Thanks! The next thing to print should be buildings (smashing them makes them either more easily damaged next time, smaller from Large to Medium and Medium to Small, or destroyed that scores points).
One suggestion with the hospital, many major hospitals have flat roofs for a helipad to enable emergency trauma patients to be airlifted in to the facility. Might be worth re-shaping the roof and making an octagonal space for a chopper to land.
I think in the color photo on the cover there should be an outline on the yellow closer to the front titan. This would underline the 3d space of the image. also it seems like theres a touch of dead space above the titan's heads. It'd seem like more of an action shot if it more closely cropped to the relevant images, the firing titan and the one evading with the city and destruction as background. just a thought
What are the common titan "builds" you expect people to make in general and are you expecting corner case "combo" builds with specific win conditions to arise?
Looks interesting, and I like the Romanesque robots.
I think they look a bit bottom heavy though, could the shoulders be beefed up? Not to absurd GW/Warmachines level, but so that they are a bit wider than the legs.
thanks for the reply. Dont you think it will be hard for new players to decide specifically individually where to place every piece of terrain? it seems like theres alot of design and finesse that would go into that kind of a strategic decision and it isn't obvious to a new player. I for one have trouble imagining how I would use the terrain to either block shots or force my enemy down a path and whether anything I place on the map woudl do either as intended. Weapons and propulsion have a logical, movement and destruction quantifiable objective but terrain is I just feel like whatever I do with these things I'm going to get punished for them until I've played alot of games.
cool card art. it has a great style to it. Have you ever considered campaigns either as expansions or as something done online? maybe people would post in forums game modes or maps that players could try?
thanks for the response. I would usually think I would simply put shields on and rotate my titan based on where I want my enemy to attack from and I cant imagine why else I would put it in that quadrant of the titan or whatever. if I put them where I'm worried he'll go he stays put and shoots me anywa. is there something Im missing? is the decision more complicated but I'm not imagining the board and systems that would change that?
The game systems seem very elusive on reading. It should be fun to play around and see what works. there are a lot of different systems all intertwined. I worry about stuff like puting down structures and giving my opponent victory points but it makes it more interesting than just dropping down stuff to get in the way. Titan does have a meshlike feel where everything connects in some way. It'll be cool to see a video of how a game plays out.
yeah cool, thats for the msg. I think perhaps I'm having trouble projecting the arithmetic of placing buildings versus being worried about taking them down. I think it'll maybe get better after I play and note some big mistakes I make. speaking of what mistakes do you find new players making very often? Is there anything you do to steer them in the right direction
thanks for the gameplay vid. the art design of the whole thing looks great and it really draws you in and makes you wonder what all these diagrams do and how they relate to one another and it really draws you into the experience!
I feel like with enough time and money it'd be good to have more indepth videos that go over individual mechanics like how actions and reactions work, and how priority is passed. I know I had to watch the netrunner videos like 5 times because I had no friends to teach me to play it. such is a degenerate's lot in life I suppose
I had no idea that this had been under development for 6 years. That's a long time, but I get that it's not been your primary focus. I think the game really shows the effort in getting this to production.
I like the box art, the 3d feel from round the corners are a nice way of cropping the image into a dense action shot that sort of unfolds. Maybe I play too many video games this seems like a weird thought. Well played sir
@JohnHwangDD: I was just taking a peek at the GW boxes since I agree that the Titanomachina logo could 'pop' a bit more. Mostly they seem to be a light logo over a dark background, so we'll see what we can do. Thanks for pointing that out!
The dork is awful. Replace him with something else, a generic icon. Or just the logo. Or nothing. I don't understand why you wouldn't use the yellow titan head fro the player board instead.
Also, not sure why you specify 1 Rulebook and 1 Gameboard, when it's just Rulebook & Gameboard.
Dice count seems high - are these the little starter dice, or larger dice? I'd prefer 6x Zombicide size dice vs 12x tiny generics. Starting with 6 small generics allows you to upgrade to customs and larger dice as SGs. Also sell additional sets.
Oh, OK, but unless you introduce him during the KS, as a point of introducing pilots, people won't know that. Are pilots as important as robots? I assume not, as they're not included as miniatures nor featured on the box cover art.
From what I see peripherally, from the outside, the yellow robot is your iconic image and you should lead with that, using the blue robot for contrast.
Congratulations, Nurglitch! This is really shaping up to look like a fun game. Following your progress and then seeing the fruits of your labors is exciting.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Congratulations, Nurglitch! This is really shaping up to look like a fun game. Following your progress and then seeing the fruits of your labors is exciting.
Agreed!
Hard to believe how far our lil' Nurglitch has come, through all these years...
Really like the building stickers. Pics of them applied?
The game as such isn't my thing ... I'm not into this particular aesthetic ... but it's obviously a passion project for you and I think it's incredibly cool that you're realising it! Seriously, congratulations.
I like the 90's vibe of the colours and style in the video. The Swappability of the weapons harkens back ot the beetleback warlords of old Epic battles but better done.
Yeah, originally I wanted a paint-job reminiscent of Okoye in Black Panther, but the painter's schedule was kind of crunched. It goes well with the darker Titan in the background of the box cover, I think though.
Ah... I'm a little surprised you didn't commission it as a yellow one to match the headliner. But now that you mention the BP link, I can see the influence.
So the background I've worked out so far is that Humanity, and its custodial Titans, physically escaped from Gaia umpteen years ago, and went into space. Mentally, Humanity went into the comfortable virtual reality of Elysium where some of them were culturally exhausted by it and eventually wanted to return to Gaia and live 'real' lives.
The Titans agreed, and returned settlers to Gaia where they helped Humanity re-settle. This is the bright new dawn, a new era for Humanity to build a utopia. The trouble being that with the Titans' control was loosened, and the long ages of caring for Humanity had perhaps loosened the Titan's own grip on sanity.
Regarding Humanity as a combination livestock/pets, the Titans found themselves pruning the new cities that spread across the face of Gaia, or at least those belonging to other Titans that didn't properly respect municipal borders. The natural disorder and entropy of free-range Humanity had brought its guardian Titans into conflict.
In this case, the 'bright new dawn' refers both to the Utopian ideals of Humanity, and many of the Titans' preference for nuclear weaponry.
I love this background. I can't help picturing a mix of The Culture and Primal Rage.
IMO, the most important thing about the armoring is consistency in style, so that the model has visual coherency. If the shield motif if thematic, then echoing as you've done is the superior option. Or, if you want it to be giant Greco-Romans, then do that. Pick a theme and run with it throughout.
Or, as your reviewer suggested, do both, so you might have a Greco-Roman version *and* a Medieval version (as a SG). This leads down the Sid Meier's Civilization route, and works really well for a very large game company like GW / Hasbro.
As a boardgamer, it's not a good idea. The ideal boardgame is immediately playable as-such OOTB. You will get a lot of complaints from the BGG crowd about how you have to assemble the minis in order to play, even if it's not strictly true. Remember, the BG crowd is very happy with rubbery monopose Zombicide minis. If you have the space to have 2 sets option parts, you have the space to provide 2 distinct models. Offer that, instead, and people will be very happy.
If you have 4 different sculpts in the box that's even better yet again! Think Monopoly tokens, Roborally minis, etc. People love that. ____
The campaign page looks so much better! You can really see the extra work that went into it this time around.
However, until you update those titan sculpts, I think unfortunately it's going to be a very strong uphill climb =/. I've backed quite a few games just for cool mechs, but never a game where I didn't like the mechs, especially when it's such a central focus. So, just something to consider as you gauge the reception this time around.
Best of luck no matter what, the progress has been inspiring!
Nurglitch wrote: Alright, so I've lots of interesting feedback since I launched the Kickstarter and now I'm asking for even more.
Keep in mind there's an option to support the Kickstarter by pledging a dollar. If 30,000 people pledged $1USD the project would not only fund, but I would have 1,000 copies of TITANOMACHINA that I could then sell. If 500 people pledged the Adherent level of 1 box, I would have 500 copies of TITANOMACHINA that I could then sell. The more copies I can sell, the more funds available for the next steps (more Titans, more buildings, more content).
What would I need to do to earn your pledge?
For me, my biggest issue with the game is its aesthetics. I do not like the art style or the way the mechs look. I have seen you mention the bottom heavy look of Godzilla as inspiration, and while that look works for kaiju (especially monsters with tails), I think it makes the mechs look clunky. Without the visual appeal to draw me in, the game would have to be incredibly engaging to get me to invest in it, and I'm not getting that vibe from the gameplay videos.
To answer your question, there isn't anything you can do to earn my pledge in your current campaign. I do not mean to sound harsh, it is just that there are so many new games coming out, and so many good mech games already available that it is hard to justify buying another one that doesn't really stand out to me.
Good luck with your game. I hope you are able to find a way to publish it.
I get the intent for kaiju proportions. Elephantine legs/feet with lighter arms/torso make sense, but this isn't a "hard" SF game, either. As I've been actively cutting back across the board, so I'm really dialing back pledges. Sorry.
I think Visceral Mass said everything I could, just more elegantly.
Also with getting 4 of the same mechs just different colors I think I’d personally really want more of my aesthetics choice to be there. Also your facing off versus Adeptus Titanicus with beautiful models. It might not be exactly the same, but if I had a choice of playing one of the other, titanicus would win for a few reasons. Style of design, being able to find someone willing to play it and something gorgeous to paint.
Nurglitch wrote: The intention was to hit an under-exploited sweet-spot between the labour-intensive miniature war-gaming crowd and the casual/hobby board-gaming crowd.
Miniatures boardgames are a big market where a game can break out, but I see it as competing with things like Malifaux on the wargaming side, and CMoN / Memoir '44 on the boardgame side. Plus GW's constantly releasing new gateway games like Necromunda / Kill Team / Shadespire (sp).
I suspect the root of the problem is that your minis aren't sexy enough for the wargame crowd, but too expensive for the boardgamers who would be just fine playing with chits and tokens.
Nurglitch wrote: The intention was to hit an under-exploited sweet-spot between the labour-intensive miniature war-gaming crowd and the casual/hobby board-gaming crowd.
Miniatures boardgames are a big market where a game can break out, but I see it as competing with things like Malifaux on the wargaming side, and CMoN / Memoir '44 on the boardgame side. Plus GW's constantly releasing new gateway games like Necromunda / Kill Team / Shadespire (sp).
I suspect the root of the problem is that your minis aren't sexy enough for the wargame crowd, but too expensive for the boardgamers who would be just fine playing with chits and tokens.
In addition to that, the component art might not be sexy enough for boardgamers. The board is extremely plain and doesn't do much to help evoke the sense of a battle in the middle of a city.
I may have used AT as the main competition, but there’s also Battletech, which has decades of source material to use. Either Thoseor other mech games have multiple robots to face off against each other, not just one body with changeable weapons. I’m not trying to be mean, but your models are not competing in style, price, ability with other manufacturers. I just don’t see anything new/innovative or jaw dropping that would pull money out of people’s pockets. There’s plenty of rules out there to be had for free that can be adapted.
Given all the feedback I've received about the Titans I thought it might be worth digging back into their development to figure out a new direction. Here is the artist's first sketch of the cover art, following a fairly loose set of specs. I had it worked over to better resemble the models in the box as I felt it was important that was people see on the cover is what they get in the box. But apparently people aren't thrilled with the models in the box, so maybe this is a better direction?
Visually, this is a much bolder vision. It's more dynamic (lighter, quicker), less plodding (elephantine). Also, much sexier.
Me, I'd lighten up the models even more, narrower shoulders, thinner waist, thinner arms, more curve in the thigh, narrow knees. More hourglass, diamond and cone shapes than barrel/cylinder shapes.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Visually, this is a much bolder vision. It's more dynamic (lighter, quicker), less plodding (elephantine). Also, much sexier.
Me, I'd lighten up the models even more, narrower shoulders, thinner waist, thinner arms, more curve in the thigh, narrow knees. More hourglass, diamond and cone shapes than barrel/cylinder shapes.
I must agree. Sleek robots sell, and there’s a reason for it. The “Godzilla” aesthetic works for the movies because when the camera looks up, it creates a forced perspective that makes him look massively tall. For minis that your looking down over, it just makes them look like they have a lot of baby fat. If you want them to look massive and pondering on the tabletop, I’d suggest the reverse - large on top like the GW mechs of AT, slimming downwards towards somewhat spindly legs.
Also, while I’m not familiar with the world you’ve built for TITANOMACHINA, might I suggest you make a plug-in for the head. The current mech looks Roman/Greek, and I for one would be much more interested in heads that were Egyptian styled, like one that had an Eagle’s or Bull’s head.
I'd prefer gender netural models myself - the bottom heavy design looks like it coykdnt support the weapon mounts on the arms, and “breasts” on a giant robot as in the art above looks ridiculous.
Carlovonsexron wrote: I'd prefer gender netural models myself - the bottom heavy design looks like it coykdnt support the weapon mounts on the arms, and “breasts” on a giant robot as in the art above looks ridiculous.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Visually, this is a much bolder vision. It's more dynamic (lighter, quicker), less plodding (elephantine). Also, much sexier.
Me, I'd lighten up the models even more, narrower shoulders, thinner waist, thinner arms, more curve in the thigh, narrow knees. More hourglass, diamond and cone shapes than barrel/cylinder shapes.
I must agree. Sleek robots sell, and there’s a reason for it. The “Godzilla” aesthetic works for the movies because when the camera looks up, it creates a forced perspective that makes him look massively tall. For minis that your looking down over, it just makes them look like they have a lot of baby fat. If you want them to look massive and pondering on the tabletop, I’d suggest the reverse - large on top like the GW mechs of AT, slimming downwards towards somewhat spindly legs.
Also, while I’m not familiar with the world you’ve built for TITANOMACHINA, might I suggest you make a plug-in for the head. The current mech looks Roman/Greek, and I for one would be much more interested in heads that were Egyptian styled, like one that had an Eagle’s or Bull’s head.
That weird perspective thing where a giant robot game involves a change in perspective from a movie is one of the things that was part of the design. I don't think trying to imitate GW is really a good way to go; they already do it, y'know? I'm not sure how to successfully avoid imitating success though...
