Well it was one of the reasons I sought to help PB in the first place. To be able to positively influence the output. As with any small company, and this is not the first time I playtested, they listen to those closest to them because they can't afford to have someone just sitting around with his eyes on the screen. It was exactly the same when I playtested with Agents of Gaming. While I understand your sentiment I also think its not realistic. PB is a small operation and does not have people who just sit around and gather thoughts and pass them on. I pass on what I can when something like problems with the rules or serious questions arise. I get what answers I can and bring them back. PB just does not have the manpower or will to watch every little comment. So you have a right to feel upset, you may even consider me a crony. I just try to help with what I can. With the present way things are and the situation you may ask for more but are unlikely to get it TBH.
They have the manpower to watch and respond to their own forum. It is straight up cronyism. Your name is the first one in the book under playtesters. The rules are a shambles because they picked friends to sort them out rather than dedicated wargamers who knew what to look for. The same crap (only worse imo) is happening again with the tournament rules.
You guys have helped get some things addressed but blocked others, some of which were extremely valid quality control issues that were spotted early on.
It is a total failure for PB to allow one person outside of the company to essentially be an ambassador and focal point for quasi official rules information. Totally appreciate that stuff is available as a resource but once we started getting visits from palladium staff and HG themselves on your page, and even off the cuff rules clarifications the cronyism was evident.
While there's nothing wrong with hiring or using people you know, it really depends if they're the best possible person for the job. Same thing with how there's nothing wrong with visits from PB staff or HG on the page, as long as things on the group aren't being changed to suit their needs (such as blocking complaints against either PB or HG)
Mike himself brought up 'the LRM fix' as something that got addressed.
It was mentioned on the PB forums, but hasn't been 'confirmed' by a Palladium source anywhere but on his closed group.
So is it really fixed? If the official answer is locked behind two doors (need to be a part of face book, need to be a part of Mike's group), has it really been answered?
I imagine that the vast majority of players around the world are unaware that it's even in contention. VT's get 8 LRMs, and delving for a comment by Wayne from a month or two ago is more of a barrier to entry than I imagine most are going to be interested in undertaking.
Long story short, even the 'things that got fixed/changed' has asterisks on it, and PB would do well to stop talking about making a FAQ/Errata page, and just fething do it.
They've wasted more time and effort talking about it than it'd take to just throw down the small handful of answers they have and start building from there.
Well it was one of the reasons I sought to help PB in the first place. To be able to positively influence the output. As with any small company, and this is not the first time I playtested, they listen to those closest to them because they can't afford to have someone just sitting around with his eyes on the screen. It was exactly the same when I playtested with Agents of Gaming. While I understand your sentiment I also think its not realistic. PB is a small operation and does not have people who just sit around and gather thoughts and pass them on. I pass on what I can when something like problems with the rules or serious questions arise. I get what answers I can and bring them back. PB just does not have the manpower or will to watch every little comment. So you have a right to feel upset, you may even consider me a crony. I just try to help with what I can. With the present way things are and the situation you may ask for more but are unlikely to get it TBH.
They have the manpower to watch and respond to their own forum. It is straight up cronyism. Your name is the first one in the book under playtesters. The rules are a shambles because they picked friends to sort them out rather than dedicated wargamers who knew what to look for. The same crap (only worse imo) is happening again with the tournament rules.
You guys have helped get some things addressed but blocked others, some of which were extremely valid quality control issues that were spotted early on.
It is a total failure for PB to allow one person outside of the company to essentially be an ambassador and focal point for quasi official rules information. Totally appreciate that stuff is available as a resource but once we started getting visits from palladium staff and HG themselves on your page, and even off the cuff rules clarifications the cronyism was evident.
1. PB did not have the rules and could not change anything for a long time until a few weeks before printing. The changes that they made were not huge. Not as big as they could have been. HG prevented the open sharing of the rules and hence the general public could not help. Sad but that is the way it was.
2. My name is at the top because they are in Alphabetic order. Notice the last names? Also they had almost left me out. I jokingly pointed it out and they made the change before sending to print. I was happy they included it but honestly would not have been put out if I had not been added.
3. I had nothing to do with the minis and purposely avoided much of the stuff surrounding them. I'm not a minis or manufacturing expert.
4. I only recently have had a few PB visits to my page and I think Wayne has clarified..what...2 rules? Most likely NMI pointed at him to come over in those instances. I've had to tell NMI to tone down the defensiveness a few times. That is noticeable in how he treats people on the Palladium FB page vs mine. Go check it out for yourself.
5. If you see the few official posts at cronyism that is your deal. The page is probably and honestly sadly the best way for PB to reach out to players. They should have their own page just for RRT and forums but the forums are unfortunately a place of vile attacks and vicious defense of PB where banning happens as often as washing your hands.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Forar wrote: Mike himself brought up 'the LRM fix' as something that got addressed.
It was mentioned on the PB forums, but hasn't been 'confirmed' by a Palladium source anywhere but on his closed group.
So is it really fixed? If the official answer is locked behind two doors (need to be a part of face book, need to be a part of Mike's group), has it really been answered?
I imagine that the vast majority of players around the world are unaware that it's even in contention. VT's get 8 LRMs, and delving for a comment by Wayne from a month or two ago is more of a barrier to entry than I imagine most are going to be interested in undertaking.
Long story short, even the 'things that got fixed/changed' has asterisks on it, and PB would do well to stop talking about making a FAQ/Errata page, and just fething do it.
They've wasted more time and effort talking about it than it'd take to just throw down the small handful of answers they have and start building from there.
It's to be included in the errata which has not been made open to everyone yet. I hope they put it in a highly visible place where all players, those on or off of my site will see it. They need something visible and tangible for the fans to see that the game will receive support.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Agreed on the they need to get their tails in gear part. Shoot, I'd hate to imagine where they would be if we had not started an errata at all......
Well it was one of the reasons I sought to help PB in the first place. To be able to positively influence the output. As with any small company, and this is not the first time I playtested, they listen to those closest to them because they can't afford to have someone just sitting around with his eyes on the screen. It was exactly the same when I playtested with Agents of Gaming. While I understand your sentiment I also think its not realistic. PB is a small operation and does not have people who just sit around and gather thoughts and pass them on. I pass on what I can when something like problems with the rules or serious questions arise. I get what answers I can and bring them back. PB just does not have the manpower or will to watch every little comment. So you have a right to feel upset, you may even consider me a crony. I just try to help with what I can. With the present way things are and the situation you may ask for more but are unlikely to get it TBH.
They have the manpower to watch and respond to their own forum. It is straight up cronyism.
Unless you develop a somewhat trusted relationship with the big guy, it is not happening... this is the reality.
Your name is the first one in the book under playtesters.
In the past it probably would have been Kevin's name, he is loosening up.
Mike has put in the time (and some passion) so first name I would think has merit.
The rules are a shambles because they picked friends to sort them out rather than dedicated wargamers who knew what to look for.
Shambles? That is a bit harsh, it was serviceable enough I could play it reasonably well.
Command points and squad cards (points cost listing) were a bit iffy at first.
I have played 40k for quite some time so this is a breeze in comparison.. but that is not MUCH of a comparison.
The same crap (only worse imo) is happening again with the tournament rules.
Not sure what to say here in case I missed something.
We are talking about what was posted for people to demo the game at the next event?
Sounds about right what they wanted: the best looking presentation of their product paying no mind that these people are doing their advertising for free.
Like how they get volunteers to ship your product and possibly Mike (Not paid right? At least some free swag?) doing some quality control and occasional forum chew toy (priceless!).
This is not anything "official" beyond the event.
You guys have helped get some things addressed but blocked others, some of which were extremely valid quality control issues that were spotted early on.
I keep feeling like I miss things.
What would be a glaring flaw that would be blocked?
I could only see holding off for "choosing your battles" of fussy details.
It is a total failure for PB to allow one person outside of the company to essentially be an ambassador and focal point for quasi official rules information.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
An alternative is being offered until such time something official decides to come along... eventually... if it is important... if the days do not slip away...
Totally appreciate that stuff is available as a resource but once we started getting visits from palladium staff and HG themselves on your page, and even off the cuff rules clarifications the cronyism was evident.
Oh common!
Ever heard of guest star appeal?
PB staff may also find their forum moderating too restrictive as well.
Facebook has strong mainstream appeal rather than some backwater forum on the net, that is so 90's.
Until someone spends some time in Detroit and gives regular feedback to PB staff that is consistently upbeat with carefully worded criticisms with helpful solutions offered: you are counted as one of the great unwashed. What is that phrase lately... "check your privilege"?
It either happens through "his people" or not at all.
"It either happens through "his people" or not at all."
This is really my beef. The only other business I have to go through a guy who knows a guy these days is buying direct from China.
The tournment rules people are all names you would recognize as the inner circle, or people that are on Mikes page mod list. And no offense intended, given the crap I have seen said over the years (almost 2 at this point) in regards to attitudes towards tournment players by these people I do not see a healthy organized play scene ever.
Well, when KS called me and PB gave me the thumbs up to playtest and share in December 2013 they did send me a Max, a Miriya mini, and one of each of the books for the RPG. Plus a copier copy of the rules as they were at the time. That is all I've gotten so far other than a thanks and a thumbs up.
Mike1975 wrote: Well, when KS called me and PB gave me the thumbs up to playtest and share in December 2013 they did send me a Max, a Miriya mini, and one of each of the books for the RPG. Plus a copier copy of the rules as they were at the time. That is all I've gotten so far other than a thanks and a thumbs up.
I figured as much.
It is better than a kick in the pants, at least they thought to throw a couple things your way.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Swabby wrote: "It either happens through "his people" or not at all."
This is really my beef. The only other business I have to go through a guy who knows a guy these days is buying direct from China.
The tournment rules people are all names you would recognize as the inner circle, or people that are on Mikes page mod list. And no offense intended, given the crap I have seen said over the years (almost 2 at this point) in regards to attitudes towards tournment players by these people I do not see a healthy organized play scene ever.
They think small time, in their immediate area, the larger world is a new thing to them.
They seemed a bit overwhelmed at Anime North when I saw them.
This is pretty much how anything is done, I do not normally hear of some "guy" having an "in" with Fantasy Fight Games, Games Workshop or Privateer Press.
There is also a bit of trepidation of taking ideas from people and using them... people get strange ideas of compensation or them being "stolen" from them.
That is why those who are made to sign non-disclosure agreements then become part of the inner circle: this is how business works.
Forar wrote: So is it really fixed? If the official answer is locked behind two doors (need to be a part of face book, need to be a part of Mike's group), has it really been answered?
I imagine that the vast majority of players around the world are unaware that it's even in contention.
They've wasted more time and effort talking about it than it'd take to just throw down the small handful of answers they have and start building from there.
Swabby wrote: Totally appreciate that stuff is available as a resource but once we started getting visits from palladium staff and HG themselves on your page, and even off the cuff rules clarifications the cronyism was evident.
Talizvar wrote: PB staff may also find their forum moderating too restrictive as well.
Facebook has strong mainstream appeal rather than some backwater forum on the net, that is so 90's.
While I would agree FB seems somewhat more mainstream, G+ or maybe reddit would probably have worked just as well if not better, maybe along with some kind of twitter option for those with smartphones.
But I think the issue is more that there is yet another locale that already busy folks must register with and log in to, when folks already don't seem to care for FB, just to see if there was an "official" or at least quasi-official answer to something not posted to the PB forums.
Swabby wrote: It is a total failure for PB to allow one person outside of the company to essentially be an ambassador and focal point for quasi official rules information.
An alternative is being offered until such time something official decides to come along... eventually... if it is important... if the days do not slip away...
IMHO that time has come and gone really, the damage is done and the impressions left won't be easily forgotten.
Bit of a rant ahead. Please skip it if you want something useful about RRT.
Sometimes I read comment pages/threads on games where players say things like... "Company X should do Z, and Company Y must have know this would happen, and Why can't Comapny A get this done in B time" and I wonder.
How many people here have actually been inside of a corporation (small, medium, or large) before and tried to actually get something done? I mean simple things that everyone agrees on still take months to get to implementation. Imagine what happens when not everyone agrees on the solution or doesn't think it is a problem.
I know from personal experience, I have spent years just getting people to agree that there is a problem that needs to be resolved in the first place much less how to solve it. Corporations/Companies are slow to react to anything.
Now, I'm sure everyone will point to the few, rare examples of a nimble corporation and prove me wrong.
Easy E wrote: Bit of a rant ahead. Please skip it if you want something useful about RRT.
Sometimes I read comment pages/threads on games where players say things like... "Company X should do Z, and Company Y must have know this would happen, and Why can't Comapny A get this done in B time" and I wonder.
How many people here have actually been inside of a corporation (small, medium, or large) before and tried to actually get something done? I mean simple things that everyone agrees on still take months to get to implementation. Imagine what happens when not everyone agrees on the solution or doesn't think it is a problem.
I know from personal experience, I have spent years just getting people to agree that there is a problem that needs to be resolved in the first place much less how to solve it. Corporations/Companies are slow to react to anything.
Now, I'm sure everyone will point to the few, rare examples of a nimble corporation and prove me wrong.
/rant
What? How dare you infer that companies have internal processes and standards to follow! I work for a big company and feel that annoying why do things take so long feeling daily.
Easy E wrote: How many people here have actually been inside of a corporation (small, medium, or large) before and tried to actually get something done? I mean simple things that everyone agrees on still take months to get to implementation. Imagine what happens when not everyone agrees on the solution or doesn't think it is a problem.
This kind of thing isn't that hard at all.
If you're the boss.
Otherwise, no way. Heck, changing things from how we've always done them, to some different way? I'd have an easier time getting my wife to do something.
Okay, big organization my foot, I would hazard a guess of 5 including Kevin.
Anyone wondering why those are in the positions they are and are not removed or disciplined or any other inane suggestions:
They are a small privately owned organization that specializes in paying others to make their product.
Kevin - high king
Alex Marciniszyn - Editor, idea guy.
Julius Rosenstein - Proofreader, shipper-receiver, game master.
Kathy Simmons - Order Processing and Book-keeper.
Wayne Smith - Editor, special projects.
Carmen Bellaire
Braden Campbell
Matthew Clements
Steven Dawes
Greg Diaczyk
Carl Gleba
Jeffery Scott Hansen
Irvin Jackson
Mark Oberle
John Philpott
Josh Sinsapaugh
Taylor White
Amy L. Ashbaugh
Nick Bradshaw
Mark Dudley
Mark Evans
Scott Johnson
Joseph Lawn
Nicholas Maradin
Mike Majestic
Mike Mumah
Ramon Perez
Charles Walton II
John Zeleznik
I'm in a corporation that's probably larger than Palladium and is still considered a SMC. Ironically, we probably have less paperwork than Palladium and can do things faster.
Sining wrote: I'm in a corporation that's probably larger than Palladium and is still considered a SMC. Ironically, we probably have less paperwork than Palladium and can do things faster.
Well, you are in Hong Kong, so one imagines you're used to working smarter and faster.
But then I look at the delays Marrow has had with Journey : Wrath of Demons, and wonder... Still, I think they'll get their first wave out with less delay than Palladium, and hopefully, they'll finish the whole thing first!
what it comes down to is when you take PB and compare it to another RPG company that started around the same time say like SJG makes one wonder why SJG did so much better then PB did? maybe its because of the owner?
Ogre Deluxe had horrible communication. Wave 1 was a year late. No action on many of the Stretch Goals, despite it being years later. SJG still owes us 30 minutes of music and a bunch of scenarios (that Steve totally fething lied about working on during the KS). Not to mention the Car Wars Kickstarter, the 2nd edition Ogre Miniatures rulebook (print and PDF), the Ogre computer game (in any form), and the Ogre expansion (again, anything will do). SJG has basically done nothing, and most backers have given up on SJG ever following through on the promises SJG made.
If Palladium actually finishes the remaining items within the next 15 months, they will have outdone SJG by a wide margin. Not only will Palladium have delivered a larger project within a shorter timeframe, but they will have done so against 2 layers of approval slowing things down (HG and Bandai).
Based on their demonstrated incompetence and failure to even attempt progress, I will never back another SJG project.
Easy E wrote: Bit of a rant ahead. Please skip it if you want something useful about RRT.
Sometimes I read comment pages/threads on games where players say things like... "Company X should do Z, and Company Y must have know this would happen, and Why can't Comapny A get this done in B time" and I wonder.
How many people here have actually been inside of a corporation (small, medium, or large) before and tried to actually get something done? I mean simple things that everyone agrees on still take months to get to implementation. Imagine what happens when not everyone agrees on the solution or doesn't think it is a problem.
I know from personal experience, I have spent years just getting people to agree that there is a problem that needs to be resolved in the first place much less how to solve it. Corporations/Companies are slow to react to anything.
Now, I'm sure everyone will point to the few, rare examples of a nimble corporation and prove me wrong.
/rant
The smaller the company, the more nimble it is. You're probably in a large company - and likely an old, well established one. Change moves at the speed of molasses in January in places like Big Oil or Education.
In newer companies (for example, ones that survived the dotcom bubble) it's much easier to get things changed, even if they're large.
In companies small enough they have to beg for volunteers to pack and send kickstarter rewards, change is as fast as sending an email to 10 people.
judgedoug wrote: Thought of the day: a game's success is not determined by a half dozen anonymous voices on an internet forum.
This was the best thing I've written on this thread. Coming back to it and witnessing the tears and gnashing and wailing were fantastic.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Merijeek wrote: You must not be used to arguing with religious fanatics or cultists. There will be no such thing that is forthcoming. Something was found that he thought validated his assertion, and therefore his assertion is right.
This is my favorite quote, because I am highly critical of Palladium. However, because I pointed out something that doesn't toe the party line, this is the result.
JohnHwangDD wrote: What do you mean, "SJG did so much better"?
Ogre Deluxe had horrible communication. Wave 1 was a year late. No action on many of the Stretch Goals, despite it being years later. SJG still owes us 30 minutes of music and a bunch of scenarios (that Steve totally fething lied about working on during the KS). Not to mention the Car Wars Kickstarter, the 2nd edition Ogre Miniatures rulebook (print and PDF), the Ogre computer game (in any form), and the Ogre expansion (again, anything will do). SJG has basically done nothing, and most backers have given up on SJG ever following through on the promises SJG made.
If Palladium actually finishes the remaining items within the next 15 months, they will have outdone SJG by a wide margin. Not only will Palladium have delivered a larger project within a shorter timeframe, but they will have done so against 2 layers of approval slowing things down (HG and Bandai).
Based on their demonstrated incompetence and failure to even attempt progress, I will never back another SJG project.
Bbbbbut the box is so huge! I keep looking at the darn thing at our FLGS and am afraid I might buy the thing, punch out cardboard models or not:
LONG time ago I think I had Ogre on the Commodore 64, was a fun game.
Scary to think even a half attempt at it to modern day standards, I can agree that bad implementation of a single source IP holder can be very frustrating.
Read many of the "Comment" section stuff, not nearly as nasty as the Robotech one but can plainly see some goals probably not going to be met.
Car wars was awesome.
I could say the same thing about it as Ogre above.
Steve Jackson has kinda the opposite problem as PB they tend to shoot for too much and have no back-up plan.
Plus, they made their own IP and they each were a phenomenon, Rifts never quite became anything for PB and Robotech is licensed to them.
judgedoug wrote: Thought of the day: a game's success is not determined by a half dozen anonymous voices on an internet forum.
This was the best thing I've written on this thread. Coming back to it and witnessing the tears and gnashing and wailing w
No idea what you're talking about, but the actual success is actually determined by a half dozen people inside PB. And golly, that is going swimmingly.
Asterios wrote: actually when it comes to retailers top 10 or top 20 sellers, don't listen to them, its all a big lie and this is from a retailer stand point, if you have product you want to move and move fast you say its a best seller and selling fast, so people are persuaded to impulse buy it in fear it will sell out
Right, so any best seller list is a big lie. Which is why you had to "deal with a crappy site" to even find the Top 20 for frpgames. They're pushing that REAL HARD
Asterios wrote: Also who said FRP was the biggest online game store around? before today I never heard of them.
They are the retail arm of Warpath. Let me guess: you don't know who Warpath Distribution is, either?
anywhoo after having to deal with a crappy site finally got the top 20 for FRPgames and other then the top game, the rest read like a whos who of mediocre games:
Actually, this list looks a like a who's who of the best selling games, new releases, expansions, and what is hot on BGG. Again, just because you are unfamiliar with FFG's high-selling Star Wars properties, a very very long awaited Dragon Age RPG release, the best selling Mice and Mystics game, King of Tokyo's bestselling status, the new releases for Arcadia Quest, Shadowrun, the insanely popular One Ring RPG (which keeps selling out of print runs). Citadels, Galaxy Defenders, Munchkin, Dominant Species, for feth's sake: those games are like printing money.
and mind you, this company also sells games like Magic and so on, that are always big sellers, so to say a bunch of unknown games are outselling them, that should tell you whats up.
"Unknown games"
That is fantastic. Yes, unknown to you.
Actually, several observations
1. It is unsurprising that any of those items are on that list because they are all well-known, popular best-sellers or expansions to well-known, popular best-sellers
2. You are unaware of the industry as a whole (which is fine, most people aren't, and if you spend all of your time in one place, such as a single forum discussion thread, you won't realize that Mice & Mystics is one of hottest things in the boardgaming world right now)
3. It is surprising that Robotech is on that list at such as high positioin (it has dropped, it is now #3)
4. It is unsurprising that the reaction to my pointing out that Robotech is doing well at least one place has caused such as vitriolic backlash
Now, please, PLEASE keep telling me I'm a sycophantic PB cultist. It was a big cover when I voted NO for them to sell at Gencon! So that I could STRIKE in January with a screen shot of frpgames.com's best seller list! OH YOU GOT ME! I was also the guy who went through the forums and ranked everyone's loyalty to PB so that the haters would have their packages shipped last - that was one of the prevailing theories on here, wasn't it?
Merijeek wrote: You must not be used to arguing with religious fanatics or cultists. There will be no such thing that is forthcoming. Something was found that he thought validated his assertion, and therefore his assertion is right.
That's an astoundingly ironic example of ad hominem, considering you are accusing someone who actually provided evidence for a claim of being a fanatic in contrast to those who have dismissed the evidence out of hand for the sake of their predetermined opinion that RRT is a failure. This the worst thread I have ever seen on Dakka Dakka. I thought we had hit rock bottom at "PB is singling me out" but this is a new low.
Merijeek wrote: You must not be used to arguing with religious fanatics or cultists. There will be no such thing that is forthcoming. Something was found that he thought validated his assertion, and therefore his assertion is right.
That's an astoundingly ironic example of ad hominem, considering you are accusing someone who actually provided evidence for a claim of being a fanatic in contrast to those who have dismissed the evidence out of hand for the sake of their predetermined opinion that RTT is a failure. This the worst thread I have ever seen on Dakka Dakka. I thought we had hit rock bottom at "PB is singling me out" but this is a new low.
I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that a single example was considered evidence.
And please explain where it was dismissed out of hand? The first response was "more data needed" and that response was mocked for no reason.
rigeld2 wrote: I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that a single example was considered evidence.
Great, then you have learned something today already.
Please respond to the rest of my post as well.
And no, a single data point isn't evidence of anything other than a single data point. It's literally exactly like me saying "No one at my FLGS has even heard of RRT." (which is a true statement) and then concluding that no one has heard of it.
Your argument is an example of false equivalence. An anecdote about the patrons of your LGS is not the same as a national distributor's retail arm listing a game in its top seller list.
