Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

BrandonKF wrote:
Well, @warboss, the plastics don't have just one arm pose. There are three arms and three legs apiece per sprue.

Yes and no. Thanks for pointing that out though as it has indeed changed since the last time I looked at the sprues in detail way back.

Just from peeking at the test pops and doing limb counts, it appears some of them have extra limb options while others don't. It appears we're both incorrect but you're admittedly less so.



In any case, I don't think they spent that space on the sprue very well if the third limb options give generally so little variety in posing without resorting to clipping, regluing, and gap filling. I mentioned it earlier but I think DP9 would have been better served by making a separate weapons sprue that they included with each squad instead of repeating so many weapons on each sprue. Crossed chest arms IMO absolutely should have been included on the sprue in addition to kneeling or running legs on every sprue. YMMV.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrandonKF wrote:
The Caprice model sprues were made in the same way. When you're finished assembling, you have additional body parts left over. If you choose a Kadesh and glue it together, you have a Kadesh, and the Aphek bits are just extra.

*snip*

I'm not going to appease everyone, but I will say that I AM pleased with the Caprice and CEF models especially.

I was aware of the Caprice stuff but that isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison. With caprice, you're doing the equivalent of putting the mamba and jager on the same sprue and mixing and matching the parts to get the actual model you want. That's not the same thing as having multiple jager arms on a jager sprue. In any case, we agree on the Caprice models being the standout release both in terms of relative quality and price savings. It's the only faction box that I have an itch to pick up at retail (assuming HG products make it back to online stores again).

Yep. You're right about the extra limb options. Sorry, I have too much plastic in front of my face, and I'm only working with one set.

If we'd had the backing to fully allow for it, an additional weapons sprue would have been nice with cross-chest options. Maybe for the next one.

BrandonKF wrote:
Yep. You're right about the extra limb options. Sorry, I have too much plastic in front of my face, and I'm only working with one set.

If we'd had the backing to fully allow for it, an additional weapons sprue would have been nice with cross-chest options. Maybe for the next one.

I hope they take that into account the next time. I'd give them 50/50 odds on it personally. Now that you're posting here regularly (at least for this 24 hours!), any updates on the rpg that you can share?

 HudsonD wrote:
DP9 delivers a subpar, poorly designed, "good enough for the fans" product yet again. Who's actually surprised there ?

Was anybody really expecting the Pod to deliver plastic minis that actually matched the metals and CAD drawings they showed in the KCs?

Because, aside from the Caprice minis, they completely failed to do that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warboss wrote:
Just from peeking at the test pops and doing limb counts, it appears some of them have extra limb options while others don't. It appears we're both incorrect but you're admittedly less so.

Spoiler:

Looking at those test pops, you can see on any of the thicker parts that no consideration was given toward shrinkage - look at the sink marks on the backpacks, for example. Those are supposed to be flat, not concave.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Looking at those test pops, you can see on any of the thicker parts that no consideration was given toward shrinkage - look at the sink marks on the backpacks, for example. Those are supposed to be flat, not concave.

I suspect Robert was George and Dave was Jerry. Not sure who Elaine is at Dream Pod 9 though...

JohnHwangDD wrote:

 HudsonD wrote:
DP9 delivers a subpar, poorly designed, "good enough for the fans" product yet again. Who's actually surprised there ?

Was anybody really expecting the Pod to deliver plastic minis that actually matched the metals and CAD drawings they showed in the KCs?

Because, aside from the Caprice minis, they completely failed to do that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warboss wrote:
Just from peeking at the test pops and doing limb counts, it appears some of them have extra limb options while others don't. It appears we're both incorrect but you're admittedly less so.

Spoiler:

Looking at those test pops, you can see on any of the thicker parts that no consideration was given toward shrinkage - look at the sink marks on the backpacks, for example. Those are supposed to be flat, not concave.

I was expecting decent-quality miniatures for a good price.

I knew that the CAD drawings were early prototypes that never got off the ground, so I wasn't expecting them to be perfect.

I also knew (and those who followed the continual updates knew) that some miniatures were left out.

And considering that I've seen what happened with other Kickstarters, I'm quite pleased with this work. Do I want replacements? No. Do I want the guys at the Pod to investigate and keep Models LLC in the loop so that I and others can act as a larger form of quality control, fixing issues like these? Yes.

warboss wrote:I hope they take that into account the next time. I'd give them 50/50 odds on it personally. Now that you're posting here regularly (at least for this 24 hours!), any updates on the rpg that you can share?

