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.

If the Kodiak is anything like the metal blitz one, it probably isn't the right proportions unfortunately. :(

@Ashley: Is the left foot of the left most Grizzly in the pic that I posted above miscast in a similar way as you were describing in your latest post? I didn't notice it when I was putting it together but only after I posted the image here a few days ago.

Just one!?! I feel like I need to make a fellow ethusiast's virtual wellness check on her just in case...

edit: I just checked and there are some nice offerings but the shipping would be too much for me. Besides, I've still got a bunch unopened (and ALL unpainted!) from my own haul that I was lucky enough to get a few years back so should let others partake anyways.

It's a great choice.

You've got a nice collection there! Did you recently acquire those in one big batch? It looks like you've solved your armless assault hunter problem there.

Cool (especially that you got them NIB and even moreso that they're hopefully complete unlike mine!). Yeah, the pics are few and far between from that early era of the internet and the ones available are if you're lucky are 640x480 (or VGA resolution IIRC) which was a hefty download back in the dialup days. It's why I put up pics of my own minis at a bigger resolution once I got my hand on them.

I can't help with the King Cobra pics as I unfortunately don't own one. I actually liked the armored hunter in the original RPG art but the mini (though accurate) just didn't capture the feel. I think in mini form making the bearhunter (iirc the name variant) with the armored hunter body and bigger grizzly V-engine (since I don't recall them making a bear) would look alot better on the tabletop while still remaining true to the original.

I can't comment on the Blitz 3.0 (or more like 6.0 if you count original, L&L, FM, alpha/beta-nu, full release-nu, and now this one!). What makes it good for holding objectives versus either heavier units like Grizzlies or more nimble ones that avoid shots in the first place? Points value for survivability? I genuinely don't know.

The bearhunter conversion should be pretty easy in rafm as long as you potentially have the extra bits. I'd have to look up the variant to make sure I'm not missing any other significant changes though. I'm not in any way wishing you a major miscast or mispack but I suppose that's a silver lining to that particular bad situation.

Looking forward to seeing the strider make its appearance in your Bad Dog universe and what changes you make to it! If that's the plan, what faction/nation are you thinking about for that monster? I used to have one back in the day and it was more of a lethal weapon than the old 40k dreadnoughts. I still giggle when I remember a 40k teenage player who never built any metal minis who picked up my old 2nd edition dreadnought for the first time and was shocked by the heft.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a peripherally related note, I saw this posted recently elsewhere and it was completely new to me! I've never seen a prototype/civilian version of the Scopedog before and I love this ungainly beast! I love all the little gribbly bits on this fan coversion of the art shown later in the link. I really like the exposed pistons and obviously less armored nature of it and could see various civilian and rover(in HG)/post apocalytic mad max style further conversions.

https://amiamic.tumblr.com/post/64759534286/rocketumbl-early-dog-modeled-by-kazu/amp

No worries and I'm sure you'll keep the blog updated when there is progress. Same thing with recasting the foot. It looks simple enough without overhangs and such that a normal greenstuff press casting should work as would 3d modelling and printing it. I'd offer but that shape (simple though it may be) is still beyond my abilities.

I've been unexpectedly on a VOTOMS kick recently and an important question came up and I figured I'd informally poll the thread. Which of these two iconic designs is your favorite and why?

the venerable Scopedog (shown here in the classic Red Shoulder Custom variation)...



or the iconic Heavy Gear Hunter?




If you had asked me a week ago (or any time in the past 25 years!), I'd have reflexively answered the Hunter but my opinion has recently changed. I still love the HG universe and the rest of the accompanying gears much more than that of VOTOMS but I have to hand it to the original Scopedog in that head to head comparison. Other than a plain and somewhat empty back in its stock configuration, I think the original design is very nice and my asthetic gripe is easily fixed with the various parachute packs, space mover thruster rigs, etc. I still prefer the look of the V-engine and loveably named buttplate but the various additons to the back come close enough in that regard. None of this is new but my resurgent interest in the design made me consider it more from a practical perspective and I have a new found respect for it; the Hunter just isn't practical as a physical real world design and mostly only useful for monopose scale miniatures. We see it from the various generations of miniatures that can only be posed in a certain way because parts physically overlap. While I don't think the company behind the defunct HGA pc game ever planned on using it as is, they did bring up a good point in that the original simply didn't work in the digital game realm either if you're using realistic physics/materials and the same would be true if the HG universe ever made it to live action film/tv as well. The Scopedog, on the other hand, is completely practical and poseable in that regard with the proof being decades of quality toys authentic to that 1983 original design. Even cheap gashapon like the ones I own have a range of motion that the Hunter would never be able to achieve without a significant redesign.