Manchu wrote: Your argument is an example of false equivalence. An anecdote about the patrons of your LGS is not the same as a national distributor's retail arm listing a game in its top seller list.
Both are individual data points. Attributing more value to one than the other is called a "bias". Without more data points, both are equally valid.
I know there are enough data points to disprove my LGS example. I do not know (and have been mocked/rebuked when I requested them, so I'm forced to assume they don't exist) there are more data points to support frpgames' top seller list.
Anecdotal evidence isn't. And a single retialers top seller list is still anecdotal evidence.
Manchu wrote: Now you are trying to justify one fallacy (false equivalence) by deploying another (appeal to authority: "data point," "bias").
Um. No.
I'm trying to discuss facts here. Fact: the frpgames top seller list is a single data point. Fact: That top seller list included (for some period of time, I didn't check again after that day for various reasons) a miniature bag. Fact: It takes more than a single data point to plot a trend in either direction.
I've asked for more data points and been mocked every time. That's all I want. I'm not saying the game is failing or that it's gak. I'm saying that "frpgames top seller means it's not failing" isn't a supportable statement.
And now you post strawman arguments ... are you just working your way through all the fallacies?
This is really quite simple. The fact that RRT is on FRP's top seller list is evidence undermining the notion (itself unsupported by evidence so far) that RTT is a flop. The inability to acknowledge even this would be stunning absent the pages and pages of committed negativity. The argument that the person who brought this evidence to light is a fanatic, however, did surprise me.
Manchu wrote: And now you post strawman arguments ... are you just working your way through all the fallacies?
What strawman? Are you just naming fallacies that don't apply to appear smart?
This is really quite simple. The fact that RTT is on FRP's top seller list is evidence undermining the notion (itself unsupported by evidence so far) that RTT is a flop. The inability to acknowledge even this would be stunning absent the pages and pages of committed negativity. The argument that the person who brought this evidence to light is a fanatic, however, did surprise me.
I never said that RTT is a flop (now who's strawmaning?) I said, and I'll quote so it's not confusing:
... Seriously, one e-tailer doesn't tell the whole story.
Needs more data.
Which is a fact. One etailer doesn't tell the whole story, regardless of who that etailer is. Saying that "frpgames is the distribution arm of Warpath (which is actually Golden now) and therefore is absolute fact" is an appeal to authority. Saying that we don't need data beyond that is an appeal to authority.
I welcome actual debate and discussion. Which is why I originally posted what I did. Instead, I was met with:
... Seriously, one e-tailer doesn't tell the whole story.
Needs more data.
and cue the
"Top Seller Lists from one of the largest online gaming retailers (and in fact, the retail side of one of the largest gaming distributors in North America) don't mean anything, not when my perpetual feedback loop is telling me the game is DOA, unsuccessful, and terrible!"
The very definition of appeal to authority. And yet *I'm* the one that's called out and mocked? Really? How do you expect me to respond?
Maybe we ought to focus on what we can agree on? For example, I bet we can agree that one top seller list does not tell the whole story. We can also agree that nothing else posted ITT tells the whole story, either, correct?
Manchu wrote: Maybe we ought to focus on what we can agree on? For example, I bet we can agree that one top seller list does not tell the whole story. We can also agree that nothing else posted ITT tells the whole story, either, correct?
Correct.
Which is what I pointed out. And was mocked for.
I am willing to bet a good amount of dollars that you were actually mocked for requesting more evidence regarding the proposition that RRT is not a failure in contrast to no one ITT asking for any evidence that RRT is a failure. That is, it was not so much a personal matter as a threadwide matter (hence initially mentioning an echochamber). But judgedoug can speak for himself in that regard.
In any case, I wonder if we can also agree on this point: The fact that RTT is on FRP's top seller list is evidence undermining the notion (itself unsupported by evidence so far) that RRT is a flop.
All that list tells us is that FRP decided to put it on their list of top sellers.
It doesn't give us context as to how those number line up. Glancing at their most current list, for all we know Imperial Assault has sold eighteen million copies, Mice And Mystics has sold eighteen thousand and Robotech has sold eighteen. I mean, hyperbole for humour here, but it really doesn't *say* anything indicative either way.
Despite being their "third best seller", it hasn't even been rated as of the time of this posting, which raises questions of how engaged that fan base might be (see: my commentary a few pages back regarding the dearth of discussion around the product anywhere but Mike's page and here, essentially).
There's is a famous saying that "the plural of anecdote is not data". If RRT is indeed selling hotly, there should be corroborating evidence. CSI's top sales chart lists like 30 items, and RRT isn't among them, though they DO include Magic cards in the mix, and those sell like hotcakes. Miniature Market doesn't seem to have a Hot List.
Asking for supporting evidence should not be an egregious offense. A sample size of 'one' is not in and of itself indicative of anything, and for all we know is cherry picked not because "FRP are the retail end of a distributor", but because it seems to be among the few sources that fit the agenda being advanced; that we're all whiny and RRT is a smash hit and we can cry and cry and cry or whatever.
I also asked for a list of the largest game distributors, because people keep referencing it and I'd like to see the info for myself. Which also shouldn't be a controversial request.
I take no issue with asking for more evidence and never have. The problem I do see is asking for evidence for one proposition but not for its alternative. And actually, the problem I cited was the inability to recognize evidence as evidence.
Manchu wrote: I am willing to bet a good amount of dollars that you were actually mocked for requesting more evidence regarding the proposition that RTT is not a failure in contrast to no one ITT asking for any evidence that RTT is a failure. That is, it was not so much a personal matter as a threadwide matter (hence initially mentioning an echochamber). But judgedoug can speak for himself in that regard.
Considering he quoted my statement, and the tone of his statement, I tend to disagree with that. But since he hasn't further responded to me directly, instead choosing to mock the thread in general, I suppose we'll never have an answer. His word choice was rather rude, however.
In any case, I wonder if we can also agree on this point: The fact that RTT is on FRP's top seller list is evidence undermining the notion (itself unsupported by evidence so far) that RTT is a flop.
No, I don't agree with that. Sure, there's no evidence to support that RTT is a flop (no direct evidence anyway - the 3 LGS I've been to having a total of 4 people knowing it exists, one of them being me is anecdotal still) but FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.
Since, as I said, there was a mini bag on there at one point - and seriously, how much volume of bags do they have? If it's low, then it doesn't take much to get on the top sellers list. If it's high - WTF?! I just seriously don't believe there is that much movement on a single specific bag.
Ignoring the fact that nothing on here http://frpgames.com/cart.php?m=search&s=fate+reforged is on the best sellers list and all. The newest M:TG expansion isn't on the best sellers list the weekend it releases? And we should just take this at face value?
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
rigeld2 wrote: And we should just take this at face value?
Rhetoric aside, what is your actual argument on this point? Do you mean that the only explanation of Fate Reforged being absent is that the list is meaningless?
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.
rigeld2 wrote: And we should just take this at face value?
Rhetoric aside, what is your actual argument on this point? Do you mean that the only explanation of Fate Reforged being absent is that the list is meaningless?
No. It's suspect and without explanation, doubly so. If you think the list should be accepted as absolute evidence that the game is selling well, explain how the top seller list is missing Fate Reforged. Did they somehow get less Fate Reforged product than RTT product?
That'd be a hell of a mistake, and not something the "retail arm of the largest NA distributor" would make. I can think of only one reason it's not on there, and that reason invalidates the list completely. I don't think it's true, which is why I'm willing to accept it as a data point.
And what, in your mind, is the difference between evidence and a "data point"?
You use data points to build evidence. The more data, the more evidence. I use them interchangeably really - or try to. If I seem to not have, it's likely a miswording by me due to meds.
It also seems like you've got a hostile tone - I'm sure you're not intending that but I wanted to let you know.
I'm inferring that based on how you're cutting up my posts and only responding to small sections instead of to the entire post.
Evidence should be corroborated. If they presented numbers of sold units, that'd show us the scope of what their list entails.
If other sites also had it popping up the rankings, we could infer some positive things as well.
Without corroboration, it's an outlier. It's enough info to say "yup, it sure is on that list, but what that list represents objectively we cannot say".
It's subjective, at this point.
And frankly, was put forth by someone who relishes in trolling (by their own admission) against a strawman argument that few people have expressed.
Sure, tons of people have commented concerns about how well or not it might be selling, and some have mentioned local stores struggling to move product or to find actual players, but other than Rick (Hi Rick!) I can't think of many people here who have proclaimed it flat out dead/failed. I think the common sentiment seems to generally be one of concern mixed with "whelp, Adepticon/Gencon ought to be interesting".
JohnHwangDD wrote: Oh, OK. I thought he was trying to compare how PB and SJG ran their KSs.
If the focus is corporate financial health, yes, SJG is clearly doing better, due to Munchkin being popular and paying the bills.
well I am going by the company as a whole.
No problem - I made a (wrong) assumption because I misunderstood. Sorry 'bout that.
____
Talizvar wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote: What do you mean, "SJG did so much better"?
Ogre Deluxe had horrible communication. Wave 1 was a year late. No action on many of the Stretch Goals, despite it being years later. SJG still owes us 30 minutes of music and a bunch of scenarios (that Steve totally fething lied about working on during the KS). Not to mention the Car Wars Kickstarter, the 2nd edition Ogre Miniatures rulebook (print and PDF), the Ogre computer game (in any form), and the Ogre expansion (again, anything will do). SJG has basically done nothing, and most backers have given up on SJG ever following through on the promises SJG made.
If Palladium actually finishes the remaining items within the next 15 months, they will have outdone SJG by a wide margin. Not only will Palladium have delivered a larger project within a shorter timeframe, but they will have done so against 2 layers of approval slowing things down (HG and Bandai).
Based on their demonstrated incompetence and failure to even attempt progress, I will never back another SJG project.
Bbbbbut the box is so huge! I keep looking at the darn thing at our FLGS and am afraid I might buy the thing, punch out cardboard models or not:
Spoiler:
LONG time ago I think I had Ogre on the Commodore 64, was a fun game.
Scary to think even a half attempt at it to modern day standards, I can agree that bad implementation of a single source IP holder can be very frustrating.
Read many of the "Comment" section stuff, not nearly as nasty as the Robotech one but can plainly see some goals probably not going to be met.
Car wars was awesome.
I could say the same thing about it as Ogre above.
Steve Jackson has kinda the opposite problem as PB they tend to shoot for too much and have no back-up plan.
Plus, they made their own IP and they each were a phenomenon, Rifts never quite became anything for PB and Robotech is licensed to them.
Wow, read wayyyy too much about SJ games writing this.
Tempted to see if I can make a cross-over of Ogre and Battletech.
The box IS so big. Ludicrously, ridiculously, stupidly big. It's so oversized, you can hardly get your arm around to carry the thing (also too heavy to comfortably carry one-handed). Right now, mine sits in the Closet of Shame, and wow, does it take up a lot of space. Worse, you cannot even store it vertically, or all of the zillions of punched counters will fall out of the trays. Imagine spending hours punching the things, sorting them, putting them in their correct slots, and then hearing the sound of an African rain stick as you struggle to put it up on the shelf... In my case, I only backed for the hardbacked maps (and the promised 2nd Ed Ogre Miniatures rulebook. I am glad to have my glorious Deluxe GEV-scale GEV and Shockwave maps for my Ogre Miniatures collection. I don't know if I'll ever get around to punching my counters for the reason above.
That said, you should strongly consider buying it during the next Black Friday / clearance sale. It's got a crazy amount of stuff in the box.
Gonna reminisce a bit...
Computer Ogre had a very good AI (I played the PC version). In the modern era, I'd would make it a head-to-head Android / iPhone game, stripping out the AI requirement.
Classic Car Wars was awesome, very much like 40k with listbuilding and metagaming strategy before the game. Then it bloated up with nonsense like boats and aircraft. Then it got pared back too something approaching the Car Wars Card Game using Hot Wheels. Now, it looks like SJG is going the X-Wing route. It's kind of like watching Oprah's weight. IMO, Car Wars' time has passed, as there is a lot of design tension due to Car Wars trying to represent things that exist in the real world, trying to balance RPG (league management), listbuiding (car creation), tactical play (battles), and simulation vs abstraction vs projection. Definitely not backing any Car Wars KS, tho!
Ogre has kept the same engine since the beginning, with very minor tweaks. This is good, as the Ogre engine didn't really need a lot of tweaking.
SJG has the luxury of the Munchkin teat to suckle. It's a great ride for them.
RIFTS has a problem of having wild power fluctuations and a massive breadth of stuff that requires an excellent GM to make work into something resembling coherence. It's kind of a mess to get started, and it's kind of a mess to play - that's why it never took off.
I'm pretty sure Ogre + Battletech has been done. I would be shocked if it hadn't, but I never really followed BT that much.
Forar wrote: Evidence should be corroborated. If they presented numbers of sold units, that'd show us the scope of what their list entails.
If other sites also had it popping up the rankings, we could infer some positive things as well.
Without corroboration, it's an outlier. It's enough info to say "yup, it sure is on that list, but what that list represents objectively we cannot say".
It's subjective, at this point.
And frankly, was put forth by someone who relishes in trolling (by their own admission) against a strawman argument that few people have expressed.
Sure, tons of people have commented concerns about how well or not it might be selling, and some have mentioned local stores struggling to move product or to find actual players, but other than Rick (Hi Rick!) I can't think of many people here who have proclaimed it flat out dead/failed. I think the common sentiment seems to generally be one of concern mixed with "whelp, Adepticon/Gencon ought to be interesting".
Manchu, this. This is my overall point.
Dissect my posts however you want, but this is really what it boils down to.
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.
No, not exactly. I will take FRP's "single data point" based on $M sales as being far more important than your non-data from a single store based on $k sales.
Unless you are in the industry, and do business comparable in volume to FRP, you lack neither the insight nor the data to refute FRP's data, given that FRP's "single data point" represents the conglomeration of several-fold more individual transactions across a much wider footprint than what you might be aware of.
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.
No, not exactly. I will take FRP's "single data point" based on $M sales as being far more important than your non-data from a single store based on $k sales.
Unless you are in the industry, and do business comparable in volume to FRP, you lack neither the insight nor the data to refute FRP's data, given that FRP's "single data point" represents the conglomeration of several-fold more individual transactions across a much wider footprint than what you might be aware of.
Hello there "Appeal to Authority".
I'll refute your statements with "Prove that FRP's Best Seller list isn't manipulated (because it seems to be, based on evidence) and provide actual transaction data instead of assumptions."
Taking FRP for more than what it is and assuming they're infallible is simply wrong. It's a single data point. If it's accurate, there's more out there. I haven't found any, despite actively looking for them.
rigeld2 wrote: That the list is cooked to exclude certain items.
I think that is almost certainly the case. It seems to me that the only reason to maintain such a list on a store website is to reinforce sales of popular items. I don't take it for an absolute list of FRP's monthly (or weekly? daily?) sales. Nor do I think that invalidates the list as an indication that FRP has been selling a respectable amount of RRT starters.
rigeld2 wrote: I use them interchangeably really - or try to.
Why use them interchangably if there is a difference between them? To get down to it, we both agree that this "data point" does not prove either that RRT is a flop or that it is a success. Whether something can be considered evidence, however, is not contingent on whether it alone is sufficient to prove or disprove a proposition.
rigeld2 wrote: you're cutting up my posts and only responding to small sections instead of to the entire post
No offense meant with this practice. I do not respond to points that assume the points with which I take issue. It's my "one thing at a time" rule of thumb.
rigeld2 wrote: That the list is cooked to exclude certain items.
Since the list seems to fluctuate at least daily, I can't accept that Golem Arcana outsold Fate Reforged.
And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly? Do you have some internal view into FRPgames sales data, that you are able to provide to refute the listing that they provide?
The current Top 20 list shows:
1. Star Wars : Imperial Assault
2. Mice and Mystics Expansion: Downwood Tales
3. Robotech RPG Tactics
...
20. Golem Arcana
That doesn't seem unreasonable at all. SWIA is selling huge - it's super-hot on BGG. M&M is a huge seller, so no reason to expect the expansion wouldn't do well. RRT has great nostalgic value as pre-marketing. Golem Arcana barely makes the list.
What evidence do you have that Fate Reforged should be a stronger seller than Golem Arcana? You keep talking about data and evidence, but you have nothing to add here.
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
rigeld2 wrote: And we should just take this at face value?
Rhetoric aside, what is your actual argument on this point? Do you mean that the only explanation of Fate Reforged being absent is that the list is meaningless?
Manchu: The frustration is that there is no clear supporting objective evidence of retail sales / units sold in comparison to any other product to measure "success" RRT.
Yes, we all have our own pet theories but what data we do see out there is also suspect.
Is a "best sellers list" used as a marketing ploy to try to sell more of that product or is it actually based on units sold in a given time frame?
With so many publishers and distributors as private companies they are under no obligation to publish sales figures.
The arguing over the various arguments (I swear I will make a drinking game of "strawman") with a condescending tone will not lead to a civilized discussion.
Passing judgment over the whole thread is your opinion but has been everything from informative to therapeutic to me so I applaud what I have seen negative or not.
Suggesting how to do things better (PB has started some things mentioned), helping others, basically figuring out a lessons learned because it is very likely PB will do another kickstarter and we are all trying to decide if it is worth diving in again.
Manchu, I really do not understand sometimes what you are trying to "contribute" in these threads.
Swabby wrote: Fact: Judgedoug and Manchu play RRT together.
Suggestion: That a more impartial mod watch this thread.
Whether you intended it or not, that is just a personal attack. At best it is a non sequitur. The fact that I am posting ITT does not mean I am the only person moderating the thread. Your post really comes across as trying to run me out of this thread for being on the "wrong side" of an issue. It's a great example of why this thread has been (generally speaking) so terrible.
rigeld2 wrote: That the list is cooked to exclude certain items.
I think that is almost certainly the case. It seems to me that the only reason to maintain such a list on a store website is to reinforce sales of popular items. I don't take it for an absolute list of FRP's monthly (or weekly? daily?) sales. Nor do I think that invalidates the list as an indication that FRP has been selling a respectable amount of RRT starters.
If the list is cooked it could mean that they sold a single box and want to sell more, or that they've sold all but one, or that they've sold none.
In other words, it means nothing except that they want it shown as a best seller. How can it be taken as a valid indicator of anything?
rigeld2 wrote: I use them interchangeably really - or try to.
Why use them interchangably if there is a difference between them? To get down to it, we both agree that this "data point" does not prove either that RRT is a flop or that it is a success. Whether something can be considered evidence, however, is not contingent on whether it alone is sufficient to prove or disprove a proposition.
Whether something is factual or not, however, can determine if it's evidence (data) or not. Making things up isn't evidence.
rigeld2 wrote: you're cutting up my posts and only responding to small sections instead of to the entire post
No offense meant with this practice. I do not respond to points that assume the points with which I take issue. It's my "one thing at a time" rule of thumb.
Again, I wasn't assuming anything - just wanted to let you know how it was reading. I don't mind in-line responses, but ignoring whole swaths of a post is off-putting.
JohnHwangDD wrote: And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly?
His evidence is, Fate Reforged is missing from the list. "Cooked" in this sense means (at least) that the list does not take into account every single product FRP sells. The obvious implication, however, is that the list means nothing.
rigeld2 wrote: If the list is cooked it could mean that they sold a single box and want to sell more, or that they've sold all but one, or that they've sold none.
You are using the phrase "cooked" here to mean that the list is either an absolute account of sales or it is totally worthless, i.e., a false dichotomy.
rigeld2 wrote: ignoring whole swaths of a post is off-putting
I hope this settles the issue: You can read whatever tone you like into my posts (as anyone could also do with yours) or you can just deal with (or ignore) the points themselves. For my part, I am not going to respond to any further tone arguments because they are no more or less than rhetorical bullying.
Merijeek wrote: You must not be used to arguing with religious fanatics or cultists. There will be no such thing that is forthcoming. Something was found that he thought validated his assertion, and therefore his assertion is right.
That's an astoundingly ironic example of ad hominem, considering you are accusing someone who actually provided evidence for a claim of being a fanatic in contrast to those who have dismissed the evidence out of hand for the sake of their predetermined opinion that RRT is a failure. This the worst thread I have ever seen on Dakka Dakka. I thought we had hit rock bottom at "PB is singling me out" but this is a new low.
This is evidence of someone being partial (to their friend) to me. Judgedoug practically admits to trolling, or at least schadenfreude in a post shortly before Manchu shows back up in this thread after a long absense to accuse Merijeek of an ad hominem.
I don't care what Manchu says or thinks about RRT, I care that there has been moderation in this thread by him and he is heavily involved in a stance on the game and other members who share that stance while wielding the mod title.
rigeld2 wrote: That the list is cooked to exclude certain items.
Since the list seems to fluctuate at least daily, I can't accept that Golem Arcana outsold Fate Reforged.
And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly? Do you have some internal view into FRPgames sales data, that you are able to provide to refute the listing that they provide?
The current Top 20 list shows:
1. Star Wars : Imperial Assault
2. Mice and Mystics Expansion: Downwood Tales
3. Robotech RPG Tactics
...
20. Golem Arcana
That doesn't seem unreasonable at all. SWIA is selling huge - it's super-hot on BGG. M&M is a huge seller, so no reason to expect the expansion wouldn't do well. RRT has great nostalgic value as pre-marketing. Golem Arcana barely makes the list.
What evidence do you have that Fate Reforged should be a stronger seller than Golem Arcana? You keep talking about data and evidence, but you have nothing to add here.
Golem Arcana - a game that I haven't seen advertised at all and only know about because of Kickstarter.
Fate Reforged - an expansion to a 20+ year old game, a game that singlehandedly keeps many stores in the black had a release this weekend. Release weekends are typically massive numbers - preorders, release events, etc.
For FRP to have a release weekend and move less Magic than Golem Arcana (or pre-release weekend and move more miniature bags than Magic cards) is simply unbelievable. I'm asking for evidence. Saying "Trust me" isn't enough.
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.
No, not exactly. I will take FRP's "single data point" based on $M sales as being far more important than your non-data from a single store based on $k sales.
Unless you are in the industry, and do business comparable in volume to FRP, you lack neither the insight nor the data to refute FRP's data, given that FRP's "single data point" represents the conglomeration of several-fold more individual transactions across a much wider footprint than what you might be aware of.
Hello there "Appeal to Authority".
I'll refute your statements with "Prove that FRP's Best Seller list isn't manipulated (because it seems to be, based on evidence) and provide actual transaction data instead of assumptions."
Taking FRP for more than what it is and assuming they're infallible is simply wrong. It's a single data point. If it's accurate, there's more out there. I haven't found any, despite actively looking for them.
"Appeal to Authority", "Appeal to Authority" - you keep using that phrase, but ...
I'm going to educate you: Appeal to Authority is when someone who knows nothing about something uses their position (only) as the basis for argument. It would be as if the world's most successful chicken farmer stood up and said "I know chicken, so you should believe what I say".
If the speaker in question actually knows what they are talking about, then it is not an Appeal to Authority. If that chicken farmer were to stand up and say "Free-range chicken is healthier than penned chicken", and I quote him, it's not an Appeal to Authority. It's actually an Expert Opinion.
Anyone agreeing with your statements based on your "accomplishments" and "knowledge" would be a ludicrously poor Appeal to Authority - you're not an Expert in game sales. People using FRP Games is not an Appeal to Authority, it is Expert Opinion.
