1) It was unlocked during the campaign.
2) After the campaign (x) number of pledges failed to fully fund, dropping the total below the level where it was unlocked.
3) We were then told it was no longer available, unless post-campaign top-off pledging drove the total back up past the unlock total, again.
4) The post-campaign top-off pledging has either just about unlocked it again, or has in fact unlocked it again, so now it is...unlocked and available.
So, I think in some people's eyes, it has now reached a position of never being not unlocked?
Important notice to the "wait-and-see" crowd (like me):
Important Notice for all Unregistered Backers that only pledged $1 during the Kickstarter, for those Backers you only have 1 week left to register.
All $1 Kickstarter Backers that are not registered in the Pledge Manage by January 8th, 2015 at 1pm EST will have their accounts closed and the $1 set as a donation to the Kickstarter.
If you want to up your pledge and get some add-ons you need to register this week, if not you don't need to do anything.
That's about 12 hours from now, don't lose your dollar!
There was a short period when the King cobra was a Question instead of a certainty. You can blame us for jumping a bit too soon. It is now secure. We probably could have done it regardless but then the contingency fund can get a little thin if you do that too often and then we're up gak creek if something goes really wrong.
First rule of kickstarters, no plan/schedule faces reality and survives unscathed.
Now we can hope to add in the Kodiak, Ammon, and a weapons sprue. You can still join by contacting us by e-mail.
We also have 154 negative balance Backers with over $6,000 in Pledges to be paid
If/when DP9 ever shows that they are going to be able to deliver what they said, perhaps those negative balances will be paid.
But, by all means, keep working on random minis that have nothing to do with the Kickstarter, while expecting backers to contribute more.
How about you guys stop harping on backers, and simply show some work that proves you're doing something besides trying to pass a collection plate around?
You know, just do some of the work that you said you would do.
What I'm wondering about is when the Christmas beta update is coming out. I remember both Rob and Dave saying it was supposed to be out for the Holidays, and now not a word. Not even a post on their website saying it was delayed. (at least that I could find)
Mmmpi wrote: What I'm wondering about is when the Christmas beta update is coming out. I remember both Rob and Dave saying it was supposed to be out for the Holidays, and now not a word. Not even a post on their website saying it was delayed. (at least that I could find)
That's more or less par for the course, unfortunately. Sticking to dates for books is not a thing that the pod has been consistently good at, and lately it seems to be even more so.
Mmmpi wrote: What I'm wondering about is when the Christmas beta update is coming out. I remember both Rob and Dave saying it was supposed to be out for the Holidays, and now not a word. Not even a post on their website saying it was delayed. (at least that I could find)
I've posted an announcement on exactly this topic.
This is a case of the kickstarter taking priority.
Our new target is for the end of January and we'll update as we go.
Thanks for your patience. This is the first milestone is the last two years of this project to be missed but the size of the update required more of a rewrite than an update and we wanted to add a lot of formatting features to the document to make it easier to use. Add in X-mas season and the need to keep the kickstarter on schedule and here we are.
It's not the delay that's irritating. It's that you guys knew it was going to be late and didn't say anything until you were asked nearly 20 days later. If you knew you were running behind why didn't you say anything? I have high school students who are more on the ball. *grumbles about companies/kids these days*
Edit: I have pasted a couple of the links to the active Groups, whether or not others are active is a matter of concern for them. The Facebook group in particular is very active.
They are super, they really are beautiful, the company that made them did tremendous work, but once again, we have a side project that has nothing to do with the Kickstarter DP9's hard at work on.
They are super, they really are beautiful, the company that made them did tremendous work, but once again, we have a side project that has nothing to do with the Kickstarter DP9's hard at work on.
Actually, I'm wondering how come that 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 inches are somehow suddenly so very important for the Heavy Gear experience as to merit a measuring template all of their own...
They are super, they really are beautiful, the company that made them did tremendous work, but once again, we have a side project that has nothing to do with the Kickstarter DP9's hard at work on.
Actually, I'm wondering how come that 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 inches are somehow suddenly so very important for the Heavy Gear experience as to merit a measuring template all of their own...
Hmm... new base/infantry sizes? Grenades? Blast templates? Lots....and lots... of blast templates? Different stealth rules where you can't tell what a unit is unless you successfully identify it?
I'm wondering if any of the KS money is going to the KS. DreamPod9 got a boatload of money and promptly put out two new products (one of which they didn't even make) that have nothing to do with what they said they were doing.
Yeah, I get the "this is a separate project, it doesn't involve the KS money" line, but, come on. How many little separate projects are you going to do? And, to be REALLY blunt, if you had all the money for these dinky little "fun" releases, then why did you need the KS in the first place? Looks like the Pod's doing fine from here!
Firebreak wrote: I'm wondering if any of the KS money is going to the KS. DreamPod9 got a boatload of money and promptly put out two new products (one of which they didn't even make) that have nothing to do with what they said they were doing.
Yeah, I get the "this is a separate project, it doesn't involve the KS money" line, but, come on. How many little separate projects are you going to do? And, to be REALLY blunt, if you had all the money for these dinky little "fun" releases, then why did you need the KS in the first place? Looks like the Pod's doing fine from here!
Indeed. One would think that the KS would be their top priority, and yet, it doesn't appear to be. Aside from the cash infusion - that is obviously very important.
If the Pod has so much time and money to spend on useless gak like the "chibi", why did they do the KS? Unlike the tokens, you can't even use the chibi in game.
So which is it? Is the KS strapped for cash, or is the Pod flush with money that they can direct into non-KS projects that drive basically no revenue? If the Pod can pay for all of this contract work, why are they harping on "unpaid balances"?
They are super, they really are beautiful, the company that made them did tremendous work, but once again, we have a side project that has nothing to do with the Kickstarter DP9's hard at work on.
Actually, I'm wondering how come that 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 inches are somehow suddenly so very important for the Heavy Gear experience as to merit a measuring template all of their own...
Maybe it has to do with the standard silhouettes you're supposed to use instead of the models for determining LOS and cover? The breakdown sounds like it would fit most of those in one dimension (height, width, length) or another. That would be my guess but apply salt as needed since I haven't downloaded a copy of the rules for at least 6 months.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JohnHwangDD wrote: 9 "Updates" that amount to little more than badgering backers for more money, hoo boy, what "progress".
I'm still wondering when DP9 is going to show us something tied to the KS, rather than continuing to pass the collection plate.
DP9 is always chasing the next dollar and disregarding the ones already collected. It's been their pattern for 20 years with edition flops invalidating books sometimes before they even get to a second printing. I'm sure some folks would see this as instead good capitalism at work but I'm sure others of a mindset more like myself would prefer an update on what they've already paid for at least occasionally. The November rules update is now officially (at best) a February one and hopefully that type of creeping delay isn't indicative of the project in general. Eh, whatever. I might be labelled a hater on the facebook page for expecting what was promised but it doesn't change the facts at hand. I was recently informed by Smilodon that the "final" designs for the minis apparently won't be available for public viewing until well after the pledges need to be locked. I'd suggest caution for anyone reading this to closely consider whether the risk of increasing their pledge instead of waiting for retail is worth the discount.
Albertorius wrote: Well, at least in my case it's simple: you don't show me the minis, I don't give you the bucks.
For a company with a long troubled past working in a new field (plastic minis) for the first time currently already experiencing a multiple month delay on the only part of the project that they're minimally commenting (the rules) despite that aspect being their field of expertise, that probably probably is a good idea. I'm in the same boat.
They are super, they really are beautiful, the company that made them did tremendous work, but once again, we have a side project that has nothing to do with the Kickstarter DP9's hard at work on.
Actually, I'm wondering how come that 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 inches are somehow suddenly so very important for the Heavy Gear experience as to merit a measuring template all of their own...
Maybe it has to do with the standard silhouettes you're supposed to use instead of the models for determining LOS and cover? The breakdown sounds like it would fit most of those in one dimension (height, width, length) or another.
This is stupid, even for the Pod. If you're going to "Magic Cylinder" (or "Magic Hexagonal Prism", in the case of the Pod), you don't really need models... And given that their rules are known to be pure gak, they might as well hang it up.
___
JohnHwangDD wrote: 9 "Updates" that amount to little more than badgering backers for more money, hoo boy, what "progress".
I'm still wondering when DP9 is going to show us something tied to the KS, rather than continuing to pass the collection plate.
DP9 is always chasing the next dollar and disregarding the ones already collected. It's been their pattern for 20 years with edition flops invalidating books sometimes before they even get to a second printing. I'm sure some folks would see this as instead good capitalism at work but I'm sure others of a mindset more like myself would prefer an update on what they've already paid for at least occasionally. The November rules update is now officially (at best) a February one and hopefully that type of creeping delay isn't indicative of the project in general. Eh, whatever.
I might be labelled a hater on the facebook page for expecting what was promised but it doesn't change the facts at hand. I was recently informed by Smilodon that the "final" designs for the minis apparently won't be available for public viewing until well after the pledges need to be locked. I'd suggest caution for anyone reading this to closely consider whether the risk of increasing their pledge instead of waiting for retail is worth the discount.
Supposedly, the Pod was hard at work on the rules revision, and they have had an extra 2 months to complete what were said to be simple changes. No, this does not bode well for project completion, considering that the changes were already identified and could have been done in-house.
I saw where the Pod said they weren't going to show things while the pledge manager was still open. That's just stupid. The smart call is to use the reveals to trickle in more money as people see things that they like. But forcing future spend on a pig in a poke? Nope.
____
Albertorius wrote: Well, at least in my case it's simple: you don't show me the minis, I don't give you the bucks.
Exactly so!
I think I'm going to sit on my $1 CAD until such time that it is clear that the Pod actually can deliver what they say, and they prove it via showing actual progress of real-world stuff.
In all fairness, I believe Dave did say last year that the delay was due to major changes to the document and not the minor ones initially envisioned but it doesn't change the fact that the only "visible" part of the KS is several months late and counting.
That's a rather strange thing to say John, considering we've always been up front about needing to change the rules up. I've made at least six blog posts about that.
The reality is that people have backed our project so that we can produce plastic minis and they can get them all next November. If we have to prioritize hitting that deadline before an update of rules that are already available as a free download I think you have to agree that we are prioritizing that one correctly.
Priority 1) Ensure that the kickstarter rewards get out on schedule or as close as possible..
Priority 2) Fulfill all our regular orders, people want their models!
Priority 3) Work on all the other projects that need doing such as rules, tokens, website, web presence etc.
All this and we try to remain accessible and friendly. So far no disasters!
Cheers!
Dave
Automatically Appended Next Post:
warboss wrote: In all fairness, I believe Dave did say last year that the delay was due to major changes to the document and not the minor ones initially envisioned but it doesn't change the fact that the only "visible" part of the KS is several months late and counting.
We have indeed taken a lot of feedback and I've rewritten a lot of sections to improve flow and remove jargon. We've been up front about this and we're still hoping to have the layout for the Living Rulebook beta done and out by the end of February, sooner if the February Grippe doesn't slow us down.
Cheers!
Dave
Automatically Appended Next Post: Of course we all wish we had made a KS about exploding cats but hey, can't win them all!
DP9Dave wrote: That's a rather strange thing to say John, considering we've always been up front about needing to change the rules up. I've made at least six blog posts about that.
The reality is that people have backed our project so that we can produce plastic minis and they can get them all next November. If we have to prioritize hitting that deadline before an update of rules that are already available as a free download I think you have to agree that we are prioritizing that one correctly.
Priority 1) Ensure that the kickstarter rewards get out on schedule or as close as possible..
Priority 2) Fulfill all our regular orders, people want their models!
Priority 3) Work on all the other projects that need doing such as rules, tokens, website, web presence etc.
The problem with this is that the proof is in the pudding: so far we've seen examples of you doing point 1) (no signs of furious people saying their orders are late) and point 2) (the chibi, new tokens and stuff) but not a peep about priority 1).
More like, we paid for pudding, and were shown a scoop of ice cream and a plate of cookies that cost extra. All the while, the cook insists that he has been really busy working on the pudding for the past couple hours.
A scoop of ice cream made by a specially-hired ice cream maker, and animal crackers from outside the restaurant. Along with intermittently working on the menu.
Having just pledged (and paid) for Conan on KS, I'm putting my Heavy Gear marker on the back burner.
For the same $110-ish with shipping, Conan promises over 180 well-detailed pre-assembled 32mm minis with a ruleset a pre-teen can handle. As opposed to 50-odd robots with known terrible rules and unknown assembly steps. Key difference, Conan raised $3.3M on KS, and will likely raise quite a bit more via the Pledge Manager. DP9 is still trying to scrape a few bucks to hit $160k, like some drunk homeless bum at the end of a freeway offramp.
If, by some unknown miracle, DP9 actually looks like they will be able to deliver, I may revisit things, pay off the balance, and go forward with the KS. But I doubt it.
Well, we know a post-KS loss of 3000$CA, or 2% of 150k, was enough for DP9 to cancel a reward level (an unprecedented move). How much did the $CA drop since, again ?
HudsonD wrote:Well, we know a post-KS loss of 3000$CA, or 2% of 150k, was enough for DP9 to cancel a reward level (an unprecedented move). How much did the $CA drop since, again ?
November 22, 2014. 1 CAD is worth 0.89031 USD so 150,406 CAD is worth $133,907 USD February 12, 2015. 1 CAD is worth 0.79596 USD so 150,406 CAD is worth $119,717 USD
About an 11% drop in money available to deal with the US based plastic tooling company. Ouch.
I had my doubts about them having enough capital to get all the plastic tooling done as it was back in November. Now they get to try to get it done with 11% less money.
I took a peek at the currency exchange values for the day the KS closed (nov 22nd) and yesterday and the same $130 CAD pledge (the most popular level plus shipping) dropped in price from $115 USD at the KS's close to $102. If you upped your pledge on Feb 2nd where it took an even steeper one day dive, you might have broke the $100 mark (plus any bank conversion fees of course).
In theory, DP9 isn't counting shipping, so there should be roughly $40k USD held for shipping, in addition to the $120k working budget.
If you look at the latest KS "unlock", DP9 is on hook to tool
* 7 Northern Gears
* 6 Southern Gears
* 6 CEF Gears, Tank & infantry
* 2 Caprice Mounts
= 22 tools
At a nominal $5k per tool, that's $100k USD.
That leaves $20k for everything else - packaging, printing, etc.
With the rules still in flux, and no visible progress on tooling, DP9 could be in real trouble on this project.
But don't worry, I'm sure Brandon and Dave will be here to say that everything will be fine if backers just pony up another $10k CAD ($8k USD) to unlock the next whatnot. I'm sure that DP9 was smart and hedged against currency shifts, given that the vast bulk of the cost would be USD, not CAD.