We finished up a couple sections and are getting layout done for them.

There are a couple other projects that are ongoing.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Was anybody really expecting the Pod to deliver plastic minis that actually matched the metals and CAD drawings they showed in the KCs?

I was extremely hopeful that they would. I fell in love with the game because of the metal minis from the Blitz line - their proportions and aesthetics really struck a nerve in me. I'm disappointed that the plastics didn't capture that same magic, because I really wanted them to. The Pod succeeding would end up giving me more sculpts that I really want to own - but alot of the recent moves just haven't scratched that itch.

I guess I have to come to grips with the fact that I'm more a fan of XactoBoy's work, than the Pod's work. I think he's the driver behind the sculpts that I loved so much.

True, and also the man behind the art that inspired Xactoboy. Ghislain.

BrandonKF wrote:
True, and also the man behind the art that inspired Xactoboy. Ghislain.

I think Xacto taking Gislain's drawings and giving the models an 'appropriate' sense of proportion was what did it for me. I don't like the tactical era minis, for instance. I like that the plastics have a similar eye for scale across models, but they certainly didn't keep a good scale within each model. The arms and legs look weedy compared to the Blitz sculpts to my eye. Only the Caprice sculpts capture the right style IMO - and those are basically straight translations.

 IceRaptor wrote:

I guess I have to come to grips with the fact that I'm more a fan of XactoBoy's work, than the Pod's work. I think he's the driver behind the sculpts that I loved so much.

Oh, he did more than the sculpts...

 IceRaptor wrote:

BrandonKF wrote:
True, and also the man behind the art that inspired Xactoboy. Ghislain.

I think Xacto taking Gislain's drawings and giving the models an 'appropriate' sense of proportion was what did it for me. I don't like the tactical era minis, for instance. I like that the plastics have a similar eye for scale across models, but they certainly didn't keep a good scale within each model. The arms and legs look weedy compared to the Blitz sculpts to my eye. Only the Caprice sculpts capture the right style IMO - and those are basically straight translations.

Basically, the upper torsos and arms appear to have been hit hardest in the size department, which likely causes the rest to look tinier as a result after "shrinkage".

The hips also frequently feel off to me/look awkward as well but I can't quite put my finger on why.

 warboss wrote:
The hips also frequently feel off to me/look awkward as well but I can't quite put my finger on why.

Oh, I do, and I pointed it out during the KS: the hips are a single, unmoving part now, whereas in earlier models they are two pieces that actually are part of the legs, which allow them to act as what they were designed to be: armored skirts for the upper leg articulation that fold up when the leg goes up. With the single piece hips, you lose a lot of movement range there, which also makes the legs stiffer and the torso longer and much more unmoving.

That could definitely be why. Thanks!

Well, for those interested, here's a video of All Miniatures Great and Small working over a Jaguar:

It's so leggy. Oo la laa.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was talking about earlier.

Also... am I the only one that finds it hilarious that the Jaguar now was a ginormous head, given that it has had "Annoyance: cramped head space" since forever? I mean, really ^_^

So I think the "The models are fethed up but it totally doesn't affect the look we promise; oh and by the way since we were too stupid to set aside some money for potential problems so we're not going to make any attempt at fixing this" comment on facebook just did me in for DP9 as a company for good.

Heh, the Pod threw Models LLC under the bus? And won't lift a finger to address the bad sprues.

Did anybody think the Pod would do anything else?

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

It appears the Pod learned a lot from Palladium in the past year, right down to the "STFU, peasants!" approach toward customer service.

 Firebreak wrote:
So I think the "The models are fethed up but it totally doesn't affect the look we promise; oh and by the way since we were too stupid to set aside some money for potential problems so we're not going to make any attempt at fixing this" comment on facebook just did me in for DP9 as a company for good.

Huh... link? Because that sounds... dumbfeth stupid, to me.

EDIT: Well, now I know that some stuff doesn't get caught by the profanity filter ^^


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It appears the Pod learned a lot from Palladium in the past year, right down to the "STFU, peasants!" approach toward customer service.

And the banning...

Link would be today's KS Update or the latest on Pod's FB page.

Yeah, just read it... wow

The small issues do not effect game play or the overall look of the models once assembled. There is not much we can do at this point about these small issues as all the plastics have already been popped and delivered to us by Models LLC for all the backer reward packages and we have shipped over half the packages to backers already and getting replacement parts made and shipped out would be very costly. Most of the dimpling can be fixed by players with a little bit of modeling putty to fill-in the area before painting. For the missing "X" detail on the upper left side of the Mounts Hips the missing detail can be painted on or just paint the hips part black so the missing detail is not noticeable.

