Switch Theme:

[Heavy Gear] General Discussion Thread  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Why did you never start or alternately stop playing/collecting Heavy Gear?
Never heard of it... what's Heavy Gear?
Don't like the mech minis genre in general.
Don't like the look of Heavy Gear specifically (art, minis, etc).
Don't like the price of Heavy Gear (books, minis, etc).
Don't like the mechanics of the game/silhouette system.
Don't like edition changes in Heavy Gear every 2-3 years.
Couldn't find any opponents to play against.
Couldn't find any of the products locally to buy.
Other (please elaborate below)
Inadequate support from DP9 (expansions, communication with fans, FAQs, etc).
Power creep and unequal efficacy between factions.
Poor resource management (playtesters, freelancers, website, etc) by DP9.

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

BrandonKF wrote:
As it stands, we're already looking at a new free alpha playtest for everyone. so hey.


I don't claim to know anything about Heavy Gear, but reading this thread tells me two things:

1. Testers aren't listened to (this is bad!).
2. People don't want more editions that invalidate everything before them.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



Indiana, U.S.A.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
BrandonKF wrote:
As it stands, we're already looking at a new free alpha playtest for everyone. so hey.


I don't claim to know anything about Heavy Gear, but reading this thread tells me two things:

1. Testers aren't listened to (this is bad!).
2. People don't want more editions that invalidate everything before them.


The company made several moves to try not to invalidate models. Armies, on the other hand, are a different story. Several updates, including requirements of army-building, had to be changed.

The original Blitz! was very rudimentary. Blitz!: Locked and Loaded opened up things quite a bit, but also gave players a great deal of customization through which they could make their models their own.

Eventually, there was some people who were mentioning that these custom builds were a break in the system, and the company began editing in the new faction (NuCoal) to start over with more solidified squad bases that didn't have as many weapon options. This invalidated many players' armies as a result.

The tester not listened to above I have read over and over on the Dream Pod 9 forums. He's a very vocal sort.

The other choice (that of Gearstriders) was not one that many of the vocal old heads round here are big on. They see it as a break from realism. I give it this. Heavy Gear, when I first entered into it back when I was 16 and dumb and enjoyed all things military, was interesting because it did take a more realistic portrayal of mecha than Gundam (my introduction to the genre).

I don't really mind the Gearstriders, because they still aren't nearly as big a scout Mech from Battletech (for you BT fans, sorry, but your storyline went down the crapper in a big darn hurry when Dark Ages hit), and there is some precedence for their creation.

On the tabletop, of course, they're still a big target. Question being is how much cover and concealment a person wants to lay down on a tabletop to make things interesting. Heavy Gear can't be played on a open tabletop with five or six terrain pieces like Warhammer 40,000... it needs a lot of much-smaller terrain pieces.

-Brandon F.

   
Made in re
Focused Dark Angels Land Raider Pilot






We're talking about army restructurations that would have GW execs blushing there...

At the same time, your dismissal of the "vocal minority" is downright insulting to the many testers that tried hard to prevent the worse of the damage, and were happilly ignored by DP9.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/05 15:27:36


Virtus in extremis 
   
Made in ca
Helpful Sophotect




Montreal

Yes, I'm very vocal. I'm also not the only one that was ignored. I'm talking about a pattern, reported by many other playtesters. When someone (DP9) does the same thing over and over, somehow, I expect them to keep doing it. That's called "learning" and "pattern recognition". Something, ironically, that DP9 seems unable to do.

The reason unit builds were breaking the system is not because they were custom, it's because they were costed incorrectly. This is still the case. Speaking for myself, I wanted more restrictive lists for:
  • Accessibility: Make it easier for new players to figure out what they can use.
  • Coherence: When someone put a squad on the table its squad type should be obvious to anyone. A new player should be able to figure out what a squad can do easily. Just as importantly, they should be able to figure out what a squad cannot do easily.

  • The new system does neither: it adds some incoherent squads, with about the same number of model specific options as in LnL below. It went from "pick a squad, then modify it" to "pick a squad, pick a squad type, then modify it." The new system did not reduce the number of options, it just added steps to the army building process. No real change, just the illusion of change.

    As for invalidating armies, that's somewhat inevitable when changing the army book. Fair enough. They are way to mitigate the damage and to give a chance to player to prepare. DP9 did not even try to do so.

    This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/01/05 15:44:33


     
       
    Made in us
    Decrepit Dakkanaut





    Glorious Nation of U.S.S.A!