JohnHwangDD wrote: But don't worry, I'm sure Brandon and Dave will be here to say that everything will be fine if backers just pony up another $10k CAD ($8k USD) to unlock the next whatnot.
I suspect Brandon is largely done with Dakka now that he has an active facebook group after the Kickstarter and it's more of a tone that he agrees with. I can't say I blame him even if I don't see eye to eye on most things HG with him.
I suspect Brandon is largely done with Dakka now that he has an active facebook group after the Kickstarter and it's more of a tone that he agrees with. I can't say I blame him even if I don't see eye to eye on most things HG with him.
Well, it's a lot easier, preaching to the choir.
As for the $CA dropping, I think it's quite likely DP9 converted the KS money to $US as soon as they got it. If they hadn't, well, I suspect we'd be hearing a lot more wailing...
It is much easier sharing models that we are painting from the Heavy Gear Universe.
The Kickstarter is not in my hands. I backed it because I believe they will deliver. What else they bring to our attention is just add-ons that I can either choose to purchase, or not.
Insofar as to what I am doing, that does not involve Dream Pod 9.
Not gonna lie, I'd play the crap out of that. My friends and I grew up playing Warhammer Fantasy (started about grade 7?) with aquarium stones as counters. Wish we'd though of using sprues like that back then!
Man, that would be a great gaming group activity. Bring your sprues, make a big pile, build armies! BYOG, though. (Bring your own glue. XD)
Firebreak wrote: Not gonna lie, I'd play the crap out of that. My friends and I grew up playing Warhammer Fantasy (started about grade 7?) with aquarium stones as counters. Wish we'd though of using sprues like that back then!
Man, that would be a great gaming group activity. Bring your sprues, make a big pile, build armies! BYOG, though. (Bring your own glue. XD)
I'm going to leave this here, but I'm not doing to accept responsibility for any damage caused by my link littering.
More expensive than sprues, but much more durable and reusable.
Dave, is the lack of any cmd upgrade or cmd variant for the northern recon models a feature or bug? I noticed that the other TN factions have that option but that it is conspicously missing from the north despite the addition of SECCOM variants with the last blitz books. Is it intentional that northern players only can't put their commander ever in a recon gear?
Any model may be a commander but only commanders can take CMD gears. The Recon models in the North are so good that they have no need for dedicated command variants!
DP9Dave wrote: Any model may be a commander but only commanders can take CMD gears. The Recon models in the North are so good that they have no need for dedicated command variants!
Cheers! Dave
In that case, I found a mistake.
Each Primary unit must have one commander model identified as the Combat Group Leader (CGL). Only variant models with the CMD attribute may be selected as a commander.
pg 56, 18.4, third bullet.
That bolded part should be reversed (only commanders may select variant models with the CMD attribute) or alternately change "as" to " only by" if you get rid of the first only.
Noted in the errata section, thanks! It is correct on the previous page but what should have been reinforcement got it backwards. This will be fixed in a quickupdate when the last of the fluff is added in the next month or two.
Thanks for the update. Is the post campaign funding period still ending in a few days? If so, are there any updates to the sculpts? Have we seen any new model renders, sprue layout pics, etc since the campaign finished 3 months ago? The only pic with renders that I can recall seeing is the cover to the beta rules update but I don't think there were any new models there.
While I haven't checked recently, the first time it came up in the thread I peeked at the relative difference in the conversion rates to USD. The $130 CAD when the kickstarter ended costed $115 USD for pledgers. Getting in a few weeks ago due to the exchange rate changes cost $102 IIRC. DP9's buying power (if they kept the money in CAD) dropped almost 10% since their manufacturer was stated as being in the US.
I've both purchased, and had purchased, many molds cross-border. That's not how it works. The price is locked in when you pay for it. Before that point, currency fluctuations are your problem as a purchaser. This may be complicated by the purchase being broken into progress payments, and final payment being made on final product approval. Currency fluctuations are going to be a significant headache for Dream Pod 9.
HudsonD wrote: I have to assume they did the smart thing, and converted everything to US$ immediately after the KS ended.
That would demonstrate forethought. Hopefully for them (and the backers), they had it.
Actually, they had to deal with this issue for the entire existence of the company. At this point, until I see proof of the opposite, I would assume that most of their income get converted to USD ASAP.
HudsonD wrote: I have to assume they did the smart thing, and converted everything to US$ immediately after the KS ended.
Otherwise... They're in trouble, yeah.
HudsonD wrote: I have to assume they did the smart thing, and converted everything to US$ immediately after the KS ended.
That would demonstrate forethought. Hopefully for them (and the backers), they had it.
Given that the Pod failed to consider that some backers payment would not go through, I'm not sure the Pod would have actually hedged ForEx for a drop in CAD vs USD.
HudsonD wrote: I have to assume they did the smart thing, and converted everything to US$ immediately after the KS ended.
That would demonstrate forethought. Hopefully for them (and the backers), they had it.
Actually, they had to deal with this issue for the entire existence of the company. At this point, until I see proof of the opposite, I would assume that most of their income get converted to USD ASAP.
HudsonD wrote: I have to assume they did the smart thing, and converted everything to US$ immediately after the KS ended.
That would demonstrate forethought. Hopefully for them (and the backers), they had it.
Given that the Pod failed to consider that some backers payment would not go through, I'm not sure the Pod would have actually hedged ForEx for a drop in CAD vs USD.
I worked at a company that should have known better, but got clobbered anyway. That was a toolshop that had been doing cross-border business for a decade at that point (and for far larger sums than the Pod is handling). I've seen others make similar mistakes. That's not to say anything about the Pod's situation, specifically, only that things like, "Actually, they had to deal with this issue for the entire existence of the company..." doesn't mean that the Pod did what you or I think would've been the smart thing with the benefit of hindsight (i.e. knowing how much the $CDN has fallen since the end of the Kickstarter). I think mrondeau's point of waiting for some evidence of a problem is fair. I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but if it were a company other than Dream Pod 9...well, you know where that sentence is going.
mrondeau wrote: At this point, until I see proof of the opposite, I would assume that most of their income get converted to USD ASAP.
I'm curious about this last part. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you. What do you mean? The Pod is a Canadian company, operating in Canada, and manufacturing in Canada. Why would they regularly be converting most of their money to $USD? The bulk of their costs are probably being paid in $CDN. Were you referring to the Kickstarter funds? My understanding is that these plastic miniatures are their first major foray into US production...
The Pod is manufacturing the KS product by an American company in the US, and they are not going to accept non-American money. They will expect to be paid in US Dollars.
Most of their income is in USD, the printing is in USD, and as far as I know, the shipping is done from the US, in USD.
I would not be surprised if the metal for the minis is bought in USD.
In the past, miniatures were priced in USD, except when the CAD reached parity. Canadian employees must be paid in CAD, as well as rent and taxes, but having most of the costs in USD is not new for DP9.
Oh, and for the record, I'm more pessimistic than you about DP9. I just don't think they made that particular mistake.
JohnHwangDD wrote:The Pod is manufacturing the KS product by an American company in the US, and they are not going to accept non-American money. They will expect to be paid in US Dollars.
I understand all that. I'm not talking about the KS, although that may have been what mrondeau was referring to... that's what I was trying to clarify.
mrondeau wrote:Most of their income is in USD, the printing is in USD, and as far as I know, the shipping is done from the US, in USD.
I would not be surprised if the metal for the minis is bought in USD.
In the past, miniatures were priced in USD, except when the CAD reached parity. Canadian employees must be paid in CAD, as well as rent and taxes, but having most of the costs in USD is not new for DP9.
Oh, and for the record, I'm more pessimistic than you about DP9. I just don't think they made that particular mistake.
I didn't know that shipping was from the US. Are we talking specifically for US orders (the border is a short drive)? Their casting is in Montréal, is it not?
My guess is that the metal (and resin) for casting is likely bought from a local supplier in $CDN (assuming casting is done in Montréal). I didn't have any of their recent books handy to check where they're currently doing printing, but considering how often they've printed books recently, I'm not sure this is a major component of their operating costs.
Casting is done in Montréal. I would not call the drive to the border "short", but yes, my understanding is that the US shipping, and possibly international, was done in the US.
I want to stress, here, that I don't know what I'm talking about. It's just stuff I recall hearing over the years from DP9's employees and the owner.
mrondeau wrote: Casting is done in Montréal. I would not call the drive to the border "short", but yes, my understanding is that the US shipping, and possibly international, was done in the US.
Way shorter than here! It's about 45 minutes from the island to the border last time I did it. That'd be worth it for a decent size shipment. Especially if you fill up on gas in the US!
mrondeau wrote: I want to stress, here, that I don't know what I'm talking about. It's just stuff I recall hearing over the years from DP9's employees and the owner.
No worries! I obviously know nothing of the inside workings of Dream Pod 9, either. It's all speculation for now.
mrondeau wrote: Casting is done in Montréal. I would not call the drive to the border "short", but yes, my understanding is that the US shipping, and possibly international, was done in the US.
I can attest international shipping is sent with USPS.
"We started this project before Kickstarter took off in the wargaming world and based on the strength of the team alone we were able to secure enough funding to create an entire starter box set in real plastic."
Maybe this isn't really relevant to the Heavy Gear discussion, I just.... I just wonder, at the differences, I guess.
I believe Firebreak is pointing out the amount of work a green team is able to put in a new project these days, and comparing it to the "20 years of experience" DP9 team.
I read Firebreak's comment somewhat differently. The quote refers to the 'strength of the team' allowing them to secure the funding to create a plastic starter set. People and banks are not in the business of handing out money even if people are good game designers. I suspect that the principles had a good amount of cash or collateral and thus were 'strong'.
In terms of the differences, I would assume that Firebeak is referring to the way in which the project is approached. The Dakka team kept the project secret (very much like another large company who shall remain nameless) They then opted for a press blitz creating buzz. In terms of the project itself, they put a great amount of effort into the fluff, hiring authors to write books. This shows that they believe the fluff is very important to the game. Again, another large company does similar things. Lastly, they decided to go plastic at great expense. Other companies have opted for different routes, such as Prodos. However, even companies that have gone plastic have had issues, see Robotech and All Quiet on the Martian Front. So plastic is not a sure fire win.
We shall see how DP9s effort goes. There is some ill will amongst fans. However, some companies manage to succeed inspite of this, such as GW and Spartan Games.
I'm rather curious to see how the Dakka KS goes. I think there is every chance they outfund and outdeliver DP9, simply because their team understands KS better - learning from others' mistakes, if you will.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I'm rather curious to see how the Dakka KS goes. I think there is every chance they outfund and outdeliver DP9, simply because their team understands KS better - learning from others' mistakes, if you will.
Indeed, I think it is an advantage in this case to be coming later to the table. While there is a lot of junk on Kickstarter these days now, with everyone and their uncle trying to sell a miniatures game, there has been ample time for the Maelstrom's Edge team to see, and not repeat the mistakes others have made. Be interesting to see how it goes...
JohnHwangDD wrote: I'm rather curious to see how the Dakka KS goes. I think there is every chance they outfund and outdeliver DP9, simply because their team understands KS better - learning from others' mistakes, if you will.
Absolutely, yes. It also probably won't hurt that they appear to already have done all the main work on the project before even hitting KS, if the minis shown and the novels already released are anything to go by.
I must admit that I myself I'm not particularly interested in the fluff of the game (one of the factions look rather nice but I don't like them much fluff wise, and the other looks weird to me), but I AM pretty interested in seeing if the game could be used as a substitute for the 40k ruleset, seeing as the amount of minis they're aiming for is pretty much the kind of 40k game I dig.
I must admit that I myself I'm not particularly interested in the fluff of the game (one of the factions look rather nice but I don't like them much fluff wise, and the other looks weird to me), but I AM pretty interested in seeing if the game could be used as a substitute for the 40k ruleset, seeing as the amount of minis they're aiming for is pretty much the kind of 40k game I dig.
Same. I may never even touch the game, but they've done an amazing, PROFESSIONAL job of it, thus far. I wish them only the best and will continue to watch with interest. I hope the KS is a runaway success, if only to set an example for future wargames ventures.
Probably better to talk about the DD-KS on whatever threads aren't for discussing the HGB-KS. Or start a new thread? Either way it would be interesting to discuss comparisons.
Me, I'm still excited by the solidworks models updated on the KS a couple of weeks back. I'm hoping we see sprues as tightly packed as modern GW sprues.
So when does the pledging period close for good? The funding pledge total on dp9.com hasn't been updated for over a month and a half; have any other stretch goals been unlocked? Will it close permanently like it says there in April and will folks gets an update with more pics of models or sprues?
warboss wrote: So when does the pledging period close for good?
Probably not until they print shippping labels.
For all their bluster, the Pod just wants people's money, and the "close" is simply to push people to pony up more money sooner. What will likely happen is the Pod extends the pledging period until the end of May. Then closes it for a bit. Then reopens it due to "demand". Then extends the reopened period. Then re-extends the re-opened period.
In the mean time, have you seen the production renders? The toylike Gears look terrible compared to the KS renders. Huge drop in quality.
Current Black Mamba
Preview Black Mamba
Production Black Mamba
In case you hadn't guessed, I will NOT be addressing the "negative balance" on my account. I am extremely glad I only put in $1 CAD. If I had put in $100 CAD + S&H, I'd be kicking myself, trying to get a refund.
Judging from the stuff I see over and over at bartertown, probably not unless you bought it at one of the online store firesales a year or two back when the big retailers were getting rid of the HG they had in stock at 50%-70% off. I bought a bunch back then myself.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Looks like Dave may still be reading this thread. The update that just came out answered my question and had some more pics. Judgement Day is pushed back to May 18th.
They match (at least at first glance) the existing flails. I'm not a fan of the sculpts either so it's not a rabid defense but they do match the metal stuff for better or worse.
Well, the renders shown so far reaffirm me in my intention of not going farther than my $1 pledge.
Really, I must thank the Pod for looking out for my finances. With so many great minis games released this year, being able to avoid completely something is a god's blessing.
DP9 wrote:"Right now the .... Iguana is 100% done, Sidewinder is 100% done ...."
JohnHwangDD wrote: In case you hadn't guessed, I will NOT be addressing the "negative balance" on my account. I am extremely glad I only put in $1 CAD. If I had put in $100 CAD + S&H, I'd be kicking myself, trying to get a refund.
Firebreak wrote: And the hell is going on with the Iguana's thighs?
Albertorius wrote: Well, the renders shown so far reaffirm me in my intention of not going farther than my $1 pledge.
I guess assuming the knee and/or ankle joints on Southern Gears might end up as shapeless blobs of glue or else have the details filled in by overly thick paint anyways is technically one way to quickly complete a 3D render for a model.