"So yeah, we would need to pay money to fix the defects of people's models, but we don't wanna, so feth you, just use some putty or something and leave us alone, you peasants. [PalladiumSpeak]Also, it's totally not our fault. [busthrowing]It was all those fethers at Models LLC who fethed up the moulds[/busthrowing] Totally NOT our fault[/PalladiumSpeak]". Real classy stuff.

Good luck with the next KS.

I find the part about "issues not effecting(sic) game play" particularly hilarious. No gak, Sherlock. If you had sent cardboard cutouts instead of plastic miniatures gameplay would not have been "effected" either. Talk about non sequitur.

Seeing as they have decided that they don't want to send replacements to backers, now I wonder what will be their answer to the rest of their customers. I mean, will they give the same answers to regular customers when they reach them regarding the sprue defects, or are only the backers the ones to get special treatment, here?

I hope this release is just for the general mold defects, seeing as two of my Cheetah sprues don't have torsos. Not, "there's a chunk of torso shaped plastic", but "shouldn't there be a torso here?".

I'm hoping that "not being able to assemble the model" counts as effecting game play.

Also, I was suprised to find out that my hover tanks (and presumably all of them ever made for the KS) have hollow bottoms. I was expecting to be gluing a top to a bottom, but the main body is all one piece, and if not for the built in flight peg, would make a lopsided candle holder.

 Mmmpi wrote:
I hope this release is just for the general mold defects, seeing as two of my Cheetah sprues don't have torsos. Not, "there's a chunk of torso shaped plastic", but "shouldn't there be a torso here?".

I'm hoping that "not being able to assemble the model" counts as effecting game play.

Well, going by their update, it would seem to depend on how widespread the problem is. If it's only you, they might replace it. If it's generalized, you seem to be SOL

It it is widespread, and going by their update, you might just get a "just fix it with a little bit of modeling putty" recommendation

 Mmmpi wrote:
I hope this release is just for the general mold defects, seeing as two of my Cheetah sprues don't have torsos. Not, "there's a chunk of torso shaped plastic", but "shouldn't there be a torso here?".

I'm hoping that "not being able to assemble the model" counts as effecting game play.

I would absolutely say that it is significantly different/worse from the other miscasts. Have you posted a pic on the dp9 forums to make them as well as the community (so they can check their own sprues) aware of this?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For those who went in on the kickstarter (or downloaded the files), what's the difference between the HG quick start rulebook on drivethrurpg and the living rulebook? I assume the former has more hobby stuff (building, painting, terrain, etc) but I'm referring to the rules. Is there more art in the quick start rulebook? Any advanced rules or scenarios missing from it?

 Albertorius wrote:
Yeah, just read it... wow

Seeing as they have decided that they don't want to send replacements to backers, now I wonder what will be their answer to the rest of their customers. I mean, will they give the same answers to regular customers when they reach them regarding the sprue defects, or are only the backers the ones to get special treatment, here?

I assume the Pod will take a page from Prodos, and treat retail customers better than KS backers, because those customers can initiate credit card disputes & chargebacks that KS backers cannot.

However, unlike Prodos, the Pod will not charge retail buyers less than what backers paid. The Pod is more like Palladium in that regard.

 warboss wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
I hope this release is just for the general mold defects, seeing as two of my Cheetah sprues don't have torsos. Not, "there's a chunk of torso shaped plastic", but "shouldn't there be a torso here?".

I'm hoping that "not being able to assemble the model" counts as effecting game play.

I would absolutely say that it is significantly different/worse from the other miscasts. Have you posted a pic on the dp9 forums to make them as well as the community (so they can check their own sprues) aware of this?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For those who went in on the kickstarter (or downloaded the files), what's the difference between the HG quick start rulebook on drivethrurpg and the living rulebook? I assume the former has more hobby stuff (building, painting, terrain, etc) but I'm referring to the rules. Is there more art in the quick start rulebook? Any advanced rules or scenarios missing from it?

Yeah I just emailed them a few minutes ago.

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


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

That update...


...wow.

Most of the dimpling can be fixed by players with a little bit of modeling putty to fill-in the area before painting. For the missing "X" detail on the upper left side of the Mounts Hips the missing detail can be painted on or just paint the hips part black so the missing detail is not noticeable.

OK.

Wow!