    BrandonKF wrote:
    The company made several moves to try not to invalidate models. Armies, on the other hand, are a different story. Several updates, including requirements of army-building, had to be changed.


    Lots of changes were also made to go along with their "creative vision" and not just balance. There wasn't a balance reason to suddenly tell MILICIA players like Albertorius that they couldn't use half their models together in squads or that the previously ubiquitious Sidewinder upgrade would be largely SRA only as a 5 Sidewinder squad. Those weren't balance issues but rather creative brain farts that screwed players over. The problem is that the "creative vision" shifts significantly from one product to the next and you end up with uneven and unfair jumps with the once per year product cycle as a new game design fad is brought in and the previous one is abandoned. Armies that have similar makeups end up with vastly different restrictions and requirements (or in the case of Paxton.. benefits for no additional TV price) seemingly for no rhyme or reason. Then add to that heavy handed switches for balance reasons like 4 gear squads that could have been handled alot better and the fluff derps like the proliferation of gear striders (see the link above to rpg.net to see what the original idea behind them was). The problems endemic to DP9 definitely resemble a hydra which is why the poll is multiple choice but unfortuantely there is no consisent vision that anyone is willing to stick to for HG so far. I hope that with Dave's entry to the field that will change but historically speaking that won't happen as the other cogs are still the same. I don't have any problem with DP9 changing gears (get it? hyuck, hyuck) but if they do so then I expect them to do it with enough forethought and planning to consider how it will be applied beyond just the immediate project being worked on and not just abandoned during the following book in favor of "the next big thing". Dp9 game design feels like dating a 17 year old hyperactive girl... I'm too old for that crap!

    In the end, I hope that they switch to a warmachine style of releases and not GW-style codex books. DP9 can't seem to adequately support individually the number of armies and minis they have in a timely and equitable fashion for almost a decade and that leaves players out in the cold and subject to the ever shifting whims of a select few. Coming out with a book that updates everyone similarly according to a theme gets them regular income from all of their remaining players and gives everyone something (general game rules/traits/scenarios and specific unit options and new models).

    This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/01/05 16:03:38


     
       
    Made in re
    Focused Dark Angels Land Raider Pilot






    I suspect the frequent changes of vision are more indicative of a lack of vision, than anything else.

    Virtus in extremis 
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



    Indiana, U.S.A.

    And you have been rather pointed in your conversations with plenty of folks on the board over there, haven't you both, mrondeau and HudsonD?

    Let me be honest. The way you guys write, chafes heavily. You talk of these things as experts. I get it. You both did a lot and put a lot of time and effort in. But not everyone IN Dream Pod 9 ignored you OR the other testers.

    You've grown so cynical of the product and the company, everything you say about it I read in shades of straight-up sarcasm mixed with bitterness. And it really bites. Perhaps that's why I have a hard time discussing with you both. Your history of hurt feelings makes it darn near impossible to write anything FOR the company and the IP without you guys jumping in and talking about the 'patterns' you guys went through with your own gaming groups. And if two very vocal ex-playtesters are so against the company, well then that doesn't bode well for someone who has never even tried the game, now is it?

    warboss, I get the idea behind the Gearstriders as mentioned over there. But I'll also say that quite a few of the newer players like them. The old heads (yes, I know that's you) aren't crazy about them.

    As for the fads they've gone through. The company tried many different things to stir up excitement and get people on board. Unfortunately the patterns of change, as mrondeau points out, were so frequent that it appears as though everyone was warded off from it.

    Myself, I've bought just about every single new book that came out. I've stuck with this thing as a fan.

    Granted, not as expensive as those people who bought a few dozen or so models for an army that was invalidated, and I grant that that is a harsh thing to go through. But I lost two dozen of my models (including two rather expensive HT-72s) in Iraq. It happened. It is over. The folks who still have models from the 90s can get back in the game with those very models if they so desired, because the company tried to keep their loyal fan base happy.

    As for the future, not in my hands (though I do wish it were sometimes). Plenty of things going on within Dream Pod 9 that I don't know about since I'm not an employee or management, I'm just a fan who enjoys the world greatly and enjoys writing about it, since it's one of the few 'real robot' genres there is that includes all of what being a human in a crazy, mixed-up world is without mucking it up with extra-terrestrials or nuclear-powered silos for mechs.

    -Brandon F.