Also, your demand that I disprove a negative is yet another fallacy of argument. Manchu was completely right that you are (bad) at arguing.
FRP's data is what it is. And it is far better than the (stuff) you're spouting based on absolutely nothing.
JohnHwangDD wrote: And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly?
His evidence is, Fate Reforged is missing from the list. "Cooked" in this sense means (at least) that the list does not take into account every single product FRP sells. The obvious implication, however, is that the list means nothing.
rigeld2 wrote: If the list is cooked it could mean that they sold a single box and want to sell more, or that they've sold all but one, or that they've sold none.
You are using the phrase "cooked" here to mean that the list is either an absolute account of sales or it is totally worthless, i.e., a false dichotomy.
It's not a false dichotomy. Those really are the only two options here - either it's a non-manipulated list and can be used as a valid data point, or it's cooked and manipulated in ways that makes it useless as a data point. There isn't a grey area of "Well, it's not a good data point..."
rigeld2 wrote: ignoring whole swaths of a post is off-putting
I hope this settles the issue: You can read whatever tone you like into my posts (as anyone could also do with yours) or you can just deal with (or ignore) the points themselves. For my part, I am not going to respond to any further tone arguments because they are no more or less than rhetorical bullying.
It's not bullying. I'm pointing it out because it seems you're getting more hostile.
Alright -- this is getting too heated for sure. It's time for a reminder that Rule Number One is Be Polite. Let's stick to arguing the points and leave out the personal attacks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rigeld2 wrote: Those really are the only two options here - either it's a non-manipulated list and can be used as a valid data point, or it's cooked and manipulated in ways that makes it useless as a data point. There isn't a grey area of "Well, it's not a good data point..."
Not at all. If the list simply excludes CCGs, it is still a good data point for measuring RRT's comparative sales. In fact, it would arguably be stronger evidence because there is no reason to compare RRT sales with MtG sales. I think the weak spot with my argument remains, we don't actually know how the list is "cooked." But that does not automatically mean the list reflects nothing about FRP's sales.
rigeld2 wrote: FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things
"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?
Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.
No, not exactly. I will take FRP's "single data point" based on $M sales as being far more important than your non-data from a single store based on $k sales.
Unless you are in the industry, and do business comparable in volume to FRP, you lack neither the insight nor the data to refute FRP's data, given that FRP's "single data point" represents the conglomeration of several-fold more individual transactions across a much wider footprint than what you might be aware of.
Hello there "Appeal to Authority".
I'll refute your statements with "Prove that FRP's Best Seller list isn't manipulated (because it seems to be, based on evidence) and provide actual transaction data instead of assumptions."
Taking FRP for more than what it is and assuming they're infallible is simply wrong. It's a single data point. If it's accurate, there's more out there. I haven't found any, despite actively looking for them.
"Appeal to Authority", "Appeal to Authority" - you keep using that phrase, but ...
Are you so ignorant and bullheaded that you don't even know what "Appeal to Authority" even is?
Considering I linked to a definition earlier in the thread...
Obviously not. I'm going to educate you, so that you look less stupid and idiotic when you post. Appeal to Authority is when someone who knows nothing about something uses their position (only) as the basis for argument. It would be as if the world's most successful chicken farmer stood up and said "I know chicken, so you should believe what I say".
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative."
Let me break it down smaller for you.
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement (RTT is a best seller) is correct because the statement is made by a source (FRP) that is commonly regarded as authoritative."
Hmm. Fits perfectly.
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Yup, exactly what I've said.
Anyone agreeing with your based on your "accomplishments" and "knowledge" would be a ludicrously poor Appeal to Authority. People using FRP Games is not an Appeal to Authority, it is Expert Opinion.
It's not an expert opinion at all.
Also, your demand that I disprove a negative is yet another fallacy of argument. Manchu was completely right that you are clueless at arguing. You're embarrassing yourself working through the fallacies.
Disprove a negative? Excuse me? I've asked you to provide numbers. I've asked for supporting evidence. I've been mocked instead.
FRP's data is what it is. And it is far better than the nonsense you're spouting based on absolutely nothing but bullheadness and bad arugment.
It is what it is - questionable data and a single data point with literally zero corroboration. Which is what I said on my first post on the subject.
rigeld2 wrote: Those really are the only two options here - either it's a non-manipulated list and can be used as a valid data point, or it's cooked and manipulated in ways that makes it useless as a data point. There isn't a grey area of "Well, it's not a good data point..."
Not at all. If the list simply excludes CCGs, it is still a good data point for measuring RRT's comparative sales. In fact, it would arguably be stronger evidence because there is no reason to compare RRT sales with MtG sales. I think the weak spot with my argument remains, we don't actually know how the list is "cooked." But that does not automatically mean the list reflects nothing about FRP's sales.
If that's all that's been done, then sure.
But that's demonstrably not true - as I said, there was a miniature storage bag on the list at one point. How is comparing that to RTTs sales any different to comparing a CCG to RTTs sales?
I'm sure the list reflects something, but it doesn't necessarily reflect that RTT is selling well. We need more data. Which is literally what I said at the beginning of this.
rigeld2 wrote: It is what it is - questionable data and a single data point with literally zero corroboration. Which is what I said on my first post on the subject.
Just to clarify, I still completely agree with this statement. The part in italics, however, does not exclude it from consideration.
Those who see RRT as a failure are not going to be convinced otherwise by a the FRP list. And there are good reasons why they would not be. But it is also worth asking, on what basis do they claim RRT is a failure?
Manchu wrote: But it is also worth asking, on what basis do they claim RRT is a failure?
The rules are shoddy (IMO).
The minis are iffy - when assembled they're okay, but not really worth the massive part count. Again, opinion.
The lack of support (despite continued assurances that they're working on it... it takes 10 minutes to put up an FAQ/Errata page).
The fact that Ninja Division is completely out of the picture now.
IMO, the rules are fun and the minis look nice. I'm not sure how evidence enters into these questions of personal taste. I think Settlers of Catan is gak but that doesn't stop it from selling.
And neither do PB's ongoing ineptitude communicating with players nor the shadowy falling out between them and ND necessarily have anything to do with retail sales.
Manchu wrote: IMO, the rules are fun and the minis look nice. I'm not sure how evidence enters into these questions of personal taste. I think Settlers of Catan is gak but that doesn't stop it from selling.
True. I was offering ideas on why people think it's a failure. I disagree with you on the rules and the minis look nice once a lot of work is put into them. A lot.
And neither do PB's ongoing ineptitude communicating with players nor the shadowy falling out between them and ND necessarily have anything to do with retail sales.
This is where I really disagree. Friends I know (that aren't local and therefore not counted before in my FLGS demonstration) have refused to buy into the game exactly because of ND's "falling out" and PB's failure to communicate.
It is having an effect on retail sales. What effect that is remains to be seen, but there is an effect.
JohnHwangDD wrote: And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly?
His evidence is, Fate Reforged is missing from the list.
Oh? I'm going to do a little digging.
Fate Reforged had a street date of Jan. 23 (5 days ago). If FRP is using GAAP-based accounting, none of their preorder sales could count until the 23rd, when they ship.
But here's the real kicker - FRP Games does not sell MtG by the case. FRP sells Magic by retail SKUs, because FRP is a hobby seller that happens to also sell cards. If FRP were a real card seller, they would do like Star City Games and sell Boosters by the case.
Finally, it is clear that FRP tracks sales by SKU, not by family. Fate Reforged has several SKUs associated with it. It is entirely possible that no individual Fate Reforged SKU has outsold Golem Arcana on a dollar basis since the last time the list was updated, given that bulk Magic sales are not part of FRP Games core offering.
Considering I linked to a definition earlier in the thread...
Appeal to Authority is when someone who knows nothing about something uses their position (only) as the basis for argument. It would be as if the world's most successful chicken farmer stood up and said "I know chicken, so you should believe what I say".
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative."
Let me break it down smaller for you.
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement (RTT is a best seller) is correct because the statement is made by a source (FRP) that is commonly regarded as authoritative."
Hmm. Fits perfectly.
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Yup, exactly what I've said.
You need to work on your reading comprehension. If you actually read and understood what you copied, you would recognize that the fallacy is only when the "authoritative" person or source doesn't actually know anything about the thing in question. When Bill Nye talks about Science, he is an expert, and me quoting him is not Appeal to Authority. FRP Games is an expert in hobby sales, and me linking their Top 20 is not a false Appeal to Authority, because it's what they actually do. You linking to Chicken Man's Top 20 games sales would be an Appeal to Authority.
You not accepting FRP games authority, simply because they don't say what you want does not actually negate the fact that they know far more about the hobby sales business than you ever will. In many ways, you are like an Creationist or Flat Earther, saying that Neil DeGrasse Tyson is not an authority on science and physics, because you believe that God Created a Flat Earth.
Nobody is saying that FRP is infallible. I am simply saying that FRP is a far better source for hobby sales than you are, in the same way that NDGT is a far better source for science than a Creationist Flat Earther.
On a lighter note someone struck an idea....with OFFICIAL squadrons we cannot make enough for a standard game. So we played with this to use what comes already in the box so that you could. Just make these veterans and add a 5 point character (yes I had to stretch a bit)
And for those less....adept...these are not Officially sanctioned cards.
Manchu wrote: I guess it also stands to reason, if the list was only there to reinforce sales of popular items, Fate Reforged would likely be on there.
Totally agreed. If the "Top 20" list were based on what FRP wants people to buy, then Fate Reforged would be on there, to remind potential buyers that this is hot and they should order some.
I'll be curious to see what this looks like a month from now. Fate Reforged could crack Top 20, but you never know. If I were serious about Fate Reforged, I'd be on a card site where I could buy singles or sets or boxes or cases. I mean, go look at SCG's Fate Reforged page of sales. FRP doesn't have anything like that.
Just because a store happens to sell Magic, doesn't mean it's a major part of their business. Heck, Target sells Magic, but I guarantee that Jan 23rd was a non-event for them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote: IMO, the rules are fun and the minis look nice. I'm not sure how evidence enters into these questions of personal taste. I think Settlers of Catan is gak but that doesn't stop it from selling.
And neither do PB's ongoing ineptitude communicating with players nor the shadowy falling out between them and ND necessarily have anything to do with retail sales.
If you dislike Settlers for being too simple and too competitive, there's always Robinson Crusoe...
The RRTKS had barely 5,000 backers, of which <10% are disgruntled like rigeld2. Zombicide 1 is said to have sold roughly 10x as many retail copies as KS copies. While a small number of disgruntled backers seem to drive the conversation in the Dakka and Comment echo chambers, it is not obvious that the have any greater influence on retail at large.
Manchu wrote: IMO, the rules are fun and the minis look nice.
Agreed.
I'm not sure how evidence enters into these questions of personal taste. I think Settlers of Catan is gak but that doesn't stop it from selling.
Sacrilege, get the torches...
And neither do PB's ongoing ineptitude communicating with players nor the shadowy falling out between them and ND necessarily have anything to do with retail sales.
Bad press is the opposite of advertising, it can dissuade sales if a purchase appears to have risk or a perceived reduced value.
Your statement would be 100% valid for the casual shopper who has not researched this product.
I think we all have a different measure of the "success" of RRT.
Since we all have some selfish interest in this game I would think the success that matters is having other people who have the game near us to play with.
My only objective evidence is my FLGS bought one box of RRT and it is still sitting on their counter (since PB started shipping to Canada).
To be a bit more thorough, I should post on their Facebook page and on their bulletin board a meet date for anyone who owns the game.
A "failure" would then be finding two people or less who own the game (my personal measure failure).
I at least know Forar is up the road about an hour but with how rabid this is getting, a restraining order could be issued.
The next level of success is that it would bring in sufficient funding for PB to pursue publishing further product (like Wave 2!!) with some degree of urgency to gain more revenue.
Again, selfish reasons: I want the rest of my Kickstarter stuff.
Since we do not see their sales numbers, we will have no means of judging any impact on this.
PB is privately owned so we have no means of assessing their bottom line.
I could only suggest seeing if Kevin upgrades his car any time soon.
Manchu: I have found the main matter raised was for the casual hobbyist the models are "too much work" (what the FLGS owner has told me when people picked up the box and talked). Have you tried some assembly? I am experienced at it, find it is more time consuming (~20 minutes per model, never mind paint) than anything. I feel like there should be some punch-out playing pieces like Mike used so you can play until you get the models together.
Fate Reforged had a street date of Jan. 23 (5 days ago). If FRP is using GAAP-based accounting, none of their preorder sales could count until the 23rd, when they ship.
But here's the real kicker - FRP Games does not sell MtG by the case. FRP sells Magic by retail SKUs, because FRP is a hobby seller that happens to also sell cards. If FRP were a real card seller, they would do like Star City Games and sell Boosters by the case.
Finally, it is clear that FRP tracks sales by SKU, not by family. Fate Reforged has several SKUs associated with it. It is entirely possible that no individual Fate Reforged SKU has outsold Golem Arcana on a dollar basis since the last time the list was updated, given that bulk Magic sales are not part of FRP Games core offering.
They may not record sales of boosters "by the case" but they do record sales of boosters (as it's a separate SKU). I have serious doubts that they wouldn't sell a box (or case) and record it as 36 (or more) boosters.
Considering I linked to a definition earlier in the thread...
Appeal to Authority is when someone who knows nothing about something uses their position (only) as the basis for argument. It would be as if the world's most successful chicken farmer stood up and said "I know chicken, so you should believe what I say".
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative."
Let me break it down smaller for you.
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement (RTT is a best seller) is correct because the statement is made by a source (FRP) that is commonly regarded as authoritative."
Hmm. Fits perfectly.
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Yup, exactly what I've said.
You need to work on your reading comprehension. If you actually read and understood what you copied, you would recognize that the fallacy is only when the "authoritative" person or source doesn't actually know anything about the thing in question. When Bill Nye talks about Science, he is an expert, and me quoting him is not Appeal to Authority. FRP Games is an expert in hobby sales, and me linking their Top 20 is not a false Appeal to Authority, because it's what they actually do. You linking to Chicken Man's Top 20 games sales would be an Appeal to Authority.
So you're stating that their authority is absolute?
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Oops.
You not accepting FRP games authority, simply because they don't say what you want does not actually negate the fact that they know far more about the hobby sales business than you ever will. In many ways, you are like an Creationist or Flat Earther, saying that Neil DeGrasse Tyson is not an authority on science and physics, because you believe that God Created a Flat Earth.
No, I'm not. I'm asking for evidence. The only evidence you've provided is that the list exists. If the only evidence for a round earth was that someone said it was round (regardless of their pedigree) I'd ask for more evidence.
Fortunately there is a lot of evidence saying it's round.
Nobody is saying that FRP is infallible. I am simply saying that FRP is a far better source for hobby sales than you are, in the same way that NDGT is a far better source for science than a Creationist Flat Earther.
Did I say I knew better than FRP? Pretty sure I didn't... I'm saying I doubt the integrity of their "Best Seller" (with no caveats) list. I've given my reasons for it. You've failed to provide evidence other than "They said so!".
And that's where we are. You are actually saying FRP is infallible when you have no doubts about their best seller list being accurate.
JohnHwangDD wrote: The RRTKS had barely 5,000 backers, of which <10% are disgruntled like rigeld2.
Please don't make assumptions without fact.
Please support your statement of "less than 10%". Please also support your statement that I'm "disgruntled". I'm satisfied with what I'm currently getting out of RTT - just the SDF-1 as I sold my original pledge.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alpharius wrote: I consider myself a big fan of Anime in general and Giant Robot stuff in particular.
I watched a lot in the early to mid-80's, than some more in the late 90's.
I managed to completely miss Robotech and Gundam. They are both two important series that I've never been a big fan of, or seen a lot of, somehow.
Did these two series become popular in the USA in the late 80's to mid 90's?
That's when I was exposed to them, yes. Robotech more than Gundam - iirc that's a more recent Americanism.
Talizvar wrote: Your statement would be 100% valid for the casual shopper who has not researched this product.
I think that is exactly who drives sales of starter boxes. It's definitely who backed this KS (myself included).
Talizvar wrote: I feel like there should be some punch-out playing pieces like Mike used so you can play until you get the models together.
Interesting idea. A competent company would have made these available as a free download. Alas, PB is the company in question -- plus there's PB's super-prickly attitude toward IP to consider.
Alpharius wrote: Did these two series become popular in the USA in the late 80's to mid 90's?
I can't speak about Gundam because I didn't know about it until I was much older but RoboTech was super popular while it was airing (mid- to late-80s).
Finally, it is clear that FRP tracks sales by SKU, not by family. Fate Reforged has several SKUs associated with it. It is entirely possible that no individual Fate Reforged SKU has outsold Golem Arcana on a dollar basis since the last time the list was updated, given that bulk Magic sales are not part of FRP Games core offering.
They may not record sales of boosters "by the case" but they do record sales of boosters (as it's a separate SKU). I have serious doubts that they wouldn't sell a box (or case) and record it as 36 (or more) boosters.
I'm sure they would, if they got the order. The problem for you is that people aren't likely buying case quantities from FRP, because SCG, etc. will always have much better prices. Apples to apples, let's look at per-booster prices:
- $ 3.99 @ Target (full MSRP)
- $ 3.18 @ FRP
- $ 2.75 @ SCG (by box for $99)
- $ 2.68 @ SCG (by case for $579)
Note that SCG doesn't appear to sell individual boosters at this time.
If I were buying Fate Reforged in box or case quantity, I would not even bother looking at FRP. I would be looking at SCG and Potomac Distribution, or whomever the current hot seller is. Therefore, FRP won't have the huge bump from card sales that you were presuming to exist as counterpoint to refute the Top 20 list.
As for whether FRP's list is "infallible", I see no reason to doubt it at this time. There is nothing obviously wrong with it. Your objection for Golem Arcana vs Fate Reforged holds no water.
Finally, whether you admit it to yourself, or not, you are a disgruntled backer. Your behavior is evidence of that.
And the 10% number? Are the 534+ distinct people whining here and on the Comments? No, there are not 534+ gripers. You are free to trawl the this thread and the Comments to compile the list.
It is a well-known axiom of MtG that serious players buy boxes or cases rather than boosters. But even casual players are less likely to buy from FRP. Meanwhile, FRP sells the RRT starter box for 20% under MSRP, which is only a little more (7%) than its major competitors, Miniatures Market and CoolStuffInc. CSI has a top seller list. RRT is currently not on it. Fate Reforged boosters ($2.69) are at the top of their list. They would have to pay 18% more to buy them from FRP. Arguably, that difference is even more notable considering that while customers will likely only buy one RRT starter box, they are likely to buy many more than one Fate Reforged booster pack.
JohnHwangDD wrote: As for whether FRP's list is "infallible", I see no reason to doubt it at this time. There is nothing obviously wrong with it. Your objection for Golem Arcana vs Fate Reforged holds no water.
Golem Arcana had to beat out miniature storage/transport bags for the #20 spot. That's not a huge jump.
Finally, whether you admit it to yourself, or not, you are a disgruntled backer. Your behavior is evidence of that.
Thanks for telling me how I feel! I disagree with your statement, and since in this matter I actually am an expert, I can - without a doubt - inform you that you are incorrect. Indisputably at that.
And the 10% number? Are the 534+ distinct people whining here and on the Comments? No, there are not 534+ gripers. You are free to trawl the this thread and the Comments to compile the list.
You do realize that not everyone who is disgruntled actually speaks up? And that not everyone speaking is disgruntled?
Thanks for agreeing that your numbers are made up and have no basis in fact.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote: It is a well-known axiom of MtG that serious players buy boxes or cases rather than boosters.
Manchu wrote: It is a well-known axiom of MtG that serious players buy boxes or cases rather than boosters.
Meanwhile, FRP sells the RRT starter box for 20% under MSRP, which is only a little more (5%) than its major competitors, Miniatures Market and CoolStuffInc. CSI has a top seller list. RRT is currently not on it. Fate Reforged boosters ($2.69) are at the top of their list.
Totally true. Back when I was "serious" about Magic, a box a month was not uncommon for personal purchase, and I'm sure I'd have moved on to buying a full case at launch. No way I'd be buying on a per-booster basis for block play, booster draft.
If CSI is selling at $2.69/booster, that's the same as SCG's case price, and 50 cents cheaper than FRP (saving $18/box, $108/case). Yeah, I'd be all over that if I were buying boosters. But if I were serious, I'd want sealed boxes and sealed cases for my money, not boosters with potential tampering / scanning / cherry-picking. If it didn't have WotC shrink on it, I wouldn't accept it.
Give that CSI is primarily a card seller (it's their first category listed), the CSi list not having RRT on it makes perfect sense, no reason to doubt that, either.
Alpharius wrote: I consider myself a big fan of Anime in general and Giant Robot stuff in particular.
I watched a lot in the early to mid-80's, than some more in the late 90's.
I managed to completely miss Robotech and Gundam. They are both two important series that I've never been a big fan of, or seen a lot of, somehow.
Did these two series become popular in the USA in the late 80's to mid 90's?
I don't remember the exact year Robotech was huge, but it felt like it was just as Transformers and Voltron were starting to appear, maybe even before them. I know I was in grade school at the time, so it would have been in the second half of the 80's. Care Bears and Rainbow Bright were the closest 'competition' I can recall. This was in CA, though, so it may have suffered from syndication shuffling in other markets.
Gundam, was never popular in my area, at least not when I was a TV-watching child.
Alpharius wrote: Did these two series become popular in the USA in the late 80's to mid 90's?
I can't speak about Gundam because I didn't know about it until I was much older but RoboTech was super popular while it was airing (mid- to late-80s).
I thought at first I had seen a few episodes before then, but upon further reflection I may be remembering Star Blazers.
I don't recall seeing a lot of any anime-type stuff back then though, as in the days prior to cable with few TV networks they must not have been popular enough yet to compete with Disney/Hanna-Barbera/Transformers/etcetera. Mostly because Westernized "Japanimation" having odd time slots is something I do remember from back then, which meant a lot of the time you missed it unless your family were lucky enough to own a Beta or VHS machine, and let you use it of course.
As an adult I had the novels for Robotech long before I ever got to see the three series in their entirety due to DVD remastering. The rest of my exposure to anime/manga came around the time of my few years of college, Tank Police, Macross+, Macross II, stuff like that.
Prior to that time I only recall seeing a few bits of RoboTech, I guess Star Blazers, and Battle for the Planets. Only recently have I watched a bit of Gundam on YouTube.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I don't remember the exact year Robotech was huge, but it felt like it was just as Transformers and Voltron were starting to appear, maybe even before them. I know I was in grade school at the time, so it would have been in the second half of the 80's. Care Bears and Rainbow Bright were the closest 'competition' I can recall. This was in CA, though, so it may have suffered from syndication shuffling in other markets.
I remember Voltron and Mazinger Z toys pretty clearly, but not that I ever saw anything of them on TV.....
Manchu wrote: Seriously? Okay, well, the latter is an accusation of bias while the former completely dismisses the target.
They are both Ad Hominem attacks.
I think you're wasting your time mate, all this thread is doing is proving why the majority of mini gamers won't play this game, there's too many things you have to turn a blind eye to.
Judgedoug is a fan of this game though, which is short for fanatic. So I fail to see how one is worthy of mention while the other is not.
From my perspective it is weird to see a mod call out one after not being around for a while when it is leveraged against their friend and totally ignore the other when it is leveraged against someone participating in a three way argument and that person is on the opposite side of that argument.