Thoughts? I had never previously ascribed any weight to that factor in the past but it really put the Scopedog over the top for me recently as I rediscovered how well designed it was while looking at youtube reviews of various Scopedog toys and model kits. It's likely that we all have our own priorities and preferences in this regard but I'm surprised that my opinion changed after all these years and specifically because of the reason behind the change.

 Albertorius wrote:
Other than not having space for an actual engine/fuel tank, I personally think that the Scopedog is a better design, meaning that it's better thought out... which is not that strange given how much of the genre is at least tangentially designed to be toyetic.

That said, aesthetically I still like the Hunter more, even though it's by a not too big of a margin.

That's a good point about the engine and I share your opinion. I mentioned the bare back above and preferring the various packs; while it was mostly of an aesthetic preference, part of the reason I prefer it is that I envision the propulsion system there as well. I actually looked through my own meager VOTOMS resources during the past week for cross sections because of the same question about where the engine is. The only thing I found was a reference to a small battery pack in the crotch so I basically headcanoned the backpack into a large Tesla style battery compartment. I don't know if the scopedog is officially electrically powered in the shows but I figured it was and thought the idea matched the electric motor high pitched whine heard whenever the secondary movement system is engaged.

 Albertorius wrote:
The blueprints I've seen show the coreless leg engines for the wheels, the hip sub battery and the PRSP system packs and battery on the thigh, but there was no engine that I could see ^^

This is the diagram I was referring to from the RPG.



I just didn't see that relatively small sub-battery (that you more accurately described as located in the hip rather my wording) being strong enough to power the whole VOTOM hence my headcanon of the massive battery pack on the back. I suppose putting the electric motor back there to power it instead of stowage (half primary battery, half motor) would be an easy enough change.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
They're both neat designs, hard to pick a "favorite". Both have their issues with actual functionality, as has been noted. The Hunter itself has also changed somewhat, it's original design felt much more "scopedog" like, with the more prominent central camera and round head. I think sticking a powerplant of some sort to the Scopedog's back would help balance the visual profile a bit more (in addition to dealing with some its apparent functional issues).

That said, just in terms of visual coolness? I think I'd have to go Jaeger over either the Scopedog or Hunter. Something about the Jaeger head design really does it for me (and is something I think that the current plastics borked big time, but the metal sculpts nailed perfectly).

Terra Novan hipsters picking option C in a binary question! Yeah, those early northern gears went through some changes during 1st edition. I liked the switch to the more angular heads and rocket pods myself (although I think they should have stuck with the rounded ones for the south for their asthetics and interfaction variety). They're all cool looking though and I don't want it to sound like I'm trying to denigrate any of them. I still strongly prefer the various HG lineups (cheetahs/hunters/jaguars/grizzlies for the north) to those of VOTOMS (scopedogs, fatties, etc).

Do you think the Scopedog needs an update for modern times? I actually like what Mektek did with the hunter in HGA (not so much the other stuff) but I'm not sure I'd want anyone to mess with the scopedog in a theoretical reboot. I'd be fine with a more modern take on fancy new VOTOMS though if they leave the scopedog and its variants alone.

Is there a time jump in the storyline with that being some sort of more advanced future Scopedog? I'll be eventually picking up the VOTOMS series on bluray but haven't watched it in many years. I'm surprised they didn't shrink the head if they were doing a partial redesign. I'm not personally a fan of it regardless FWIW.

I agree that the head is iconic but western media gaking all over what was previously considered iconic just to put their own ultramodern divisive mark on IPs has left me somewhat jaded. I had never made the connection with the Black Adder. Huh...