       
    Made in gb
    Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






    I'm honestly more surprised no ones put together a "fixed" version online. 1) the game has fans, 2) it's a good setting, 3) the rules as are are good, just....messy if i'm right in all this. Honestly? I'm struggling to see why this hasn't gone the way of GW specialist games. Namely: If the company wants to feth around and play whimsical games, fine, but we have our nice community version over here that actually works.

    - 1250 points
    Empire of the Blazing Sun (Combined Theaters)- 1950 points
    FUBAR Starship Troopers- Would you like to know more?
    GENERATION 9: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your sig and add 1 to the number after generation. Consider it a social experiment.  
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



    Indiana, U.S.A.

    There has been a great deal of discussion among the Grognards of that.

    My own blog I started working on a version that crossed between Heavy Gear and Infinity, using d20s like Infinity and making modifications to some of the special rules, like attack aircraft and bombers, making them much more lethal.

    warboss there built up his own small version, Flash, simplifying some of the dynamics and data cards. It's on his blog link.

    -Brandon F.

       
    Made in us
    Decrepit Dakkanaut





    Glorious Nation of U.S.S.A!

    GW games have a much bigger following and therefore more people willing to mod them. More importantly, though, is that with a DP9 edition lasting on average 2-3 years, any combined fan attempt to do the work themselves and fix it would only be useful for a short period of time before being invalidated along with the edition it "fixed".
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



    Indiana, U.S.A.

    Sometimes I think it's caused more by the fact that there are a lot of different ideas running amuck in Grognard world.

    -Brandon F.

       
    Made in re
    Focused Dark Angels Land Raider Pilot






    BrandonKF wrote:And you have been rather pointed in your conversations with plenty of folks on the board over there, haven't you both, mrondeau and HudsonD?
    Let me be honest. The way you guys write, chafes heavily. You talk of these things as experts. I get it. You both did a lot and put a lot of time and effort in. But not everyone IN Dream Pod 9 ignored you OR the other testers.

    You've grown so cynical of the product and the company, everything you say about it I read in shades of straight-up sarcasm mixed with bitterness. And it really bites. Perhaps that's why I have a hard time discussing with you both. Your history of hurt feelings makes it darn near impossible to write anything FOR the company and the IP without you guys jumping in and talking about the 'patterns' you guys went through with your own gaming groups. And if two very vocal ex-playtesters are so against the company, well then that doesn't bode well for someone who has never even tried the game, now is it?

    What can I say ? Nothing hurts like the truth. I do not tolerate false witnessing, regardless of its intent or sincerity.
    You readily admit you know nothing of what happens behind the scenes, then you just as easily dismiss it as "bitterness". What makes you think there's just the two of us ? Why are you even worried a couple of loud voices would be enough to turn players away, if the product was actually good ? Why do you think the player base has been shrinking steadily ? Why do you think the playtest team is replaced every year or so ?
    I haven't spilled half of what I know about DP9's inner workings, mostly out of professionalism.

    BrandonKF wrote:Sometimes I think it's caused more by the fact that there are a lot of different ideas running amuck in Grognard world.

    Are you seriously trying to tell us you think DP9 changes its lead designer every couple of years, because of a private forum section where players can post house-rules ?

    Virtus in extremis 
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



    Indiana, U.S.A.

    The second post was speaking of what doc1234 was discussing, HudsonD, about players creating their own fan-made rulesets.


    Hard truths cut both ways. I don't believe it is just the two of you. But I don't 'dismiss' it as bitterness. It is bitterness. 4 years I've been reading your posts, and they've continued on with this angle of cynical sarcasm for a good bit of it. That includes Heavy Gear Assault.

    I am not worried. I am fed up. Every darn time I always read the same thing out of you, that you know more about Dream Pod 9 than most, that you keep your tongue in check. But if the teams keep changing, as you say, what do you know about the current team?

    I don't know what you went through, and you won't tell because of your professionalism and because of your NDAs, whatever. But if all that is the case, than why on the LGA's green Earth would you even hint about it in the first place?

    If you can't stand the company and you don't like the IP and the people who run it anymore, than drop it. Otherwise, don't put out this crap here on Dakka, then go back into the DP9 Forums and chat it up like you know everything (again). It's double-mouthed as all get-out.