Manchu wrote: Not at all. If the list simply excludes CCGs, it is still a good data point for measuring RRT's comparative sales. In fact, it would arguably be stronger evidence because there is no reason to compare RRT sales with MtG sales. I think the weak spot with my argument remains, we don't actually know how the list is "cooked." But that does not automatically mean the list reflects nothing about FRP's sales.
What benefit is there in a "list of our top sellers that ignores some of our top sellers"?
While comparing the core box of a Minis game is not quite the same as booster boxes of a CCG, if we're to accept that this is an inclusive list of their sales figures, its accuracy comes into question when a massive release somehow falls behind a product that is charitably a niche of a niche market.
And if they're ignoring CCGs, what else are they ignoring, and for what reasons?
Obviously I'm asking rhetorically here, I don't expect anyone to actually have the answers. I'm simply trying to point out why I (personally) find the assertion that FRP's 'top sellers' list is pertinent to be questionable. If it's inclusive, it's missing a massive new product, and if it's not a comprehensive list, then why not, and how does that alter the figures?
As I joked above, for all we know the Number 2 and Number 3 slots might be orders of magnitude apart, with 3 and 4 separated by 1%.
We don't know if it's by units sold, or by revenue earned, or by profit, etc. Is it US only or are all global purchases included? Like, I'm trying to not go crazy here, but if I'm to accept that nearly 2 months after release the RRT core box is outselling the latest Magic expansion, it's going to take more than figurative cooing reassurances that it's totally accurate.
Also, I still haven't seen this list of Top Distributors that people keep asserting exists. A link would be immensely appreciated.
JohnHwangDD wrote: The RRTKS had barely 5,000 backers, of which <10% are disgruntled like rigeld2.
[citation needed]
Apologies if it appears I'm splitting hairs, but you cannot back that up. We have no way of knowing what percentage of the backers are happy or unhappy, but even if we use the 'sell or don't sell at Gencon' as a basis, it'd be more like 20-25% of those who voted.
I don't consider that a hard metric, but it's probably the closest thing to a sizable portion of the community speaking up at once, and even then it was still only like 20%.
Let's not rehash the "those who didn't speak up are with me in a silent majority" bull that went on during that period. It was shenanigans then and time has not improved it.
Asterios wrote: what it comes down to is when you take PB and compare it to another RPG company that started around the same time say like SJG makes one wonder why SJG did so much better then PB did? maybe its because of the owner?
Ok how about other RPG companies from the 1980s?
Victory Games - (James Bond) Disbanded 1989
Iron Crown Enterprises- (MerP and Roel Master) Bankrupt 2000
West End Games (Starwars, Paranoia) Selling off proerties as of 2011
R. Talsorian Games- periodic releases went dormant from 1998-2006
Fasa - Out of Business
@Forar - I count a disgruntled backer as a someone who makes noises. If they don't say anything, they're not disgruntled. That isn't to say that silent backers are are happy or unhappy. They're simply not bothered to the point that it's worth their energy to complain. By that definition, the 10% number holds.
As for the FRP Top20, I think the supposition that they exclude CCGs is a false one. FRP simply isn't a big card seller.
Swabby wrote: From my perspective it is weird to see a mod call out one after not being around for a while when it is leveraged against their friend and totally ignore the other when it is leveraged against someone participating in a three way argument and that person is on the opposite side of that argument.
First, I didn't call out anyone as a moderator. When I post anything as a mod, I use orange text. I do that to avoid precisely the kind of insinuation you keep making. Second, the argument I called out as ironic/miserable was that someone who posted evidence is like a religious fanatic or cultist, a person who doesn't care about evidence. There was no similar irony in the accusation that someone who has posted critically for many months now is biased against PB and the RRT as a disgruntled backer.
Forar wrote: I'm simply trying to point out why I (personally) find the assertion that FRP's 'top sellers' list is pertinent to be questionable.
Manchu wrote: Those who see RRT as a failure are not going to be convinced otherwise by a the FRP list. And there are good reasons why they would not be.
Forar, I don't think we are arguing. Unless you are really saying that the FRP list indicates nothing at all pertinent to this conversation.
Talizvar wrote: Your statement would be 100% valid for the casual shopper who has not researched this product.
I think that is exactly who drives sales of starter boxes. It's definitely who backed this KS (myself included).
Talizvar wrote: I feel like there should be some punch-out playing pieces like Mike used so you can play until you get the models together.
Interesting idea. A competent company would have made these available as a free download. Alas, PB is the company in question -- plus there's PB's super-prickly attitude toward IP to consider.
Gosh darn Manchu!
Infuriating-cherry-picking-not-answering-the-other-questions-pain-in-backside-this-is-not-a-personal-attack-comment!!!!! Merely a comment on the style of replying to a sincere person wishing a more in-depth debate but should have known better from prior experience.
I will now assemble incredibly small robot miniatures with a hammer in your name.
Manchu wrote: Forar, I don't think we are arguing. Unless you are really saying that the FRP list indicates nothing at all pertinent to this conversation.
I'm not asserting that the list 'doesn't bring anything pertinent to the conversation', but I am challenging just how useful it is.
As I've noted a few times, it's a subjective list. There's nothing objective about it other than "apparently 1 is outselling 2, 2 is outselling 3, etc". No numbers of units sold, or profits, or anything to indicate much more than that, if taken at face value, it's the 3rd best selling thing on their site.
The lack of context makes it interesting, but not really proof of anything other than perhaps "FRP is selling RRT, and apparently in high enough quantities (for whatever value that might be) to put on what may or may not be a comprehensive list of top sellers (whatever that might be; again, based on monetary sales or profit margins or units sold, etc)".
JD is throwing it down in a clearly smug "hey fethers, y'all haters can just suck it, peace out" but it's a data point missing a lot of context.
I'm not arguing that it's utterly irrelevant, but I don't feel it's nearly the magic bullet to 'put people in their place' that JD seems to believe it is.
On it's own, it's an "oooh, well that's interesting".
Talizvar wrote: Your statement would be 100% valid for the casual shopper who has not researched this product.
I think that is exactly who drives sales of starter boxes. It's definitely who backed this KS (myself included).
Talizvar wrote: I feel like there should be some punch-out playing pieces like Mike used so you can play until you get the models together.
Interesting idea. A competent company would have made these available as a free download. Alas, PB is the company in question -- plus there's PB's super-prickly attitude toward IP to consider.
Alpharius wrote: Did these two series become popular in the USA in the late 80's to mid 90's?
I can't speak about Gundam because I didn't know about it until I was much older but RoboTech was super popular while it was airing (mid- to late-80s).
I made standees for every official units from every generation including the Sentinels stuff and was asked by PB to not share them.
Imperial Assault: 2 BILLION UNITS! Mice and Mystics: 1 BILLION UNITS! Robotech: '... like, 20 boxes sold, or something.'
Again, hyperbole for humour, but without greater context, being 'third" could mean it's barely behind M&M and on the verge of overtaking it, or it could mean there is an order of magnitude between them (or more).
Based on the rough numbers of cores PB was receiving per container during 'shippinggate', I have doubts we're talking tens of thousands of units at retail here. Maybe, maaaaaybe low five-figures, but globally what does FRP really represent here? A couple thousand, tops?
Especially at $5/box more than CSI's normal price, and $30/box more than their sale price, which has been up repeatedly in the last two months.
Hell, one RRT box from FRP is $90 US (including shipping), 2 boxes from CSI is $140 not on sale ($100 on sale, both with free shipping). If I lived in the US and missed the Kickstarter, I know where I'd be buying from.
Mike, show a little appreciation of your stand-in work and get picture spammed!
It made for a great way to play before the KS so I will not make any more fun...
Funny, I was remembering of 3rd edition (?) Battletech where it had a bunch of the punch-out playing pieces with the plastic stands as well.
I am not as content with these "placeholders" as I used to be.
Asked not to share those pieces... hehe, I seem to remember PB was all proud of some paper punch-out items up for sale in their store, cannot seem to find it from a couple searches. Could be a "supplement" they can offer.
Things I would like sold / supported as a supplement of Robotech:
Cars- I found a few to scale, I want LOTS and RULES for scooping up cars and using them to throw (or field goal with the pods). Using a tanker truck as an improvised weapon! HAHAHA (Pacific Rim has damaged me).
Scale street lighting (handy pipe to beat with), I am working on making little parks with water fountains on the larger GW disk bases (scenic trees glued down).
Inexpensive easy to stick-on roof details for my drop zone commander buildings (I know there are some out there).
I want to-scale cranes, you know for high-rise construction: I will not rest until I have a veritech swinging from one.
Were are the emergency response vehicles?
There must still be conventional tanks out there as well.
Hey! Didn't the earth have some facility with a huge gun tunneled into the earth? Could be neat scenery.
Anyway, brain is wandering all over the place but the little details make this kind of stuff immersive.
Talizvar wrote: Asked not to share those pieces... hehe, I seem to remember PB was all proud of some paper punch-out items up for sale in their store, cannot seem to find it from a couple searches. Could be a "supplement" they can offer.
Forar wrote: f I lived in the US and missed the Kickstarter, I know where I'd be buying from.
You and me both, which is why I don't order anything available from MM or CSI from FRP. (FRP being the retail front of a huge distributor is really for obscure/OOP stuff while MM and CSI cater to big sellers/new hotness sales.) They both sell RRT for 75 USD and getting up to free shipping from there is a cinch. But lots of other people do buy stuff from FRP and it seems like many of them are buying RRT (or a few are buying a lot of RRT*), unless the Top Seller list is an outright sham ... for which of course there is no evidence.
Swabby wrote: From my perspective it is weird to see a mod call out one after not being around for a while when it is leveraged against their friend and totally ignore the other when it is leveraged against someone participating in a three way argument and that person is on the opposite side of that argument.
First, I didn't call out anyone as a moderator. When I post anything as a mod, I use orange text. I do that to avoid precisely the kind of insinuation you keep making. Second, the argument I called out as ironic/miserable was that someone who posted evidence is like a religious fanatic or cultist, a person who doesn't care about evidence. There was no similar irony in the accusation that someone who has posted critically for many months now is biased against PB and the RRT as a disgruntled backer.
To be correct, I've criticized PB and how they've handled RTT, and the rules for RTT. I haven't (intended) anything more and I'm far from disgruntled at this point. I've corrected judgedoug (twice now) and I'd like to think you read those posts - do I need to correct you?
I'm not disappointed with what I'm getting out of this KS anymore. I'm completely happy - I'm essentially getting the SDF-1 for free.
Sure, I'm biased against PB but that has nothing to do with being "disgruntled" (defined as angry or dissatisfied - if you use a different definition it's not an English one).
by calling you a "disgruntled backer" rather than some more specific reference to your satisfaction with having sold your pledge.
IMO "disgruntled backer" is suitable for someone who was motivated to sell their pledge because of dissatisfaction with the product and how PB has been handling the project. I would consider myself a disgruntled backer because I agree PB has sorely mismanaged this whole process and continues to do so, even considering I did not sell my pledge and am satisfied with the product I have received thus far. Anyone evaluating my arguments would be right to consider my bias against PB.
Which is why I say to fully support this game you need you need to be able to willfully ignore all the failings. I dont think there's enough players to make this possible.
I kind of agree with Joyboozer, if having fun with your chosen game becomes hard at any point, it kind of has failed in a way.
I actually look forward to breaking open a 40k kit from start to finish. RRT is a battle to even start the assembly process, and that to me is a freaking shame because I know that I am super motivated to want to play this game. I know there are a ton of my fellow gamers who are not nearly as motivated.
Buying, assembling, and painting RRT all occupy a range on the difficulty spectrum comparable with other conventional miniatures games (that is, excluding pre-paint lines like X-Wing). The same is true of "find an opponent" generally speaking if you exclude 40k and WM/H from the comparison. I would say RRT is considerably easier to learn than, say, WM/H.
Hey, everyone. This is a few days late because I had hoped to include links to some instruction sheets and other resources I’m working on posting, but that’s taking longer than I expected. More should be coming in the next few days.
Europe Update
The container with the rewards for European backers was finally loaded on its ship this past weekend, and set sail on Monday morning. She should be passing through the Panama Canal early next week, and is currently scheduled to reach the UK around February 20.
Australia Update
We loaded up a 20-foot container full of Australian backer rewards on Thursday last week, and it is en route to the port. Ironically, in order to avoid the West Coast port congestion that has plagued the container headed to Europe, the Australia container will be shipping out of New York. Its ship, the Corcovado, is scheduled to set sail from New York on February 8, and to reach Sydney four weeks later. That’s subject to weather and other delays, of course. We’ll keep an eye on things and update you if anything changes.
Other Stuff
Jeff has been working on some more detailed instruction sheets, and I’m planning to start posting them online this week. I’ll also be posting some images from the color guide, including a few schemes that didn't make it into the rulebook, plus blank illustrations to help people plan their paint schemes before putting brush to paint. FAQ and other stuff is coming. Oh, and those cards that are "missing" from everyone's box set or Battle Cry extras (no, it's not just your copy) will be posted online, too.
So, kudos on putting the 'missing' cards online (a 'and we'll include them in the wave 2 bags' wouldn't go awry, but I'll take what I can get).
The notated sprue diagrams that were tentatively supposed to take 'a week' two weeks ago remain a work in progress (meh).
Shipping continues (the people who were all 'why the crying, you'll get your stuff 'soon'; apparently 'soon' means 'March, maybe April, let's be real here').
They continue to spend more time talking about doing a FAQ than simply putting up a page entitled "FAQ" with the text "Yes, in Battloid Mode the GU-11 can be fired up to 3 times if you spend the 2 command points, yes, seriously." (feel free to copy/paste that one, it's on the house Palladium).
Edit: they addressed Europe and Australia, what about ROW? Considering those two and the US/Canada took up the vaaast majority of the backers, how long can shipping a couple hundred boxes take? And before anyone starts in on the 'omg international shipping is the most torturous thing in the history of mankind', they've been at this for nearly 4 months, holidays notwithstanding. Get that gak in the fething mail already, haven't these people waited long enough?
Swabby wrote: she picked up the RRT book and gave me a solid wtf look
It's hard to judge what this anecdote means. Did she think the rules were too complex or poorly written or did she have no interest in RRT or what? RRT is objectively less complex than WM/H inasmuch as RRT has fewer stats, units, exceptions, etc. Someone used to the intricacy of WM/H might respond to RRT with a wtf face because RRT seems comparatively primitive.
Swabby wrote: she picked up the RRT book and gave me a solid wtf look
It's hard to judge what this anecdote means. Did she think the rules were too complex or poorly written or did she have no interest in RRT or what? RRT is objectively less complex than WM/H inasmuch as RRT has fewer stats, units, exceptions, etc. Someone used to the intricacy of WM/H might respond to RRT with a wtf face because RRT seems comparatively primitive.
It was kind of off the hip. The rules didn't make a whole lot of sense to her (like ignoring elevation, which I have also brought up) in some ways. The lack of army lists in the book was a huge turn off (Book reading is a large part of her pregame). Sadly I can't get her to play the game, when she has played every other minis game I have dragged into the house, including old stuff like car wars.
My personal opinion, warmachine/hordes is not more complex, just more concise. In some ways RRT is more complicated (LOS and all the ways to avoid damage) in my opinion.
Looking at the fat stack of WM/H rulebooks on my shelf, I am really confused as to what you mean by WM/H being more concise. Maybe on a paragraph by paragraph basis? That would mean each paragraph of WM/H is denser in terms of substantive information and therefore, given the overall greater number of pages in the Prime Mk II rulebook (to say nothing of the many army books), WM/H is more complex.
As for my own personal anecdote, I have owned WM/H rulebooks for years now and still don't understand how to play the game. I understood RRT after skimming the photos taken at GenCon. I have never played and have no interest in playing WM/H. I have played and enjoyed RRT several times.
The actual rules portion of the warmachine books is about the same size as the rules portion of the RRTIMO. They are pretty close. When I say concise I mean they take the time to describe their concepts in more detail, things are far tighter in the wording and in the description of how things work.
The majority of warmachine rulebooks are either expansions or descriptions of additional units, they don't really alter the base rules at all.
The rules section of RRT is 22 pages long. The rules section of WM Prime Mk II (excluding the pages covering scenarios) is 60 pages long. My impression is that WM/H is a game of exceptions to the rules, so it is probably misleading not to count the army books. This is true to a far more limited degree with RRT and all the special rules are included in those 22 pages, in about 6 pages.
But I think you are right about WM/H having tighter wording.
Manchu wrote: As for my own personal anecdote, I have owned WM/H rulebooks for years now and still don't understand how to play the game. I understood RRT after skimming the photos taken at GenCon. I have never played and have no interest in playing WM/H. I have played and enjoyed RRT several times.
Don't feel bad - a lot of people claim to have been playing 40k for decades, and don't really know how to play, either.
I'm sure if you were to go back to the early WM starters and QuickStart rules, with someone who knew their way around the game, it wouldn't be too bad. But if you're not interested, why would you own the rulebooks? In my case, I own original Cryx and Khador starters, along with the original Prime rulebook so I can play a WM skirmish at any time. Sure, it's a bit limited, but it's not hard to start -- assuming you want to play.
In your case, if you've played and enjoyed RRT, that's a great endorsement. Who knows, maybe I'll consider playing a game or two at some point?
I really like the WM/H setting and until recently always aspired to get into the game. I have realized lately, however, that my taste runs contrary to the rules-heavy, tournament-focused design of games like WM/H. Don't get me wrong, I think RRT is mostly fine for tournament play -- certainly nothing like MtG intensity, however. But it is also simple and approachable enough to pick up pretty much at the drop of a hat for a bit of pew pew fun. It is probably more enjoyable for those who like the show.
My current game of choice is Bolt Action. It is also fairly simple (again compared to something like WM/H) but I think the rules are clear and comprehensive. The heart of the game is drawing dice (each die represents any given unit in your army and your opponent's army) to determine activation. I find that I am decreasingly interested in army-wide activation, even when a game has turn-interruption mechanics. RRT uses unit-level alternating activation, which holds my interest better than UGO-IGO design (bad label but you know what I mean), especially thanks to the command point economy. There is a good amount of tactical choice in RRT's command point mechanics.
I'm not really sure what you find so confusing about WMH. At it's base, it's move figures, roll 2d6 and add it to your attack value (melee or def) to see if you equal the targets defense value + any buffs the target may have. It's that easy to grasp.
A deeper understanding of each unit/model however...Then yeah because each warcaster/warlock makes things interact in very funny ways at times
The fact that different units interact with each other in different ways? Isn't that better for the long term growth of a game? It'd be pretty bland if units were just units and didn't have any sort of way of interacting with the abilities of others
To me, WM 1E was always like playing a combo deck in Magic, trying to set the board for just the right time to pop the Feat... Whoever sets up and goes off first usually wins, and then, primarily by Caster Kill.
I found WM 1E is less of a tactical game than a really ornate duel.
Depends on the feat though. Some feats are just kind of bland and not game-winners or changers. Also, it depends if you're playing scenario, which you really should because winning by caster kill can be very one-sided. 2E is pretty different from 1E from what I've heard from 1E players. I only started in 2E so I can't say.
Robotech RPG tactics has almost the same amount of base rules. They are just not as described in as much detail and lack examples in many instances. Special rules and characters in RRT modify how things interact in almost the same way they do in warmachine, only the information is in the book like 40k instead of the card.
Honestly I think warmachine may actually be more simple in some ways. There are not nearly as many damage avoidance mechanics in warmachine as there are in RRT.
Manchu I think you might just understand RRT better but really at their roots they are not very different.
Sining wrote: The fact that different units interact with each other in different ways? Isn't that better for the long term growth of a game? It'd be pretty bland if units were just units and didn't have any sort of way of interacting with the abilities of others
I don't think WM/H is a bad game or whatever just because it isn't for me. Nor do I think RRT is bland game because it doesn't work like WM/H. I think the relative simplicity of RRT is one of its strengths -- which is how this originally came up. I don't see many people having a hard time learning or being taught RRT because it is a pretty efficient rule set.
Robotech is finally shipping to Australia - with a February 8th departure, 4 weeks at sea, 1-2 weeks in customs and a conservative 1 week of local shipping, I should have Wave 1 in hand roughly in the final week of March, 2015
I play (and enjoy) Warmachine, but it is an infinitely more complex game than RRT. Warmachine is very much a tournament ruleset with synergistic combinations in your army lists that can take hours to think of and give you a headache, but when you pull them off and murder a Carnivean in one charge, you get a little rush of accomplishment.
Warmachine has also had over a decade of development, and has been developed specifically as a tournament ruleset with no wiggle room for rules misinterpretation.
RRT is a much simpler ruleset - making it prone to rules lawyer asshat arguments (like the battlepod behind a lamp post). But it is very much a simpler game than WMH.
Actually, having not played it in months and months now, I'd kinda like to bust it out again, but that would make me a fanatic for playing the game, right?
BTW, I emailed frpgames and asked how their top seller list is formed. I'd be willing to bet money it's just an algorithm pulled from their quantity sold for the month. It's full of other games that are huge on BGG.
(I also agree with whoever was talking about Magic being sold in multiple skus - as my brother is a games store manager, and I've learned a huge amount about MTG recently. They sell the booster boxes in quantity, and have very little demand for booster packs)
Someone also asked about why a foam bag would hit the best sellers for a day or two - well, the answer is obvious to me. I personally have several items on my wish list at frpgames so when they come back in stock, I get an email. I would bet that an Army Transport case of some variety arrived at frpgames, x number of people had it on their wish list, get emailed, and then bought it. This has happened to me with their Litko bases, where I get an email of stock, and it actually goes out of stock before I am able to complete the purchase. (I often wonder if frpgames' inventory is the realtime inventory of Warpath due to the rapidity of stock level changes)
Swabby wrote: I disagree, my wife plays WH/H and 40k. She picked up the RRT book and gave me a solid wtf look.
???
Scary stuff when I see that look my other half, it tends to equal "Don't make me come over there to kill you... it is almost worth the bother." I have an exciting household.
I would say the command points, stealing initiative and the levels of hit, dodge, roll with impact as well as "where be the unit points costs???, oh yeah, those wee cards lying about" give those moments.
Sining wrote: The fact that different units interact with each other in different ways? Isn't that better for the long term growth of a game? It'd be pretty bland if units were just units and didn't have any sort of way of interacting with the abilities of others
I don't think WM/H is a bad game or whatever just because it isn't for me. Nor do I think RRT is bland game because it doesn't work like WM/H. I think the relative simplicity of RRT is one of its strengths -- which is how this originally came up. I don't see many people having a hard time learning or being taught RRT because it is a pretty efficient rule set.
Bolt-Action was mentioned and that is a good example of nicely laid-down rules that have a hidden complexity to it.
RRT is simple enough to figure out and play is not bad, I enjoy the more activation type turns than the "You-go, I-go" for the first player - first turn advantage can be too much.
I think it is the contrast of fairly accessible rules with the models being a bit finicky that made it a bit of a letdown, at least PB is looking at making better assembly instructions (the sprue map may be more helpful for matching parts) so they seem to realize this gap.
Gah! I think I have agreed with Manchu... I was not even drinking...
judgedoug wrote: having not played it in months and months now, I'd kinda like to bust it out again
LOL same here. It always happens when I return to posting ITT. I think it forces me to remember how intuitive and fun the mechanics actually are, which certainly came as a surprise to me given, to be frank, PB's RPGs.
Talizvar wrote: Bolt-Action was mentioned and that is a good example of nicely laid-down rules that have a hidden complexity to it.