Cool! You'll have to let me know how poseable they are (both pre and post assembly) as I'm curious how those work. Unlike with western models, I'm usually quite amazed with what Japanese kits can accomplish in that regard. FWIW, the gashapon I posted further up the thread is a bit bigger in scale and softer in detail (the 85mm Sunrise one below).



I mistakenly thought it was roughly 40k scale but that's more accurately the 1/60 model (assuming 6ft=30mm as the baseline).

 John Prins wrote:

I see this, and I wonder why this is still not a thing for Heavy Gear. These aren't any bigger than Mammoth/Red Bull minis, and the scale would allow so much better detail, poses and weapon options. And the game could be easily tuned for more detailed, 5v5 gear plus some infantry, making it relatively inexpensive and visually amazing.

Agreed. I had some wild hopes that maybe we'd get a larger scale and skirmish rules back before nublitz was even announced but obviously that didn't happen. My next hope was for the RPG that collected money and iirc delivered almost nothing. The votoms are about 25% too big for a 30mm infantry scale but gears are about midway between mine and the 1/60th scale models (4.3m height for a hunter vs 3.8m for a scopedog). I suppose there is nothing stopping us from doing it ourselves and that's why I bought them in the first place. I've been toying around with rescaling and printing the Dropzone Commander free downloadable buildings for a themed game at the FLGS when/if I make my return for the first time in 2020. Just a simple beer and pretzels walk up and play game of VOTOMS vs dollar store toys and prepainted minis I own. Think the Earth Defense Force videogame meets the Rifts RPG apocalypse where portals are opening across the city spewing out various monsters (not just bugs). That's been a part of my resurgent interest in VOTOMS and specifically scopedogs. I don't know if anything will ever come of it as I have to research how much the printing costs for the buildings will be but if I do it then I'll definitely take pictures.

Same here regarding rewatching. I'm considering getting the new bluray complete collection as I've only ever seen the original ova many years ago. The only reason I haven't ordered it already is because I've read some complaints about the transfer/technical quality.

 John Prins wrote:

Yeah it's sad that the RPG plans went nowhere, but I don't think it would have been very successful anyways. Things are a lot different now. Back when Heavy Gear first came out, its production values were way ahead of most other RPGs in terms of graphic design and art assets. Even the big games like AD&D were pretty plain, design wise, and that really made Dream Pod 9 stand out. Most modern RPGs have caught up or exceeded this level of production design and INFINITY seems to have grabbed the anime-esque tabletop/RPG market. It wouldn't stand out to new players and the old players would have very high standards on all fronts.

Totally agree. I was someone coming from Palladium games and (to a much lesser extent since I didn't play them) D&D2e and the ultramodern layout and obviously color created albeit printed in B&W art was a big draw for me. Most of the last two decades have been relatively lackluster in that regard with Dp9 trying (or being able to afford) an eye catching layout and decent art only with a few products (the Nucoal/Southern Blitz big books). As for the success of the rpg, I think there are degrees of success. To borrow a quote from the matrix... there are levels of survival we are prepared to accept. Just replace survival with success and budget according. I don't have a clue what type of rules they were planning to use as the whole "plan" (if you could call it that) seemed half baked and I didn't pledge. Were they planning on coming out with their own independent ruleset built from scratch? Or were they planning on tweaking the old silhouette system? I don't see the benefit in doing the latter as it would just be more efficient to just update the timeline/fluff/equipment parts and print on demand; the problem is you are not really offering much to returning superfan players who likely have the orginal version. Creating your own system from the ground up is both time intensive and expensive to do properly and I didn't feel that would happen for a variety of reasons (number of folks involved, previous efforts, reliance on crowdfunding before any real work was done, etc). About the only thing left (and probably what I would have chosen if I were the benign overlord of all things HG) would be to pick a system with an established compatible ruleset that is open for use by others and then publish a smaller flavor book with rules only for what isn't covered in the core rules (like Savage Rifts did for example). I'd have mainly used existing classic art/layout and have the book ready to download/print POD for the initial crowdunding with the main stretch goals being updated art/layout for hopefully a full retail release. Admittedly that's typed now with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight but I was pretty much thinking the same thing years ago.

