor is there to be mudslinging. I and the others there want to see the efforts shared, and succeed in connecting the wider world audience with Heavy Gear.

I genuinely hope you're right about that first part as DP9 has a distressing history of doing exactly that when they aren't shamed into doing better going back 20+ years. It's not dredging up old grudges but rather pattern recognition. This kickstarter is supposed to be the (final) new start for the company, product line, and IP in several different ways and this is another unfortunate preventable roadblock on that journey.

I've been there for quite a few, and I've had it mentioned multiple times about the whens and wheres. Do believe that I keep that in mind.

So far on the DP9 forums several people have come out and said much of the defects were/are unacceptable, so yeah Bran your right to a degree.

This same group though also produced 11Bullets and his insulting "you pay for the Podbay's mistakes" idea though too.

What I would have found as a preferable option for the podbay is for them to wait until all the waves have been delivered, and than go back and redress any of the major defects. Yeah, I don't really like waiting any longer, but this would let them: A get back on their feet, and B: take stock of what needs to be replaced in bulk so they can add that to the manufacturer's order for pre-orders; get it all done in one swoop. Offering metal jager backpacks to offset the miscast one would also be a reasonable idea.

@Brandon:
How does being in disagreement invalidate an opinion? The only thing John is guilty of is being a pushy in expressing it. While I'm mostly fine with how the ones I've built look (even if the Recon gears feel smaller than before), doesn't change the fact that they are different than what was initially promised. To be honest, (and I'm not even a gifted amature, let alone an expert in making miniatures) I really never understood why they couldn't have directly copied the metal molds and made EXACT copies. Like GW has been doing since they made plastic their mainstay (their first bulk non-starter plastics were carbon copies of their metal marines), or Privateer press (for their infantry).

Man, Dakka at it's finest, amirite?!

Seriously, this thread is a bunch of crap. I've got a massive amount of minis from this Kickstarter and really people here are overstating any of the issue. Dimpling happens in nearly all large-cast plastic minis, it's part of the hobby, just as much as mold lines, it's not something exclusive to DP9. Most of the imperfections in the models are just that, imperfections, I've yet to see anyone show a picture of a model so horrifically disfigured that it should be replaced.

If anything they've been incredibly professional in even acknowledging the issues they've found and can make their models even better in future casting runs. Most companies just sweep it under the rug and pretend it doesn't exist, and keep pumping out the flawed minis (anyone who has assembled a tau crisis suit knows about how bad dimpling can be). We don't need an apology for something that is pretty standard, it's just something that happens and if it bugs you enough, can be easily corrected.

You guys really need to chill out, especially when some of the most expensive miniatures in the world come out like this and don't lead to threads full of vitriol on a daily basis: http://i1129.photobucket.com/albums/m508/Heavens-Eagle/Storm%20Eagle%20for%20Cancer/GamesDay2013-2.jpg

 minionboy wrote:
Dimpling happens in nearly all large-cast plastic minis, it's part of the hobby, just as much as mold lines, it's not something exclusive to DP9.

I haven't had any issue with dimpling on my Baneblade, Shadowsword, Valkyrie, Imperial Knight, or Wraithknight. Nor my Dreamforge Leviathan. Nor my Kingdom Death models. Nor my Bandai Gundam kits. Dimpling is an issue with cheap plastic and low quality production, and the idea that we should accept it is ridiculous.

Second, mold lines can be very fine. If we use a human hair as the minimal standard, my most recent GW, Dreamforge, Gundam and KD product have had minimal mold lines and minimal flash. I would not accept that large mold lines or misalignment should be acceptable today.

This product isn't even as good as a 1980s Tamiya scale armor.

If you're OK with the Pod delivering 1970s quality going into 2020, that's on you. But to suggest that others should be so forgiving, just because the Pod has a few white knights, that's simply ridiculous.

Sorry, I thought you only went into the Kickstarter for $1. Where's the product you own so that you can make first-hand comparison? More to the point, what's your deal? You paid your entry fee, decided you didn't like the product enough to buy, and then...you decided that everyone should stop liking what you don't like? For someone who never bought anything from the KS you have this weird need to tell this story about how DP9 and their KS product is bad. Does a successful HGB compete with your KOG homebrew or something?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I haven't had any issue with dimpling on my Baneblade, Shadowsword, Valkyrie, Imperial Knight, or Wraithknight. Nor my Dreamforge Leviathan. Nor my Kingdom Death models. Nor my Bandai Gundam kits. Dimpling is an issue with cheap plastic and low quality production, and the idea that we should accept it is ridiculous.