       
    Made in us
    Raw SDF-1 Recruit




    Columbus, OH

    I effectively left the game back in late 2012 (pre-Field Manual) because of various issues. I was very tired of teaching the game to people, because there's a major learning cliff to understand how to make units effective in the game. You couldn't just get a guy in the open and shoot him, and expect to do damage - you either needed to just be a better model flat out, or learn how to stack enough modifiers to make it worth your time. And that only works until someone started bringing indirect fire to the table... at which point you just sit in the corners and pummel each other. It became a very unfun game to play, especially compared to other games on the market (Warmachine, Mercs, Infinity in particular). It's sorta like learning to play Infinity, except instead of needing to learn a new subset of skills (camo / tags / hacking / etc) to broaden out your capabilities, the answer basically boils down to get the cheapest IF and FO units, and the most expensive DF units, and you're set.

    I still play games with my Heavy Gear models, but I've stopped buying them - they are simply too expensive for me at this stage in my life. $20 for a single model - that I need 5 of - is a pretty high premium, even compared to 40k or Infinity. At least in Infinity / Malifaux / Mercs I can pickup a single model that I like the look of, and work it into my army - whereas with HG I need to fit the force constraints that are, quite frankly, nuts. They *still* screwed up the newest books by yet again going half-way with their changes, but taking all the pain of the change on the chin. They broke army builds in the FiF book, but *still* have army specific and even group specific swaps for models in the group, instead of just creating a new group.

    I stayed involved with the game since 2012 in a quasi-official capacity, but I finally walked away after Gencon. There's only so much time and effort I was willing to pour into the black-hole of HG gaming. I love mecha, and their rules were... okay... but there's not enough to keep me playing or buying anymore. I'll play my own houserules, or Gruntz, or Tomorrow's War, or other games instead.

    That's my 2 TV at least.
       
    Made in re
    Focused Dark Angels Land Raider Pilot






    BrandonKF wrote:

    Hard truths cut both ways. I don't believe it is just the two of you. But I don't 'dismiss' it as bitterness. It is bitterness. 4 years I've been reading your posts, and they've continued on with this angle of cynical sarcasm for a good bit of it. That includes Heavy Gear Assault.
    I am not worried. I am fed up. Every darn time I always read the same thing out of you, that you know more about Dream Pod 9 than most, that you keep your tongue in check. But if the teams keep changing, as you say, what do you know about the current team?
    I don't know what you went through, and you won't tell because of your professionalism and because of your NDAs, whatever. But if all that is the case, than why on the LGA's green Earth would you even hint about it in the first place?

    I do my best to keep up to date on the latest, in many ways. If someday I'm wrong, then I'll apologize. So far, the facts have been on my side.
    I've read your post a few times, and I haven't yet found that "hard truth" you promised. If you have facts to provide, please do so.

    Virtus in extremis 
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant






    Heavy Gear is a really interesting game. Ignoring the RPG and previous edition history (which I never played) and starting with Blitz as of Field Manual (the current Edition), the game has a lot of really wonderful selling points, some neutral bits, and bad stuff. I love so much about the game, that the parts that suck only stick out the more.

    + A really innovative style of gameplay, where maneuver is not only preferable, but REQUIRED to succeed in a direct fire engagement. This is really cool, as you literally cannot park on a hill and just rocket launcher the enemy to death. Some guys rollerskating past you will machine gun you from three directions and kill you. Awesome. NOTE: THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO INDIRECT FIRE
    + Lovely models. I do actually greatly like the multipose models, and their general style. Gears and Striders are interesting.
    + Combined Arms. Having Tanks and Infantry and Howitzers make the game much more diverse, especially as they all behave so differently. Great.
    + Objective System. It's certainly novel, where your force org chart determines your likely objectives. Has a number of downsides, but it's cool that the emphasis is on completing the mission.
    + Electronic Warfare. It's everywhere, powerful, flexible and damn near mandatory. That's neat. Though part of the problem is INDIRECT FIRE related.

    = Pricepoint. The prices aren't cheap, but they aren't stupid hideous either. People seriously need to stop comparing games on the 'individual mini vs GW plastic guy' level, since no game (outside of I suppose, Spartan's ship based games) are on that level, but rather on the 'what it takes to play a full list'. This is why games like Infinity are awesome, since the total game is substantially cheaper than most.

    Now onto the negatives. They're bad. I mean real bad.

    - POOR SENSE OF GAME DESIGN / SLAVISH ADHERENCE TO LEGACY
    This is where Indirect Fire comes in as well as other glaring issues. That beautiful model of maneuver based combat? Destroyed by the fact that Indirect Fire needs no line of sight, has trivial spotting requirements, massive blast radiuses. Cover does nearly nothing.