This is why I'm a Warlord Games sarge and do demos for Bolt Action. Conversely I would never be a Palladium Megawhatever Ambassadorman.
Automatically Appended Next Post: UGH
13. Do all Mecha under the template of a blast weapon get attacked, even though they could be at different elevations, sometimes extreme, due to terrain? If so, what are the upper and lower limits of the blast?
Yes, all Mecha covered under the template get an attack on them without regard to the height.
...and this is why Starship Trooper's SIZE trait was the best innovation in miniatures wargaming, to be ignored by every other ruleset after that.
Anyway: a FAQ!!! presented in a Forum... how quaint!
At least we got some answers to burning questions... wait a minute, not so burning??
Okay, they addressed something and rewarding good behavior is the right thing to do:
Keep em coming PB (You need to crank out a few more...)
Swabby wrote: At least Forar can no longer have his squad of ricks.
He still he would just have to make some custom characters with the same stats and different names if his group allowed.
Can't be done.
You can't make "not-Rick" for 5 points.
Also custom characters take up the Special slot in a squadron, if I'm not mistaken, so you could have Rick and an RPG character, but can't fly a squadron full of RPG characters in an RRT game.
Swabby wrote: I like how the FAQ ignores like all the rules questions thar are still unanswered on their forums.
I'm kinda pissed that they only took into account some of the questions we came up with here. I'm going to be calling them.
Gents, I've been haranguing them for like half a year for not starting to address some of these, and they finally did. The post even admits that it'll be a living document and will be updated in time.
13 answers is a start, and presumably more will be forthcoming.
Hopefully it doesn't take another half a year to get 13 more, but as a vocal critic, even I think it's a reasonable start.
Swabby wrote: Random robotech RPG tactics echo chamber #6 or 7.
Which one are we?
The never bloody happy backers club "NBHBC"(tm) somewhere just south of that warm place in the center of the earth.
I must admit though, everyone else is calling it right: if it walks like a duck...
Forar wrote: Hopefully it doesn't take another half a year to get 13 more, but as a vocal critic, even I think it's a reasonable start.
Agreed.
The victory points for a half dead squadron makes me laugh at how awkwardly they worded that rule. It could've been done sooooo much cleaner.
It looks like a GW rule a bit doesn't it?
All in all, I like the rules, It looks like they have combined the features of several of my favorite games and then tweaked it a bit. The rules are well written, tons better than a GW rule, and are easy to learn. As a "First Edition" of a game there are bound to be balance issues, and oddly written rules. Coupled with the fact that it is based off of an RPG instead of being written from the ground up, it does great. There are things in an RPG that just don't translate well.
"Constructive criticism" it would be nice to have it included at PB's store under RRT as well, you know, because they publish the game and Drivethru does not spring to mind... plus it would be good press for them to publish free stuff on their site.
Honestly man at this point I dont care where they release it, it is out there for us to grab. I get that it isn't cohesive or easily accessible, but at least it actually is out there somewhere
.
"Constructive criticism" it would be nice to have it included at PB's store under RRT as well, you know, because they publish the game and Drivethru does not spring to mind... plus it would be good press for them to publish free stuff on their site.
On the FB page
Wayne Smith
At some point we'll host them, or some version of them, on our website, too. I'm still working on that page, though, plus I want to avoid the strain on our server as much as possible.
Automatically Appended Next Post: He also said more cards will be up soon
Strain on the server? From adding a web page/the cards? Or the theoretical swell of people coming to the site? There's... like... at least four directions to take that. >.>
Careful with DriveThruRPG. Just glancing at the stupid paper PFRPG standees the other day caused them to set me up for some newsletter thing. omg btw DTRPG will totes have some more Rifters soon! *FingerGunToHeadGesture*
Unsubscribed in turn, but that reminds me I need to go into their settings and nuke from orbit whatever 'opt out' email garbage they might have.
Just an FYI, I know that sort of thing drives some people crazy.
Forar wrote: Strain on the server? From adding a web page/the cards? Or the theoretical swell of people coming to the site? There's... like... at least four directions to take that. >.>
Careful with DriveThruRPG. Just glancing at the stupid paper PFRPG standees the other day caused them to set me up for some newsletter thing. omg btw DTRPG will totes have some more Rifters soon! *FingerGunToHeadGesture*
Unsubscribed in turn, but that reminds me I need to go into their settings and nuke from orbit whatever 'opt out' email garbage they might have.
Just an FYI, I know that sort of thing drives some people crazy.
Mike1975 wrote: [On the FB page
Wayne Smith
At some point we'll host them, or some version of them, on our website, too. I'm still working on that page, though, plus I want to avoid the strain on our server as much as possible.
Automatically Appended Next Post: He also said more cards will be up soon
Thanks Mike.
Next suggestion to Wayne, placeholder of the card at PB with a link to DriveThru for the download.
No strain on server other than the added clicks until the day arrives.
Forar wrote: Strain on the server? From adding a web page/the cards? Or the theoretical swell of people coming to the site? There's... like... at least four directions to take that. >.>
If you've ever worked with an old PDP-11 or VAX you know it takes a lot of effort to program
(and it's hard to get the spare tapes now, they don't make them like that anymore)
It looks like a GW rule a bit doesn't it?
(Snip)
The rules are well written, tons better than a GW rule, and are easy to learn.
Why not both!
Yeah, I should really learn to type my entire thought out. As a whole, the rules are better than GW rules. A new game will always have an odd rule. The one rule I was referencing is written like GW rules. Which someone else was stating as an awkwardly written rule that could have been so much cleaner.
*usual Facebook -> Closed Group -> Limited Effectiveness Issues*
Making them available digitally now and putting them into the wave 2 bags is good news on both fronts.
And hey, inadvertent good news about Wave 2.
Now, I wonder if we'll actually get something about the figures of Wave Two before CNY sets in again.
Gonna ride the fence on this one; I wouldn't be surprised if they waited until the last minute to show off everything they have at once, but frankly it wouldn't surprise me if we had to wait until March or so. It's 3 weeks away and the best we've gotten so far is "wave 2 is totes coming along", but without at least renders or pre-production prototypes or 3D printed sprue test pieces or *something* tangible, that carries even less weight than it did during wave one.
They have to wait until the last minute so it will be too late to make all the changes backers request to fix the obvious flaws.
Then say "it's ok guts, we totally learned our lesson for next time!"
Forar wrote: Now, I wonder if we'll actually get something about the figures of Wave Two before CNY sets in again.
Gonna ride the fence on this one; I wouldn't be surprised if they waited until the last minute to show off everything they have at once,
Doubt it. Given the gak storm that brewed up over the initial amateur PB builds, PB probably decided "feth it, it's not worth the hassle". Which is really disappointing, as I kinda liked the previews and samples.
Palladium is working on a number things to support and promote Robotech® RPG Tactics™, including an ongoing FAQ to be posted online, color and paint guides, “step by step” detailed instructions for building the game pieces and many other useful tools and information for your gaming enjoyment.
The container with the rewards for European backers was finally loaded on its ship this past weekend, and set sail on Monday morning. She should be passing through the Panama Canal early next week, and is currently scheduled to reach the UK around February 20.
We loaded up a 20-foot container full of Australian backer rewards on Thursday last week, and it is en route to the port. Ironically, in order to avoid the West Coast port congestion that plagued the container headed to Europe, the Australia container will be shipping out of New York. Its ship, the Corcovado, is scheduled to set sail from New York on February 8, and to reach Sydney four weeks later. That’s subject to weather and other delays, of course. We’ll keep an eye on things and update you if anything changes.
After having a good conversation with Jeff Burke this is the method of Blast missiles:
The attacker can decide if he would like to target all missiles on the same mecha or point of impact or he can choose to target individual points for each missile.
Option 1: the attacker can pick a target of the attack and launch all or some of the missiles at a single target. The group of missiles rolls 1 Dice to hit. If it hits, the damage is all of the missiles in the group MD damage combined. If it misses, it scatters as per the rules, but the scatter damage is only one missiles MD damage.
Option 2: the attacker can pick multiple targets, one for each missile (this includes multiple spots on the ground). Roll for EACH missile. Misses scatter as normal and deal damage as normal.
Attempts at shooting the missiles down are for EACH Attack Dice. If the missiles are grouped under one attack, then every mecha under the template gets a shot at the incoming missiles, any success shoots down all of the missiles in that group. If the attacks are separated yet overlap, the mecha under the templates gets a free shot at EACH attack, treating them separately. A success eliminates only that missile or group.
Likewise, attempts to ‘Dodge’ and ‘Roll with Impact’ are handled per attack DICE, not individual missiles. So, if the attacked launches 4 missiles at three targets (1 group of 2 missiles, 2 individual missiles), he would roll 3 dice to attack. Each attack dice would be treated separately with regard to ‘Dodge’ and ‘Roll with Impact’.
I will post an example when time permits and put this in the FAQ.
Group all missiles under one attack: each model under the blast get a chance to shoot down the 'one' attack.
If we split the missiles as separate attacks: each model under the blast gets a chance to shoot down 'each' attack.
Is it just me, or for the sake of gameplay I would do one big attack?
Why is my mind boggling trying to figure out which method is better for chances to hit?
I suppose, as individual attacks there would be a higher chance of sucking out command points dodging or rolling with impact.
<jazzhands!!!>
Imo the only way to go is missiles at seperate targets. I have to reread the ground targetting rule but I think it might be more of an advantage to target a point on the ground instead of the actual target as well.
Option 1: basically you fire all at one spot, add the damage like one super missile. If you miss they all miss/deviate. If you hit they all hit. If a unit is hit it only pays one CP to attempt to dodge.
Bad: All or nothing to hit.....
Bad: The present rules make deviated shots basically a given to dodge since you need to roll at 1-3 to miss since you only need to hit a DF of 5.
Good: Die rolling iis minimized.
Option 2: basically split up the missiles 1/4 inch apart or more. Roll at attack die for each missile.
Very Very Bad: Defender needs to roll against every single missile with AM. If Defender has no AM or wishes to dodge, he must pay one command point PER UNIT and PER DODGE attempt in order to dodge the missile.
Bad: Misses are again too easy to dodge.
FIX: 1. Each salvo declares location of center of blast and marks it on the table.
2. For each missile roll to strike
3. Deviated shots are moved to new locations
4. Under each individual blast roll for Anti-Missile, remove if successful.
5. Working from one end/blast marker to the other, If a unit wishes to dodge and is covered by multiple blast it will only pay one command point and make one dodge roll attempt. If successful at dodging a few of the blasts the other blasts will hit normally. So if one missile hits with a 7, one with a 6 and one with a 5 and you roll a 6 total to dodge (adding in PIL), then only the blast with the result of a 7 strikes the target.
6. Once all the units under one blast marker have been taken care of (AM/Dodge/Roll)remove the marker from the table and move to the next blast marker.
7. Any missiles that missed and deviate count as if they have hit the ground with a DF of 5. So deviated blast missiles are not automatically dodged but AM and other functions are repeated as normal.
8. Units with cover between them and the center of the blast will get the cover bonus.
9. Blasts that roll a high enough DF to hit some targets under the blast radius but not all, such as A Glaug (DF 7) and a Glauf (DF 6) only strike the targets that they roll high enough to meet or exceed the DF for. The reason is that some units like the MAC II and the Glaug have higher DF to represent thicker and harder to penetrate armor. So a Monster will need to be struck with a high enough strike roll as to penetrate the armor. Example is a Monster surrounded by Defenders. The Blast may well strike the target zone but not have the ability to damage the Monster but still damage the Defender.
This reduces the total amount of command points a defender burns when attacked by blast missiles to a more reasonable level. This also increases the effectiveness of missiles that deviate from their target.
The attached picture is also an option for just straight out Anti-Missile
rigeld2 wrote: We're getting into GW levels of rules... I thought this was supposed to be a simple, quick rules set?
As with anything it's a balance as to how realistic you feel the rules should be vs how playable. Hence the reason Starfleet Battles eventually came out with the Commander and so many other versions that kept the flavor but made great strides in simplifying things.
rigeld2 wrote: We're getting into GW levels of rules... I thought this was supposed to be a simple, quick rules set?
You're new here, aren't you.
Go pick up the RIFTS book, and you'll see where things are headed.
As long as we don't have to make a character...
I wish spreadsheets were around when Rifts first came out; you did not cry because your character died, it was because you had to make a new one.
The rules have struck me as pretty one dimensional, if only because of how ungodly strong missiles are. And how everything has a half dozen.
Every single game I've played is round 1: All forces advance, take cover where possible, and fire as many missiles as possible. Both sides lose half their models.
Round 2: Remaining half fire all their missiles again. Less missles than before, as you've dumped your low-ammo racks. Forces reduced to a third of starting
Round 3: Whatever's left fires their last missiles (Valks have 3 turns of missiles), Maybe somebody without missiles shoots a gun or something, but nobody cares.
Round 4: Like, 1/5th of what's left of either force shoots, clubs or kicks each other to death.
It's like Palladium decided D&D was popular due to the complexity and tailoring, and then decided that constantly adding MOAR of everything to everything would "improve" it and make their world "better". Not so much.
I can't wait for the "final" force creation rules, because you just know they'll be more and more RIFTS-like with more and more options and specials to add.
____
Round 1: All forces advance, take cover where possible, and fire as many missiles as possible. Both sides lose half their models.
Round 2: Remaining half fire all their missiles again. Less missles than before, as you've dumped your low-ammo racks. Forces reduced to a third of starting
Round 3: Whatever's left fires their last missiles (Valks have 3 turns of missiles), Maybe somebody without missiles shoots a gun or something, but nobody cares.
Round 4: Like, 1/5th of what's left of either force shoots, clubs or kicks each other to death.
If I wanted a game to be exactly like the anime, I'd sing a pop song and win instantly.
It's just so dull. We have a lot of gamers with good experience in modern minis games, spanning the range from complex to beer-and-pretzels, but well. RTT in how we've played it has less tactical depth than even 40k, and that's saying something.
Walking forward and spamming missiles (cover barely matters as a modifier), occasionally halving damage with a CP just doesn't make a fun game.
Killionaire wrote: If I wanted a game to be exactly like the anime, I'd sing a pop song and win instantly.
It's just so dull. We have a lot of gamers with good experience in modern minis games, spanning the range from complex to beer-and-pretzels, but well. RTT in how we've played it has less tactical depth than even 40k, and that's saying something.
Walking forward and spamming missiles (cover barely matters as a modifier), occasionally halving damage with a CP just doesn't make a fun game.
Making wargamers sing verses of a girly pop song for bonuses would be a great mechanic.
To be fair, 40k has more than 2 factions and far more units per faction.
I swear, if I ever get around to making my WW I simulation game, RRT will look totally dynamic... Good turn? A unit advances 3" on the board with only 20% losses. Bad turn? Unit takes 50% casualties due to exposure and disease. After turn 7, tally points to see which side lost less.
Killionaire wrote: If I wanted a game to be exactly like the anime, I'd sing a pop song and win instantly.
Given most gamers' vocal talents (gleaned from two post game drunken kareoke nights), you would win. My first instinct would be to
and then I'd walk away and concede.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Killionaire wrote: The rules have struck me as pretty one dimensional, if only because of how ungodly strong missiles are. And how everything has a half dozen.
Every single game I've played is round 1: All forces advance, take cover where possible, and fire as many missiles as possible. Both sides lose half their models.
Round 2: Remaining half fire all their missiles again. Less missles than before, as you've dumped your low-ammo racks. Forces reduced to a third of starting
Round 3: Whatever's left fires their last missiles (Valks have 3 turns of missiles), Maybe somebody without missiles shoots a gun or something, but nobody cares.
Round 4: Like, 1/5th of what's left of either force shoots, clubs or kicks each other to death.
Meh.
Do you play with destructible cover? Does that help or not matter at all? The missiles did seem concerning to me but the fact that almost everyone had anti-missile systems seemed to dissipate that fear for me personally at least in theory (haven't played yet).
Killionaire wrote: If I wanted a game to be exactly like the anime, I'd sing a pop song and win instantly.
Given most gamers' vocal talents (gleaned from two post game drunken kareoke nights), you would win. My first instinct would be to
and then I'd walk away and concede.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Killionaire wrote: The rules have struck me as pretty one dimensional, if only because of how ungodly strong missiles are. And how everything has a half dozen.
Every single game I've played is round 1: All forces advance, take cover where possible, and fire as many missiles as possible. Both sides lose half their models.
Round 2: Remaining half fire all their missiles again. Less missles than before, as you've dumped your low-ammo racks. Forces reduced to a third of starting
Round 3: Whatever's left fires their last missiles (Valks have 3 turns of missiles), Maybe somebody without missiles shoots a gun or something, but nobody cares.
Round 4: Like, 1/5th of what's left of either force shoots, clubs or kicks each other to death.
Meh.
Do you play with destructible cover? Does that help or not matter at all? The missiles did seem concerning to me but the fact that almost everyone had anti-missile systems seemed to dissipate that fear for me personally at least in theory (haven't played yet).
No destructable cover. So that should actually be to the benefit of the defender, but it's not really.
Almost every unit in the whole game is destroyed if two standard sized missiles hit it. And everything fires between 4 to 8 missiles in a volley. The roll to hit is not hard, since it's just a base gunnery + dice trying to meet a defense value. Usually, it's a 3+ or 4+ to hit, which isn't hard.
To shoot down a missile, with an anti-missile system, you're rolling a 5+, and forgoing dodging.
This means that at any given time, if I decided to 'merely' have my Valkyrie fire 4 missiles, 2 each on 2 enemy Valkyries, 3+ to hit and them electing to use 5+ Anti-missile, it's trivial. Each has a 43 percent chance of being destroyed. Both have a ~20 percent chance of being destroyed.
And that's just one missile system. Stuff like the Tomahawk have more.
Meanwhile, it takes a bare minimum of 3 gunpod attacks to destroy the same target, in which the target has a dodge chance too. So between three attacks, I have probably around a 10 percent chance of killing a single target.
---
tldr; Anti-missile sucks since you're just banking on a roll of 5+ to 'not die', vs units that can fire multiple missiles. Also, since gun attacks can be dodged, those suck worse.
You don't roll AM vs each individual missile but against the entire volley. If you are hit by 1 or 12 missiles you still need a 5 or 6 to shoot them down. If you have missiles that you can use in an anti-missile role that becomes a 4+.
In the cartoon OTOH Rick and Max and other better pilots would have an even greater chance of shooting the missiles down. That is why I proposed the optional anti-missile rules shown in the attached picture in the post above.
Adding the PIL skill improves the pilots chance of avoiding missile fire. Most units have a PIL of 2, even Regults. MPA, FPA, Glaugs, Destroid Commanders, VF-1J and VF-1S, basically all the command level units have a higher chance of shooting down missiles.
Automatically Appended Next Post: A big advantage of the GU-11 is that the Battloid has a GUN of +1 in Battloid over the other modes making the shots harder to dodge and they cannot be shot down like missiles.
I know that's how anti-missile works. It still sucks. Because if I scatter missiles across 4 targets, and expect it to kill on a hit, I've still killed 3 targets despite anti-missile.
+1 GUN for the gunpod is not a good advantage. That thing does 5 damage as my shot. A missile volley is better, since it can do up to 36. And it can do that for three turns in a row. Why would I go to battleloid, when I could stay in Guardian, with it's defense bonus, and spamming missiles instead of relying on a gun that does an eighth the damage?
Unfortunately, gunpod bullets that 'cannot be shot down' are not an advantage, since you can still dodge those.
Really, the game's rules are flawed quite deeply. The core mechanics can work, but the numbers for all probabilities are seriously off. No serious game design thought went into how they'd end up, and you get utter rubbish.
Look at hero units, and especially importing your custom character. So a guy with minor upgrades is 120+ points? WTF?
Really, Missiles needed a serious counter. Perhaps they need a command point to fire, or something, or suffer extra-hard against cover, or can be both shot down and dodged at the same time (instead of just one or the other). But they dominate all games I've played.
Anyway, game's DOA in both North and South California in three stores I've been at due to horrid rules.
Killionaire wrote: I know that's how anti-missile works. It still sucks. Because if I scatter missiles across 4 targets, and expect it to kill on a hit, I've still killed 3 targets despite anti-missile.
+1 GUN for the gunpod is not a good advantage. That thing does 5 damage as my shot. A missile volley is better, since it can do up to 36. And it can do that for three turns in a row. Why would I go to battleloid, when I could stay in Guardian, with it's defense bonus, and spamming missiles instead of relying on a gun that does an eighth the damage?
Unfortunately, gunpod bullets that 'cannot be shot down' are not an advantage, since you can still dodge those.
Really, the game's rules are flawed quite deeply. The core mechanics can work, but the numbers for all probabilities are seriously off. No serious game design thought went into how they'd end up, and you get utter rubbish.
Look at hero units, and especially importing your custom character. So a guy with minor upgrades is 120+ points? WTF?
Really, Missiles needed a serious counter. Perhaps they need a command point to fire, or something, or suffer extra-hard against cover, or can be both shot down and dodged at the same time (instead of just one or the other). But they dominate all games I've played.
Anyway, game's DOA in both North and South California in three stores I've been at due to horrid rules.
LOL, Horrid rules from people who have barely played? I'm worried.... The vast majority of all the games posted up on the facebook page have been the total opposite of what you say. Most people enjoy the fast play style and the tactical variability with command points and alternating activations.
So 1. Volley limits you to spreading out missiles to targets within LOS and also 2 inches from the primary target.
2. That means typically you are talking 3 targets at best.
3. There is a 1 in 3 to shoot down the missile using AM. That means likely only 2 get slammed.
4. Pods can Roll or share damage, this ensures that they can survive a hit by a medium missile.
5. Pods are only worth 1/4 what a VT is worth. If you are in missile range they can activate and get into range and fire back.
1. The GU-11 is VERY useful. At first I played as you do, spamming with Guardian mode.
2. Get the VT into Cover.
3. Not being able to get shot down is no biggie since you can still dodge is only half the story. To dodge you have to meet or exceed the attack roll. So a VF-1A has a GN of 3 in Battloid. That increased GN means that the shot is harder to dodge. The player only needs a 3+ to strike and not a 4+ as with missiles in the other modes. If he hits the Pod will have a harder chance of dodging. So easier to hit and harder to dodge than missiles.
4. Once I started using VT's that way it can make a big difference.
Again, changing AM and making it easier to shoot down missiles is something I'm all for. Adding the PIL of the defender to the roll makes it much more realistic in my mind and matches the cartoon better.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and AP's to build characters are NOT the same as in game points. I hate that system too and redid it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also you do realize there is a Northern California RRT Gamers Facebook page right?
LOL, Horrid rules from people who have barely played? I'm worried....
You just described most products from palladium for the past 2 decades. The megairony is so thick you can cut it with a vibroblade!
The RPG system is not that bad. Better than others I have played. The main problem is that they are way freaking screwed up. You have to look at 20 different pages and you have to have an experienced players to tell you how and what works together. If the rules were re-organized with examples they would be twice as playable. I've made quite a few characters and that is the biggest PITA. If they redid that the game's popularity could improve. Sadly they refuse to do so.
As someone that has extensively played Rifts (mixed with Nightbane, Robotech, System Failure, Heroes Unlimited, PFRPG and others), the baseline rules aren't great. As in, objectively, they are often unclear, contradictory, and are often at odds (mechanically) with the setting they are presented in.
Yes, there are absolutely worse games (and 'games', yes F.A.T.A.L., I'm looking at you) out there, but my group eventually had a document multiple pages long that was maintained to keep track of all the clarifications, tweaks and modifications we found necessary, not just to meet our general needs for the game, but to keep things clear.