You should consider yourself lucky then. All of those GW minis (can't speak for the others, never seen them in person) have been designed to avoid puckering, and are VASTLY larger kits than HGB models, which allow them to make everything hollow and avoid this issue whenever possible. Try playing Tau that tend to get dimpling on suit heads and weapons (SMS and fusion guns in particular), or basically any other model kit that has flat boxy areas more than a mm thick, much like the HGB sculpts.

Additionally, I've got a mountain of FW models that all have issues with dimpling, and each one costs more than the entire 4-player set from this Kickstarter. Dimpling happens, and what has happened on the ones in this Kickstarter aren't even that bad. To make it better, unlike GW (sorry kiddo, GW isn't perfect), they're actually rectifying it for future production runs.

For kits coming from a small company, which DP9 is, these are fantastic, and far better quality than I had expected.

Nomeny wrote:
Sorry, I thought you only went into the Kickstarter for $1. Where's the product you own so that you can make first-hand comparison? More to the point, what's your deal? You paid your entry fee, decided you didn't like the product enough to buy, and then...you decided that everyone should stop liking what you don't like? For someone who never bought anything from the KS you have this weird need to tell this story about how DP9 and their KS product is bad. Does a successful HGB compete with your KOG homebrew or something?

The product is what people are showing, obviously.

Whether others like the product is on them - I don't care. I do, however, take exception to ignorant people saying that the quality of the models is not crap.

The objective fact is that the models delivered do not, and can not match what was proposed during the KS. Unlike, say Super Dungeon Explore or Bones or Zombicide. SPM, Reaper, CMoN - deliver minis that look 99% what was shown in the KS.

The other fact is that the models are clearly more flawed than they should be for any HIPS models produced from new tooling in the past few years. Claiming that every model has flaws belies the fact that the overwhelming majority of modern kits are not nearly as flawed as these.

So, if people want to keep arguing that crap is good, I'm going to keep arguing that no, crap is crap.

As for KOG light project, I didn't bring that up in this particular part of the discussion - you did. I don't even link it in my sig. So you're reading something in that isn't there. Or you're creating something that isn't there.

Regardless, whether I put in a buck, a thousand, or nothing, that doens't preclude me from noting that people are wrong when they claim that this product is up to par.

 minionboy wrote:
Man, Dakka at it's finest, amirite?!

Seriously, this thread is a bunch of crap. I've got a massive amount of minis from this Kickstarter and really people here are overstating any of the issue. Dimpling happens in nearly all large-cast plastic minis, it's part of the hobby, just as much as mold lines, it's not something exclusive to DP9. Most of the imperfections in the models are just that, imperfections, I've yet to see anyone show a picture of a model so horrifically disfigured that it should be replaced.

If anything they've been incredibly professional in even acknowledging the issues they've found and can make their models even better in future casting runs. Most companies just sweep it under the rug and pretend it doesn't exist, and keep pumping out the flawed minis (anyone who has assembled a tau crisis suit knows about how bad dimpling can be). We don't need an apology for something that is pretty standard, it's just something that happens and if it bugs you enough, can be easily corrected.

You guys really need to chill out, especially when some of the most expensive miniatures in the world come out like this and don't lead to threads full of vitriol on a daily basis: http://i1129.photobucket.com/albums/m508/Heavens-Eagle/Storm%20Eagle%20for%20Cancer/GamesDay2013-2.jpg

The lack of a flame war over the GW miscast is because it's an isolated issue. Someone got a faulty product, and it was probably replaced fairly quickly. What's happening here is very similar to the still relatively recent Failcast issues. The rage behind that can of worms could have powered several major cities for years. The production itself is flawed. It's not an isolated incident, (every Jager sprue has the same exact back pack flaw, and no one has reported one that doesn't have that issue). On top of that, the Podbay issued a VERY poorly worded (in my opinion) press release about it that fanned the flames rather than calmed things down.

@Nomeny: "Does a successful HGB compete with your KOG homebrew or something? "

He does seem to push it alot. Feels like every couple of pages, at least in the other thread.

@minionboy: I guess I've been lucky too, not that I buy that much from forgeworld. But I rarely run into the same flaw twice with GW.

 minionboy wrote:
Man, Dakka at it's finest, amirite?!

I am sure it is. This thread exists, here, instead of having disappeared and the posters banned.

You should consider yourself lucky then. All of those GW minis (can't speak for the others, never seen them in person) have been designed to avoid puckering, and are VASTLY larger kits than HGB models, which allow them to make everything hollow and avoid this issue whenever possible. Try playing Tau that tend to get dimpling on suit heads and weapons (SMS and fusion guns in particular), or basically any other model kit that has flat boxy areas more than a mm thick, much like the HGB sculpts.