    Stuff like this really boggles the mind. Much of it is a due to a complete lack of understanding of both quantifiable theory on how to design this game (ie, the easier, cheaper to field attack should not be mathematically way more powerful and require less pieces to enact') , and slavish adherence to legacy materials. All of the damage numbers come from an RPG that has only a passing resemblence to what the game is right now, and the units are designed with that RPG in mind (my ultra-high end gear has 8 different weapons, but can only fire 1 at any time... why?)

    Other systems, instead of being outright broken and damaging, are instead clunky and awkward or unplayable.
    This is also where the inane terrain rules come into play, where you go at 1/2, 1/3 or 1/4th speed if you ever touch them. Mostly 1/4th, if you do Read as Worded. Which makes them pretty much impassable, when the fastest units in the game capable of traversing such terrain move a blistering 3 inches, in a game that can have a 48x60 longwise board.
    Concealment is another problem. You get a point of concealment for every object between a unit and an enemy, including every 4/6/whatever inches of woods, plus for smoke and--- it gets insane, checking so many things prior to shooting. Which incidentally, is again nearly entirely avoided by Indirect Fire.
    Stealth is another broken system. Instead of making a target harder to hit slightly or whatever, specific armies are literally immune to fire unless you're right on top of them. And unless Indirect Fire is used.

    Slavish Adherence to legacy rulesets are much to blame. For example, Melee does NEARLY NOTHING in the game, and it's almost impossible to harm someone except with one very specific and very rare weapon. The problem with Indirect Fire stems from it's attack modifiers being based on old modifiers from an earlier edition of the game, where all of the other modifier numbers were extremely different.

    - POOR RELEASE SCHEDULE / HANDLING OF FEEDBACK
    DP9 has a worse GW-styled release schedule than GW. That's hideous.
    The game has the following factions: North, South, NuCoal, Peace River, Earth, Caprice, Utopia, Black Talons.
    The following armies are up to date and playable in a competitive manner: South, NuCoal

    That's... just wrong. Especially for the poor bastards who play Earth, Caprice or Utopia, who have NEVER been remotely viable, and pay 3 times as much for worse versions of upgrades other people get.

    By releasing one book every year, and a handful of models (largely resculpts), it's feast or famine. There's a reason every other company has switched to a warmachine style 'every faction gets something' schedule: It keeps you interested, no matter what you play.

    Likewise, when something cool does come out, it's not marketted right. Even fans of the game don't see anything on most gaming news sites, nothing on their frontpage, and need to instead dive into some obscure forum threads for basic information like that a new unit box came out.

    It also doesn't help that the company's book editing is poor, and schedules slip a lot. And that they don't like it when called on it.

    - MINDLESS DIE-HARD FANS WHO ARE KILLING THE GAME.
    A striking number of fans stand by the 'the company can do no wrong' line, and lash out at others as 'whiners'. This further stifles the value of real, effective criticism and game growth, and makes the echo chamber effect all the more noticable. Others have brought this up in greater detail in this thread, so I won't go into it further.

    ----

    Alas Heavy Gear, you really DO need a 'Firestorm Mk2' treatment. A professional new ruleset, backed by excellent miniatures, made as a quality product with good marketing, a responsive and growing community and so-forth. We'll see what 2014 holds, but if the new ruleset is slated for 2015, with a 'beta' starting January...

     
       
    Made in us
    Regular Dakkanaut




    Oh, whaddya know, I do remember my login info.

    That Buckmaster post how DP9 is afraid of math, yeah...

    That seems to be one of the biggest problems and often why the game design seemed to fall flat on its face. DP9 had some really groggy math fans of the game, and could come up with percentages and figures for why certain things where overpowered, but seemed to be largely ignored by the rules makers. And so we got NuCoal. Hey IF too powerful? Let's take something that was already overpowered and make it triple-linked! It's the only faction that was tailor made to the ruleset, instead of shoe horned in. Though even barring that, even grenades from first edition should've been blindingly obviously overpowered. They had better range than the default guns, and a better chance of doing damage.