And then there was the Initiative Tracker. That thing was a work of art, and yet not for the faint of heart.
The setting is plenty fun, and my group had a blast with it until we picked up 3E/4E D&D, but it wasn't without stumbling points.
Not to dispute that you might have found it plenty workable. On the PB Forums there are certainly others who think it's the best thing since sliced bread, but this is something that unlike RRT, I have played the gak out of and can speak from extensive experience on. Experiences may vary, but man, those were an interesting 6-7 years, and we really put that system through the wringer, from lower powered adventures to committing justifiable genocide. Twice.
What Forar said, If it was not for Robotech I would have never bought the first book. I do like the way the Fantasy RPG did magic vs D and D and spell memorization though. TMNT was also fun.
The RPG system is not that bad.Better than others I have played. The main problem is that they are way freaking screwed up.
[yoda voice] Conflict in you, I sense... [/yoda voice]
The RPG mechanically was the worst that I've personally played that is still in production and supported. YMMV. It was a slightly improved version of D&D 2e which I also disliked with a passion for it's bolt on we thought of this at the last second and threw it in feel. YMMV. Regardless, we played despite the inconsistencies, confusion, and conflicting rules because of two main reasons for a decade:
1) We didn't know any better. It was our high school group's first RPG and one of the few that supported all our interests at least in some mechanical way (albeit a dysfunctional way). None of us had played anything else and the GM's only experience was looking through his older brother's 1980's GURPS books occasionally.
2) We liked the setting and the art. Even though one guy was an ubertrekkie with a phaser as his main weapon, I wanted to start with a veritech pilot character, and another later character played was totally-not-buffy-the-vampire-slayer, there were still plenty of characters from within the IP.
The rules were what hindered our fun, not enhanced it... but it worked for a time until slowly most of us found rules we actually liked more and the monthly game turned into one played largely only for the GM's birthday.
The RPG system is not that bad.Better than others I have played. The main problem is that they are way freaking screwed up.
[yoda voice] Conflict in you, I sense... [/yoda voice]
The RPG mechanically was the worst that I've personally played that is still in production and supported. YMMV. It was a slightly improved version of D&D 2e which I also disliked with a passion for it's bolt on we thought of this at the last second and threw it in feel. YMMV. Regardless, we played despite the inconsistencies, confusion, and conflicting rules because of two main reasons for a decade:
1) We didn't know any better. It was our high school group's first RPG and one of the few that supported all our interests at least in some mechanical way (albeit a dysfunctional way). None of us had played anything else and the GM's only experience was looking through his older brother's 1980's GURPS books occasionally.
2) We liked the setting and the art. Even though one guy was an ubertrekkie with a phaser as his main weapon, I wanted to start with a veritech pilot character, and another later character played was totally-not-buffy-the-vampire-slayer, there were still plenty of characters from within the IP.
The rules were what hindered our fun, not enhanced it... but it worked for a time until slowly most of us found rules we actually liked more and the monthly game turned into one played largely only for the GM's birthday.
LOL, actually there were a lot of things that we liked with the system, A lot we did not like either. GURPS was more realistic but to the point of insanity. A modifier to how far you could go in a day based on height? You could roll a failed crit and kill yourself when throwing a rock? D and D I never liked the straight AC system. You can't harm me because I have magical armor but my buddy that has magical bracelets and a cloak is harder to hurt? I guess as with everything beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I have never understood how easily some people's suspension of disbelief is broken when literal magic is involved.
"So this Chain Shirt +5 is somehow equal in protection to Plate Mail +1?"
"Yes."
"How?"
"Magic. Next question."
Which, to tie it back around, is something that drives me crazy when people start arguing about realism in Robotech (and RRT). I get that you can have inconsistencies within a setting (or game) that can be jarring, but when we're talking about a fighter jet that can fly while transforming in this way without tearing itself apart and then crash through a city block without more than scratching the paint job, we're talking materials that might as well have "A Wizard Did It" written on the data sheets.
But somehow the caliber of a gun doing too much/not enough damage pulls them right out.
Not to mention introducing the notion that sometimes fluff and hard reality need to take a step aside for game balance.
Forar wrote: I have never understood how easily some people's suspension of disbelief is broken when literal magic is involved.
<snip> I get that you can have inconsistencies within a setting (or game) that can be jarring, but when we're talking about a fighter jet that can fly while transforming in this way without tearing itself apart and then crash through a city block without more than scratching the paint job, we're talking materials that might as well have "A Wizard Did It" written on the data sheets.
Funny, this was a rather "visual" example of how Palladium introduced the concept of MegaDamage:
Fire a machine gun at a tank and chip the paintjob but really do nothing.
There is SDC (cardboardium) and then there is MD (adamentium).
I think the getting bent out of shape is based on expectation set by the setting portrayed in the books.
According to what I observed in Japanese Anime; a sword is WAY better than a gun in a fight.
I just think of MIB and "Noisy Cricket" and it puts it all in perspective.
LOL, Horrid rules from people who have barely played? I'm worried....
You just described most products from palladium for the past 2 decades.
The megairony is so thick you can cut it with a vibroblade!
IMO, everybody who's ever played RIFTS should have been very well aware of Palladium's ability to write clear, concise, balanced rulesets. Or not.
Vibroblade, like the knife you bring to a gunfight in Heavy Gear? I understand those guys at Dream Pod 9 also do a stellar job of ruleswriting and balance. Also very professional management, no delays.
The main problem is that they are way freaking screwed up. You have to look at 20 different pages and you have to have an experienced players to tell you how and what works together. If the rules were re-organized with examples they would be twice as playable. I've made quite a few characters and that is the biggest PITA. If they redid that the game's popularity could improve. Sadly they refuse to do so.
If your best defense consists of saying "it's not that bad", by definition, it *is* is at least that bad. Probably worse. No lie.
When you say it's better than others, but cannot immediately list examples, again, you're not helping make the case for RIFTS not being terrible. Also, you sharing that dog gak tastes better than pig gak really isn't the kind of endorsement that makes me want to get out my spoon.
And yes, they are hugely screwed up. Making RIFTS characters is so painful. Don't do this seriously. The best way to make a RIFTS character is to start drinking. Once you've got a decent buzz on, flip through until you find something that looks good, and pick it. The rest can be arbitrary. The details? feth it. If you don't really care, it works out a lot better.
Might want to go back and read some posts there DD. I did speak briefly about Gurps and D and D. Thought there was no sense in going into minutia since this is kinda off topic.
Oh, RIFTS is definitely on topic, because Palladium did both, and we're starting to see how the design philosophy from RIFTS is making its way into RRT. The missiles thing is just the first real indication of RRT becoming a "true" Palladium game.
Looking at how Palladium has done character creation in RIFTS gives good insight into how forces will be created and composed for RRT. In RIFTS, a ninja juicer is par with dragon borg, or a Glitter Boy robot pilot. Also, an office accountant. I do not expect balance in RRT, now that ND is out of the picture.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Oh, RIFTS is definitely on topic, because Palladium did both, and we're starting to see how the design philosophy from RIFTS is making its way into RRT. The missiles thing is just the first real indication of RRT becoming a "true" Palladium game.
Looking at how Palladium has done character creation in RIFTS gives good insight into how forces will be created and composed for RRT. In RIFTS, a ninja juicer is par with dragon borg, or a Glitter Boy robot pilot. Also, an office accountant. I do not expect balance in RRT, now that ND is out of the picture.
Don't be ridiculous! There are no office accountants in rifts! There are, however, IIRC, homeless people and librarians in the core book though on par with 20ft tall robots who can sink a modern cruiser in seconds. Also, the missile rules (complete with the stupid "can't dodge more than 4" rule) is straight from the RPG which ultimately shouldn't be surprising given literally the name of the game. I suspect though that more people were simply hoping for more/better given the lies told to us during the actual 30 day campaign.
I distinctly recall the RIFTS core book having generic human beings with no special stuff as a valid character choice. I didn't have my RIFTS book handy and couldn't recall if it was a librarian or accountant. Sorry, my bad.
And yes, Palladium bringing the higher-detail RPG rules to what should be fast & smooth RRT is exactly what I expected, but did not want.
Killionaire wrote: I know that's how anti-missile works. It still sucks. Because if I scatter missiles across 4 targets, and expect it to kill on a hit, I've still killed 3 targets despite anti-missile.
+1 GUN for the gunpod is not a good advantage. That thing does 5 damage as my shot. A missile volley is better, since it can do up to 36. And it can do that for three turns in a row. Why would I go to battleloid, when I could stay in Guardian, with it's defense bonus, and spamming missiles instead of relying on a gun that does an eighth the damage?
Unfortunately, gunpod bullets that 'cannot be shot down' are not an advantage, since you can still dodge those.
Really, the game's rules are flawed quite deeply. The core mechanics can work, but the numbers for all probabilities are seriously off. No serious game design thought went into how they'd end up, and you get utter rubbish.
Look at hero units, and especially importing your custom character. So a guy with minor upgrades is 120+ points? WTF?
Really, Missiles needed a serious counter. Perhaps they need a command point to fire, or something, or suffer extra-hard against cover, or can be both shot down and dodged at the same time (instead of just one or the other). But they dominate all games I've played.
Anyway, game's DOA in both North and South California in three stores I've been at due to horrid rules.
LOL, Horrid rules from people who have barely played? I'm worried.... The vast majority of all the games posted up on the facebook page have been the total opposite of what you say. Most people enjoy the fast play style and the tactical variability with command points and alternating activations.
So 1. Volley limits you to spreading out missiles to targets within LOS and also 2 inches from the primary target.
2. That means typically you are talking 3 targets at best.
3. There is a 1 in 3 to shoot down the missile using AM. That means likely only 2 get slammed.
4. Pods can Roll or share damage, this ensures that they can survive a hit by a medium missile.
5. Pods are only worth 1/4 what a VT is worth. If you are in missile range they can activate and get into range and fire back.
1. The GU-11 is VERY useful. At first I played as you do, spamming with Guardian mode.
2. Get the VT into Cover.
3. Not being able to get shot down is no biggie since you can still dodge is only half the story. To dodge you have to meet or exceed the attack roll. So a VF-1A has a GN of 3 in Battloid. That increased GN means that the shot is harder to dodge. The player only needs a 3+ to strike and not a 4+ as with missiles in the other modes. If he hits the Pod will have a harder chance of dodging. So easier to hit and harder to dodge than missiles.
4. Once I started using VT's that way it can make a big difference.
Again, changing AM and making it easier to shoot down missiles is something I'm all for. Adding the PIL of the defender to the roll makes it much more realistic in my mind and matches the cartoon better.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and AP's to build characters are NOT the same as in game points. I hate that system too and redid it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also you do realize there is a Northern California RRT Gamers Facebook page right?
This doesn't really address my points at all. It's a horrid ruleset, which is why it died rapidly after everyone gave it a shot. What, do you expect us to play a [i[bad game[/i], when we could be having a blast playing Infinity or Dark Age or Dropzone or one of the (working) Spartan games?
Anyway, you didn't refute at all the problem with missiles.
3 Gun means I'm rolling a target dodge of 4-9. That means the average hit is a 7.5, meaning a dodger of the gunpod needs to roll a 5+ much of the time to avoid 5 damage, and only occasionally a 4+. Against missiles, you just need to do a 5+ anyway against an attack would do between 9 to 36 damage. It's obvious which one is superior almost every time. I'll take 2 GUN missiles, especially as those can roll up to 4 dice against that single target.
With any reasonable game design, a unit should NOT have the firepower and probability on it's side to destroy multiples of itself per turn. This leads to a degeneracy of the game into mass wipe-outs very early on, especially for a ranged attack which can control massive amounts of area. Even if the target spreads out, that just means you've concentrated your probability of scoring multiple missile hits on a single opponent, more than 'paying for' the cost of the guy firing the shots in a single attack.
This leads to the game being all about alpha strikes and little else, especially as Cover has minimal effect when you're targetted by 4 or more seperate missiles, at least some of which will roll 5 or 6 and kill you.
Mike, I'm sorry, but you've got worse rose-colored glasses than even the HG White Knights, and that's saying something. You're defending a system that you have stated that you've house ruled a ton of stuff on, which really, really obviously suggests a bad game.
We're now in a modern era of game design, where quantifiable principles and working models of streamlined but nuanced mechanics are very much a thing. RTT reads like a dinosaur someone wrote in the early 90s or late 80s,
---
To make missiles much more fair, they need to be much harder to apply. Perhaps friendlies within (X) can spend a CP to contribute anti-missile rerolls, for example. This would mean alpha striking a wave of missiles as your first shot would result in most all of them being shot down, making missiles only a viable (but devastating) weapon when the enemy is low on CP, for example.
But somehow the caliber of a gun doing too much/not enough damage pulls them right out.
Not to mention introducing the notion that sometimes fluff and hard reality need to take a step aside for game balance.
I think a good part of that is that a disturbing number of gamers masturbate to Guns & Ammo.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JohnHwangDD wrote: Oh, RIFTS is definitely on topic, because Palladium did both, and we're starting to see how the design philosophy from RIFTS is making its way into RRT. The missiles thing is just the first real indication of RRT becoming a "true" Palladium game.
Looking at how Palladium has done character creation in RIFTS gives good insight into how forces will be created and composed for RRT. In RIFTS, a ninja juicer is par with dragon borg, or a Glitter Boy robot pilot. Also, an office accountant. I do not expect balance in RRT, now that ND is out of the picture.
Did you know taking up boxing, running, or Judo makes you more able to shrug off gunshots? It's TRUE!
The entire RRT games set is BASED on the RPG. That was known and has been known for ages. Does that mean it is the same thing? No. The missiles came from that. The massive # of HtH attacks came from that. For the license to work it MUST be based on the RPG in some way or form. If anyone thought otherwise they are unaware of the facts.
Now Killionaire....
First off you shoot yourself in the foot by showing that you have not played much it at all. GU-11's do 6 points of damage, not 5. I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt that this was a typo but you did it twice. They also have rapid fire, and can fire an additional time in Battloid for a total of 18 points of uniterceptable damage.
You are assuming a few things to make a VERY specific case.
Example 1. VT in Guardian mode shoots at 3 Pods with DF of 6. He has a GN of 2. That means he needs a 4+ to hit. Let's pretend he hits with one missile on each target....75%. Note this is more than the average.
Now the Pods all roll Anti-Missile, because it is free. They need a 5+. One succeeds and the other 2 take a hit for 9 points. Normally enough to kill them but one shields his buddy. So now one is taking 9 points and the other 2 are taking 4. The player decides to Roll with Impact for all 3 Pods. The one that was going to take 9 now takes only 4 and survives. The other 2 that each were going to take 4 now only take one point of damage each.
Final tally , 3 Command Points Spent, no losses, one pod hammered with 4 of his 5 gone and the other 2 have taken 2 points each.
Example 2. The GU-11 fires in battloid and Rapid Fires for one more shot at the cost of a Command Point. He shoots at 2 Pods. They have a DF of 6. He needs only a 3+ with his GN of 3 to hit. That means he has a 16% greater chance to hit with each shot. He rolls a 3 and a 5. Pretty average roll. The Pods dodge and expend 2 command points for the attempt. So the GU-11 FORCES expenditure of Command Points, Anti-Missile does not. The Pods each have a PIL of 2. The one that got hit with the roll of a 3 needs a 4+ to dodge. The other Pod needs a 6 or he is hit. Let's say one dodges. The other now takes 6 points. He Rolls, spends another command point and takes 3 damage.
So missiles are superior in most cases. If this was against a Glaug, the Glaug could use missiles as hit AM Defense OR Dodge depending upon what he preferred. If he uses the missiles he only needs a 4+ (50%) to shoot the missiles down regardless of how many hit him. If he is out of those he can use his normal weapons in AM mode and get the 5+ or dodge.
ALSO you are comparing Pods in value to a VT? At most with the best rolls a VF-1A will be able to kill 2 others and that if all his shots hit and neither target Rolls with Impact.
So I have no ROSE COLORED glasses but actual gameplay experience....I also have pushed and proposed fixes to every point that I see can be improved as I stated above.
So my counsel is go and play the game. Your posts do not inspire me with a sense that you have actually played. You may have. But I do not get that feeling. Also you complain about depth and tactics but never mention the tactical use of activations, troop maneuvering, command points, It sounds like you are comparing to 40k on a table without an ounce of terrain on it.
Can you give specific examples of "quantifiable principles and working models of streamlined but nuanced mechanics"?
JohnHwangDD wrote: Or just do a lot less damage. Or miss nearly all of the time.
The RPG rules are completely and totally written around Hero Factor. The heroes are basically indestructible, and that's fine. That's what stories generally have going on for the protagonists and significant antagonists.
The problem is, instead of including a mechanic that would allow for Heroes To Be Heroes, Palladium instead decided on some random numbers and ALL Veritechs have 350 (or whatever) MDC in the main body.
And if you want to make a really fantastic killing machine pilot? Have him be skilled in as many different martial arts as possible, and spam all the physical skills you can get up with to increase your attacks and PP.
Basically, according to the Robotech RPG, Lynn Kyle should would have made a better Veritech pilot than Max, because martial arts.
But somehow the caliber of a gun doing too much/not enough damage pulls them right out.
Not to mention introducing the notion that sometimes fluff and hard reality need to take a step aside for game balance.
I think a good part of that is that a disturbing number of gamers masturbate to Guns & Ammo.
Wouldn't surprise me. As much as I might respect their real-life service, if there's one thing I've generally come to dread when talking sci-fi/fantasy, it's a post starting with "my time in the military taught me ______".
I'm sure there are a ton of cool former military gamers. One of my favourite people to chat about the Lord of the Rings and X-Men movies was former NZ SAS.
But far too often it becomes some dude explaining how X weapon system should have Y effect, because of *reasons*, some better explained than others.
And some of that is going to be game balance. Or because authors/writers/game and anime and movie designers generally aren't hardcore military types (there are exceptions, but that's why having a couple of advisers on the payroll can go a long way). Or any number of other reasons (up to and including "this was written three decades ago, we have to bend anachronisms everywhere otherwise it feels like a period piece in fancier uniforms").
Merijeek wrote: And if you want to make a really fantastic killing machine pilot? Have him be skilled in as many different martial arts as possible, and spam all the physical skills you can get up with to increase your attacks and PP.
Ah, I see "Boxing, Gymnastics, Acrobatics, possibly Plyometrics, and maybe an advanced Martial Art from that one Rifter article or a sourcebook that is eluding me right now" were popular in your group too!
"Other and Secondary skills" were often just code for "here's how we turn those 3d6 attributes into 3d6+4" (except for speed which became something absurd like 3d6+4d4+8 and suddenly the average person with a few skills to blow is an olympic level sprinter).
Rifts character generation was definitely an involved process, and often unintuitive as hell. Eventually between power creep (Hi C.J.!) and having to account for the usual gun/armour/mech porn the books generally seemed to have going on, it could get a little weird.
Oh, and regarding the last page; there are absolutely 'normal human' characters in the Rifts books. The Rogue Scientist, Rogue Scholar and Vagabond "OCCs" (Occupational Character Class) were basically just 'person with a bunch of skills and crappier gear than the guys that start with power armour', but that's okay because the lack of balance is a feature, not a bug as far as Palladium and their long term fans are concerned. You can totally have a game where one person is holding a swiss army knife and a bottle of bourbon for combat, and the others are Dragon Hatchling Mystic Knights (of the White Rose, of course, an order with millions of members apparently) in Glitter Boys and carrying Rune Weapons.
Yes, it can be a pain to GM for; you have to have opponents that can challenge the latter without splattering the former by looking at him funny, but that's kind of an extreme example anyway, and can be offset by simply establishing within the group what type of game is being played (hard combat, political intrigue, thriller, hybrid, whatever) and having characters built accordingly.
And then sometimes you have "jimmy with a 9mm and a heart of courage" who either needs to mysteriously sprout super powers ("man, going through that Rift(tm)(c)(r) sure changed you, Jimmy! Also now you're covered in living steel and can fire ice blasts up to 100ft (+20ft per level)!") or become a fine mist when an MDC creature casually slapped him aside.
As I said before, there are some aspects to the system that are definitely at odds with the fluff/setting. Sometimes a reason is provided or created, sometimes you just shrug and accept that, sure, apparently that's just how it is. Again, because reasons.
No Merijeek, I mean real honest examples. His math proved nothing. It was a very specific example trying to use as proof of a much larger premise. I also did the math.
What about having missiles not hit with GUN but rather at a fixed value dependent on the type of missile (so more advanced ones hit with a higher value and less advanced ones shoot worse). While there is some pilot skill involved with firing missiles (especially in the past) depending on the angle of release and target trajectory, with the "modern" scifi fire and forget missiles, the skill of a legendary ace max stirling is the same as a 4 year old after pressing the big red button. WIth fire and forget missiles, the pilot could be comatose and it wouldn't have an effect once the missile leaves the pylon.
Heavy gear did something like that in the old RPG in that the guided ammuntion had its own stats used for firing independent of the pilot.
warboss wrote: What about having missiles not hit with GUN but rather at a fixed value dependent on the type of missile (so more advanced ones hit with a higher value and less advanced ones shoot worse). While there is some pilot skill involved with firing missiles (especially in the past) depending on the angle of release and target trajectory, with the "modern" scifi fire and forget missiles, the skill of a legendary ace max stirling is the same as a 4 year old after pressing the big red button. WIth fire and forget missiles, the pilot could be comatose and it wouldn't have an effect once the missile leaves the pylon.
Heavy gear did something like that in the old RPG in that the guided ammuntion had its own stats used for firing independent of the pilot.
Forar wrote: Wouldn't surprise me. As much as I might respect their real-life service, if there's one thing I've generally come to dread when talking sci-fi/fantasy, it's a post starting with "my time in the military taught me ______". I'm sure there are a ton of cool former military gamers. One of my favourite people to chat about the Lord of the Rings and X-Men movies was former NZ SAS. But far too often it becomes some dude explaining how X weapon system should have Y effect, because of *reasons*, some better explained than others.
And some of that is going to be game balance. Or because authors/writers/game and anime and movie designers generally aren't hardcore military types (there are exceptions, but that's why having a couple of advisers on the payroll can go a long way). Or any number of other reasons (up to and including "this was written three decades ago, we have to bend anachronisms everywhere otherwise it feels like a period piece in fancier uniforms").
[...]
As I said before, there are some aspects to the system that are definitely at odds with the fluff/setting. Sometimes a reason is provided or created, sometimes you just shrug and accept that, sure, apparently that's just how it is. Again, because reasons.
"Does it fit the setting?" is the question I prefer to ask first as my reaction to something, because in my experience that question tends to be glossed over if not outright ignored when the enthusiastic folks get together and try to create new ideas.
Sometimes things can be made to fit, but quite a lot of the time those ideas end up more like either a blatant $$$ grab inclusion intended to attract a different crowd of fans or just a purely "rule of cool" easter egg/addition. I think how well things fit the setting can indicate the presence of, or lack of, a coherent vision amongst those responsible for designing product(s), not to mention the presence or at least the utilized suggestions of some kind of knowledgeable adviser.
All too often however an awful lot of folks seem indifferent, or even eager, to give the design folks a pass that in the end equates to a completely free hand to introduce kitchen sink additions that turn a setting into something else entirely.