It's worth mentioning I originally designed the game so the Titans would be more like the MkII-VIII Space Marine armours, modular so players could swap bits in and out. It might be good work putting in a choice of heads though. One of the neat things is that the heads (sensor system) can be functionally different as well as cosmetically.
Well, I'm not sure if you're aware, but you are already somewhat mimicking a look that already exists in Gigantor.
Spoiler:
and... (which I actually like better)
Spoiler:
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, your aesthetic somewhat reminds me of the robots from Mazinger; I have a fondness for the ol' "Shogun Warrior" toys of the 70's, and if you could pull the design more in the direction of that look, I would find that more appetizing.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Visually, this is a much bolder vision. It's more dynamic (lighter, quicker), less plodding (elephantine). Also, much sexier.
Me, I'd lighten up the models even more, narrower shoulders, thinner waist, thinner arms, more curve in the thigh, narrow knees. More hourglass, diamond and cone shapes than barrel/cylinder shapes.
I must agree. Sleek robots sell, and there’s a reason for it. The “Godzilla” aesthetic works for the movies because when the camera looks up, it creates a forced perspective that makes him look massively tall.
For minis that your looking down over, it just makes them look like they have a lot of baby fat.
If you want them to look massive and pondering on the tabletop, I’d suggest the reverse - large on top like the GW mechs of AT, slimming downwards towards somewhat spindly legs.
Also, while I’m not familiar with the world you’ve built for TITANOMACHINA, might I suggest you make a plug-in for the head.
The Godzilla look is partly tied to putting a man in a suit, partly tied to being as tall as the typical building in Tokyo - which is why modern Godzilla is ridiculously tall compared to OG Godzilla, and the American GINO didn't work at all.
I.e. "elephantine", as I put it.
The GW look is a good one, and it's got 20+ years of design refinement behind it. There's no need to copy the details, but the proportions aren't bad. IMO, tjhe Epic 2E proportions were awful - don't do that.
A plug-in head would go well with the plug-in hands, and could be another draftable component. I like the suggestion as a SG because it opens up gameplay. .
That's actually a really interesting idea, Nurglitch - it seems like the current mechs are either a negative, or at least not a draw, for most people. What about looking into a board game version without miniatures, where upgrades are just tracked on a dashboard like you described above?
I would honestly be much more interested in something like that, personally - it lets you try out the cool mech combat idea, but in a much slimmed-down format.
It would let you make the game footprint much smaller on the table, too - it might even be a really portable game.
This would ideally bring production costs wayyyy down, without closing the door on making a "deluxe" version with miniatures in the future. But for that, I really think you would need the budget for a complete overhaul of the mech design (likely outsourcing it). And this might help you take a step in that direction and what's more, get people playing and trying the game you've been working on.
It actually sounds much more unique, and like it might stand out a bit more, in the above format. It would of course have to contend with the broader board game market, so the game itself would have to be really fun and good... but making that the focus might be the better plan, I think!
Right now, your minis are HUGE, which I assume to be the point, but what if they were only 40mm tall, Terminator-sized? That would be a smaller mold, so cheaper to cut.
What if your buildings were nesting pyramid stackable? That would shrink your box size and also reduce cost.
Gameplay-wise, your game could reduce to something like a Cheapass box, with 4-6 colored pawns and a fold-out map.
Couldn’t the buildings be made out of cardboard/paper/cardstock instead of plastic? If they could flat fold that would also save space for storage and printed buildings would not require stickers.
As some one mentioned above, I think you should consider a version with only cards and/or cardboard components. Until you can get some traction, you might also want to consider standees instead of minis. Battletech did start that way, and as you get more popularity, you can introduce plastic components.
Also, swinging back to the swappable head; besides cosmetic differences and possibly “sensor” differences, you could also align head styles to factions, and possibly even give them special traits for that. For example, the current head might symbolize the Hoplites, who azure known for aggressively closing with the enemy and using “lance” close range weaponry and energy shields. Meanwhile, the Minotaurs revel in destruction and maneuvering through the maze-like corridors of buildings and streets...
I just watched the game play video you posted on the 26th. In that game, there seems to be a lot of open space on the board and the majority of the fight seemed to take place in one corner. Is that normal?
When I designed Giant Monster Rampage, static fights was something I kept trying to prevent, but they kept happening. It didn't take me long to realize that those types of fights are common in games where there are single combatants and no real reason to keep the combatants moving.
I recently reworked my entire game from the ground up with an eye towards forcing a more dynamic style of play and an increased number of combatants. Watching your gameplay video, I can't help but wonder if your game suffers from many of the same issues that my early design faced.
If I can offer one suggestion - the cover art for the box really turned me off. Rather than have two mecha in mighty combat, it's one running away while being shot in the ass. Not really an epic narrative.
and what's more, get people playing and trying the game you've been working on.