    A wargame like Heavy Gear deserves to have some really strong statistics guys in the mix keeping things real. Along with a decent god damned editor and technical writer to make sure gak is understable and can't be misconstrued. Murky rules that take forever to get answers from the POD on seem to be a staple. Witness that awesome rules thread that sits mostly idle, and should've been shutdown. (Oh at least they locked it finally)


    EDIT: And the reason why there hasn't been a good indie ruleset so far is that there just isn't enough of a playerbase to take it up. There are a couple of different attempts, but with an already small playerbase, it's just not worth it. The forums are just tiny, with barely a handful of players ever online at once.

    This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/07 01:18:34


     
       
    Made in ca
    Helpful Sophotect




    Montreal

    ferrous wrote:
    DP9 had some really groggy math fans of the game, and could come up with percentages and figures for why certain things where overpowered, but seemed to be largely ignored by the rules makers.

    Hi.
       
    Made in us
    Regular Dakkanaut




    mrondeau wrote:
    ferrous wrote:
    DP9 had some really groggy math fans of the game, and could come up with percentages and figures for why certain things where overpowered, but seemed to be largely ignored by the rules makers.

    Hi.


    Oh I know, what's even more sad is that even now, there are still some really decent maths guys who can do some quick work and show tables and percentages on why certain things are underpowered or overpowered.

    Though there are still a subset of the fanbase that is afraid of math, and actively scornful of it. Which of course boggles my mind, as a balanced game is good for everyone.

    My one hope, is that if they do an open playtest, maybe they'll actually listen to feedback this time. Basically pull a warmachine, and have the rules open and ready to undergo massive revisions. But I think it's too late, most people who would give the best feedback are already gone.
       
    Made in us
    Decrepit Dakkanaut





    Glorious Nation of U.S.S.A!

    Over on Heavy Gear farm, the proud tradition of all Gears being equally created (under VCS) but some being more equal than others (like Paxton PiG gears) continues to this day. It's weird that you'd have to argue the point that you shouldn't get something for nothing (or alot of somethings) if there is ostensibly a (flawed) system for calculating everything but you do... and you lose the argument.
       
    Made in us
    Raw SDF-1 Recruit




    Columbus, OH

    mrondeau wrote:
    ferrous wrote:
    DP9 had some really groggy math fans of the game, and could come up with percentages and figures for why certain things where overpowered, but seemed to be largely ignored by the rules makers.

    Hi.


    I think I count in that camp as well...
       
    Made in ca
    Helpful Sophotect




    Montreal

     IceRaptor wrote:

    I think I count in that camp as well...

    Indeed.
       
    Made in au
    Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






    Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

    BrandonKF wrote:
    Sometimes I think it's caused more by the fact that there are a lot of different ideas running amuck in Grognard world.

    -Brandon F.


    Grognard world? So we're just falt out insulting people I see?

    What I'd suggest now is that you keep digging. Eventually the hole you've dug yourself into will become a tunnel that leads the other side, and probably a light to escape into.

    Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
    "GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

     
       
    Made in us
    Decrepit Dakkanaut





    Glorious Nation of U.S.S.A!

    ferrous wrote:
    My one hope, is that if they do an open playtest, maybe they'll actually listen to feedback this time. Basically pull a warmachine, and have the rules open and ready to undergo massive revisions. But I think it's too late, most people who would give the best feedback are already gone.


    I suspect some of them (but not all) will return if temporarily to check out and comment on the new edition. Of course, even if the rules undergo massive revisions based on feedback (assuming that feedback is mostly wheat and not chaff), none of that matters if the typical cycle of DP9 closed door unfriendly yearly random twists and turns in game design punctuated by edition flip flops every 2-3 years continues. Is it really progress if the rules are tweaked to the satisfaction of the playerbase only to have a randomly chosen army and its players screwed over a year later by a poorly thought out army book? That's why I'm advocating a warmachine style book release where everyone gets something and DP9 gets something ($) from everyone. I frankly don't know if that will help or hinder but at least it's something different and would force the company to see how a particular change would affect all players and not just the project lead's darling chosen faction.

    edit: fixed erroneous quote

    This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/01/07 16:11:43


     
       
    Made in ca
    Helpful Sophotect




    Montreal

    warboss's quote is erroneous, ferrous said that, not I, but I agree 100%, so I'm stealing ferrous's sentence. For that matter, I will look at the new rules and at how they intend to test them. I'm not spending anymore money on DP9, but I enjoy reading rules anyway.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/07 13:30:45


     
       
    Made in ca
    Fresh-Faced New User




    I own a HG:B army and an occasional player versus two other opponents in my area. I've stopped really playing the game for quite some time, though I do lurk on the forums and post every once in a while. There's a few reasons I've stopped buying models.