As for things military, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect the folks designing wargames to have done their homework before applying the knowledge, educated assumptions, and extrapolations in a manner true to the setting they are helping to create. Because yeah, too often over the years I've picked up a ruleset touted to be science-fiction oriented only to find it nothing more than a poorly-thought out theme thinly veneered over a [insert period war here] ruleset.
Why bother making something, going through all of the time and trouble, yet not have bothered to understand even the most basic questions that folks are going to ask other than to say "because I/we said so"?
In my opinion, it can simply be a matter of reversing the matter of suspension of disbelief.
Rather than saying "it doesn't work like that in real life, my immersions have been broken!", I'll simply see it as "wow, it normally doesn't work that way, must be *insert technobabble here*"
Rather than complaining that a 110mm round 'doesn't work that way', perhaps it's nanobots or hyper advanced explosive compounds or whatever.
Basically, having something tied to real life can be a short hand way to keep people on roughly the same page (we can go to Google and look up what that looks like, rather than needing to commission art and spend X lines describing it in detail), but at the same time the need for some people (Hi B_S!) to have hyper realism in their nigh-magic-transforming-jet-anime means trying to crash real life with something that is so very distinctly not-real life.
Now, yes, there have to be *some* baseline assumptions. I would be put off if something silly was presented, like people breathing methane and pooping frozen yogurt were clear plot points (it would not shock me if both of these were in one of the eight hundred Macross spin offs), but there are levels to which I'm willing to drill down before it gets unreasonable.
And let's be real; writers/designers can be as informed as they like, there'll always be some dude who is all "man, I spent fourteen tours of duty in a tank, and they failed on X, Y and Z".
But you're right, the real questions are does it fit in the setting, is it balanced (within the expectations of the system), is it fun, is it cool. A shoutout to the gun geeks is one thing, but some of those folks seem predisposed to bitch about how "oh, man, that's not a 7.62 round, that's totally 5.56 with the wrong jacket, noobs", which just as often comes across as less even an issue with the game and more them just showing off in a 'humble bragging' style. "Look at me and how much I know about this!"
Like, damn, I'm in security technology. Movies and shows and games get CCTV and ACMS (Access Control Management Systems) wrong alllll the time, but for the layperson, that's just how it works, and I don't expect them to call me up every time they're making an episode of Person of Interest or something.
The latest palladium news is comedy gold!
He specifically mentions that the update is not spam, then immediately follows with a mention of the company that ploughs their snow!
Joyboozer wrote: The latest palladium news is comedy gold!
He specifically mentions that the update is not spam, then immediately follows with a mention of the company that ploughs their snow!
After reading it, I have one simple request. Can someone from North America, Europe or Australia please email them and tell them that the the other places on the planet haven't been destroyed in a massive Kaiju invasion, and they can send my stuff anytime they want? Preferably as soon as possible? Maybe even mention us again?Thanks !
Evil_Toast wrote: Can someone from North America, Europe or Australia please email them and tell them that the the other places on the planet haven't been destroyed in a massive Kaiju invasion, and they can send my stuff anytime they want? Preferably as soon as possible? Maybe even mention us again?Thanks !
I believe they only respond to direct phone calls.
I am unsure I want to use-up my one phone call before they put me on call-block.
You-know, every kick-starter backer for himself.
Why is this darn itching guilt of being in North America so irritating?
Makes the complaints while having the product in hand seem that much more whiny.
Palladium continues to work on a number of things to support and promote Robotech® RPG Tactics™, including an ongoing FAQ to be posted online, color and paint guides, “step by step” detailed instructions for building the game pieces, and many other useful tools and information for your gaming enjoyment. We have also been doing a bunch of stuff to make the Robotech® RPG Tactics™ premiere appearance at AdeptiCon an outstanding one.
FREE Robotech® RPG Tactics Paint Guide Resource now available on DriveThruRPG.com. This is a pair of PDFs of Robotech® mecha presented as black and white line art as well as in various color schemes. They are a) for your reference, and b) for you to use to create your own color schemes on the computer before you paint.
Australia & Europe Shipping Updates. The container with the rewards for Australian backers is finally getting loaded onto the ship and setting sail this weekend! Meanwhile, the ship carrying European backers’ rewards has passed through the Panama Canal and is currently chugging its way through the Caribbean. Oddly enough, the ship heading for Europe will dock in Savannah, Georgia on Sunday, and the ship heading for Australia will dock in Savannah in Monday. The two could actually be in port at the same time, as they pass each other on their respective routes.
Robotech® RPG Tactics™ Tournament at AdeptiCon – www.adepticon.org
We’ve been told that the more of you who register for this event, the bigger it will become, so please join the fun. AdeptiCon will offer an official Robotech® RPG Tactics™ Tournament. It is Robotech® RPG Tactics™: Battle for Macross City™. Here are the highlights:
•This tournament will be 300 points and have several games with fantastic scenarios.
•Each table shall be a beautiful custom creation, for a unique gaming experience.
•Five different awards will ensure that no matter what aspect of the hobby you are most interested in, there is an award that will be for you.
•This tourney is for all levels of players, from first time tournament and convention attendants to the seasoned gamer.
•If you find yourself in the Chicagoland area, we would love for you to sign up, stop by and say hello and meet a group of people who have the same interests as you. Even if you are unlikely to play, we would be happy to meet everyone. Come join the fun, fast-paced game of Robotech® RPG Tactics™. Slots are limited!
UPDATE: DriveThruRPG.com – FREE Robotech® RPG Tactics™ color guides and more
Wayne has added some Robotech® RPG Tactics™ supplemental material including four game cards and the mecha painting/color design templates.
The FREE Robotech® RPG Tactics Paint Guide Resource. The color guide in the Robotech® RPG Tactics™ rule book contains several classic paint schemes from the Robotech® universe, providing different visual options for every unit in the game. Ah, but what about those of you who want to create your own paint schemes? Use these PDFs as work sheets to create your paint schemes and unique designs on the computer before you go to paint the actual game pieces.
Each of the PDFs provided contains the templates created by artist Jeffrey Burke for the Robotech® RPG Tactics™ rule book. They are in a digital format so that you can colorize and alter them using Photoshop, Paint, or almost any other graphics program to work out and test your original squadron designs. For your convenience, we included the color art as well as black and white “blank” versions of each unit for those of you who want to start from the ground up.
Test out your paint schemes, see how units look next to each other, and get a feel for how your army will look before you break out the paintbrushes. Enjoy.
Much, much more is coming in the weeks ahead. We plan to add a bunch of new material to DriveThruRPG.com over the next several weeks, so keep an eye on it. DriveThruRPG.com already offers 90+ Palladium Books titles available as PDFs with more to be made available soon. They currently include the Coalition Wars®/Siege on Tolkeen™ series, Splicers® RPG, The Rifter® issues #1-58 (with more being added soon), and first edition rules of the Rifts® RPG, Beyond the Supernatural™ RPG, Heroes Unlimited™ RPG, The Palladium Fantasy RPG®, and related 1st edition sourcebooks for each. And more! Like what? Like Fantasy Paper Miniatures and Game Master Kits for digital download. They are available only as PDF files and were designed special to help you run your games and build campaigns. There are also sneak previews of books and other good stuff. Check it out! And let other gamers know they are available too. We’ll be making more available on DriveThruRPG.com in the weeks and months to come. So take a look on a regular basis.
Gen Con Indy – July 30 to August 2, 2015
The important thing right now is we NEED Game Masters who plan to run Palladium events to contact Palladium Books and/or Gen Con game coordinators Victor Peterson and NMI with information about your games. We need your game info as soon as possible to get your games registered and in the Gen Con program book and online pre-reg. Getting the games listed in the Gen Con Games Pre-Registration is vital to get the outstanding showing we saw at last year’s Gen Con. PLEASE get us ALL game information by mid-February to make it into the online pre-reg.
Send your game descriptions in to the Palladium Megaversal Ambassadors pronto at ambassadors@palladiumbooks.com; or by telephone (734-721-2903). We are also looking for volunteers familiar with RRT and wargames to run demos of Robotech® RPG Tactics™ in the miniatures area of Gen Con.
Other titles for 2015 and beyond:
Plus Robotech® RPG Tactics™ Wave One and Wave Two releases worldwide. And there are still some secret projects and licenses yet to be revealed.
Wow, if they saved some of their writing for product rather than gushing over their product sales updates they would pump out books once a month.
The begging for people to showcase their stuff is getting irritating:
"We need game-masters now!!! Register now!!! Our, er, YOUR time is running out for it to be listed in the event itinerary so we, er, YOU do not want to be left out!!!"
"Secret projects and licenses to be revealed." as well as "Wave 1-2 worldwide release" feels like they are trolling...
What bugs me a bit is the "Oh, by the way" method it is presented for wanting people to demo RRT at GenCon.
Is roleplaying games bigger than tabletop games?? I know it is Kevin's #1 focus but this is weird.
What IS positive is extra stuff is being offered for download and is free as well as admitting to errors: there is hope for them yet.
It almost feels like they are trying to do things a little different... will the chaos ever end?? (yes, yes, they will never make me happy, it is too late for me now...).
Like I said years ago, you need to read anything Kevin Siembieda writes in a 50% carnival barker ("step right up, step right up, to see most stupendiforous show in your life!") and 50% Professor Farnsworth ("Good news everybody! The ROW backers items will be shipped via pack mule caravan across the Bering Straits!).
Wow, pretty much gone dead on RRT even in the kickstarter comments.
Probably getting down to the business of assembly or waiting for shipment...
Happy days for me, got the following assembled:
1 full Veritech squadron (12 models). This is with the standard missile load-out, yes, all fully modeled on them (guardian and jet).
4 models of each destroid squad (16 models).
1 Zen attack force (10 models)
1 Zen scout force (8 models)
Figure I should get about 300 pts a side done for a good sized force (3 formation cards a side).
I am bracing myself to get one more Veritech squadron assembled, that is the hardest grind of all to do (really should have at least 3).
I find I need to hack-up one leg for different poses rather than the set two to avoid a cookie-cutter look.
Random but semi-serious question:
On the gun pod, do you put the "UN-Spacey" right side up in gun mode or jet?
Supposedly, no-one was to know these changed so it makes sense the lettering should be upside-down when used as a gun.
Spoiler:
Just one of those questions since it seems the artists could not bother to make it consistent or anyone else...
Is it just me or are those pod legs kinda funky to mix and match?
They go together well enough, it is those two wide stance legs: not good to put together and is weird with the "low stance" set.
You want to make you life interesting use the two standing legs together: the other two sets are weird together.
Huh? It's very clear that the UN SPACY lettering is only upright when the gun is inverted for fighter model. In Battloid mode, the upright gun will have the lettering inverted.
I bought extra decals specifically so I could put the UNSPACY on every GU (I didn't know and they didn't say we'd get extras in blitzkrieg/battlecry beyond the one each in the starter set). Personally, I'm willing to bend the canon a little bit to make the UNSPACY upright in every mode. That is, of course, assuming I get around to building the models first which hasn't happened so far.
I find it very funny how many people are doing either "the Captain Morgan stance" or "dodging/flying to one side" to make use of some of those 90 degree legs. Sure, some people are cutting and customizing, but it's sort of hilarious how widespread that pose it becoming.
I haven't even primed anything yet, but I can see doing the gunpods either way. We're talking about fighters that dramatically change shape. Self-orienting decals are kind of low key in comparison. Though I'm not sure I'll bother putting them on at all, as I've always found "UN SPACEY" to be kind of dumb.
As for the Battlepods, I've been mixing and matching a little across the half dozen I have built. It's imperfect, but the poses aren't too awkward for my liking at least. It does make me kind of glad I only have 7 more VTs and 9 more Pods to go, so I won't have to fight too much to keep some variety.
And yeah, it has been kind of quiet lately. People are moving onto new projects, the ROW'ers are a fairly small minority and mostly seem to be vocal in the update comments, I wonder how long it'll take before Wave 2 begins to get some community focus (because despite saying they'd have stuff to show soon for a good month now, PB doesn't seem to be in any rush to show off what they do have done).
But don't worry guys, I have on good authority (hi B_S!) that they're totally close to being done W2! Any day now. Annnnny day at all.....
Is it really surprising though with the limited options (despite what the parts count was supposed to indicate) that folks are doing that?
I haven't been following the Rick and Boba show over at the comments regularly for months (with one exception) but I was under the impression from comments here that after some sort of cease and desist from his models that he was out of the inner circle. Is he "back" in the bosom (or buttcrack since that's where the sun DOES shine at Palladium!) of Palladium after that?
JohnHwangDD wrote: Huh? It's very clear that the UN SPACY lettering is only upright when the gun is inverted for fighter model. In Battloid mode, the upright gun will have the lettering inverted.
I copied images to make my point of upside-down.
If you look around the net more, many images have them upright in gun mode.
Sometimes in the actual show they make a point of not writing anything (I think just to save on work).
"Canon" as pointed out is to have the writing upside-down in gun mode which makes for funny looks from those not in the know...
Forar wrote: I find it very funny how many people are doing either "the Captain Morgan stance" or "dodging/flying to one side" to make use of some of those 90 degree legs. Sure, some people are cutting and customizing, but it's sort of hilarious how widespread that pose it becoming.
I haven't even primed anything yet, but I can see doing the gunpods either way. We're talking about fighters that dramatically change shape. Self-orienting decals are kind of low key in comparison. Though I'm not sure I'll bother putting them on at all, as I've always found "UN SPACEY" to be kind of dumb.
As for the Battlepods, I've been mixing and matching a little across the half dozen I have built. It's imperfect, but the poses aren't too awkward for my liking at least. It does make me kind of glad I only have 7 more VTs and 9 more Pods to go, so I won't have to fight too much to keep some variety.
And yeah, it has been kind of quiet lately. People are moving onto new projects, the ROW'ers are a fairly small minority and mostly seem to be vocal in the update comments, I wonder how long it'll take before Wave 2 begins to get some community focus (because despite saying they'd have stuff to show soon for a good month now, PB doesn't seem to be in any rush to show off what they do have done).
I've heard that they're 98% ready to update us on Wave 2.
But don't worry guys, I have on good authority (hi B_S!) that they're totally close to being done W2! Any day now. Annnnny day at all.....
JohnHwangDD wrote: Huh? It's very clear that the UN SPACY lettering is only upright when the gun is inverted for fighter model. In Battloid mode, the upright gun will have the lettering inverted.
I copied images to make my point of upside-down.
If you look around the net more, many images have them upright in gun mode.
Sometimes in the actual show they make a point of not writing anything (I think just to save on work).
"Canon" as pointed out is to have the writing upside-down in gun mode which makes for funny looks from those not in the know...
OK, got it. I say, go with the high-end Japanese kits as reference - the ones which obsess over the license details will get it right, "upside-down" lettering and all!
JohnHwangDD wrote: OK, got it. I say, go with the high-end Japanese kits as reference - the ones which obsess over the license details will get it right, "upside-down" lettering and all!
That is better advice than I could give proper credit.
I had supplied the Japanese for many years and their level of detail can be listed as "obsessive" if not by our standards "insane".
It is not always proper to paint with a broad brush but "typically" anything of manufacture considered the best of it's kind tends to be found in Japan, unless made by Canadians within a Japanese company...
Is it really surprising though with the limited options (despite what the parts count was supposed to indicate) that folks are doing that?
That's why I said it was funny. Not that it was surprising. Do try to keep up, good chap. :-P
More of a 'great minds thinking alike!' with some eye rolling aimed at PB's idea of "multi-pose minis" including being forced to use kind of an obnoxious stance and how some 'solutions' seemed to becoming quite common. Similarly the "Tomahawks with open or closed chest pieces... that is to say, 1 will be open and 1 will be closed, or mix and match! MPM!"
Edit: though we joked before about the power of the Zentraedi kick-line earlier. Perhaps it's fitting that the RDF be forced to have a kick line of their own.
I haven't been following the Rick and Boba show over at the comments regularly for months (with one exception) but I was under the impression from comments here that after some sort of cease and desist from his models that he was out of the inner circle. Is he "back" in the bosom (or buttcrack since that's where the sun DOES shine at Palladium!) of Palladium after that?
B_S? He's been pretty quiet on the KS comments once his 'omg I have a box and will youtube the gak out of it' period (aside from a little cheerleading when an update goes down), but after his "IP LAW BAD RAWR AMERICA FREEDOM CRYING EAGLE!" tantrum on Mike's page, he seems to have settled back into general commentary. I only swing through there once in a while, but he's definitely still chattering away here and there.
JohnHwangDD wrote: OK, got it. I say, go with the high-end Japanese kits as reference - the ones which obsess over the license details will get it right, "upside-down" lettering and all!
That is better advice than I could give proper credit.
I had supplied the Japanese for many years and their level of detail can be listed as "obsessive" if not by our standards "insane".
It is not always proper to paint with a broad brush but "typically" anything of manufacture considered the best of it's kind tends to be found in Japan, unless made by Canadians within a Japanese company...
There is something in the Japanese national character such that they earnestly do little things with exacting precision and attention to detail. Like Bonsai. It's something that I have noticed that they do exceedingly well, and when it reaches the level at which rightsholders and creators approve, well, yeah, it's pretty insane if you're not used to it. I think for them, it's a real point of pride to do something that they consider "correct". I'm always glad to see someone sweat the details.
Forar wrote: Similarly the "Tomahawks with open or closed chest pieces... that is to say, 1 will be open and 1 will be closed, or mix and match! MPM!"
Ah yes, then the "gun arms up", "gun arms down", "walking legs" or the "standing legs", the mixing and matching is endless!
Funny, this seems to apply to all the destroids except the one without missiles (which I cannot remember the name to... bad, very bad...).
Ah! and do not forget the "Command" add-on that only seems to fit properly on a Tomahawk... will think on how to attach that fancy head-piece on the other dudes.
I found the 90 deg veritech leg you can cut and straighten a bit and build-up the back of the knee with green stuff so you can have two new stances:
"leaning back a bit on a slightly bent leg" (recoil) and the " walking forward with leg slightly bent at front and straight leg pushing off at back".
This is the genius I have to offer, it was very creative I thought...
The jets are the hardest to show any character at all, cutting the wings to a more swept back look for the leader was the best I could come up with.
I have no idea what to do with the Glaug.
It stands there with gun arm raised, looking intimidating.
Could we say it is hard to improve on a good thing?
The pods have so much character:
- both guns aimed: I will destroy you!
- both guns aimed away and up: I see nothing!
- little guns and big guns aimed in two different directions: We are outnumbered!!
- crouched: I am so jetting out of here!
- looking down: That micronian is around here somewhere... wait, did I step on him??
As it all starts getting together the mind turns to painting, this shall be fun.
Like assembly, I may not dwell on the decals just yet...
Talizvar wrote: Funny, this seems to apply to all the destroids except the one without missiles (which I cannot remember the name to... bad, very bad...).
The pods have so much character:
Rifleman! Er, Destroid Defender!
Good thing you have a lot of them! Also, that they're easy to build.
I had concern about the Glaug too and how you could pose the sucker and there was a small painting and posing contest on the FB page. Here are some pics.
So we have the "Hold-on guys I got this" pose.
The super leap and land pose.
Then the classic foot on the defeated enemy. I might want to have foot-on-enemy-and-leveling-gun-to-head.
The running one I like the most but there must be a way to reduce the length of the stride: it is a bit much for the size of the base.
I think cutting the bottoms of the legs to feet so they are round and having a walking pose may do the trick: I think that may be the simplest mod with good payback.
The trick may be figuring out how to bend (cut) a leg so the hip pegs remain at the same height (<edit>maybe cut a bit inside the foot to level out?).
Yeah, I think this model is the most challenging to show some variety other than that repair pod which really I am unsure I want to do much with anyway.
Running the risk of being repetitive: Wave 2... rumors, progress, leaks, taking thumbscrews to key PB personnel...
<edit> Gone from kickstarter to kickstop.
Clearly, Palladium failed by not giving enough parts for posability. If only the knees and elbows had been joints, so we could have more posing options.
Two pieces as "lower leg and upper leg" rather than "left half and right half"?
By jove I think you're onto something.
Or at the very least, make the 90 degree an optional piece, not a requirement for 50% of Battloids (barring modification, which not all of us are interested in fighting with).
JohnHwangDD wrote: Clearly, Palladium failed by not giving enough parts for posability. If only the knees and elbows had been joints, so we could have more posing options.
Ha!
I will quit when I am ahead: I really would not have wanted even MORE parts.
Joints are not a bad idea, at least for feet an arc rather than a peg may have worked.
The feet for the Veritech's as an arch you insert into the leg would allow some stride options, similar to their larger toy counterparts.
To do it right, we should have at least 4 pieces per leg
- Left thigh + right thigh;
- Left calf + right calf.
At that point, the ideal configuration uses a separate 2-part foot, for a minimum of 6 pieces per leg.
You know, like the scale model kit that I built as a kid:
Granted, we could cut the polycaps and go with solid wings for the small scale. But I think something like 30 pieces per model would be achievable, vs the 100+ pieces from the 1/72 kit.
Also, it's fail that the Fighter wings weren't mounted on pins to rotate.
JohnHwangDD wrote: You know, like the scale model kit that I built as a kid:
Spoiler:
Granted, we could cut the polycaps and go with solid wings for the small scale. But I think something like 30 pieces per model would be achievable, vs the 100+ pieces from the 1/72 kit.
Also, it's fail that the Fighter wings weren't mounted on pins to rotate.
I made that same kit too.
Your interests and history is sounding more scarily similar to my own... First model I came across that had metal parts and was designed to move.
Got the "Griffen" (Battletech name for it anyway) kit shortly after.
Anyway, what frightens me is it was quite possible they could have put pegs in for sweeping the wings with no increased part count and cool-factor way up.
Good way to ensure a fantastic join with the wing trapped between halves with a pin <sigh> a missed opportunity.
I wonder how the "bolt-on" versions of veritech (super and armored) will be modeled for Wave2, watch you get the original and then glue a frame over it... the tiny gluing would be exquisitely painful.
Well, continuing with building pods, the leggy little darlings they are, then imbibe a bit and get cracking on another veritech squadron...
I wonder if the slotted fixed wings might have been a carryover from ND working with solid PVC (SDE, RK) versus a fully-transformable Bandai / Imai styrene kit baseline.
It seems more and more we're speaking ill of the dead here these days, but I certainly wish things had been different for RPG Tactics. The models are going to be a significant barrier to entry to anyone that is not a hardcore miniatures gamer/assembler already.
Has anyone seen the Bandai Macross Fighter collection to compare the Tactics minis to? I offer up the below picture from my collection. The scale is slightly larger, and the detail a little less, but Bandai has managed to make decent models with far fewer pieces than the abomination that emerged from Tactics. Of course they are more expensive being pre-painted and all, but the point was someone made Macross models in a vastly easier to assemble way. Basically no assembly, actually. But you could have an entire squadron of Valkyries ready for paint if they had been like the Bandai kits while you were still fiddling with your first Tactics mini.
Granted, Bandai has way more experience with plastic kits than Palladium/Ninja Division. But someone with some sense should have done a little more looking for what to emulate out there. I've attached a picture of a 'Mayor Milia' VF-1 and Basara's custom VF-19 from Macross 7 with one of the Tactics minis here. I think the slightly better overall detail of the Tactics mini is not worth the absurd number of parts that go into making it.
As an aside, I had one of the Robotech Defender 'Vexar' kits assembled on my shelf for many years before a move did him in. Even had painted up the pilot in Hikaru's white/red/blue flight suit. The good old days.....
I would add besides the Bandai kits having clear canopies, the swing wings on the VF-1 do work as well...