On the wargaming scale of things, Heavy Gear sits in an oddball space. It sits between 10mm and 15mm scales (though the dynamic scaling does odd things and you end up with 10mm light gears and 15mm support gears). I'd almost suggest a scale refresh at true 15mm scale, where you could have individually based infantry, gears closer to RAFM size and everything fits nicely in with the common 15mm terrain. But I know scale changes were unpopular in the past, so an entirely new, complimentary game is probably better.

I really think a 32mm skirmish scale could revitalize interest in the game. As I mentioned, 5v5 (gears) wouldn't be horribly expensive to get into and you could easily start with the big 4 from North and South with enough options in the pack to build many variants. People who already have 32mm terrain have an easy in and if they want games of larger scope, well, there's the Blitz! scale for that.

Yes and no (respectively and respectfully!). For the 15mm idea, I think that time has passed and so has the momentum/good will of the existing fanbase and rules. I don't see it working now even pre-pandemic personally but I'll admit that it's just a pure guess/opinion not backed up by anything concrete. As one of the staunchest critics of the original scale change from blitz, I'd have had no problem with it assuming it had been done with a skirmish version of nublitz prior to the plastic releases. I'm as grognardy as they come but even I think 20+ years of tactical/blitz scale is plenty of value; the problem with the first change is that is was being done 2-3 years after the intro of the line while also invalidating the printed products at roughly the same time. Literally everything I bought (and I was a completionist at the time with 90%+ of both the books and northern minis) was going to be incompatible with everything going forward after only a couple of years.

As for 32mm, I think you're wrong about the affordability. The average gear would be bigger than striders/gearstriders that currently cost $35-55 and getting an actual single strider would likely be CEF Overlord hovertank ($100+) cost. I don't see a new player to a franchise in decline investing what would be necessary for the average 5v5 gear game size default. YMMV but personally I don't see anything bigger than RAFM working economically for either them or the playerbase. I'd love to see it but I don't think that I'd even buy in for more than just one of each of the core northern gears (and a King Cobra!).

In a nutshell, I think that DP9 and HG are in a damned if you do/damned if you don't situation/grave entirely of their own making. It's not completely hopeless but I don't see that changing until literally the entire IP changes hands completely.

Another reason why the Scopedog is awesome!

 John Prins wrote:

Matryoska Scopedogs?

Definitely! Additionally, I think the old Yo Dawg! internet meme and/or an Inception reference would be applicable.

 Albertorius wrote:
I am more or less confident by now that the only way I'll have a 28mm Gear is by designing it myself, unfortunately.

Which might be the incentive to do it, I guess >_>

Probably though I may eventually be of help there. When I last checked (a long time ago), that pre-blitz garage kit large scale Kodiak was almost Inquisitor scale (54mm).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
All this Hunter talk got me thinking about my old 3d model project and I decided to do some work on it over the weekend again. Instead of trying to create a faithful nuBlitz XMG, I decided instead to just try and create a reimagined stock hunter. It's not particularly different from my prior attempts (I'm very limited in my poses unless I want him flipping the bird or doing a cowboy victory dance) but I globally thickened up the model to hopefully fix some of the printing errors I got in my first two prints (broken antenna, missing pieces behind the eye lens, etc).



My previous attempts just for reference:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-1478-15751_Heavy%20Gear.html

I previously printed my gears at an intended height of 30mm to the top of the sensor head but I don't know if I should test this out at RAFM scale (40mm?). I suppose I could just properly support the model and do both in one print with a resize. Just a quick graphic for the three potential scales. I didn't apply any modifier to the Hunter for Blitz scale and just showed it as is for 1/144 for a 4.3m gear (measured to the top of the rocket pod).

 Paint it Pink wrote:

Okay, looking good, but consider breaking it down into sub-assemblies, which would then allow you to repose the parts.