Not very elegant though.... and kind of a 'WTF ?' moment in actuality.
Nomeny wrote: Well, if you don't like it, why not go spend your time thinking about something you do like?
If you don't like what, exactly? and to whom might this be directed? I mean it has already been pretty well established in this very thread and a couple others here (and elsewhere) that most of the people posting here not only DO like Heavy Gear, but LOVE it, at least the setting if not the current particular rendition of the rules. Not liking the actual rules is probably not enough for people so engrossed in Terra Nova as most of the posters here to dismiss is completely. And the current metal minis, when properly cast, are quite nice.
I'd even dare to say that it gives people more reasons to rant about it, not less.
I'm going to try and crystallize the mindset of us grumpy complainers here with a couple of analogies.
If you're in a relationship and your significant other cooks a meal you don't like, you don't say "Welp, divorce time." You try and offer come constructive criticism. "Next time, maybe use less tabasco sauce. Maybe a little sugar would balance the onion. More salt."
And then, when your significant other shouts at you, tells you it's all your fault because you don't support them, well, then there's some bad blood.
And there is some bad blood here. But that has been discussed ad nauseum, and you're free to go looking. Moving on.
A long time ago, Nintendo made Mario, and it was good and set the tone of video games for decades to come.
....and then they made Mario 2. And it was weird.
And then, they made Mario 3. And it was perfect.
Because a company does something a fan may not like, is not a reason to leave that property and never speak of it again. Dream Pod 9 has gone some stupid places, but there's every chance that a Mario 3 is lurking around the corner.
The people who are being critical of Heavy Gear and, more importantly, Dream Pod 9, are not in it for gaks and giggles over trolling. We're here because, in many cases, we've been here for twenty years. It's not always been a perfect ride. There have been our Mario 2s, and there will be more. But none of us want to just sit back and make fun of how bad Mario 2 is. We all just hope there's a Mario 3 somewhere.
Of course, in this case "Nintendo" made Mario 2 (which I actually liked btw but it's your comparison so I'll roll with it), Mario 2 GOTY edition, Mario 2 HD Remaster, and are now promising Mario 3 instead of another rehash.
warboss wrote: Of course, in this case "Nintendo" made Mario 2 (which I actually liked btw but it's your comparison so I'll roll with it), Mario 2 GOTY edition, Mario 2 HD Remaster, and are now promising Mario 3 instead of another rehash.
Super Mario 2 was actually a game called Yume Kōjō: Doki Doki Panic. However, during production of Super Mario Bros 2 (JP) it was found to be too similar and difficult. So the company took Doki Doki Panic, re-skinned it with Mario characters and released it for the US.
The Super Mario Bros 2 (JP) Later came out as "The Lost Levels" in North America.
So... yeah. take from that what you will. I forgot my point.
I'm disappointed and relieved that I dropped my pledge to $1, those 3D models I don't want $2.5k worth of.
As for Maelstrom's Edge, I like some of the models, especially the Mechs. Others have potential. But I would never have backed this 'unknown' group (sure we know them from dakka, but what have they made). The plastic sprues pulled me over the Edge (get it ;-) to risk $90, the Mech Hunter sprue made me fork over $180 and chomping at the bit to give them more money for more Mechs.
And you would have been right not to back them. But someone with actual capitol, in the actual, grown-up sense of investing, apparently saw something worth their money.
And no one has done that with Heavy Gear. Which I think should be setting off huge alarm bells for the Pod.
We looked into some groups that were interested in partnering with us over the last two years but the result would be too much work done out of house, which we didn't want to do.
So far we're happy to say we're on track for Delivery in the fall.
If Angel wasn't fully grabbed by the Cassus Belli guys for al their Infinity work I would have loved to get him to paint a new plastic Mamba and put it next to the metal one he did for us. That's probably the only fair way to evaluate the two models.
Personally it's the Grizzly that I think has turned out the best.
I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the first casts and playing with the posing to get the attitude look. Before with the Gears the only way to change the pose was to bend or turn the legs or do a lot of cutting with the jewelers saw. Now just a small trim on the plastic connection will allow almost any angle for the leg. I'm looking forward to that.
And hey, if you like the metal figures the best, no problem, you will still be able to order those, it will cost more due to being metal but that's all.
So far we're happy to say we're on track for Delivery in the fall.
If Angel wasn't fully grabbed by the Cassus Belli guys for al their Infinity work I would have loved to get him to paint a new plastic Mamba and put it next to the metal one he did for us. That's probably the only fair way to evaluate the two models.
Good to hear about the first part. As for the second, if the wider community thinks there is a difference when the final sprues are done, you could always commision a single painter to do both the metal and plastic versions of a model to show side by side. Angel Giraldez isn't the only commision painter around.
Just don't send it to LCM if you want to ever get your stuff back. For those reading, LCM is a long time player, poster, and mod on the dp9 forums who took over hundreds of dollars of minis each from multiple folks and money to paint them two to three years ago and hasn't shipped anything in years due to personal problems. Somehow, after "admitting" finally through a third party that the stuff (money, minis,etc) is all "gone", he's still a mod despite not posting much anymore but (at least as of a few months ago) logging in daily. It would be like Mandelbaum being a mod here after all the crap he pulled.
That's CORVUS Belli, Dave. If it were Casus Belli, I guess things would be a lot more interesting around here, you know .
DP9Dave wrote:If Angel wasn't fully grabbed by the Cassus Belli guys for al their Infinity work I would have loved to get him to paint a new plastic Mamba and put it next to the metal one he did for us. That's probably the only fair way to evaluate the two models.
You... don't think that putting a primed metal mini side by side with a primed plastic mini of the same model would be fair, then? ...right.
Personally it's the Grizzly that I think has turned out the best.
Personally I can't say any design has turned out well, so far. Mainly because the renders we've been shown so far has been quite a bit lacking compared with the current offers, but also partially because no plastic mini has turned out, yet. We'll see once you actually have a plastic mini on hand to show.
And hey, if you like the metal figures the best, no problem, you will still be able to order those, it will cost more due to being metal but that's all.
And due to not being sold anywhere else by in your store, too, don't forget about it.
DP9Dave wrote: We looked into some groups that were interested in partnering with us over the last two years but the result would be too much work done out of house, which we didn't want to do.
Dave
As always I appreciate the respectful interaction. Thank you.
I do wonder, though, in retrospect was two years of little to no visible progress better than having things done out of house? Aren't these new models being worked up by some other company now, anyway?
@Firebreak, The final lay out and mold making is being done by one outside company under contract. The 3D model making is being done under our direct supervision.
Naturally as a starter set we are aiming to limit the number of parts as much as possible while still allowing for posing the figures. I'm sure people can appreciate how tricky that can be when working with these complex geometries.
And we do have a local painter who will be painting the plastic figures for the core rules/quickstart/living rules who is excellent.
DP9Dave wrote:We looked into some groups that were interested in partnering with us over the last two years but the result would be too much work done out of house, which we didn't want to do.
DP9Dave wrote:@Firebreak, The final lay out and mold making is being done by one outside company under contract. The 3D model making is being done under our direct supervision.
What's different from two years ago that you're now comfortable with out-of-house work, and was a similar contract impossible to draw up with whoever could have been providing capitol for those years?
I think he's referring to two different things, licensing a (dead) game line involving royalty splits versus subcontracting work for hire that once paid for is done.
RE: LCM: Thank you for bringing the issue with LCM to my attention. That went quiet before i was with the company in my current capacity. He has been removed as a moderator.
RE: Contracting vs Sub-Contracting: And yes, there were companies that wanted to produce figures for us under licence but we preferred to skip the middle man.
I got the latest update from DP9 for the kickstarter and it looks like they've tweaked the models again to better resemble the metal models. I think that's probably a good thing but I don't think anyone would be surprised about that opinion given my cobra heavy southern force. Any thoughts? It seems like DP9 is more responsive to feedback than in previous years.
Personally I'd say it is a step in the right direction (and although I believe there's still room for improvement, IMHO it looks much better than the original render), but I'm as of yet unsure if it heralds a new attitude by the company or if it's only the result of a generalized bad reception of that single render.
The feet look especially odd. It reminds me of the original cobra render in how it was just off. The good news is that they seem to be receptive to feedback with details on what is wrong but I do wish they'd be proactive about it and maybe look themselves to see which ones are just too far off the original designs.
A point made on the Kickstarter was that the original designs need some modification to work with the plastic tooling: "The leg poses we can do in plastic are constrained by the draft needed so that the parts don't get stuck in the plastic injection molds."
It's worth remembering that any design work is a matter of compromise. Even GW has gotten it about the new plastic character models having less 'detail' than their metal and finecast predecessors, for what are presumably the same reasons.
I agree that compromise is going to be a factor with this but the King Cobra series of changes does indicate that they obviously could have been closer to the original design in the first place. Fans politely but firmly raised the concern and the company responded appropriately (which for DP9 is an improvement worth noting).
Nomeny wrote: A point made on the Kickstarter was that the original designs need some modification to work with the plastic tooling: "The leg poses we can do in plastic are constrained by the draft needed so that the parts don't get stuck in the plastic injection molds."
It's worth remembering that any design work is a matter of compromise. Even GW has gotten it about the new plastic character models having less 'detail' than their metal and finecast predecessors, for what are presumably the same reasons.
Well, yes and no: they could as easily have halved the hips in two and added them to the legs, which would have given them a lot more poseability potential. They have chosen not to, for reasons they have not as of yet disclosed.
And the Tiger render looks off for reasons other than the legs assembly.
Nomeny wrote: I take it you're speaking from your experience in using Solidworks for the design of plastic tooling?
You can take I'm speaking from my experience of 30 years consuming plastic kits at alarming rates and from my experience working 5 years at GW. Not Solidworks, though, not very many minis companies use it. Most companies either use ZBrush or a propietary program (GW does that, for example),as Solidworks is not really a program designed to do plastic minis for sprues (that said, Solidworks Plastics is a pretty neat program).
That said, invoking the "you can't critique a work unless you do it" fallacy is not really a conversation starter, you know.
I know it's not a conversation starter. I'm just suggesting that maybe changing the models they currently have isn't as easy as you suggest that it is.
Nomeny wrote: I know it's not a conversation starter. I'm just suggesting that maybe changing the models they currently have isn't as easy as you suggest that it is.
Well, the current legs the Pod has shown already have detail on the same planes that they would need had they added half a hip to them, except maybe the buttplate, but as they would have one piece less (the aforementioned hip), they could add the buttplate as a separate part. Also, I'm not suggesting it's easy. I'm suggesting is doable, and for whatever reason (which we don't know) the Pod has decided not to go for it.
Nomeny wrote: Okay, think of it this way, how much would you charge for creating a similar model to the Tiger?
Are you suggesting that the budget allocated and asked for during the kickstarter is not enough to pay for models with the expected level of details and fidelity to the original ?
'Cause I'm not quite getting what you are trying to say, other than that, or "but it's haaaaaaaaard".
The answer to my first hypothesis is: "yep."
The answer to my second is: "that's why people gave them money to do it, instead of doing it themselves."
That's assuming you are trying to say on of those two things. If you are not, disregard the above.
Actually, from comparing a picture of a painted Tiger side by side with the model, the model seems pretty high fidelity to me. So I'm kind of lost as to what the problem with the Tiger is supposed to be.
Nomeny wrote: Actually, from comparing a picture of a painted Tiger side by side with the model, the model seems pretty high fidelity to me. So I'm kind of lost as to what the problem with the Tiger is supposed to be.
...really. Hm. So, this:
...is a pretty high fidelity rendition of this:
OK then, nothing more to say. Well, yes, one thing. The actual fidelity of the model has nothing to do with the fact that the parts breakdown chosen for the plastic minis is limiting a lot the poseability of the resulting minis.
Seriously now, most of the problems with that mini are from the waist down, TBH.
Yup, those were the exact pictures I was looking at. I'm guessing they were the first pictures of "Heavy Gear Tiger" in a GIS for you too?
From the sound of things on the Kickstarter, the "poseability" of the models will be enhanced by ball and socket joints, and the fact that they'll be plastic. Maybe you should wait until your kickstarter order arrives before passing judgement?
May I ask how much you put up for the Kickstarter?
Nomeny wrote: Yup, those were the exact pictures I was looking at. I'm guessing they were the first pictures of "Heavy Gear Tiger" in a GIS for you too?
Yes, and I can't for the life of me how would I rate the two of them as "high fidelity" when compared ne with the other: the proportions are all different, one looks almost twice as high as the other one, and the plastic one has basically made away with any detail smaller than the sensor visor (and even that one has been grossly simplified).
From the sound of things on the Kickstarter, the "poseability" of the models will be enhanced by ball and socket joints, and the fact that they'll be plastic. Maybe you should wait until your kickstarter order arrives before passing judgement?
They've already shown the parts it's made of, as if it wasn't obvious by looking at the renders. And all the ball and socket joints in the world aren't going to do anything at all for the leg to hip joint. That design basically forces the legs to either go more or less straight down, with the results shown, or you'd need to remove part of the leg to make more dynamic poses (which would prevent much poseability in those particular legs), unless the players is willing to do hip surgery afterward (mainly cutting it up to do what I said some posts above).
I can pass judgement on the stuff shown pretty easily, partily due to experience and partly because they have deemed it worthy of showing (so, worthy of critique). Also because this is the exact moment where a critique can have a beneficial effect!! Waiting until the deed is done will only lead to regrets. What good is it going to do to anyone, once it's been produced? They won't have the money to do it again!!. I (we, actually) have done as much (offering critique), and lo and behold, in at least one instance the Pod has even agreed and made amends (to their credit, hopefully they will continue doing so and the line will benefit from it).
May I ask how much you put up for the Kickstarter?
May I ask before...
1) How is that relevant to anything we're discussing here? (I've said how much over here more than once. Or thrice)
2) Why do you so firmly believe the Pod's way of cutting up the mini is the best possible without them even explaining the motivations for it?
1. I'm just curious what your skin in the game is. I mean, if you aren't supporting the Kickstarter, then why do you care what they do? If you are supporting the Kickstarter, then why don't you trust them to do what they do?
2. Because I know some of them personally, and I trust their judgement?
Nomeny wrote:Okay, think of it this way, how much would you charge for creating a similar model to the Tiger?
I'm not sure what's your point there, would you expand on that one ?
Nomeny wrote:1. I'm just curious what your skin in the game is. I mean, if you aren't supporting the Kickstarter, then why do you care what they do? If you are supporting the Kickstarter, then why don't you trust them to do what they do?
2. Because I know some of them personally, and I trust their judgement?
The good 'ol "if you don't pay, you have no rights to complain; if you pay, why should you complain ?" routine.