Also, I think the Bandai ones are better proportioned, too. In this shot I think it shows pretty well the nose of the Tactics Valkyrie is noticeably too long and thin.
The RRT Valkyrie is based on transformable design, whereby each part has to be the same in all 3 modes. It is a "least bad" compromise of parts.
Bandai is doing a Hasegawa and only worrying about Fighter proportions. The Bandai fighters do not have to worry about looking "good" in Battloid (or Gerwalk) mode.
Offer whatever excuses you like for the poor tortured souls at Palladium & Ninja Division, but their models did not have to be 'least bad' compromises. They are a failure because they are not good game pieces, and they're not good plastic models, either.
I had quite a few of those Revell Robotech kits. I used to think a lot of them were Southern Cross mechs, as that was the one part of the series I'd mostly skipped over (only having seen the episode where Dana knocks over the police robot, and an episode with a Logan).
I got a gashapon Miraya super veritech in Guardian and Miraya Zent power suit to see how it scaled to RRT. While I love the quality a thousand times over RRT, the models were about twice the size of the minis.
I'm still considering getting an all gashapon force together, but battlepods are expensive for some reason (need something for my beloved UEDF to blow up), and other than just having pretty prepainted models, the RRT game hasn't caught my attention to make it worth diving in to do.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Looking over the models left for Wave 2, I'm wondering what they'll do for the Rick & Roy models. Somehow, I think it's just going to be a change out on the microscopic canopy piece (with a skull carved in it, somehow) for Roy's battloid, and a set of new leg poses for Rick (wide straight leg stance, with gun arm tucked in, I'll bet).
JohnHwangDD wrote: The RRT Valkyrie is based on transformable design, whereby each part has to be the same in all 3 modes. It is a "least bad" compromise of parts.
Bandai is doing a Hasegawa and only worrying about Fighter proportions. The Bandai fighters do not have to worry about looking "good" in Battloid (or Gerwalk) mode.
If I'm not mistaken, the Yamato VF-1s are fully transformable and the proportions are pretty spot on...
To my eyes, the later version is a huge improvement over the first version. Others tend to agree.
If I'm not mistaken, I've seen first person the 1/48 and 1/60 v2 versions.
Also, the Yamato toys were well over $100 each... These toys are like $2 each.
Yes, they are... but I was answering to this:
Bandai is doing a Hasegawa and only worrying about Fighter proportions. The Bandai fighters do not have to worry about looking "good" in Battloid (or Gerwalk) mode.
I don't think price has anything to do with proportions (particularly not when taking into account that the Robotech models don't need to, you know, transform), and Palladium said time and again they were cutting up the models into so many parts to "get the best detail and fidelity".
JohnHwangDD wrote: The RRT Valkyrie is based on transformable design, whereby each part has to be the same in all 3 modes. It is a "least bad" compromise of parts.
Bandai is doing a Hasegawa and only worrying about Fighter proportions. The Bandai fighters do not have to worry about looking "good" in Battloid (or Gerwalk) mode.
Yeah, I would probably have to disagree on this.
The PB model does have a much longer and thinner nose on it and it "appears" they do not maintain it in Battleoid mode (looks stubbier, could just be me).
It could have been made more bullet-nosed to be a bit closer to "canon".
Spoiler:
It appears the nose cone section could stand to be about 2/3rds it's size.
If we really wanted to be fussy which we were told the CAD modeling was all about.
Does it also seem that the wings on the back of the Battleoid should be close to the length of the nose?
<edit>Also notice the cockpit canopy is "straight" on the PB model and does not have that 30 deg bend near the back.
So we have the "Hold-on guys I got this" pose.
The super leap and land pose.
Then the classic foot on the defeated enemy. I might want to have foot-on-enemy-and-leveling-gun-to-head.
The running one I like the most but there must be a way to reduce the length of the stride: it is a bit much for the size of the base.
I think cutting the bottoms of the legs to feet so they are round and having a walking pose may do the trick: I think that may be the simplest mod with good payback.
The trick may be figuring out how to bend (cut) a leg so the hip pegs remain at the same height (<edit>maybe cut a bit inside the foot to level out?).
Yeah, I think this model is the most challenging to show some variety other than that repair pod which really I am unsure I want to do much with anyway.
Running the risk of being repetitive: Wave 2... rumors, progress, leaks, taking thumbscrews to key PB personnel...
<edit> Gone from kickstarter to kickstop.
On wave 2, I avoid asking now. When I have news some people are happy and still others bitch about "inside" information. So people need to realize they can't have it both ways. I think while annoying I can completely understand why PB is not willing to share much anymore.
Why avoid asking what is obviously of import/interest to you personally?
When I have news some people are happy and still others bitch about "inside" information.
Any progress report is welcome, it shows active progress is being made and is not being shelved.
Those who complain of "inside information" I suspect are jealous they are not in the know.
The other end of it would be why not publically release that information rather than a chosen few (socialist mentality )
So people need to realize they can't have it both ways.
Logical conclusion BUT we are a varied bunch with differing motivations. <edit> You cannot please everyone, it does not mean don't try though.
I would suggest "catering" to the more positive crowd.
I think while annoying I can completely understand why PB is not willing to share much anymore.
It is I hate to say a rather dumb stance to take.
Why leave to the rumor-mill when you can "manage" the information to your benefit?
I have repeated this before and it all can give nothing to complain about in the end: (gah! big list, spoilering it now)
Spoiler:
We have a primary timeline process (make the models):
- 3d model design.
- PB / Kevin approval.
- Harmony Gold approval.
- Failure / tweak required, fix, re-apply.
- Break apart model and lay-out for die design.
- Review design, changes made to original model for manufacturing capability may require HG approval again.
- Die machining process.
- Prototype manufacture (dialing settings, looking for short-shots, opening up injection areas if not filling properly).
- Main production scheduling, finding a machine for availability, make sure you got the plastic and run size is verified.
- Pound out parts.
- Pack at facility or arrange to be shipped to packing facility.
Secondary processes:
- Determine how large an initial run to make (backers, retail, or shipping crate size)
- Card design, approval, printing.
- Box design, approval, printing.
- Assembly instruction design, approval, printing.
- Verify decal stock, arrange for another run if short.
- Verify packing contents required and pack method.
Near end of process:
- Ensure all box contents are sent to packing facility and pack method/list is finalized and quantities.
- <edit>Check remaining backer orders that can be completed with what models that are finished and plan for packing first and plan retail shipping pallets.
- Determine progress of the most late models for final Wave2 packing date.
- When final/complete cargo container is on the way from China for Wave2 packing start figuring out logistics for backer / retail shipping.
With ALL this stuff going on it is EASY to show progress, you can say "HEY we got 3 models all ready to go!!! Just waiting on the other "X" which are being made now!!!."
Having a logical layout/timeline/plan and showing progress will demonstrate control rather than us thinking they are fumbling in the dark.
They can continue to keep buzz and interest since they can trickle-out info as progress is made.
By saying nothing the whole thing will drop off the radar and just leave a bunch of grumpy backers and confused retailers with potential customers giving it a pass.
What do you think Mike? Any hope someone could see it that way? I am not proud, I would use any "in" I can get to have my selfish wants addressed. <edit>Hell, I would sign any non-disclosure agreement and be happy to make the road-trip down to help with planning... no anger on my part, more get-er-dun.
It is better to be part of a process than to have it inflicted on you...
I never said PB's stance was smart, but I feel myself feeling quite similar sometimes. I will ask the next time I speak to them. To be honest I did tell Jeff that an update on the next KS update would be good but I did not ask him about present status or specifics.
Mike1975 wrote: I never said PB's stance was smart, but I feel myself feeling quite similar sometimes.
Only because you are trying to explain for them or offer an "unofficial" alternative and get snubbed.
There is probably quite a few things you are not allowed to say and get punished for it.
That is the problem of being "in the know".
This is why them actively managing release of logical progress will take the heat off.
I will ask the next time I speak to them.
Much appreciated!
To be honest I did tell Jeff that an update on the next KS update would be good but I did not ask him about present status or specifics.
Please consider the list I outlined.
Maybe I am naive, but I really cannot see the harm, any particular area stalls you say "Because complicated overseas China issues!" or even better, only mention what is still moving.
Then immediately after you can say "Hey look at the new shiny cards for the unit!", distract, distract, distract.
Out with the bad (make no mention but actively fix it), in with the good (anything done? finishing up?), marketing spin with real facts not excuses.
At the very least get pictures of product regularly and use the same pre-release camera GW uses: blurry, so you cannot see the cavernous parting lines.
<edit> Or the 40 piece per model sprue (low resolution, 20 feet away). Yes, show only assembled models, by a professional, even more blurry pic.
On wave 2, I avoid asking now. When I have news some people are happy and still others bitch about "inside" information. So people need to realize they can't have it both ways. I think while annoying I can completely understand why PB is not willing to share much anymore.
I'm sure it had nothing to do with your continual "I know but I can't tell you but I could tell you because I know but I can't tell you because NDA but trust me it will fulfill all the hopes and dreams you ever had but I can't tell you because NDA" bs tap dance you pulled for something like a year.
But no, it's certainly just because people are mean.
On wave 2, I avoid asking now. When I have news some people are happy and still others bitch about "inside" information. So people need to realize they can't have it both ways. I think while annoying I can completely understand why PB is not willing to share much anymore.
I'm sure it had nothing to do with your continual "I know but I can't tell you but I could tell you because I know but I can't tell you because NDA but trust me it will fulfill all the hopes and dreams you ever had but I can't tell you because NDA" bs tap dance you pulled for something like a year.
But no, it's certainly just because people are mean.
Merijeek wrote: I'm sure it had nothing to do with your continual "I know but I can't tell you but I could tell you because I know but I can't tell you because NDA but trust me it will fulfill all the hopes and dreams you ever had but I can't tell you because NDA" bs tap dance you pulled for something like a year.
But no, it's certainly just because people are mean.
Wait till you sign a non-disclosure agreement sometime.
If it is important, you begin to feel torn (possibly bi-polar).
Some scenarios I could just imagine:
Spoiler:
I know all these things!
There IS progress you negative thinkers!
Oh, boy, they made a massively bad decision... can we convince them out of it in time?
Ack! they missed this important thing... do we tell or wait till people notice?
Something unbelievably stupid happened... no-one needs to know.
We actually had shouting in a meeting... they do care! Though the shouting was for all the wrong reasons...
We are on the third request for information or a decision... waiting... getting concerned.
We assembled and the freaking parts fit!
Is it bad if the graphics on the back of the cards are printed the wrong way? Does anyone care?
Do we find a new customs guy after our stuff gets held at the border for the third time?
When we have volunteers work in our facility, what is our liability if they get hurt?
Have you ever explained tabletop gaming rules to someone who never played? Then try to convince them it matters?
What if I was to let people REALLY know the personalities involved in the game's, evolution?
Got a call/email from China, we think they want us to decide something, we are not sure what however...
Anyway, these loosely mirror some of my own experiences trying to develop product while tiptoeing around an IP / proprietary process that we need to do different while knowing the patented process.
Fun times.
Mike is only guilty of wanting to forward the game "official" or not (as best I can tell).
It looked to me he is not bothered with rules cast in stone in some tome handed down by the game-gods.
Many of us are competitive suckers and if it is not RAW then it did not happen, so home brew stuff can be considered irrelevant (unless the game dies, then we can mess with it at will!).
So, convince those PB people to give more detail, all the factual good stuff and can bother with bad news later when it has a chance to sort itself out...
Merijeek wrote: I'm sure it had nothing to do with your continual "I know but I can't tell you but I could tell you because I know but I can't tell you because NDA but trust me it will fulfill all the hopes and dreams you ever had but I can't tell you because NDA" bs tap dance you pulled for something like a year. But no, it's certainly just because people are mean.
Wait till you sign a non-disclosure agreement sometime. If it is important, you begin to feel torn (possibly bi-polar).
Want to know what the first rule of an NDA is? You don't talk about NDA. Want to know what the second rule of an NDA is?
As Meri pointed out, it's the whole "I've got a secret! But I'm not telling!" thing that grates. If you're under an NDA, you shouldn't even reveal you are under an NDA. If it becomes know that you are, you shouldn't mention it unless you're directly questioned, and even then your response should be "Can't speak about it, NDA". Dropping hints, or trying to avert things, or just using it to be a smug donkey-cave (not directed at Mike here, seen others though), doesn't do much good. If you really want something revealed, it's up to convincing the issuer of the NDA to do so. Not for you to do so.
Merijeek wrote: I'm sure it had nothing to do with your continual "I know but I can't tell you but I could tell you because I know but I can't tell you because NDA but trust me it will fulfill all the hopes and dreams you ever had but I can't tell you because NDA" bs tap dance you pulled for something like a year.
But no, it's certainly just because people are mean.
Wait till you sign a non-disclosure agreement sometime.
If it is important, you begin to feel torn (possibly bi-polar).
Want to know what the first rule of an NDA is? You don't talk about NDA. Want to know what the second rule of an NDA is?
As Meri pointed out, it's the whole "I've got a secret! But I'm not telling!" thing that grates. If you're under an NDA, you shouldn't even reveal you are under an NDA. If it becomes know that you are, you shouldn't mention it unless you're directly questioned, and even then your response should be "Can't speak about it, NDA". Dropping hints, or trying to avert things, or just using it to be a smug donkey-cave (not directed at Mike here, seen others though), doesn't do much good. If you really want something revealed, it's up to convincing the issuer of the NDA to do so. Not for you to do so.
Which would be true for a normal typical NDA. BUT you guys know very well that that is not what I had signed. Mine was with the explicit purpose that I could share impressions and more about the game as long as I did not reveal written materials in any way. I remember being told the same to Rick/Asterios until I offered to send him a copy he was the worlds expert on NDA's. Frankly I find it funny, childish, and sad all at once that something that was full well resolved is being drug back up. I wonder what the motivation might be......????
Automatically Appended Next Post: And you also know full well I pushed the limits as far as I could to share as much as I could.
NDA's as stated and from my own experience varies.
Mine was not to reveal settings or techniques.
I HAD to discuss the process to some degree: common industry practices.
So weird wording and "you figure it out from there" is not being a son of a gun but helping as best you can.
I do agree it amounts to frustration for both groups.
So at least we have some means of advocacy other than the heavily moderated PB forums.
My involvement in this is for Mike to not give up.
I shudder to think where PB would hear the voice of tabletop gamers after that.
Which would be true for a normal typical NDA. BUT you guys know very well that that is not what I had signed. Mine was with the explicit purpose that I could share impressions and more about the game as long as I did not reveal written materials in any way. I remember being told the same to Rick/Asterios until I offered to send him a copy he was the worlds expert on NDA's. Frankly I find it funny, childish, and sad all at once that something that was full well resolved is being drug back up. I wonder what the motivation might be......????
The motivation is for you to get done from your "I tried to be helpful but people were meeeeeeean so now I'm not even gonna try I'm just gonna sit here in a corner and pout."
And if you consider Rick to be the world's greatest expert on anything, well, I can offer you some great appraisals of this bridge that I can sell you for well below what you could resell it for.
I bought CAV since the minis are awesome but as much as I love CAV...Robotech was my first love. I've converted some units from wave 1 for use in Robotech Tactics. Still a WIP but feel free to suggest changes. I'm not completely familiar with CAV or the unit abilities so help is welcome.
Regarding sharing of information; this is the same debate had regarding Palladium's dissemination of info as well.
This is a sizable group of people, all with different views, experiences, opinions and desires. Dozens of participants in this thread, quite possibly hundreds once accounting for infrequent commentators/lurkers. The KS campaign has over 5k contributors, and while generally only dozens (if that) seem to speak up regularly, we've hit easily hundreds upon hundreds of contributors at once, and probably even more when adding in those who didn't bother to post (plus outside observers).
Long story short, there will always be donkey caves.
Any stance that starts with 'people are mean on the internet/why should they talk to backers/consumers if they're going to be jerks/etc' fails right from the premise.
The reason to keep people informed is A) because they said they would during the campaign, and B) because unless they truly believe that 'the negativity' folks are in the majority, they do more good spreading information and reducing the foothold misinformation can take than remaining silent because of some, ah, vocally obnoxious sorts.
Hell, it's often stated (here, in the comments, elsewhere) that the vocally obnoxious are some sort of tiny minority, a mere handful of individuals, perhaps a few dozen at most. By that standard, how the gak would punishing 99% or 95% or hell 90% of the backers/consumers for the actions of a fraction of the base make sense?
"Oh, we could show you renders and toss up a Gantt Chart showing where every figure is, but Forar's a real fether so screw y'all!"
These are communities with limited abilities to police themselves. People can voice dissent, dislike, and outright mockery, and as long as they stay within the guidelines of Facebook / Dakka / KS / etc, they will continue to do so. Which is highly pertinent because it means that other than peer pressure there is little that the "non-haters" can do about "the haters".
We've done this dance a dozen times and I suspect we'll do it again, but while I don't expect the PB staff to be robots, immune to verbal slings and arrows, I do expect them to be professional and to act for the greater good.
Setting deadlines they flagrantly cannot hit is and has always been folly, so kudos on them for finally recognizing that.
But choosing to go all "name, rank and serial number only!" in the face of (supposedly) a handful of jerks is plenty silly on its own.
So without going all Conspiracy Theory, what they say (Wave 2 is totes coming along!) and what they're showing (... nothing) will continue to be at odds.
And frankly, we all know that they are going to start talking about whatever releases they have for Gencon in the next few months, at which point it would become flat out transparent that the emphasis is on the financial bottom line; that the need or desire to make money with whatever they have on hand outweighs their reluctance to share. "Oh, we can't tell you things, we don't want to build hopes or anythHEY LOOK AT WHAT WILL BE FOR SAAAALE!"
Chinese New Year apparently starts next week, so presumably production is already winding down (if it hasn't already) and likely little will happen from the factory for weeks, if not the rest of the month.
If there's something to say on the matter of the other 22'ish figures that make up the rest of the product line (as we know it) and the handful of resin pieces (bases, objective markers, SDF-1, etc), I daresay that'd be a fine time to bring us up to speed.
Forar wrote: [...]Any stance that starts with 'people are mean on the internet/why should they talk to backers/consumers if they're going to be jerks/etc' fails right from the premise.
The reason to keep people informed is A) because they said they would during the campaign, and B) because unless they truly believe that 'the negativity' folks are in the majority, they do more good spreading information and reducing the foothold misinformation can take than remaining silent because of some, ah, vocally obnoxious sorts.
Hell, it's often stated (here, in the comments, elsewhere) that the vocally obnoxious are some sort of tiny minority, a mere handful of individuals, perhaps a few dozen at most. By that standard, how the gak would punishing 99% or 95% or hell 90% of the backers/consumers for the actions of a fraction of the base make sense?
More than a few gaming companies of late remind me strongly of dealing with the bank - they too like your money just where it is, and the only conversation they're ever willing to have is how you can put more of it in the same place.
But when companies start withholding information about a service they are providing while asking everyone to nevertheless trust them to still carry it off.... yeah, that is a bit silly.
Because when you get someone acting like that over email or on the phone, it's usually some kind of telemarketer if not indicative of a scam, yet somehow a company acting in the same manner believes themselves to be completely different.
And really, when it comes down to it are so many folks said companies feel are asking too much, actually asking for too much?
Namely: Show that progress is being made,
Deliver on what was promised,
Fix what the company goofs up,
Not be complete a$$holes about everything.
Sure, the details might be subjective at times on the part of both the company and consumers, but is all of that so absolutely difficult that the powers that be at these companies can't manage to make good on it while feeling the need to no longer say anything?
Even the most vehement "haters" are in essence asking for the same things as the constructive criticism folks.
Forar wrote: Chinese New Year apparently starts next week, so presumably production is already winding down (if it hasn't already) and likely little will happen from the factory for weeks, if not the rest of the month.
If there's something to say on the matter of the other 22'ish figures that make up the rest of the product line (as we know it) and the handful of resin pieces (bases, objective markers, SDF-1, etc), I daresay that'd be a fine time to bring us up to speed.
Also regarding the schedule, remember that GenCon is two weeks earlier this year. May not seem like much, but going from 23 weeks to 21 weeks after the end of CNY, it IS a 10% loss of time, and given so many "fixed times" (production/shipping/customs/domestic trans), that means the percentage of "flexible time" lost is significantly larger.
If you assume production is four weeks, and shipping in it's entirety is four weeks (and I think those estimates are light), that leaves 13 weeks (as opposed to 15 last year) to get twice as much done. Sure, some of it MAY be duplication (specifically all the variations on the Veritechs), but that also means not "fixing" the issues with those for the next Wave.
Of course, it's not an issue if they go full "screw the backer", cause then they can just concentrate on a handful of units, and get them ready and shipped for GenCon/Black Friday. As they're not gonna spring for a third Wave, that means backers would have to wait. And I'm sure at this point, the backers would be tolerant and understanding.
Point the first: considering the at least thin veneer of 'you should totally still be getting it first!' they're keeping up regarding RRT being on shelves it's 'not supposed to be on yet', if people complain about it being available at Gencon before backers get it, that's of PB's own making. They said it originally, and continue to double down on it. If it doesn't bother you though, that's cool, that's cool.
Point the second: what "poisonous back and forth in the comments"? That happened, like... once. Nearly a year ago, during "Spartangate". And despite one person being a donkeycave in the comments and them commenting back, let's not overlook that "Spartangate" led to good things happening. Feedback was given, and even if their initial stance was "nope, this is how it is, can never ever be changed"... they then changed it. Unless you're referring to the backers sniping at each other, which has indeed dramatically dwindled, but I'm thinking that's due to a mix of satisfaction that *something, anything* has been delivered and/or apathy/disengagement from the project, which isn't exactly a good thing.
Point the third: this seems incongruous with your other points. If you care about quality, then surely being kept abreast in a fashion such that you might give feedback on what you think are problems is more worthwhile before the molds are cut rather than after.
It's why the "just wait and see it in person!" stance has always been problematic: by the time we can do so, it's too late. At which point people are often found pointing out the futility of bitching about it, which is hilarious on a couple of levels. "Don't complain until you can see it!" followed by "Why complain it's too late to do anything about it!" A nice firm circle of immunity to critique.
All kidding aside, I sincerely hope they only do so (if they choose to) once this campaign is done. As in, not "the molds are done and we're working on production and delivery, you can totes trust us!", but "the last box just left the warehouse".
As a show of good faith (yes yes, boo hiss, I know). To actually complete something they've started before adding even more to their plate.
So if they decide to do another campaign, I say wrap up wave 2 this year, get through the holidays (grab bags!!), relax a bit and get a head start on series 2 (and/or 3, depending on what they go with).
Will it prevent ALL the bitching? Keep ALL the trolls out? Of course not. But it'd be a hell of a lot classier than raising questions as to whether or not they're taking Peter's money to pay Paul, as has been alluded to a hundred times now (Hi Rick!).
All kidding aside, I sincerely hope they only do so (if they choose to) once this campaign is done. As in, not "the molds are done and we're working on production and delivery, you can totes trust us!", but "the last box just left the warehouse".
As evidenced by the sham vote, I don't think most backers would sadly care. That said... I would point out that 5+ months after shipping "started" (Gencon or bust!), only a single continent has received wave 1. If they say that the molds are done, that is in no way a guarantee of anything arriving in a timely fashion. In any case, I'm no longer a customer of theirs so it doesn't affect me. After I get wave 2 and pick up a single zentraedi infantry box at my FLGS, I'm done with palladium again.
Manchu!
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif){kind=icon}