It's a good idea and I might try that. I did something similar when I started tweaking them this year but wasn't happy with the results. Since then I've hopefully gotten better with both supporting the models and fine tuning my prints so it might be worth another shot. My embarassingly crappy photo below shows the one piece on the left and multipiece on the right. It's not an apples to apples comparison as I tweaked other variables like size/thickness in an attempt to emulate the blitz models more closely.



edit: Last night's efforts. I figured I'd split up the parts mostly like a rafm physical model (so the LAC is attached to the hand) and eventually print it out this way. Tonight I'm going to retry the boolean subtractions so that I can actually have proper sockets to go with the ball joints on the arms and head. I haven't been able to get that function to work properly in any of the programs I've tried. :( If it doesn't work then I'll just have to print it as is and drill it out manually with an electric drill.

Cool! I'm looking forward to seeing the eventual full model! Just don't be tempted to be too faithful or detailed at the cost of printability. The pc game had very detailed eyelenses that failed to print correctly despite intramodel supports and multiple rounds of detail thickening.

FWIW, I prefer metric for hobby purposes.

I'm printing out my RAFM custom gear so decided to search for HG on youtube for the first time in a long while this morning and found this interesting first hand account of having a nascent interest in HG and interacting with DP9 at gencon. Those pertinent parts are in the first few minutes and I'm only about 15 min currently. When he gets to the rules, it gets more optimistic so far.

There is indeed a sisyphean aspect to Heavy Gear fandom for many that seems related to how long you've been interested.

Any thoughts on this? It kind of reminds me of a modern CGI take on VOTOMS/HG with its seemingly disposable trooper mechs. I've only skimmed through the first episode but plan to watch the series this week. Apparently this used to be paywalled on youtube behind their red service but now isn't with the second season coming up in 2-3 months.




There seem to be some 1/35 modular model kits available as well but nothing wargaming though.

 Albertorius wrote:
I watched the first ep back when the rest was behind the paywall, and it looked pretty cool. Smaller than HGs but much in the "upgraded infantry" box as them.

Definitely smaller than HG and Votoms and basically a Star Wars Clone Wars AT-RT with arms prior to modification. The pilot fits in the box on the back when it is armored which was a bit of a pleasant surprise for me.



I think it's interesting that the various models use the same core skeleton structure given to them by aliens apparently in the anime and the differences are due to the human factions adding stuff on.

It's even tinier! At least from the official spec sheet, the one that I pictured (the USMC Toad) is 2.856m tall.

https://project-obsolete.com/en/exoframe/

Even the butt-wheels like the Weasel are around 3.5m not including rocket pods and V-engines. If I buy one of the kits, I'm thinking that I'll end up putting a 28mm style figure (40k Guardsmen size) into a custom cockpit. I think the smaller size compared with 1/35 should fit in the same boxed area.

I've been pondering making an off scale 40k tau 15mm army and was wondering how to justify the cost/effort of 3d printing it. One of the reasons I came up with was that I could theoretically use it in HG as a counts as force. The mix of infantry, crisis suits, mechs, and hovertanks seems to best fit a CEF force with Caprice allies (for the bigger suits as mounts). Is there any word on when the army lists will reach a final (for now) status? It's been months and a quick check of the forums still has the mishmash of Microsoft Office files instead of the properly laid out off that was mentioned months ago.

Edit: I've never owned any CEF/Utopia/Caprice models and I'm a bit surprised at some of their relative sizes (especially frames as they look fire support gear size and up!). I'm not sure if frames/flails as crisis/stealth suits is appropriate and caprice mounts as bigger ones like riptides is better or using Utopia as allies instead for armigers/golems as crisis/stealth suits and frames as riptides to better match the devilish as a hovertank. I know there likely is still some sort of Infinity style silhouette system for LOS (I'm still using the 2016 rules) but I'm mainly asking for asthetic/visual reasons.

Yup, your blog is a goldmine for that stuff! Those are the 1/60 votoms, right?

Oh wow... that's definitely news. One of the folks working on it (Vaktathi) is a mod here and occasionally has posted in this thread (most recently IIRC with his RAFM haul). I'd say I'm surprised he didn't pop in to make the annoucement but I wouldn't blame him for thinking that the thread is a bit of a lost cause for excitement.