Yeah, sorry, doesn't work like that.
The KS is supposed to be the future of the HG mini line, so anyone interested in HG minis has every right to care.
As for the actual DP9 staff, well, I'm not sure what you mean by "personally know them", but I've met them in MTL, and worked with them on a couple of books, which is precisely why I don't trust DP9's judgement one bit.
Nomeny wrote: 1. I'm just curious what your skin in the game is. I mean, if you aren't supporting the Kickstarter, then why do you care what they do?
Because one can care about Heavy Gear the game without being involved in Heavy Gear the Kickstarter? Not that it matters, or is relevant to the conversation (except, apparently, in your mind). As I've said, repeatedly, I pledged on the KS exactly $1, to be able to go in heavily if, and only if, what they show is worthwile. And I say this having about 400 Gears already at home. That's your answer to "why I care", right there.
If you are supporting the Kickstarter, then why don't you trust them to do what they do?
Because trust must be won and retained every day. And their account with me is quite a bit spent, nowadays, and they haven't shown me anything so far to make me change my mind in this particular case (I am very much sold on the Caprice mounts, for example).
2. Because I know some of them personally, and I trust their judgement?
So do I, which is why I don't. Particularly Robert, who is the one with the keys.
But that's besides the point: the point is what they've shown so far, and what they've shown so far is lacking... resolution, you might say.
It's an old adage, Albertorius, and you hear it all the time over in the 40k threads. Somehow, having 20,000pts of painted 40k models isn't enough "cred" for me to comment on what I see as continously negative changes to that game that both literally and figuratively devalue my collection. The same is true here. i didn't pledge much for HG partly because of my lack of faith in them (from a short stint looking behind the curtain at how the gear sausage is made) and partly because I already have three armies that are 50% to 300% greater than the average sized HG game played during the blitz era... and I haven't been any to use any of them for years. That doesn't mean that somehow my lack of an arbitrary KS pledge amount disqualifies me from caring where the game goes.
Also, 400 gears? My god, man... what were you thinking!!?!
warboss wrote: Also, 400 gears? My god, man... what were you thinking!!?!
I'm not sure I was thinking much, or at all XDD
And you bought those mainly during the rafm/tactical days too, right? When you could only use about 5 or 6 at a time max!?!
Tactical/early Blitz, actually ^_^. I only have about 30 rafm Gears and striders. Most of the stuff I have is 2nd ed tactical or Blitz.
...but yeah >_>, although back on the day we were doing 20 vs. 20 without too many problems (it was right after playing heavily Battletech in our group, though).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Huh... the northern plastic designs have been going from strength to strenght, haven't they -_-
Then you'd be the first, looks like. Most people at the Pod forum (even the playtester coordinator and main PRDF "we want it all" promoter guy, and for whom might be the very first time I've seem "bashing" the pod) it's basically saying the same: they look from "off" to "horrid".
Personally, I think they look kinda horrid and I'd be disappointed if they didn't fix them, but to each their own.
That's the thing though, isn't it? DP9 has to cater to a wide variety of tastes. I like how the less bulky, bulbous look of the Gears helps distinguish them from their real-robot predecessors. I expect they'll get the Cobra treatment, and that's cool too.
Heh, I wish I was the sculptor. I've been looking for a sculptor to do some work for me for ages, and I don't have time to learn. Although, just to be pedantic, I'm probably just the first person who has told you that I like them.
Yeah...they definitely look off. The Cheetah's legs have grown, and did the White Cat always have the giant shoulderpads like they came out of a World of Warcraft zone?
The Ferret, nice work taking out all the detail out of the torso and turning it into a giant block. Also the V-engine does look small.
Though to be honest, with the V-engines, I'd be okay if they downscaled most of them, as they are comically large in most Blitz figs.
I pretty much agree with the above. While the Tiger seemed "off" but I couldn't really nail down exactly why, the cheetah and ferret seem like someone stretched them on the rack. The cheetah can mainly be fixed by simply shortening the thighs but the white cat definitely needs some shrinkage on those ridiculous 1980's shoulder pads. The ferret's waist just seems way off as well both in shape as well as height. If their goal is to homogenize all the gears sizes back to RAFM ratios then keep the thighs. I don't like them but I won't be buying any regardless as I have enough metal cheetahs as long as the decision is not just random/lazy sculptor but instead is a consistent and persistent design change for the whole line. I just cut and paisted the cheetah torso below from the KS update pic further down the legs to give it a ratio more consistent with the last 10 years worth of metal models and art.
Nomeny wrote: That's the thing though, isn't it? DP9 has to cater to a wide variety of tastes. I like how the less bulky, bulbous look of the Gears helps distinguish them from their real-robot predecessors. I expect they'll get the Cobra treatment, and that's cool too.
Okay but... Frames. Frames do that.
Gears, both North and South, share a very distinctive look. You can tell they're related, despite the blocky/round parity. Deciding to piss away that distinct aesthetic that has been cultured for 20 years just to distinguish them from their inspiration is a bad reason. If that's all the artist is capable of, or the guy making the molds has told DP9 that's all he can do, well, that's a different kettle of fish. But the Pod didn't go into this with a promise of "Reinventing the look!!" They went it to it swinging the "20 years!!" banner.
If they want to change things up the way the live action movies did for Transformers, cool, more power to them. If they want to just make plastic versions of what they've got, then they need to start cracking the whip a little more on the artist. It's good that they're responding to feedback, that marks a very positive step for the attitude at the company, and I'm not so worried about how BAD the Cheetah and co. look as I otherwise would be. But this project isn't for changing things up and making new, radical designs. It's about giving us the same thing, in plastic. And in the majority of cases, that's not what we've seen (until feedback has been received.)
Nomeny wrote: So politely give feedback? Presumably that's why the Pod are soliciting it.
I'll add that I like the Cheetas' longer legs. Makes it look more 'cheeta' and fast.
DP9 neither solicits, nor cares about feedback. All feedback that does not consist of "Here's my money and internal organs, take what you want" is considered impolite in all cases.
Feedback that consists of "Here's my money and internal organs, take what you want" is not feedback.
As for the Cheetahs, Leopards do not look like leopards. I see no reason for Cheetahs to look like cheetahs.
Which they don't, BTW. All the renderings I have seen show Gears with human proportions instead of Gear proportions.
Well, I can understand why, in your specific case, DP9 might file your feedback in the circular filing cabinet,
I think you sum it up well when you say that the Gears are depicted with human proportions. I think that's what I like about them. Not to say that the older, 'gear' proportions are bad, but they look like they could actually walk with more human proportions. Still, rule of cool, I suppose.
Out of curiosity for all you facebookers, how is the reception of the renders on Brandon's facebook group? I've found that the responses you get from the more long term/hardcore fans here on forums and KS comments weren't actually indicative of the responses from more casual come and go fans at least in Robotech. I'm curious if the reception there is any different (excluding obviously those who may post on both venues).
I guess we'll have to take your word on this really positive feedback that differs so much from both dakka and the official dp9 forums. Are you on the facebook group?
warboss wrote: I guess we'll have to take your word on this really positive feedback that differs so much from both dakka and the official dp9 forums. Are you on the facebook group?
warboss wrote: I pretty much agree with the above. While the Tiger seemed "off" but I couldn't really nail down exactly why, the cheetah and ferret seem like someone stretched them on the rack. The cheetah can mainly be fixed by simply shortening the thighs but the white cat definitely needs some shrinkage on those ridiculous 1980's shoulder pads. The ferret's waist just seems way off as well both in shape as well as height. If their goal is to homogenize all the gears sizes back to RAFM ratios then keep the thighs. I don't like them but I won't be buying any regardless as I have enough metal cheetahs as long as the decision is not just random/lazy sculptor but instead is a consistent and persistent design change for the whole line. I just cut and paisted the cheetah torso below from the KS update pic further down the legs to give it a ratio more consistent with the last 10 years worth of metal models and art.
This looks amazingly better. I've been enjoying all the work done so far but these last few have me upset. I fell in love with HG from the video game and these new models just don't look right. They are, like someone said, human proportions, and they really shouldn't be.
Have you sent your feedback with this image to them? I would love it if they made this change.
Dave might be checking on this thread periodically (even if he doesn't post) but that is about it. The pic just illustrates the feedback given here so feel free to post it on the official forums as I haven't logged in there since last year.
warboss wrote: I guess we'll have to take your word on this really positive feedback that differs so much from both dakka and the official dp9 forums. Are you on the facebook group?
You don't have to take my word for it. You can hop on the chatbox and ask the regulars yourself. These days around 4pm Atlantic time is when the most people seem to be online. I'm not on the Facebook group. Got a link for that? edit: You mean the DP9 facebook group? I'm on that.
No, sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the one started by dp9forum regular BrandonKF who calls it the DMZ Heavy Gear group. In any case, it's a bit of a moot point as another update went out and DP9 is responding to the feedback. While I'm glad that they are, I'm surprised that no one is proactively catching these things when it seems that the gaming populace wants to continue the existing designs instead of making super tall Imperator Rex Cheetahs.
Been watching this thread and laughing for a while. So much vitriol, not all of it undeserved.
I bought into the KS for a full starter set. I've always like the HG asthetics, and was waiting for a plastic mix up to come in before buying in any significant amounts.
The new rules are... coming along. I'm seeing a lot of changing of mechanics, and a lot of response to feedback on it. It's a very mixed bag right now, but there's a lot of potential for the new ruleset to be AT LEAST as polished and workable as 40k 7e. *SNICKER*
Models. What i really came for, because I can write my own rules in a poke. Keeping in mind that the way the renders look in wire frame is not equivocal to how final models will look coming out of the molds, I'd say that right now it's another mixed bag. There does certainly seem to be an aesthetic shift going on, I'm not really sure I like most of it.
My biggest harumphs (personally) are the moving away from Gear proportions (and the shared North/South heritage). I think the longer thighs and human proportions would make for a nice refresh on the Paxton Gears, and it would help give them their own DNA, more so than they already have. Also, some model (ferret and cheetah esp) are looking very bland. Finally, casting the feet and legs together makes a physically stronger model, with lower parts count, the trade off being lack of detail in joint.
On the other hand, and I'm sure this will really bring out the pitchforks, I really like where the Caprice models are going. Shape and feel is great, it's going to come down to detail, and that's very hard to judge from renders.
It also really seems that the responding to feedback attitude has been an abrupt shift, from looking through here and the dp9 forums. It's a good shift, so far, I hope it keeps up.
I personally have no doubt my models will be delivered late, because it's a kickstarter. But the behavior the last month or two, especially considering communication and response to feedback, is making me hopeful that the models will be nice.
Looks like the new update says they received the feedback and are going to work on the previous models. Personally I like the grizzly model. The grizzly is the gear I remember and it's the model I saw on wikipedia that made me find the website and almost buy the northern army pack at something like $120 last year. I'm glad I waited because I'm getting one of all of the models I want, which is basically all I wanted anyway as I think I'll only get to play with one friend who is willing to try any game (for free).
I know there's a lot of negativity here and I bet I'd be on that side of the fence too if I was in your position. You're all watching this thing you've cared so much for decades and every move seems to hurt. It made me buy though, it made me look more into HG.
Considering the models were supposed to be done and completely locked down IIRC in May and we're a few days away from July and still tweaking, I'd say you're correct. That two months and counting delay in the current step will have to get accounted for later as I doubt they have a buffer than can account for this multimonth delay plus whatever else comes up. I agree though with most of your comments (can't speak to the rules since it has been a year since I looked them over).
warboss wrote: [..] I'm surprised that no one is proactively catching these things when it seems that the gaming populace wants to continue the existing designs instead of making super tall Imperator Rex Cheetahs.
Good point, but let's be honest - how many times in the past, just in your own experiences, have potential issues been pointed out by somebody yet TPTB didn't change anything before that whatever got previewed/released just to still need the same fix(es) anyways.
And in that vein, another oddity; since when have the square reinforcement blocks on the Kodiak & Grizzly shoulder armor facings been inset rather than extending outwards?
Like, never.
An interesting point or two about the FB group, for those who haven't yet checked it out:
- It is public, but only if you have a FB account and can/are logged in, as it cannot be viewed otherwise.
- Unlike the G+ community (which has lost a few members again after hitting over 100, even though it's all but a deadzone post-wise) you cannot simply join the facebook group; one of the moderators must approve your application.
Not exactly an open forum for much any kind of meaningful feedback?
Nomeny wrote: Well, I can understand why, in your specific case, DP9 might file your feedback in the circular filing cabinet, [..]
While TPTB in Pod-land may dislike the mutual history they helped to shape... that does not in the end, or quite often in the past, make what he says wrong and not worth consideration.
I didn't notice the inset armor plates on the shoulders but, yeah, that's not right or cool. :( What hit me was the "usual" with the 3D designs namely that the waist looks off. The armor plates on the front groin as well as the butt plate seem too small at first glance for both and not the right shape for the front.
Spoiler:
The angled cuts have been minimized giving the front plates an almost rectangular instead of leaf shape and they're too small. The thighs on both the current model and the concept art are almost invisible whereas you can clearly see them on the 3D render. As for the back, Sir Mix a Lot would not be a happy gear pilot. If anyone agrees with the above, feel free to post the pics/details or link here for feedback. Again, I'm really not sure how this is slipping through the cracks.... or is this digital version of the old Blitz era crowdsourced spell check/editing for WTFs? Or is the pod purposefully trying to move away from the existing metal designs? Their willingness to change stuff doesn't really point to the former but rather the latter which is both impressive (they're responding to feedback!) and depressing (why the hell is no one taking the 3D image and simply putting it side by side with metal mini pics?).
If not a move to somehow save on plastic per each mold injection, I'd venture the possibility of some kind of "flow" limitation imposed by whichever type of plastic they finally decided to utilize.
But yeah, amongst other issues the Kodiak & Grizzly torsos appear undersized and the waist area too elongated in the vertical plane.
The arms seem about right for length compared to some of the other new renders, but as with the 'Spit & King look kind of thinned overall.
No idea as to a possible why for the engines, drums, and buttplates all to have gotten shrunk as on so many other previews.
I wonder what kind of source material is being/was provided to the artist(s).
maceria wrote: On the other hand, and I'm sure this will really bring out the pitchforks, I really like where the Caprice models are going. Shape and feel is great, it's going to come down to detail, and that's very hard to judge from renders.
Not sure why... the Caprice stuff has been the best looking so far, by a very wide margin. Might have to do with them probably being the easiest to sculpt (and the least susceptible to the staticness of the poses), but hey, they look fine.