    1. Lack of company support for its ruleset

    This is a glaring one. For years the company provided zero rules support. Any sort of rules question was essentially being pitched into a black hole. Then, after a protracted, heated argument last year about just how poorly written the Heavy Gear rules are (prompted by a new player basically asking how good the rules are), the company announced there would be a forum specifically for answering rules questions. Weekly answers were provided, which was great. It lasted three or four weeks, then the person in charge just flat out stopped answering. No official word on why he stopped, no questions about if rules support are over are answered. This wouldn't be so much a problem if the rules were well written and edited, but they're in a state I would consider barely adequate.

    How can you take a game seriously if the developers themselves don't seem to care about it themselves? You get the feeling that DP9 is operating primarily as a model-making company, with the actual game behind the models a distant second.

    2. Lack of transparency

    This one's closely related to the first, but any communication with the company is largely one way. They announce new releases, then will have a spurt of activity where they will answer feedback, then it reverts to the "no questions, please" mode. You get the occasional comment that they monitor the forums closely, but why don't they chime in with comments more often? It gives the appearance that the people on the forums have more invested in the game than the developers themselves.

    3. Price

    This is maybe par for the course for miniatures gaming, but everything is just too expensive for what you get. To get a decent two player game you'll need a myriad of rulebooks & army guides, plus two sets of fairly expensive models. You can get good board games with equal or more tactical depth for half that price or less. I like the detail on the models, but to me it's second to the game play, so it's hard for me to justify keep dumping money into a game whose rules I find ho-hum.

    This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/07 18:38:50


     
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



    Indiana, U.S.A.

    HudsonD wrote:
    I do my best to keep up to date on the latest, in many ways. If someday I'm wrong, then I'll apologize. So far, the facts have been on my side.
    I've read your post a few times, and I haven't yet found that "hard truth" you promised. If you have facts to provide, please do so.


    Not asking for an apology, HudsonD. Perhaps that's the disconnect here. You're thinking I'm demanding you make an apology, when what I would rather have is for you to leave behind whatever bad blood ran between you and the others.

    ferrous wrote:Oh, whaddya know, I do remember my login info.

    That Buckmaster post how DP9 is afraid of math, yeah...

    That seems to be one of the biggest problems and often why the game design seemed to fall flat on its face. DP9 had some really groggy math fans of the game, and could come up with percentages and figures for why certain things where overpowered, but seemed to be largely ignored by the rules makers. And so we got NuCoal. Hey IF too powerful? Let's take something that was already overpowered and make it triple-linked! It's the only faction that was tailor made to the ruleset, instead of shoe horned in. Though even barring that, even grenades from first edition should've been blindingly obviously overpowered. They had better range than the default guns, and a better chance of doing damage.

    A wargame like Heavy Gear deserves to have some really strong statistics guys in the mix keeping things real. Along with a decent god damned editor and technical writer to make sure gak is understable and can't be misconstrued. Murky rules that take forever to get answers from the POD on seem to be a staple. Witness that awesome rules thread that sits mostly idle, and should've been shutdown. (Oh at least they locked it finally)

    EDIT: And the reason why there hasn't been a good indie ruleset so far is that there just isn't enough of a playerbase to take it up. There are a couple of different attempts, but with an already small playerbase, it's just not worth it. The forums are just tiny, with barely a handful of players ever online at once.


    As I pointed out, warboss has his own indie ruleset on his blog, as do I. I'm more than willing to hear you folks out.

    H.B.M.C. wrote:
    BrandonKF wrote:
    Sometimes I think it's caused more by the fact that there are a lot of different ideas running amuck in Grognard world.

    -Brandon F.


    Grognard world? So we're just falt out insulting people I see?

    What I'd suggest now is that you keep digging. Eventually the hole you've dug yourself into will become a tunnel that leads the other side, and probably a light to escape into.


    The forum is called 'a pint of grog'. So I call'em Grognards. Not insulting, stating the fact that there have been dozens of ideas floated between dozens of individuals.

    mrondeau wrote:warboss's quote is erroneous, ferrous said that, not I, but I agree 100%, so I'm stealing ferrous's sentence. For that matter, I will look at the new rules and at how they intend to test them. I'm not spending anymore money on DP9, but I enjoy reading rules anyway.


    The alpha is to be released sometime later in January or February. It will be open to any player who decides to chime in on the DP9 Forums.