I'm not much of a GW fanboy myself, but one thing I can say: I have never had any problem with a GW mini or sprue that has not been promptly replaced. I've never have been told "just use some putty to smooth it off" if I wanted a replacement. Until now, I could say the same of DP9. No more.

As to Tau, I've assembled in the las couple of months a Start collecting box, a scouts box and an additional fire warrior squad. It might have to do with all of them being new sprues, but I did not find any dimpling whatsoever.

 minionboy wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I haven't had any issue with dimpling on my Baneblade, Shadowsword, Valkyrie, Imperial Knight, or Wraithknight. Nor my Dreamforge Leviathan. Nor my Kingdom Death models. Nor my Bandai Gundam kits. Dimpling is an issue with cheap plastic and low quality production, and the idea that we should accept it is ridiculous.

You should consider yourself lucky then. All of those GW minis (can't speak for the others, never seen them in person) have been designed to avoid puckering, and are VASTLY larger kits than HGB models, which allow them to make everything hollow and avoid this issue whenever possible. Try playing Tau that tend to get dimpling on suit heads and weapons (SMS and fusion guns in particular), or basically any other model kit that has flat boxy areas more than a mm thick, much like the HGB sculpts.

Additionally, I've got a mountain of FW models that all have issues with dimpling, and each one costs more than the entire 4-player set from this Kickstarter. Dimpling happens, and what has happened on the ones in this Kickstarter aren't even that bad. To make it better, unlike GW (sorry kiddo, GW isn't perfect), they're actually rectifying it for future production runs.

For kits coming from a small company, which DP9 is, these are fantastic, and far better quality than I had expected.

Let me get this straight. You foolishly claimed that (and I quote again) "Dimpling happens in nearly all large-cast plastic minis, it's part of the hobby, just as much as mold lines, it's not something exclusive to DP9."

I gave *several* examples of plastic minis (across multiple decades) that clearly disprove your statement.

And now you're getting all pissy with me, moving the goalposts to include some resin stuff that isn't perfect? To try and make your terribly weak point, you're now using poured resin in rubber molds as the reference, rather than the injection plastic in tooled steel that characterizes current plastic models?

Dude, you can kiss Robert's ass all you like, I won't stop you there.

But don't go around telling lies about how the Pod's stuff is somehow up to par for 2016, or that everybody else is equally flawed. It's not, and they aren't. And moving the goalposts to make an apples-to-oranges comparison is like being a Flat Earther.
____

Also, at no point did I ever claim that "GW was perfect".

 Mmmpi wrote:
The lack of a flame war over the GW miscast is because it's an isolated issue. Someone got a faulty product, and it was probably replaced fairly quickly. What's happening here is very similar to the still relatively recent Failcast issues. The rage behind that can of worms could have powered several major cities for years. The production itself is flawed. It's not an isolated incident, (every Jager sprue has the same exact back pack flaw, and no one has reported one that doesn't have that issue). On top of that, the Podbay issued a VERY poorly worded (in my opinion) press release about it that fanned the flames rather than calmed things down.

@Nomeny: "Does a successful HGB compete with your KOG homebrew or something? "

He does seem to push it alot. Feels like every couple of pages, at least in the other thread.

@minionboy: I guess I've been lucky too, not that I buy that much from forgeworld. But I rarely run into the same flaw twice with GW.

I suppose I thought that even acknowledging the issue was pretty damn professional, I don't think we are entitled to any apology, none of the issues really are really bad enough that they should be begging for forgiveness. I took a good look at my Jagers and the dimpling is incredibly minor, it's so slight that seriously after a lick of paint, you'll never notice it. It is however more noticeable on the shiny black plastic they're cast in because it reflects light differently.

A quick google search of "tau bits" yielded a picture of exactly what I was talking about. Same cracking-lines on the Missile Pod, same slight puckering on it the fusion gun (notice the slightly lighter color in the middle, due to reflecting the light differently), and the multi-tracker. Yes these are the older bits, but they illustrate the problem: http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/371052659149-0-1/s-l1000.jpg

Here's a lovely crisis suit head that shows the dimpling on the back half and around the injection point, and this is the NEW version.: http://www.bitzbox.co.uk/images/tau_crisis_suits_head_1_large.JPG

If you want to know what it's like to assemble FW models "correctly" just take a look at this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/507545.page

Basically every large section is puckered at some point and requires filling and sanding. FW gets a pass because they're for "expert" players, but really, that's just a BS excuse, they cost a ton yet get a pass because they're expected to be crap... Seriously, DP9 doesn't deserve to be raked through the coals for delivering overall a fantastic product, with the worst problems being incredibly minor defects that are mostly invisible after painting. I backed this Kickstarter for 2x of each army set, plus a handful of extra gears on top of that, I have a lot invested in the game (compared to many), and I couldn't be more thrilled with the result.

So what you're saying is that you're complaining out of principle?

 Mmmpi wrote:
@Nomeny: "Does a successful HGB compete with your KOG homebrew or something? "

He does seem to push it alot. Feels like every couple of pages, at least in the other thread.

I'm sorry if you thought I was pushing KL excessively. You'll see a lot less of that from here on out. I'll still announce "final" release(s), but that'll be the end of it.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
@Nomeny: "Does a successful HGB compete with your KOG homebrew or something? "

He does seem to push it alot. Feels like every couple of pages, at least in the other thread.

I'm sorry if you thought I was pushing KL excessively. You'll see a lot less of that from here on out. I'll still announce "final" release(s), but that'll be the end of it.

Don't worry about it. Just because I'm not interested doesn't mean the others aren't.

 minionboy wrote:
A quick google search of "tau bits" yielded a picture of exactly what I was talking about. Same cracking-lines on the Missile Pod, same slight puckering on it the fusion gun (notice the slightly lighter color in the middle, due to reflecting the light differently), and the multi-tracker. Yes these are the older bits, but they illustrate the problem: http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/371052659149-0-1/s-l1000.jpg

Here's a lovely crisis suit head that shows the dimpling on the back half and around the injection point, and this is the NEW version.: http://www.bitzbox.co.uk/images/tau_crisis_suits_head_1_large.JPG

If I'm not mistaken, the flaws you're pointing out are like the one in the Jäger's forearm, isn't it? Were the slight decoloration shows a small lack of material. The one from the Jäger's shoulder, though, is a full-on dimple. And the Jäger's engine show full a heavy depression and a deformity in the engine grill.

You know, what I find the most amusing with this whole casting scandal, is that people have forgotten the actual minis, even with a perfect cast, are seriously bleh. The proportions are bad, the detail is either shallow, or lacking, and the painted pics that have been posted only confirm that no paintjob can save those.
Man, the plastic Black Mamba doesn't even look good next to a tac-era Mamba, so lets spare the poor anorexic thing a comparison to the gorgeous Blitz Mamba. Now that's what I call a "defect".

Since we seem to be having some...difficulties in here, here's a quick refresher on the rules:

RULE #1 is BE POLITE, and it is required AT ALL TIMES.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/forum_rules.jsp

Rule 1: Be Polite
This seems obvious, however many folks can sometimes forget that common courtesy goes a long way to lending respect to both you and your opinions. Just because you don't see the other users' faces doesn't mean they don't have feelings and won't be hurt by rude comments or offensive images. When you see something that you find silly, rude or insulting first assume that perhaps there is more to it than you initially thought. Look at it again, keeping in mind that tone and inflection is difficult to convey in a visual format. It may be that the person is attempting a joke or is exaggerating on purpose. It is best to politely request clarification before accusing someone being ignorant, a liar, or worse.

If after clarification you still disagree with the person then politely outline your points. Try to avoid name-calling or even implying insults wherever possible. These tactics generally only inflame a situation and lead to what are known as "Flame Wars." Whenever a flame war starts it usually ruins a perfectly good discussion. Others will lose interest in the thread and the site in general if this kind of interchange becomes a common occurrence.

Consider this post the only general in thread warning that will be given - after this, warnings and possibly suspensions will follow.

I'm sorry if anybody was taking anything I said personally. I apologize for that.

As I don't want to cause any trouble for you guys, I'm out of the thread. Good luck.

 HudsonD wrote:
You know, what I find the most amusing with this whole casting scandal, is that people have forgotten the actual minis, even with a perfect cast, are seriously bleh. The proportions are bad, the detail is either shallow, or lacking, and the painted pics that have been posted only confirm that no paintjob can save those.
Man, the plastic Black Mamba doesn't even look good next to a tac-era Mamba, so lets spare the poor anorexic thing a comparison to the gorgeous Blitz Mamba. Now that's what I call a "defect".

That ship sailed months ago, during the design phase when the Pod found that the initial files wouldn't work for designing molds. I don't know why they didn't just try to port the metal designs over to plastic, but then I'm not privy to the logistics driving their design solutions. I'm personally very happy with the miniatures and how they turned out, even if they aren't plastic copies of the metal miniatures. The painted pictures that were put up before Gencon sold me on the models, and if you care to read the Kickstarter comments and the forums I'm not the only person happy with the miniatures. I mean, if you put in money to the Kickstarter and now own models you don't want, I'll be happy to take them off your hands, but if you're just standing on the sidelines complaining that the models you didn't buy are models you don't like, well, I guess you're entitled to your opinions. It's not like you can't continue to buy the metal models if you're absolutely determined to buy a product you don't like from a company you don't like.

 HudsonD wrote:
You know, what I find the most amusing with this whole casting scandal, is that people have forgotten the actual minis, even with a perfect cast, are seriously bleh. The proportions are bad, the detail is either shallow, or lacking, and the painted pics that have been posted only confirm that no paintjob can save those.
Man, the plastic Black Mamba doesn't even look good next to a tac-era Mamba, so lets spare the poor anorexic thing a comparison to the gorgeous Blitz Mamba. Now that's what I call a "defect".

To borrow from the software industry, the mambas looking anorexic is a now long known feature. The mambas potentially missing body parts, sporting gaping wounds, or wearing burkhas over their V-engines is a more recent bug.

Did anyone back the HG terrain kickstarter a few months back? If so, you may want to take note of the creator's "pro-business" stance on casting issues now reposted and confirmed.

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17650&p=304326

 warboss wrote:
Did anyone back the HG terrain kickstarter a few months back? If so, you may want to take note of the creator's "pro-business" stance on casting issues now reposted and confirmed.

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17650&p=304326

That isn't HG terrain, nor do I believe Terraforms is associated in any way with DP9, it's just generic 10-12mm scale terrain, and his points are totally valid, specifically this one:

"A defect is not a defect when bubbles, dimples, etc are a normal part of the process of metal, plastic, or resin recreations. Go find a modelling tutorial that doesn't begin with "prep the model by filling gaps or bubbles, removing flash and seam lines, etc" and instead says "check your model for any defect, return to the store if you find anything." It's an industry standard. It happens, and frequently. Again, I say that most of what have been brought up aren't 'defect' in the sense as it applies in this industry, since industry norm is what they'll use not Webster's Dictionary. None the less, the DP9 crew have been happy to handle the issue, as is a good business practice."

I firmly disagree, both here and on the DP9 forums. The industry leaders disagree seeing as they replace those models with little or no fighting, usually just a picture to confirm you actually bought the item you're complaining about.

It would be like buying a red car, only to find out the hood was dented because someone in the factory dropped a wrench on it. The car dealer doesn't tell you to pull the dent yourself, repaint and clear coat. They fix it themselves.

Most of the people in those videos just don't want to take the time to wait over a minor defect (and those small bubbles and such ARE defects, no matter how you try to sugar coat it), that it would take to contact GW/PP/ect and wait for the replacement to be mailed to them. I have asked for defective parts to be replaced, and GW and PP both have been more than happy to send me what I needed. Reaper has done the same with missing parts. GW didn't even demand evidence that I had bought a product, and sent me 30 backpacks rather than the five I needed. Defective in this case means bubbles in plastic, deformed metal, not as pictured on their websites/catalogs. Aka how people are describing the molding issues with HG. Not as depicted. Broken but still usable.

Hmm...Three of the biggest miniature companies freely replace defective (aka not perfect) product. And I've heard the same from FFG's players, Mantic players, and Battletech players. I'm thinking your industry norms aren't actually all that normal.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back to the car example. You might be thinking "But Mmmpi, a car costs thousands of dollars, while your mini's are only $2 a piece."

My answer back is: I don't care. I paid for correct, I expect correct, it doesn't matter if I payed 2 bucks or had to take out a loan.

 Mmmpi wrote:
It would be like buying a red car, only to find out the hood was dented because someone in the factory dropped a wrench on it. The car dealer doesn't tell you to pull the dent yourself, repaint and clear coat. They fix it themselves.

Bad analogy is bad. If you drive the car off the lot, no dealer is going to repair a damn thing that isn't under warranty.

Regarding the models though, unlike a car, models have inherent flaws, which is why you spend time cleaning mold lines and filling gaps or bubbles. Part of the hobby is perfecting the model from an imperfect manufacturing process, it's the step that most people do right before painting, and if you don't do, people will point out as something YOU didn't do. They don't comment that X company really shouldn't have shipped you a model with mold lines or other imperfections, they say, you should have done a better job prepping your models.

The models I own, and the ones I've seen, I haven't seen anything beyond what I would consider normal. Just like any other kit you buy from nearly any other manufacturer. Yes, the big guys will replace anything, often without question, but they also have it in their operating budget to do so and can afford/need the write off. DP9, while they may have been around for a long time (in name) are nowhere near as big as the big players, nor are they in a position to burn money over things which are really, at the end of the day, pretty standard in the hobby.

 minionboy wrote:

That isn't HG terrain, nor do I believe Terraforms is associated in any way with DP9, it's just generic 10-12mm scale terrain,

Except that it was promoted by DP9's Robert in the DP9 announcement section of the forum

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17431

And he uses HG models in every real life shot in his kickstarter video... and is allowed to use HG logos in association with his own advertisements (see his sig banner). If that isn't "associated in any way with DP9" then I don't know what it. He's not an employee but that isn't the sole criteria of association.

and his points are totally valid, specifically this one:

"A defect is not a defect when bubbles, dimples, etc are a normal part of the process of metal, plastic, or resin recreations. Go find a modelling tutorial that doesn't begin with "prep the model by filling gaps or bubbles, removing flash and seam lines, etc" and instead says "check your model for any defect, return to the store if you find anything." It's an industry standard. It happens, and frequently. Again, I say that most of what have been brought up aren't 'defect' in the sense as it applies in this industry, since industry norm is what they'll use not Webster's Dictionary. None the less, the DP9 crew have been happy to handle the issue, as is a good business practice."

He also said in the same post you quoted:

" If you get a defective piece from me, expect to pay to ship it back to me. I've already bit the bullet and will have paid the vast majority of shipping fees to get the product to you (doubly so for international backers). If it's truly defective then I'll happily recast a new piece, ensure that it is free of defect, and send it back to you with a handwritten note. "

Please note that he is referring to REAL defects there and not flash, gaps, seams, or minor bubbles. Yes, if he sends you a globular ball of resin with an imprint of his foot that he accidentally stepped in instead of the building you were supposed to get, he'll autograph a love note for you and charge you twice for shipping as punishment. That's some Siembieda-level stuff there. Oh, and what happens if you pay shipping twice and send him a defective part... and he DISAGREES that about it being defective? You just paid for a piece of terrain AND double shipping and have nothing to show for it. Maybe he'll generously offer to send you back the totally not defective part for a third shipping payment along with a sample of hair for a locket? He has a throwaway statement about maybe throwing in some extra bits and bobs but then goes on to disclaimer it within the same sentence.

Talk to Toyota or the writers of the lemon laws about "perfect car manufacturing". I also know a few people who've ordered cars, test drove the delivery before paying, and got those repairs done. I also know people who've brought a car back within hours of purchase and had fixes made at the dealer's expense, so it's a two way street.

Mold lines happen. A bubble, or a gap that shouldn't have existed also happen. Doesn't mean we have to accept it. I've never had anyone not replace defective models for me (using the Webster's dictionary definition of defective). Even DP9 until recently had a good reputation for meeting this industry norm. Don't think of it as burning money. All these companies do it for the same reason. It's an investment into a potential returning customer, and good press, rather than a few bucks for the loss of future business and bad press. None of it is altruistic. And I do feel DP9 can afford it, or more to the point I feel they can't afford not too. I suspect that after all the shipping is done, we'll receive an email asking people to send in their claims for defective product if only so they can fix the issues in their manufacturing chain.

 minionboy wrote:

The models I own, and the ones I've seen, I haven't seen anything beyond what I would consider normal. Just like any other kit you buy from nearly any other manufacturer. Yes, the big guys will replace anything, often without question, but they also have it in their operating budget to do so and can afford/need the write off. DP9, while they may have been around for a long time (in name) are nowhere near as big as the big players, nor are they in a position to burn money over things which are really, at the end of the day, pretty standard in the hobby.

I don't consider dimples on a flat featureless surface to be returnable either but I do consider having to gap fill that kind of casting error in a plastic kit to be indicative of BELOW average quality. In 25+ years in the minis game hobby, I've never had to bondo a dent (to use the earlier analogy) on plastic kits from any manufacturer... Seams? Yeah... Gaps... occasionally... but actual depressions or cavities? Never. I've had to do it moderately frequently with resin and ocassionally with metal but never plastic even going back to late 80's early 90's model airplane and starship kits. YMMV.

In any case, your pic palming three gears on your sig link blog might be the first time/angle I've seen the plastic gears actually look nice (as opposed to just meh).

 warboss wrote:
In any case, your pic palming three gears on your sig link blog might be the first time/angle I've seen the plastic gears actually look nice (as opposed to just meh).

This one?



Personally, I would not say that they look good in comparison with the equivalent metals, but I'd say that they do look decent enough, probably because the poses selected seem to agree with the parts.

Also, it seems to me that the plastic used (color, reflections) is very unflattering to the miniatures.

Yup, that's the one. I think it's more the straight on angle that doesn't draw attention to the immobile hips as much and the torsos look a bit more bulked up there too. I don't doubt that I'd still far prefer the metals in a side by side comparison but that's the first pic of the plastic gears (including the painted ones DP9 put out with the updates) where I wasn't automatically drawn to the negatives of the design. Just in case someone brings up Caprice as a counterpoint, I specifically said "gears" above.

 warboss wrote:

 HudsonD wrote:
You know, what I find the most amusing with this whole casting scandal, is that people have forgotten the actual minis, even with a perfect cast, are seriously bleh. The proportions are bad, the detail is either shallow, or lacking, and the painted pics that have been posted only confirm that no paintjob can save those.
Man, the plastic Black Mamba doesn't even look good next to a tac-era Mamba, so lets spare the poor anorexic thing a comparison to the gorgeous Blitz Mamba. Now that's what I call a "defect".

To borrow from the software industry, the mambas looking anorexic is a now long known feature. The mambas potentially missing body parts, sporting gaping wounds, or wearing burkhas over their V-engines is a more recent bug.

Yeah, the new minis are bad, but they're also the "future" of HG from now on, and I'm quite certain DP9 is going to retire the metal line ASAP.

The casting issues, just like the 3D models, and the final result, are just the usual sloppy "good enough for the fans" DP9 "quality".

Cool. You don't have to buy them. You could go find something you enjoy.

 warboss wrote:

 minionboy wrote:

The models I own, and the ones I've seen, I haven't seen anything beyond what I would consider normal. Just like any other kit you buy from nearly any other manufacturer. Yes, the big guys will replace anything, often without question, but they also have it in their operating budget to do so and can afford/need the write off. DP9, while they may have been around for a long time (in name) are nowhere near as big as the big players, nor are they in a position to burn money over things which are really, at the end of the day, pretty standard in the hobby.

I don't consider dimples on a flat featureless surface to be returnable either but I do consider having to gap fill that kind of casting error in a plastic kit to be indicative of BELOW average quality. In 25+ years in the minis game hobby, I've never had to bondo a dent (to use the earlier analogy) on plastic kits from any manufacturer... Seams? Yeah... Gaps... occasionally... but actual depressions or cavities? Never. I've had to do it moderately frequently with resin and ocassionally with metal but never plastic even going back to late 80's early 90's model airplane and starship kits. YMMV.

In any case, your pic palming three gears on your sig link blog might be the first time/angle I've seen the plastic gears actually look nice (as opposed to just meh).

Thanks for the kind(-ish) words, haha. I've been at this for 20 years myself, and I feel like I am filling dents any time I get a plastic kit with thick, flat parts (as I've mentioned regarding Tau), and basically any time working with big resin kits. It's just part of model prep to me, like any other correction. It's definitely true that the black plastic doesn't flatter the minis, and just from looking at my Jäger kits that seem to have the same issues mentioned above, I can say the enlarged photo with light emphasizing the imperfection goes incredibly far to exaggerate the flaw. I actually think the dent on the Hunters head is more noticeable (but incredibly easy to fix).

Here are a few others I built, sorry about the picture being blown out, I was trying to lighten it up a bit so you can see what's going on with the black minis:

Heh, I can just imagine a Grizzly holding a Cheeta at arms-reach.

Did the relative scale/size differences between the classes get even wider? Those scout gears look even smaller next to the slimmed down grizzlies than I remember the metals being. I might be mistaken though due to working last on RAFM scale stuff for several weeks.

 warboss wrote:
Did the relative scale/size differences between the classes get even wider? Those scout gears look even smaller next to the slimmed down grizzlies than I remember the metals being. I might be mistaken though due to working last on RAFM scale stuff for several weeks.

I actually never owned much north before the Kickstarter, but I can say the Ferrets aren't any smaller, though the cheetahs might be a tiny bit smaller, but seem about the same size. It might be an optical illusion because the grizzly are slimmer making them not look as stout as before. What I really know is that only having 6 cheetah might not be enough for me, haha. I've decided to go the artillery route and focus on RC squads backed up by a pair of Verders.

It's kind of interesting just how much the perspective changes the perception of size if you look at the bases relative to each other.

Okay. This is not an official competition run by Dream Pod 9, however, after reading some comments in the Terra Nova DMZ, I wanted to make an effort for everyone to get their painting skills sharpened, and also to show off Heavy Gear a little to the wider wargaming community.
With that in mind, I will be holding a painting competition in the Terra Nova DMZ, and share the news in the DP9 forums, and elsewhere, though I would appreciate it if everyone could see their entries within the Facebook group.

Rules of the Competition:

1. One model per entrant. These may be Gears, Frames, Mounts, tanks, or striders.
2. All entries must be Heavy Gear miniatures. The model can be plastic or pewter.
3. Conversions and scratch building is allowed, but must fall within the scope and atmosphere of the Heavy Gear Universe. Third-party parts and bits are allowed within reason.
4. Bases may be dioramas or playing bases.
5. The second and third-place winners will be able to choose which miniature(s) they will be awarded after the vote has been cast and final decisions have been made.
6. In the event of a tie vote, I will adjudicate as tiebreaker.
7. All entries must be submitted before midnight of November 5th, 2016.
8. Entrants are able to use whatever paints or primers they desire, and brush or airbrush styles are entirely up to the entrants.
9. The winning entrant will also be presented as this Group's cover Photo for one month following the event.
10. All entrants will submit their pictures (limit of 5 pictures per entrant) to the following e-mail: thanatosstorm357@gmail.com

So, with that in mind, I hope everyone will share and get the word out, and that you get those brushes cleaned off, because we're in for a ride.

*Note: The HHT-90 will not be available as a grand prize, unfortunately, due to my lack of funds for it.

That's... not really news about the Kickstarter? I'd suggest you to open a new thread about it.

Also, those pics are not plastics KS

Brandon, are you personally funding the contest prizes?

Albertorius wrote:That's... not really news about the Kickstarter? I'd suggest you to open a new thread about it.

Also, those pics are not plastics KS

True. I'll submit a new entry. And yes, I needed a couple quick pictures for the poster.

warboss wrote:Brandon, are you personally funding the contest prizes?

That's personal, warboss. But yes.

Edit: I have someone who is offering to chip in for prize support, and another offer from one company that I'm discussing with.

That's generous of you and good luck with the competition. One suggestion that I'd make is asking folks to post a new pic of the model unpainted so that it's painted specifically for the competition. It's not really fair IMO to have someone submit a long ago professionally painted model done by someone else and have it competing against other models painted within the timeframe of the competition by the actual entrants. YMMV.

 warboss wrote:
That's generous of you and good luck with the competition. One suggestion that I'd make is asking folks to post a new pic of the model unpainted so that it's painted specifically for the competition. It's not really fair IMO to have someone submit a long ago professionally painted model done by someone else and have it competing against other models painted within the timeframe of the competition by the actual entrants. YMMV.

That was actually brought up in the group, and I did ask for an honor system in place for folks to paint only what they had available, or could reasonably fulfill within the time frame. One person has already sent me an example of what he is painting. So, I hope that others will maintain that same courtesy.

Well my stuff arrived today and.. well.. I think I will have to reserve judgement until I have assembled a few gears and put them next to my metal ones. However I wasn't impressed by the size of the box.. which turned out to be the size and - only slightly heavier - than my Project Z game box from Warlord. In other words, small and light. I sense a lot of the 'shipping fee' must have gone towards VAT and covering the cost of picking and packing..

Also, I must have misread the pledge rewards at some point as I added on a printed quick start guide and it seems one came with my pledge. So now I have two. Doh.

Got my kickstarter set, very happy with everything except the shipping cost so far, it's got me more interested in Heavy Gear than I have been for the last 10 years.
Long tale of woe and angst between myself and DP9 but I really loved that setting back in the early days.
If the rules suck (personal taste etc.) I'll just have to put my own together, maybe based on something rules light like Open combat.

It sucks that people aren't happy with what was delivered, but I guess it's my gain. Skipped the KS due to issues w/ DP9 except for a $1 pledge to get the updates, honestly wasn't sure that they'd ever deliver and was very pleasantly surprised as they made constant (if delayed) headway and kept people fairly well informed. I was even rather impressed with their handling of the money issues and how upfront they were about it (compared ot some of the KS' that just choose to fail to deliver ANYTHING instead, hello RRT) and was kinda sad I passed on the pledge manager buy in. But since some people are so unhappy I managed a full base pledge level for $86 shipped that came in yesterday, can't beat that.

I'm happy with it, figures aren't amazingly well detailed but they're detailed enough, a bit of paint and some decals will do them wonders. Certainly easier to assemble than the metals, I still have literally dozens of Jovian Chronicles figs sitting in blisters from the old Alliance distribution clearance sales, such a PITA to assemble :(

Now I just need to find the time to assemble and paint them all, already too much stuff on my painting table and Overwatch & WoW are SO good right now! Not enough time in the day