Tydil wrote: Looks like the new update says they received the feedback and are going to work on the previous models. Personally I like the grizzly model. The grizzly is the gear I remember and it's the model I saw on wikipedia that made me find the website and almost buy the northern army pack at something like $120 last year. I'm glad I waited because I'm getting one of all of the models I want, which is basically all I wanted anyway as I think I'll only get to play with one friend who is willing to try any game (for free).
I know there's a lot of negativity here and I bet I'd be on that side of the fence too if I was in your position. You're all watching this thing you've cared so much for decades and every move seems to hurt. It made me buy though, it made me look more into HG.
Very well said. The plastic is going to help expand the game and put it on a good track. It's not going to invalidate metal models, or previous editions of the rules. Even if it's not exactly what old grognards may have personally wanted, it's great for developing a community and the game.
As long as it's good, that is, and correctly priced.
You might have noticed some other opinions on this thread coming from people other than "old grognards" of the game that wasn't exactly stellar either. Like this one, for example:
Alpharius wrote: I went in for $1 and from what I've seen son far, I'll be staying at $1.
But of course, we won't know for sure one way or the other until we see something real: I'd say this might be a good time to assemble a couple of physical, 3d printed prototypes. That way they could show off how it all works together and put them besides the current metal range.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nomeny wrote: Very well said. The plastic is going to help expand the game and put it on a good track. It's not going to invalidate metal models, or previous editions of the rules. Even if it's not exactly what old grognards may have personally wanted, it's great for developing a community and the game.
Yeah, alienating the Pod's existing player base worked so well when they changed ranges and scale from RAFM to Tact, that I can see how appealling would be to repeat it now.
BrandonKF wrote: Just how many of you are on Facebook? Answer yea or nay in a reply.
So how is there reception of the sculpts over on facebook? Are some of the same issues raised here and on the forums being raised there (excluding the possible overlap in members)? I'd imagine new players who didn't really pay attention to older stuff wouldn't care too much if the cheetah was stretched an extra 20% or if the armor plates on the kodiak got changed from XXL to L. It's kind of like me with infinity at this point. I don't have any prior investment in the minis so them changing the look and scale/size of some models isn't as much of a big deal for me as it is for those folks trying to have a more visually cohesive force when one mobile brigada or whatever is 20-30% larger than the others. The issue of changes scales in warzone completely scared me off from buying figs and with infinity I've pretty much made the decision to only buy recent digital sculpts if I ever get into it to hopefully prevent the issue. I was curious if the less hardcore crowd that I guess (no idea if it is valid) on facebook is the same way.
Yeah, alienating the Pod's existing player base worked so well when they changed ranges and scale from RAFM to Tact, that I can see how appealling would be to repeat it now.
I don't want the old guard to be alienated at all. I just don't want them to look at this whole thing and wish it didn't happen. With the new models, I'm getting a lot more info about the universe than my original idea to buy one faction's models and never speak of it. I need the existing players to notice all the little things wrong with the models so they are corrected (hopefully) and I end up with a better, more representative product in the end. I didn't notice the thigh pads being too small, but the cheetah was way too tall for me. I care about the northern gears the most so I hope they are done well.
Yeah, alienating the Pod's existing player base worked so well when they changed ranges and scale from RAFM to Tact, that I can see how appealling would be to repeat it now.
I don't want the old guard to be alienated at all. I just don't want them to look at this whole thing and wish it didn't happen. With the new models, I'm getting a lot more info about the universe than my original idea to buy one faction's models and never speak of it. I need the existing players to notice all the little things wrong with the models so they are corrected (hopefully) and I end up with a better, more representative product in the end. I didn't notice the thigh pads being too small, but the cheetah was way too tall for me. I care about the northern gears the most so I hope they are done well.
Hopefully the Pod will see stuff like this and will be able to reach a happy middle between design contrivances due to material and process, fidelity to the setting and current aesthetics needs/desires ^_^.
What I'm sure about is that they can earn a lot more (money, good faith, players) from listening than from not doing so.
From a quick check, the feedback on the official DP9FB page is lukewarm at best, and the comments about the new renders virtually non-existent on KD's FB group.
warboss wrote: I didn't notice the inset armor plates on the shoulders but, yeah, that's not right or cool. [..]
rdubois wrote:No we won't be making extra inserts for this areas in the shoulders, the plastic arms will have their new look. If customers want the older look of the metal arms they will still be available for purchase.
...erm, hokay... Guess I can stop bothering to ponder any of the whys of the visual change(s) to the various renders.
"Because we say so." it is then - the Pod God has spoken, and as per usual it's a nonsensical decision that poorly impacts yet another iconic design from the setting material.
Already bought a load of stuff I plan to review and put together.
Erm... I think they are disposing of their stock (seeing as everything is heavily discounted and that they seem to have everything there), I wouldn't say that's too good of a new for the Pod (also, not one dime will go to them, as the store already paid for that whatever time ago), because it looks like they are losing another trade acccount to me.
warboss wrote: I didn't notice the inset armor plates on the shoulders but, yeah, that's not right or cool. [..]
rdubois wrote:No we won't be making extra inserts for this areas in the shoulders, the plastic arms will have their new look. If customers want the older look of the metal arms they will still be available for purchase.
...erm, hokay... Guess I can stop bothering to ponder any of the whys of the visual change(s) to the various renders.
Translation from Robertese: "If you don't like them, you can kindly go feth yourself, or buy more crap". That's what I end up with: not so much an explanation but a, as you rightly put it, "because I say so", or a less kind "because feth you, that's why".
And since most of the stuff is getting snapped up quickly, I don't doubt their sales will notice.
But I still don't see anyone here stepping up in the Terra Nova DMZ from here actually explaining their thoughts. The DMZ is open to all fans or newcomers with questions.
And since most of the stuff is getting snapped up quickly, I don't doubt their sales will notice.
But I still don't see anyone here stepping up in the Terra Nova DMZ from here actually explaining their thoughts. The DMZ is open to all fans or newcomers with questions.
The stock dumps are a good chance to beef up collections. A few years ago, I'd be clicking those "add to cart" buttons with you. I'd say probably half my current HG collection was from fire sale purchases like that. I've got enough for now regardless both painted and unpainted. I've only got a single arena ninja cobra left for my southern army, a single left over and miscast chasseur MkII for my nucoal (from making a 5 man squad using 2 fig blisters), and about at least a dozen northern gears to work on. If I ever started back up working on my gears, it would be the white cats, kodiaks, weasels, and jaguars that would be next from that pile (roughly two each of those). Of course, the above priorities are from the blitz era rules so I don't know how that fits with the current trial stuff though. I'm not a facebooker beyond a stealth account that I use to sign up for contests (and whose password I always have to have reset/sent to me as I forget it). Did you get your blog haul from this sale then?
Erm... I think they are disposing of their stock (seeing as everything is heavily discounted and that they seem to have everything there), I wouldn't say that's too good of a new for the Pod (also, not one dime will go to them, as the store already paid for that whatever time ago), because it looks like they are losing another trade acccount to me.
As a last note, good luck selling those books.
Yeah, the books are pretty much wasted. I thought for a moment about getting the perfect storm one but even at 50% off the starting price is just below what the full retail price should have been. The minis though are obviously still useful regardless of edition switchover. He's a smart retailer to try and get rid of the stuff at cost since the writing is on the wall for the metal minis at the retail level. If a store is going to stock future HG products, it'll likely be just the plastics with folks having to direct order from DP9 for the rarer variants in metal. I don't think it can realistically be called as doom and gloom though until the plastics and new rules come out; if he doesn't stock the new stuff at that point then they're losing another trade account. If he had done it a year or two ago like the other big online retailers who dumped their HG stuff (wayland, miniature market, and FRP), I'd say they were losing an account. At this point though, I'd say they'd be stupid to keep their stock just sitting there. I don't have any insider knowledge of sales but I'd be shocked to find out that the plastics KS did NOT tank the sales of metals as folks wait to see what comes out (and for backers what they'll get). YMMV.
And since most of the stuff is getting snapped up quickly, I don't doubt their sales will notice.
But I still don't see anyone here stepping up in the Terra Nova DMZ from here actually explaining their thoughts. The DMZ is open to all fans or newcomers with questions.
The stock dumps are a good chance to beef up collections. A few years ago, I'd be clicking those "add to cart" buttons with you. I'd say probably half my current HG collection was from fire sale purchases like that. I've got enough for now regardless both painted and unpainted. I've only got a single arena ninja cobra left for my southern army, a single left over and miscast chasseur MkII for my nucoal (from making a 5 man squad using 2 fig blisters), and about at least a dozen northern gears to work on. If I ever started back up working on my gears, it would be the white cats, kodiaks, weasels, and jaguars that would be next from that pile (roughly two each of those). Of course, the above priorities are from the blitz era rules so I don't know how that fits with the current trial stuff though. I'm not a facebooker beyond a stealth account that I use to sign up for contests (and whose password I always have to have reset/sent to me as I forget it). Did you get your blog haul from this sale then?
No, my recent purchases on my blog came before. After I completed backing the Kickstarter for the Marine Tactical Unit, I realized that I still had a lot of disposable income, and I wanted to finish what I started in the year's first edition of Aurora with a Water Viper and a Water Viper Silent Running conversion. So I purchased four of those Desert Vipers, plus two Lynxes, because no one seems to have posted any painted pictures of these little guys anywhere on the Internet. The MP Cadre was another buy, though strategic, since I'll be using their frag cannons for some of the Water Vipers.
But before that, I had already arranged to purchase a pair of PBRs from Gomi Designs. Gomi didn't just send me that, but also an ASPB, so I am going through a conversion of those units at this time through the 15mm Sci-Fi Gaming group on Facebook.
All that I have reviewed somewhat.
Then I realized there was a really great Gecko Squadron on Ebay, and I purchased those.
This stock dump I purchased a lot more, and I probably will buy even more soon. I've had buku overtime these last 4 and a half weeks, and I can finally afford to purchase all these great models and show them off to the world. So, I buy and I share.
Erm... I think they are disposing of their stock (seeing as everything is heavily discounted and that they seem to have everything there), I wouldn't say that's too good of a new for the Pod (also, not one dime will go to them, as the store already paid for that whatever time ago), because it looks like they are losing another trade acccount to me.
As a last note, good luck selling those books.
Yeah, the books are pretty much wasted. I thought for a moment about getting the perfect storm one but even at 50% off the starting price is just below what the full retail price should have been. The minis though are obviously still useful regardless of edition switchover. He's a smart retailer to try and get rid of the stuff at cost since the writing is on the wall for the metal minis at the retail level. If a store is going to stock future HG products, it'll likely be just the plastics with folks having to direct order from DP9 for the rarer variants in metal. I don't think it can realistically be called as doom and gloom though until the plastics and new rules come out; if he doesn't stock the new stuff at that point then they're losing another trade account. If he had done it a year or two ago like the other big online retailers who dumped their HG stuff (wayland, miniature market, and FRP), I'd say they were losing an account. At this point though, I'd say they'd be stupid to keep their stock just sitting there. I don't have any insider knowledge of sales but I'd be shocked to find out that the plastics KS did NOT tank the sales of metals as folks wait to see what comes out (and for backers what they'll get). YMMV.
As of right now, the discussion in Facebook has been explained by Mr. Dubois as plastics being very few on parts, more as a way to introduce people to Heavy Gear with relatively simple builds. Plus, some models just wouldn't do well if they were multi-part kits (the Cheetah, for example, would not look great if its legs were chopped up into halves or thirds for greater flexibility in posing, not when it's less than 28mm tall) We're discussing other options for heavier conversions later on, but nothing concrete just yet. Still, both the Cheetah and the Ferret are being sent back to the modeler for work.
In the meantime, some of the static poses will require actual chopwork. I'm open to others' suggestions about using metal leg kits to give variety to the posing.
As for the books, thanks for reminding me. I'll have to see about purchasing them. Considering that an Infinity 3rd edition book with an authorized bounty hunter miniature is $68.99, though, I'll have to disagree with you on agreed pricing. Clearly, the cost of paper and print is more than most people bargain for in this day and age (another reason to be grateful for the new updates to the 5.0 edition of HGB).
BrandonKF wrote: As for the books, thanks for reminding me. I'll have to see about purchasing them. Considering that an Infinity 3rd edition book with an authorized bounty hunter miniature is $68.99, though, I'll have to disagree with you on agreed pricing. Clearly, the cost of paper and print is more than most people bargain for in this day and age (another reason to be grateful for the new updates to the 5.0 edition of HGB).
-Brandon F.
When doing a price comparison, it's probably best to use full retail. The field guides for Heavy Gear are $55 for TPS (136 pages) and $60 for FIF (176 pages) at 11.00 x 8.50 inches. N3 is a double book set (180 and 275 pages) with a slip case for $75 and 12.2 x 8.4 inches. They're both full color and soft covers but the N3 has a significantly higher page count despite a slightly larger page size, is glossy while the HG books are matte and has a slip case as well as the included (for now) mini that at infinity prices is probably at least $15 if not more. You simply get ALOT more for your $75 objectively speaking with the N3 book and that is before we get into purely subjective things like fluff, utility, and rules quality. The Heavy Gear books are both OVER twice as expensive per page and that isn't even including the gloss, slipcase, and mini in the equation at all for Infinity. There are things I can't compare since I don't own the infinity book like the paper weight/thickness but I seriously doubt that this single factor would more than double the value for the HG side of the equation. Simply put, the HG books were way too expensive for what you got objectively speaking compared with the similar offerings from other companies other than maybe GW.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrandonKF wrote: But before that, I had already arranged to purchase a pair of PBRs from Gomi Designs. Gomi didn't just send me that, but also an ASPB, so I am going through a conversion of those units at this time through the 15mm Sci-Fi Gaming group on Facebook.
All that I have reviewed somewhat.
Then I realized there was a really great Gecko Squadron on Ebay, and I purchased those.
This stock dump I purchased a lot more, and I probably will buy even more soon. I've had buku overtime these last 4 and a half weeks, and I can finally afford to purchase all these great models and show them off to the world. So, I buy and I share.
Congrats on the gaming slush fund! I'm not familiar with PBRs or Gomi but I do know of Infinity Geckos (they're quite nice!). If I did have a complaint about Infinity minis besides the occasional cheesecake or way too weird design, it would be that they give you little to no alternate weapons in the kits. If would have loved visually to have a pair of geckos with the Mk12 guns but it looks like you only get one and the other only has a different loadout. I don't know which one is more effective in game but the mk12 definitely works better for me visually. YMMV.
As far as which Gecko is more effective, really, I read most people saying to think of them as heavy infantry with extra Armor. The dual combi rifles might be more effective against light infantry, while the Mk 12 is a mid-range bruiser. Nothing long-range here, which means no trying to take any other TAGs in long-distance sniper engagements.
Whoa, your blog looked changed from the last time I was there. Nice! In any case regarding the HG books, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and such. Like I said, at 50% I was even tempted to get the TPS because I liked the field guide layout format and squad/model page design. At that discount, it pretty much evens out with infinity's $ per page calculations and that's before throwing in the subjective stuff like being a HG fan.
I'll have to peek at your geckos as that article wasn't up the last time I swung by. Have you tried out N3? I've been trying to pick it up over the last week or two and have been watching a bunch of battle and "learning infinity" videos. I even started stripping/scrubbing my 28mm VOTOMS to use as tags as I have tried out unsuccessfully some paint jobs on them last year.
No, sadly, haven't had time to try out N3. In fact, purchasing these rules will officially make it the first time I've purchased 'the rules' from Infinity, rather than relying on their free ones. I'm curious. It is, of course, going to cost me a pretty penny, but since I can afford it for the moment, I figure I might as well.
As far as actually playing, I would need some opponents. I think there might be a few folks around Houston who are interested, including those within our current group for Heavy Gear, who wouldn't mind having a go with these new rules, but they are truly a lot more intensive, and just like you, I've had to open up some of the learning Infinity battle reports to get a proper feel.
Not only that, but I would need some of that slick terrain, which is an additional expenditure which I am debating at the moment.
Weighing all the options at this point and figuring on what is worth taking and what isn't, because ultimately, while I have the funds, I want to save my money in any 'extreme emergency' situations, and still cover all my bills.
For now though, it appears as though you'll be reading a lot more from me on my blog, and be getting a lot more pictures in the future as well.
On thing you could always do is to just paint up little boxes and stack them as needed. Either paint or glue ladders and stairs and such and you've got a decent amount of terrain you could probably use for heavy gear in a pinch as well. If you get the Icestorm starter box, one thing they did is make those cardstock buildings in there the exact size of the infinity squad boxes so you literally stick your old boxes like from the geckos into the cardstock ones to make them alot sturdier.
Maybe it's because I've been so used to Heavy Gear "terms" so long but Infinity does feel from an outsider's perspective alot more dense. The sheer amount of terms is daunting but I'm muddling my way through the multispectral visors to the TO camo to even more exotic sounding kinematika. If you haven't already, the beasts of war youtube Icestorm and N3 week videos (two separate weeks last year) are quite good. I actually understood most of what was going on in the full 300pt 2 hour game video by the end of both of the series.
Truthfully? To me, it's a hell of a lot more dense. Heavy Gear often plays with maybe half the board covered. Infinity can have up to 70 percent or more, and still I see people who can play out a 150 or 200 point game in less than an hour, and sometimes even less if things get really nasty really quickly.
I've collected so much garbage though, thinking it would look good for terrain, but never getting around to actually making the terrain, that I'm almost tempted to just buy the pre-made stuff and call it a day. Lazy of me, but there it is all the same.
The one good thing about all these projects and blog posts is that it encourages me to keep the tempo up, it sets a record of just how quickly I can produce the material for others to enjoy and for myself to be satisfied.
Erm... I think they are disposing of their stock (seeing as everything is heavily discounted and that they seem to have everything there).
This is the second time I've seen the Warstore dump their stock - I made out like a bandit the last time, significantly bulking up my northern forces. Like then, stuff was going for 50% off - and they were subtly critical of the product then. I have to wonder if this is a natural cycle for slow-moving stock, or if they will consider having to go through this a process a second time a non-starter for any future investment in the line. Time will tell, I suppose.
Very well said. The plastic is going to help expand the game and put it on a good track. It's not going to invalidate metal models, or previous editions of the rules. Even if it's not exactly what old grognards may have personally wanted, it's great for developing a community and the game.
It depends - the plastics just put the game on equal footing with other offerings. A successful wargame needs both good sculpts and good rules to have a long life, and in essence the latest offering is working towards new variations of both those assets. Personally, I find the aesthetics of the plastics off - they don't contain the wow factor that the metals did, for various reasons. I'm not sure that I'd be as instantly smitten by the renders as I was by Phil's metal renditions many years back. Sure, a good paint job and the end product will tell - but my suspicion is that these don't have the same appeal as the metals and so will make pushing the game a bit harder.
HG is already competing in a tough market - Battletech locks up the 'massive mech' genre, Infinity is effectively dominating the high-end market, and DMZ is going fairly strong in the battle market. Having lack-luster models - even if they are plastic, and therefore cheap - may not help carve out a segment from those other companies and may leave the Pod in a worse spot than it was. The new rules were intended to be a way to jump the company firmly into the battle segment, but they can't carry the game themselves.
I'll be interested to see what the final results of the plastic production looks like. But for now, it looks like I'm going to prefer my existing metals to the new designs.
I do hope that they price both the eventual retail starter set and individual model/squad boxes competitively with similar offerings unlike with the field guide examples above. The books were simply way too expensive for what they gave you compared to similar offerings and I hope that isn't the route they choose to take with the models post kickstarter. I don't expect nor should the retail price be as low as the likely year ahead of time or more KS special price but the statement during the KS that they'd be priced according to the market worries me a little bit. I wouldn't put it past the pod to say that their plastics are equivalent to other companies metals/resin and price them accordingly with an end result of having the squads and armies for HG stay at about the same cost of entry outside of the starter. I sincerely hope that I'm wrong in that regard as I think cost of entry was one of several big barriers to folks picking up Heavy Gear.
IceRaptor wrote: [..] Personally, I find the aesthetics of the plastics off - they don't contain the wow factor that the metals did, for various reasons. I'm not sure that I'd be as instantly smitten by the renders as I was by Phil's metal renditions many years back. Sure, a good paint job and the end product will tell - but my suspicion is that these don't have the same appeal as the metals and so will make pushing the game a bit harder.
[..] Having lack-luster models - even if they are plastic, and therefore cheap - may not help carve out a segment from those other companies and may leave the Pod in a worse spot than it was. The new rules were intended to be a way to jump the company firmly into the battle segment, but they can't carry the game themselves.
[..] But for now, it looks like I'm going to prefer my existing metals to the new designs.
While the initial renders had some potential, and some HG:Assault models have a few interesting features, overall I'd agree there doesn't seem to be the same "grab factor " in the model designs anymore between the most recent metal offerings, the Kickstarter, and the Pod supported PC-game effort.
The supposed inability to mold certain features due to drafting (or "reasons") seems questionable, because effort was specifically made to include the spikes of all things found on Southern models - yet somehow other features that I'd expect to be easier to mold cannot be kept on the new renders.
BrandonKF wrote: [..] But I still don't see anyone here stepping up in the Terra Nova DMZ from here actually explaining their thoughts. The DMZ is open to all fans or newcomers with questions.
You never seem quite able to grasp that folks might want to discuss miniatures in a very active miniature gaming forum, and that they might be tuning you out every time you try to push them towards a venue other than the one they're already using.
Catyrpelius wrote:No thanks I like this forum... Plus from what I've read its more active then their own. Crowdfunding doesn't mean that people should blindly throw money at a company that obviously isn't ready to use it. Choice of plastic has a lot more impact to the production process then just how hard the models are. Plastic choice is going to effect a lot of things and really needs to be taken into account when the models are first sculpted. There are things you can get away with using one type of plastic that you can't get away with using another.
You haven't visited the DP9 forums then. So I can say honestly that you don't realize that the fans are asking questions and making suggestions, and the company is listening. No, crowdfunding isn't blindly throwing your money at the company. It is an investment in the future of the company and the community. This community wants to grow.
er, I think people being allowed to have discussions about a company outside of the company's own forums is healthier in the long run for a game and it's associated setting.
Or at least not one(s) potentially still subject to moderation at the whims of company supporters and/or the company itself, not to mention that yes, there really are people who just don't like facebook which should be reason enough for you on its own. And do you constantly post on Steel Paladin's forum, or the few other similar forums/blogs, how everyone there should "step up" and only be talking on facebook or the official Pod forums? Nope.
The G+ community would probably have worked out equally as well as FB for the Pod, if the company had ever once given any support or presence - but TPTB chose not to, and things are what they are.
Constantly making an appeal to authority your main, if not only, point of view rather than participating in the discussion folks are actually having about certain points probably doesn't help either.
Nor does language setting yourself above everyone else, whether intentional or not:
I think the most obvious would be the Dougram/VOTOMs vibe to the models, particularly the Dougram big-feet/armour style that they have going. It seems like they take advantage of some humanoid design features rather than try to hand-wave them away.
I thought it went "we like butt plates and we cannot lie... you other pilots can't deny... when a gear sms's in with an itty bitty waist... and an armor plate in your face... LACs get slung..."
I thought it went "we like butt plates and we cannot lie... you other pilots can't deny... when a gear sms's in with an itty bitty waist... and an armor plate in your face... LACs get slung..."
Yes... I went there..
BrandonKF wrote:Those are going on my blog, and I'm quoting all of you.
What I'm reading and comprehending is that the current direction of the models isn't fitting older tastes, but realistically speaking, they have been trying.
One of the things they have to deal with is the fact that at this scale they can't model in the additional sensors, so you're left with a single cover over where your monocular eye went, which was shown with the Tiger.
Then again, that's no different than what they've been doing in Heavy Gear Assault.
-
That being said, I understand you all are old heads.
Thing is, Heavy Gear's not going to keep on wearing well with new eyes if it doesn't freshen itself some.
There's some real tough competition out there now.
With any luck this next batch of images for the Cheetah and Ferret might be closer to the mark.
Like Alphy, I pledged $1, and haven't added a penny.
The regression in sculpt quality compared to KS renders and existing metal is obvious to anyone who isn't a blind fanboy. About the only things that are passable are the tanks and the spiders. The classic VOTOMs look terrible.
And the idea that this is somehow going to expand the player base? How? Only existing players backed, and the poor sculpts are creating more regret than excitement.
While it's nice that the old stuff is on clearance, I'd feel kinda foolish paying 50 cents on the dollar, knowing this game is almost certainly DOA. Besides, there aren't any Support Cobra or King Cobra models available, and those are the only things that interest me at all.
@John, I'm not you or Alpharius. You both pledged $1 because you chose to listen to blind criticism.
This isn't VOTOMs. It's Heavy Gear.
Do these look precisely like their metal counterparts? No.
As far as whether this will expand the player base, that also depends on whether those who decide to follow the critics are going to either support blind criticism and naysaying, or whether they will lend their own expertise in helping the playtesters hammer out the rules and ensure that the game plays well.
Edit: And another thing that can help is, of course, more folks playing and sharing their experiences.
Second Edit: And when somebody immediately writes it off as DOA, that just goes to show that the few critics speaking are the ones folks want to listen to, Hwang. I can't help you there.
Allow me to offer an example. Compared to the Kickstarter for Alpha Strike, we had almost a fifth the number of backers, and the project received far less funding. In spite of that, theY are clearly making headway and sharing progress here, are open to some criticism, but also explaining their production choices.
One of the key notes was to make these introduction plastics... along the lines of the introduction Space Marine squads you see. Very few parts, less requirements for small tweezers to handle objects.
Consequently these aren't the detailed metals. But they are comparable. Plus, many of those here who are hard core modelers can probably chop the plastic up as they wish and rearrange them for their own personal armies if they so wish.
And unlike what some here have to say about me, I am not a blind fanboy. Far from it. I am aware that Heavy Gear is fighting to get back what was lost during the RAFM days. But I also am willing to put my money where my mouth is and have a go at the game. There's no other way to do this than to play and enjoy it with the ladies and gentlemen at your local gaming groups.
If playing the game isn't fun, I wouldn't be here. But one of the great things about wargames is getting to sit around with new friends and acquaintances and talk shop while we try to blow each other out of the way.
BrandonKF wrote: One of the things they have to deal with is the fact that at this scale they can't model in the additional sensors, so you're left with a single cover over where your monocular eye went, which was shown with the Tiger.
Sorry, no. That's not "can't". That's "won't". They've simply decided it's not economical enough for them to do the additional detail. It's like how they've decided to do the details for the northern gears' shoulders carved in instead of extruded: because it's easier that way, and cheaper to boot.
In a world where GW, Renedra, Malifaux, Dreamforge Games and the like are things that exist (not to talk of Bandai, of course, or the many actually advanced plastic manufacturers), you can't say that they "can't" do that level of detail with a straight face.
They have gone for very questionable design choices (as for example leg placement), which coupled with their budget forces them to go for certain sculpt and mould decisions.
Trying to frame it as "yeah, it's you old grognards that don't like it" is disingenuous at best.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrandonKF wrote: You dislike the renders because you think they are crummy. Edit: Slight difference, since they are just renders, and not actual models.
Actual models will be at best as good as the renders. So when you look at renders, you're looking at a best case scenario. If in said best case scenario you already think they're not so good, then...
No, it wouldn't be economical, Albertorius, since we had a fifth of the backers that Robotech RPG Tactics did, but raised up a fraction of the funds.
GW, Malifaux, Renedra, and Dreamforge are all 28mm-32mm-35mm skirmish games that involve personnel and extremely large vehicles that rival an HHT-90 for just an armored personnel carrier, and costs as much or more to field.
They have gone for design choices based on who they are working with, within the limits of their current budget.
And it isn't disingenuous, it's fact. However, I can say that even those bright-and-shiny new faces are also advising the company with input, and that input is being considered by the company both in their Kickstarter comments as well as on Facebook.
BrandonKF wrote: No, it wouldn't be economical, Albertorius, since we had a fifth of the backers that Robotech RPG Tactics did, but raised up a fraction of the funds.
They've raised what they asked for, though. And said they'd create more moulds than the RRTKS, for the money they asked for.
If the money that they asked for is not enough for the task... that's on them. Going cheap on the sculpst won't do them any favor, you know.
BrandonKF wrote: GW, Malifaux, Renedra, and Dreamforge are all 28mm-32mm-35mm skirmish games that involve personnel and extremely large vehicles that rival an HHT-90 for just an armored personnel carrier, and costs as much or more to field.
So? Any of those companies have details much, much, much more intrincate, delicate and slight than anything discarded by the Pod in this. How much, exactly, does scale matter, when for all intents and purposes Gears are just blocky space marines, scale wise? They are humanoid full armored figures with the same dimensions, but much shallower details. What does it matter that they are supposed to be giant armored vehicles, for that comparison? If anything, they should have more detail due to that fact, not less.
But you don't actually need to go there: you can go see plastic miniatures with that level of detail and a relevant scale: go see the DZC plastic offerings. Or Plastic Soldier Company. They blow anything shown here out of the water, and then some.
BrandonKF wrote: GW, Malifaux, Renedra, and Dreamforge are all 28mm-32mm-35mm skirmish games that involve personnel and extremely large vehicles that rival an HHT-90 for just an armored personnel carrier, and costs as much or more to field.
So? Any of those companies have details much, much, much more intrincate, delicate and slight than anything discarded by the Pod in this. How much, exactly, does scale matter, when for all intents and purposes Gears are just blocky space marines, scale wise? They are humanoid full armored figures with the same dimensions, but much shallower details. What does it matter that they are supposed to be giant armored vehicles, for that comparison? If anything, they should have more detail due to that fact, not less.
But you don't actually need to go there: you can go see plastic miniatures with that level of detail and a relevant scale: go see the DZC plastic offerings. Or Plastic Soldier Company. They blow anything shown here out of the water, and then some.
Those companies are also much more established and have a lot more revenue to use on creating their miniatures. Either that, or they began their work in plastic for starters, so they already had the equipment available to produce the sprues right off the bat, and could refine the process as necessary.
They also utilize either heroic scaling to make their details more distinguished (larger heads, hands, and feet), and are human in appearance, rather than being, as put by Smilodon, human 'in form'.
How much does that affect them when they are just 'blocky Space Marines'? Quite a bit. You're not modeling this off a human body. You're creating a human-like robot that still has to look like a machine, and then still has to look like you expect a Gear to look.
Edit: HudsonD, weren't you one of those who had been asking for a long time to do plastics in Heavy Gear? When was the last time you even made a request of the company? What was it exactly? A stable ruleset? Because that's already being worked on with 5th edition, and since they want to make it free, it makes it easier for you, since you don't have to spend your money on anything but miniatures to begin with. But several of those comments I recall over the last two years have been to change the miniatures up to plastic so that the cost would be less for entry level players.
BrandonKF wrote: Those companies are also much more established and have a lot more revenue to use on creating their miniatures. Either that, or they began their work in plastic for starters, so they already had the equipment available to produce the sprues right off the bat, and could refine the process as necessary.
Right... Dreamforge has no manufacturing capabilities whatsoever (they subcontract) so no ticket there. Renedra is a subcontractor itself, but for some reason their contractors seem to know what they're doing (and there's a lot of them, also a lot of first timers, who'dve known). Malifaux is established, yeah... only not as much as DP9 is, of course. They've been around for a third of the time, and they've only started doing plastics this last two years. so I'm not sure you could really say much about that.
They also utilize either heroic scaling to make their details more distinguished (larger heads, hands, and feet), and are human in appearance, rather than being, as put by Smilodon, human 'in form'.
Yeah... no, not really. They do everything, from human to monsters, to vehicles to anything in between. Detail is detail is detail, and theirs is just better.
How much does that affect them when they are just 'blocky Space Marines'? Quite a bit. You're not modeling this off a human body. You're creating a human-like robot that still has to look like a machine, and then still has to look like you expect a Gear to look.
So are space marines... do you really think that's how a human looks? It is. Exactly, The. Same. Situation.
I don't know those companies that well to be honest.
You say detail is detail is detail.
I just showed you another render of the Kodiak and Grizzly, which both look pretty spot-on to their original metal counterparts.
I don't know who is working on the renders, but whoever it is seems to have the larger sculpts down fairly well. It was the recon Gears that gave you the fits, and they already confirmed the sculptor was taking those back for redrawing.
And no, you yourself stated that Gears Are. Not. Power. Armor.
Edit: HudsonD, weren't you one of those who had been asking for a long time to do plastics in Heavy Gear? When was the last time you even made a request of the company? What was it exactly? A stable ruleset? Because that's already being worked on with 5th edition, and since they want to make it free, it makes it easier for you, since you don't have to spend your money on anything but miniatures to begin with. But several of those comments I recall over the last two years have been to change the miniatures up to plastic so that the cost would be less for entry level players.
No, I haven't asked for plastics, you must be thinking of someone else.
I haven't requested anything from DP9 in a while, either. If anything, it's more the reverse that happens these days.
Good rules, free rules. Know the difference.
Last, but not least, I'll repeat myself. The main reason DP9 is struggling to design decent plastic minis and willing to compromise on quality and shape, is DP9.
As listed above, there are plenty of other companies of similar size that have managed to build better products, despite more complex shapes, but then they're not DP9.
And yes I am aware you have been preaching against DP9 everywhere you go.
Which is another reason why I find you to be less-than-reliable as a grognard, since you have long since if ever played Heavy Gear.
And if more of those present actually spent half the time they do theory-crafting and instead put out battle reports in blogs or the Dakka forums, I don't doubt the rules and army lists could be made that much better as a result, and also increase the footprint and visibility of the gaming groups.
And as I have said in my previous post, I will repeat myself. The recon Gears were your problem, and they are being worked on. But it really wouldn't make a difference to you Hudson, because you long since have decided to take it upon yourself to 'caution others' not to 'waste their money'.
BrandonKF wrote: I just showed you another render of the Kodiak and Grizzly, which both look pretty spot-on to their original metal counterparts.
The big guys are among the best, I agree on that. You can still see some glaring differences, first of all in leg lenght and even feet proportions. Seeing how the shoulders have made a negative version of the metal one will be... interesting, once seen physical.
It's also completely lost the pilot's front hatch, the front hip plates's cross detail, it's gained a whole new waist on top of the older one... and of course, basically all of the fine detail is gone. Compare the details shown (again, the details, not proportions, not anything else, details shown and sculpted) with, say, a terminator:
I probably gotcha there (nope, not those other terminators, what were you thinking)
Those are significantly smaller, they are about half as many pieces, from a completely new company, and still... their detail blows out of the water not only any render the Pod has shown so far, but anything the Pod has done, ever. In a plastic sprue with half as many pieces and with a mini that might be about 1/5th the volume of that first Grizzly.
I don't know who is working on the renders, but whoever it is seems to have the larger sculpts down fairly well. It was the recon Gears that gave you the fits, and they already confirmed the sculptor was taking those back for redrawing.
I agree the big ones are better. Still, so far I wouldn't call them good. Or maybe wouldn't call them good enough.
And no, you yourself stated that Gears Are. Not. Power. Armor.
Neither are Space Marines, as a human does not fit in there. But the proportions are pretty similar to Gears, and funnily enough, they look very alike compared with a BM.
But it really wouldn't make a difference to you Hudson, because you long since have decided to take it upon yourself to 'caution others' not to 'waste their money'.
When faced with incompetence and unethical practices, some people decide to warn others to stay clear of it, and some believe such practices should be supported. That's how it goes.
You have not in years, for reasons you have already reiterated above.
And your own incompetence in the matter is what I cannot abide. You haven't played in years and you have no intention of playing, so instead you would rather try and burn the rest of us who want to play the game, purely for your kicks.
I don't support unethical practice or incompetence, but I also do not abide arrogance and self-aggrandizing.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think that right there is the problem, Albertorius. The theory-crafting and the comparisons are all about playing a 'gotcha' game, not about actually improving the line.
If that's the case, no amount of arguing is going to change your mind. This is the reason why a lot of those new voices get snuffed so quickly, because you have multiple folks here who shout them down right away. And anyone who doesn't play sees the fallout and thinks, "Nope, not touching this game."
So yeah, you got me on detail with tiny Terminator skeletons.
BrandonKF wrote: If that's the case, no amount of arguing is going to change your mind. This is the reason why a lot of those new voices get snuffed so quickly, because you have multiple folks here who shout them down right away. And anyone who doesn't play sees the fallout and thinks, "Nope, not touching this game."
That's why I've been asking for actual, 3d printed test models. Those are really, really needed, and until then we will only be able to guesstimate and to compare to other companies' renders.
So yeah, you got me on detail with tiny Terminator skeletons.
It was more a ribbing that you might be thinking about other terminators than anything else, actually . I'm afraid that the ill intent is not on me this time. I've clarified anyways, just in case.
Okay, Albertorius. Sorry, I have a hard time dealing with arguments when I truly want the game to grow. I have played the rules and, while they are rough, i find them good. Thanks for clarifying about the ribbing. I can accept that. 3D-printed test models are a good idea. I will make that suggestion to them after they have finished up with the last renders to have some test pieces made for all of us to check on. Rather than purchase sight unseen, as it were.
BrandonKF wrote: [..] And your own incompetence in the matter is what I cannot abide.
You haven't played in years and you have no intention of playing, so instead you would rather try and burn the rest of us who want to play the game, purely for your kicks.
I don't support unethical practice or incompetence, but I also do not abide arrogance and self-aggrandizing.
BrandonKF wrote: I think that right there is the problem, Albertorius. The theory-crafting and the comparisons are all about playing a 'gotcha' game, not about actually improving the line.
This is the reason why a lot of those new voices get snuffed so quickly, because you have multiple folks here who shout them down right away.
Are you sure you're entirely blameless so as to be the one casting stones at folks having a low-key discussion with new voices who'd already made up their own minds about both good and bad points regarding the renders versus expectations and art or potentials and drawbacks of the chosen medium. TPTB in Pod-land are the ones who chose to forsake those on G+, and for almost two months, those here on Dakka as well - are you likewise sure you're not having a case of sour grapes over the fact that everyone hasn't chosen to move onto your facebook group.
And it's not like the comments on the KS updates or on the forums have been 100% positive either. So tarring all those here with the same brush, regardless of past Pod experiences, as provocateurs is at best glossing over the facts of the matter that much of the renders are not being seen as all that good compared to the images DP9 chose to show during the KS campaign.
Warboss made a good point earlier, in that some of the renders were so obviously bad why did they get released for preview in the first place. It isn't exactly listening to feedback when the company has to keep going back to change things they should've already caught beforehand as not going to be accepted by much anybody - this is a throwback to past practices the Pod needs to be avoiding like the plague.
If there aren't enough people to handle this internally anymore, that is not the fault nor should it be the problem, of either the fans or the backers.
BrandonKF wrote: Sorry, I have a hard time dealing with arguments when I truly want the game to grow. I have played the rules and, while they are rough, i find them good.
[..] 3D-printed test models are a good idea. I will make that suggestion to them after they have finished up with the last renders to have some test pieces made for all of us to check on. Rather than purchase sight unseen, as it were.
Theophony wrote: I do want to say however that I was more apt to get into the game back at the very beginning of the campaign, but when people voiced their opinions and were shouted down I was completely turned off. SAS had no control over this happening, it was the general audience of future MEdge players that caused it, it's something that has to be watched in my opinion.
The reason I don't go to play at FLGS are because of "those players" who have to be heard and shout down anyone who doesn't like what they like, or know better than others, or my biggest peeve the one who cuss loud enough for everyone to enjoy.
I saw some interesting points brought up by others and saw them shot down by others who think they are earning Dakkadakka points by defending every decision made by SAS. I kept quiet as I wanted this to succeed even if I am not part of it.
We all need to realize we are ambassadors of the hobby from time to time, and with all new aspects what we say can make or break a persons decision on joining the hobby and creating a larger player add for each other.
I just showed you another render of the Kodiak and Grizzly, which both look pretty spot-on to their original metal counterparts.
Uh... no, they don't. They've lost the characteristic 'mass' of the metal sculpt, and many of the proportions look off. Compare the straight on shot of the torso, with the slightly angled shot that Albertorious presented - the front glacis looks 'narrower', probably due to the rounding of the corners that occurs on the metal sculpt. You can tell from the highlight on the front-left side of the glacis what I mean. I suspect increasing the dimensions of the glacis by a mere 3-5% would restore some more of the 'bulk' that makes the Grizzly look 'big and tough'. The collar ring looks to be the right size, but the rest looks too thin. It's evident to me in the Crossbow Grizzly shot, where it looks brittle and frail. Phil was good about matching mental constructs (big means bulky and tough, small means thin and light) to the models, but these don't seem to match as well.
Similar problems exist for the rocket packs (angled corners reduce the mass), knee-guard side armor (barely a sliver, where it was a plate) and the head (which is fatter, whereas it used to be a long snout). The crossbow's ATMS also lost their 'mass' and look too small. Oddly, the HAC barrel has been enlarged - while the magazine and stock remain equivalent. It again makes it look a bit off, a bit too far into the 'sci-fantasy' side for me. I feel like the tracks are a bit long, but it's hard to tell - to be fair, I didn't really notice them before because the sculpts hid them (see Mason's for an example of what I mean), Also, the fore-arm proportions are a bit off; they aren't as wide as they were before, or the 'underarm' extension is too thick, I can't really tell. This might be a trick of the render, but I suspect it's the same issue as the leg vents - they just didn't extrude them far enough past the main part to get the same effect.
I'm also curious to know if the butt-plate and v-engines will be angled, or if they are straight up and down now. Again, those two minor touches added a sense of mass that feels lacking with the new render. The old Grizzly projected a tough SOB attitude in it's sculpts - the new one reads far 'weedier' and less powerful than before.
So no, they are *not* spot on to their originals. They are similar, yes - but have enough differences that the projection of the sculpt has changed.
Why did they offer the very bad renders? I think it might have had something to do with the fact that for almost two or three months they weren't updating anything on Facebook or the KS, and Backers started asking for updates regularly.
Isn't it one of the mantras that an update in Kickstarter, regularly, is better than no news at all for said Backers?
You keep going back over what I have said concerning things and then finalize it under the summary of me being superior to you.
That isn't my mindset. My mindset is simply to have the other guy's six.
Which is why I said I would make the suggestion to Albertorius. I was agreeing and saying I would support that suggestion and make it as well, because it is a good idea.
@Ice Raptor
You wrote that an increase in 3-5% would beef the models up.
Edit: And yes you are right, they are thinner. Not spot-on. As to the weapons, I would not be averse to beefing up the proportions.
@Mmmpi, That waist is beefy. Honestly if the company is making these in a ball/socket hip joint, I will be breaking out my clippers again to give more surface adhesion by snipping off the ends so the models torsos are lower to the hip joint.
BrandonKF wrote: Okay, Albertorius. Sorry, I have a hard time dealing with arguments when I truly want the game to grow. I have played the rules and, while they are rough, i find them good. Thanks for clarifying about the ribbing. I can accept that. 3D-printed test models are a good idea. I will make that suggestion to them after they have finished up with the last renders to have some test pieces made for all of us to check on. Rather than purchase sight unseen, as it were.
Hey, it's all good, misunderstandings happen, and even more in text form. I swear I was only trying to explain my point, for what's worth ^_^
One thing that's got me thinking is... that I have no idea about how one should paint the new, "negatived" shoulders. I mean, if you try to paint them as before they're pretty surely going to look like crap...
Hey, it's all good, misunderstandings happen, and even more in text form. I swear I was only trying to explain my point, for what's worth ^_^
One thing that's got me thinking is... that I have no idea about how one should paint the new, "negatived" shoulders. I mean, if you try to paint them as before they're pretty surely going to look like crap...
I believe you. No apologies necessary from you, you were making a good point.
And honestly, as far as painting goes, I don't have the foggiest. I could make suggestions like using a lighter color to offset the depression, but that might come out fugly.
I will have to wait and see, but if worst comes to worst, I suppose I will have to use some discarded square metal cast-offs as additional panels glued over the depression. That or Milliput.
The only reference I found was that, due to the inflexibility of the molds they couldn't do edge details as cleanly as the metal models can. That's fine - but I don't think it relates to many of the criticisms I pointed out in the Grizzly. I've never created a model for plastic casting, so I won't say that I know better than them - just that the models don't look as 'impactful' as the metal renders. They are close, but don't have the same soul.
Oh well. I have plenty of Grizzlies to begin with.
It could be the case that you're seeing a 2D image of a 3D render, rather than a 2D image of an actual model. If you own any GW stuff compare the instructions vs the actual models, and the instructions lack the impact of the actual models. I think that's why GW and Privateer Press do that 360 degree spin of models on their respective sites.
Nomeny wrote: It could be the case that you're seeing a 2D image of a 3D render, rather than a 2D image of an actual model. If you own any GW stuff compare the instructions vs the actual models, and the instructions lack the impact of the actual models. I think that's why GW and Privateer Press do that 360 degree spin of models on their respective sites.
Hence why I've offered two ideas: actual, physical 3d printed test minis, and manipulable 3d renders using Sketchfab. So far, none of the options have been used.
You can even get it "painted" for maximum impact. As an example, here, have a Tachikoma:
That's a nice example. Something like that likely would show off the mini better. Unfortunately, they're pressed for time (and already almost two months late) and we don't know how much of that extra effort is in the budget. And, yes, I did see that the link you made was done by a student in an intro to 3d modelling class but since they're outsourcing it the old joke about plumbers and photocopier technicians apply ($100 bill: $1 parts for screw needed, $99 labor for knowing which screw). I would hope that the contract with the modeller included clauses for waves of revisions included in the price and (with hindsight) putting up 3d models that you can manipulate. Even just uploading the file to shapeways gives you a B&W 360 view of the model automatically so it can't be that hard.
hopefully they're not rushing it for budget reasons. I'd rather get my stuff late and have it right, than on time and gakky.
Than again, I'm a rational adult who can understand over-runs (though even I have my limits). Just as long as they actually TELL us that they're going to be late and why. Keeping me in the dark makes me angry.
Mmmpi wrote: hopefully they're not rushing it for budget reasons. I'd rather get my stuff late and have it right, than on time and gakky.
Than again, I'm a rational adult who can understand over-runs (though even I have my limits). Just as long as they actually TELL us that they're going to be late and why. Keeping me in the dark makes me angry.
Palladium style danger lies in thinking that way. Delays =/= quality. You can be both late and crappy... see the robotech sprue layouts (although the final minis are decent, not great but not horrible like the sprues).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Barzam wrote: When are these plastic abominations expected to see release now? Caprice was going to get some plastic kits, right? I ask for
... reasons.
Supposedly November... but they're running about 2 months late at the current step compared with what they quoted. All in all that isn't bad but I can't comment on whether or not the initial Nov 2015 date has enough of a buffer to absorb that or if we're in 2016 realistically at this point. Maybe after all the designs are finalized, Dave will comment on the KS or here in the thread (or over on brandon's FB page, the dp9 forum, etc).
Barzam wrote: When are these plastic abominations expected to see release now? Caprice was going to get some plastic kits, right? I ask for
... reasons.
I think the only mount that isn't getting done in plastic at this point is the Hammath (the six legged APCs), but I expect people posting how they build Hammaths out of Accos and spare parts if they're cheap enough.
warboss wrote: Looks alot better and more historically accurate IMO. The two criteria are not necessarily the same thing always but are in this case for me.
That's very much a step in the right direction, certainly. It does look much better, and above all.... it does look much less "wrong".
Unfortunately, the running pose shows the same lack of poseability every other one has so far due to the way the hips have been designed.
Sure, but as I understand it what tripped up Palladium books was the logistics of the whole business. Keeping production on continent/language/etc seems like it simplifies a whole bunch of things, like using feedback.
Nomeny wrote: Sure, but as I understand it what tripped up Palladium books was the logistics of the whole business. Keeping production on continent/language/etc seems like it simplifies a whole bunch of things, like using feedback.
The massive Mt. Everest pile of hubris that Palladium displays at every turn probably didn't help either. When you're completely clueless, humility and a willingness to learn and adapt generally help you alot more than expecting the world to bend to your whims because Siembieda.
Okay. Certain things like the dockworkers' strike don't seem to be the result of anything the RTT producers could control except by making things on the same continent and avoiding all the hassles of shipping to distribution.
Nomeny wrote: Okay. Certain things like the dockworkers' strike don't seem to be the result of anything the RTT producers could control except by making things on the same continent and avoiding all the hassles of shipping to distribution.
The dock strike accounts for a few WEEKS of the 2 YEARS worth of delays if everything goes perfect from now until Dec 2015. The only reason we knew about it wad it was both public anyways and an easy scapegoat that Palladium didn't have control over. The rest of the 95% of the delays (100+ weeks) are of other etiology. Palladium has already admitted waaaaay after the fact that they were wrong and clueless despite their MULTIYEAR assertions to the contrary; I'm not sure why you're having a hard time accepting that. My goal and hope for THIS kickstarter is to prevent Dp9 from doing the same as they both trained under palladium and have shown the willingness to follow their mistakes. While not entirely consistent nor completely of their own volition, the kickstarter so far has shown definite improvement over both what dp9 was doing wrong in the past themselves and what palladium continues to do wrong.
Don't get me wrong.... I agree that making it in the US might be advantageous in the end for the reasons you listed but we have yet to see the final results or if the disadvantages (namely cost) outweigh them. It might be that the initial output is in NA to build up the rollout stock and then switches to China for the long term. We don't know and dp9 has no reason to share that in any case. If they ever do, we'll likely just see a change in he "made in..." box text as the only indication. As long as the final product is good (quality, timeliness, price, rules support), those decisions don't concern me.
warboss: I agree, those decisions don't concern us except where they impact the products we're hoping to see for supporting the kickstarter, and then the ongoing development and support of the game.
I must admit, I do regret raising the spectre of RTT in this thread now.
Indeed. Tell me again, when, exactly, did the dockworkers' strike end? And when, exactly, did you get your Wave 1 stuff, Hudson?
Yesterday.
Now, to be fair, I was away on vacation, and from what my folks told me the box actually arrived a couple of weeks ago. 8 months and a half since they started shipping.
Indeed. Tell me again, when, exactly, did the dockworkers' strike end? And when, exactly, did you get your Wave 1 stuff, Hudson?
Yesterday.
Now, to be fair, I was away on vacation, and from what my folks told me the box actually arrived a couple of weeks ago. 8 months and a half since they started shipping.
Congrats!... I think. So you're back home? I noticed your flag change with most every post, lol. Did you see the minis first hand in NA or is this your first impression?
BrandonKF wrote: Quick update for everyone. This is a comparison shot with the old Cheetah render versus the new Cheetah renders from the Kickstarter update.
That's certainly an improvement. The impression of mass has been returned, without making the Cheetah look like a 'bruiser'. I like the bevel on the calves as well - they really look to have gotten that right on this model. That said, the neck collar is a bit thin - will that detail even show? And I wonder if the RFB model is indicative of a Strike cheetah - if so, losing the 'extra' armor plates that indicate the heavier armor is a bit irritating, but nothing you couldn't model.
At least this model I believe would compare favorably side by side, with detail loss on the plastics hopefully being offset by a lower price.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nomeny wrote: warboss: I agree, those decisions don't concern us except where they impact the products we're hoping to see for supporting the kickstarter
In a discussion thread, those types of decisions certainly seem like fair game to talk about, though. Even if we ultimately have no say in them
IceRaptor: Oh, don't get me wrong here, it is a discussion thread so we should be discussing something. Heck, it seems like some of the constructive criticism provided on this thread will improve the final products of the kickstarter, which is awesome. It means we've both had a say and got to contribute. On the other hand where the criticism isn't constructive, or doesn't contribute, then why bother? Actually, I know why, but somehow or other I still prefer positivity over negativity.
maceria wrote: On the other hand, and I'm sure this will really bring out the pitchforks, I really like where the Caprice models are going. Shape and feel is great, it's going to come down to detail, and that's very hard to judge from renders.
I'm liking the Caprice stuff, too. Indeed, I pledged the box set plus stretch goals becuase it was cheaper than buying just the Caprice and CEF stuff. I've already got a fair size collection of Norther and Southern gears, so I didn't really need them but I wanted the CEF and Caprice minis.
The newest update is out on Facebook. Here is the new updated Ferret.
From their Facebook post: Updated Ferret 3D Model.
Our 3D Modeler updated the Ferret torso and hip parts at the end of last week, based on feedback. It was noted that the torso was sitting to high on the hips when compared to the old metal miniature in both the walker and ground mode poses. This was due to the space needed for the ball joint between the torso and hips on the new model, the old metal mini didn't have a ball joint. So we have decided to remove the ball joint from this model, which has allowed for material under the rear torso to be removed like the old design. For the torso to work in the front/rear pull production molds we have gone with cylinder type connection between the torso and hips, that way the model can be posed with a torso twist. The cylinder surface on the hips was given an angle so that when the Ferret torso is placed on top its more angled down in the front.
The image below includes the old Ferret models on the left, along with the new Ferret walker and ground poses to their right. One of the new Ferret walkers was posed with a bit of a torso twist, so you see how it can look. Plus we put a new exploded parts view to show the new cylinder connection between the torso and hips looks.
I agree that the redo's are better, but all of them still look blockier than the original metals. All of the renders shown so far are chunkier and have larger flat areas than the metals. I'm hoping at some point before they're done that they show us some of the actual test models, preferably painted (or at least primed).
Not saying that they're bad, just noticeably different. (Time for Hunter Mk IV?)
I think it's less negative feedback than constructive criticism. Calling someone stupid because they did something wrong isn't constructive. Telling someone precisely what they did wrong and how they can fix it is constructive. That's what I've seen on the DP9 forums and on the facebook page.
The added detail on the side of the torso is adding a weird effect, I think. It makes the end of the torso look bent at a more severe angle, but I don't think it actually is.
I strongly agree with Albertorius on getting some 3D prints done.
Nomeny wrote: I think it simplifies the logistics to keep production in America.
I think most Game companies wouldn't agree with this sentiment. The vast majority seem to think the added logistical challenges of producing in China are out weighed by other benefits.
All-in-all I don't think the demographic that Heavy Gear is catering too is really influenced by where something is produced.
Nomeny wrote: I think it simplifies the logistics to keep production in America.
I think most Game companies wouldn't agree with this sentiment. The vast majority seem to think the added logistical challenges of producing in China are out weighed by other benefits.
Yes - and the biggest benefit there is 'cost' which will equal higher margins.
But OTOH, not everything coming from China is bad and wrong.
Personally, being not american and seeing as DP9 is canadian, I thought it was funny to see them tout the "all produced in America" fanfare at the KS.
Exactly. Especially as "Made in America" usually means "vastly overpriced for low quality."
Given the quality of the Chinese kits I own, I have no issues with the Chinese ability to deliver.
You've been buying the wrong Made in America stuff. Everything I've bought that's made in the US is decidedly quality compared to other options. Granted, they are usually more expensive, but you get what you pay for and then some more.
China produces good things and also loads of junk. They're also on the other side of the world, and there isn't much (aside from future business) that prevents them from doing a shoddy job compared to using US manufacturers. I think that's one reason for them using a US source. They probably look at it more as Made in North America.
Nomeny wrote: I think it simplifies the logistics to keep production in America.
I think most Game companies wouldn't agree with this sentiment. The vast majority seem to think the added logistical challenges of producing in China are out weighed by other benefits.
All-in-all I don't think the demographic that Heavy Gear is catering too is really influenced by where something is produced.
I don't think it matters what other game companies think in this case, and rather what matters is that DP9 appears to agree. When I was in a similar position to get a game produced in China, I looked at the benefits to doing so, and didn't find they outweighed the costs to me. Maybe other companies can handle China because they have contacts or direct experience in getting stuff produced there, and maybe some don't. It's kind of silly to generalize across companies when the specifics are so important.
Albertorius wrote: DP9 is canadian, I thought it was funny to see them tout the "all produced in America" fanfare at the KS.
Yes. It very much was, speaking as a Canadian whose government has spent years (decades) telling us to shop at home, and a media that implies we're vaguely traitorous when we don't.
They've been touting the line "Made in America" for a while now. Since the US are their main market, it suppose they think it's a good commercial move.
Incidentally, their books were pure garbage (in term of print and binding quality), more expensive than colour hardcover and were proudly presented as "made in America!!!!".
The latter was supposed to compensate for the formers.
Nomeny wrote: I think it simplifies the logistics to keep production in America.
Canada and the USA still have borders, yes? And customs offices, I guess? I'm guessing that to sell stuff to americans their stuff will have to cross the border twice. That's what I found funny.
Nomeny wrote: I think it simplifies the logistics to keep production in America.
Canada and the USA still have borders, yes? And customs offices, I guess? I'm guessing that to sell stuff to americans their stuff will have to cross the border twice. That's what I found funny.
Does the Pod not have distribution centers in the US?
Nomeny wrote: I think it simplifies the logistics to keep production in America.
Canada and the USA still have borders, yes? And customs offices, I guess? I'm guessing that to sell stuff to americans their stuff will have to cross the border twice. That's what I found funny.
Does the Pod not have distribution centers in the US?
... You're joking right ? They don't even have a distribution center, never mind distribution centers.
They do at least have a mailing address in Plattsburgh, NY that they've mailed packages out of for US customers. Wouldn't be too surprising if the US and Canada orders get processed in the separate locations. But, as far as the US/Canada border goes, generally it's less of a big deal the closer you live to it. (Depending on the state, you can cross the border using an "enhanced" drivers license and not even a real passport, after all. ) And the Pod looks to be pretty close.
Either way, there is a lot to be said for having something manufactured in your same general time zone.
Thank you! Thank you! I'm here all week. Tip your waiter!
In all seriousness, this whole thing has gone better than I expected, but that's really just because DP9 actually appears to be listening to some small amount of feedback. Still, the only renders that look decent to me are the Caprice Mounts, and I wouldn't say they look good, just okay. Most of the others look like a combination of poor modeling and attempts to cut corners/costs (which I think is a function of not raising enough money for what they said they would deliver). But again, at least they're listening to feedback and making some positive changes. As ever, we'll see.
. I'm afraid that the ill intent is not on me this time. I've clarified anyways, just in case.