    Mr. Dubois writes:

    "Dream Pod 9 is announcing development of a new edition consolidated core tabletop wargaming rulebook for Heavy Gear. The full Beta rules will be released as a free e-book and b&w printed booklet in Summer 2014. The full color new edition core rulebook (both electronic and printed editions) will follow in early 2015.

    The new rulebook will consolidate all the rules and complete army lists for all factions into one book for the first time and will introduce concepts for speeding up game play and simplifying army selection. Rules updates will be determined through an Alpha development phase which players are invited to participate in. The Alpha test period will occur between January and June, 2014. Support for the Alpha and Beta rules will be via a development webpage with a blog and weekly updates. The Dream Pod 9 forum will host playtester feedback and discussion in a special section to be announced.

    The future for Heavy Gear will be the new edition consolidated core rulebook containing the storyline, rules, and core army lists for all factions currently available. The vast array of Heavy Gear armies will continue to be supported and expanded within the new standardized army construction rules system. Heavy Gear players will be able to participate directly in future development through playtesting, design competitions, and collaborative army design committees.

    The recently released Blood Debt - Peace River Army List and forthcoming Northern Army List (early 2014) e-books only exclusives for Heavy Gear Blitz will allow all current players of HGB not involved in Alpha development to continue to enjoy playing until the new rules are released in 2015. Material from the originally planned printed books will be incorporated into the new edition rulebook.

    The Heavy Gear universe will continue to expand with new miniature releases, re-sculpts, and the continuation of the storyline.

    We need the participation of all Heavy Gear fans to help us develop the most fun mecha combat tabletop wargame available. We can’t make it happen without you and your enthusiasm in getting friends involved and bringing the game to your local stores and gaming groups."

    -Brandon F.

       
    Made in re
    Focused Dark Angels Land Raider Pilot






    BrandonKF wrote:

    Not asking for an apology, HudsonD. Perhaps that's the disconnect here. You're thinking I'm demanding you make an apology, when what I would rather have is for you to leave behind whatever bad blood ran between you and the others.

    Your assumptions and disregard for not only my points, but also pretty much everyone else's, are showing in a very obvious way there.

    Everything I've posted, I've done so out of respect toward truth and facts. If you post something wrong, I will call you on it. As I have, many times already.
    If one day, you are able to make your own points, and provide facts and evidence, instead of repeating official statements, then we might finally be able to have a conversation.

    The forum is called 'a pint of grog'. So I call'em Grognards. Not insulting, stating the fact that there have been dozens of ideas floated between dozens of individuals.

    Using plural for "dozens" is kind of pushing it, although not technically inaccurate. Furthermore, you appear to have completely missed the real intent of the Grog sub-forum.

    The alpha is to be released sometime later in January or February. It will be open to any player who decides to chime in on the DP9 Forums.
    Mr. Dubois writes (...)

    This would be the perfect illustration to my previous point. What are you trying to achieve by re-posting official DP9 statements as if they were actual arguments, in a thread where people are complaining about the gap between DP9's promises and their actual delivery ?
    To put it another way, after so many failed deliveries, and with DP9's output visibly reduced, what makes you think that this time, it'll be different ?

    Virtus in extremis 
       
    Made in us
    PanOceaniac Hacking Specialist Sergeant



    Indiana, U.S.A.

    Unlike you, I haven't been one to demand that the Pod throw out the old legacy rules, primarily because it was rather simple for me to re-learn the basics with their basis being in the Tactical and RPG setting. However, I, like many others, had difficulty finding opponents, primarily due to the fact that I was in the Army at the time, and also because I lacked a reliable source of transportation.

    Now, the legacy rules are preparing to go by the wayside. This is an effort on the part of the Pod to reach out to casual wargamers to make some of the more difficult rules simpler, and to make certain vague rules clearer in their intent. Many people have spoken with regards to the detection rules, and these are being looked at.

    -Brandon F.

       
    Made in us
    Decrepit Dakkanaut





    Glorious Nation of U.S.S.A!

    BrandonKF wrote:
    However, I, like many others, had difficulty finding opponents, primarily due to the fact that I was in the Army at the time, and also because I lacked a reliable source of transportation.


    You had a main battle tank. Neither sleet nor snow nor jihadis or concrete walls could stop you from getting to a game!
       
     
    Forum Index » Other Sci-Fi Miniatures Games
    Go to: