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.

Ah.
I get you, now.
It's not about playing the game, so much as it's playing the game with a more dynamic appearance.

Good enough. Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Eric

Sounds kind of like Skylanders except I won't have little models sitting next to my TV...

MagickalMemories wrote:Ah.
I get you, now.
It's not about playing the game, so much as it's playing the game with a more dynamic appearance.

Good enough. Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Eric

Exactly, Why should I upgrade from my PS1 where I play Legend of Dragoon or FF7 when the PS3 looks so bad arse graphic wise. Food for thought.

That and the fact that I can do it on my ASUS Transformer vs my ASUS G73, means I can do this while on lunch break at work (its like having a chess game that spans a long long time).

I also want the ability to PAINT my minis on vassal instead of HAVING to use the BA for my Blood Falcons. (horrid artist drawing wise)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:Sounds kind of like Skylanders except I won't have little models sitting next to my TV...

I enjoyed Skylanders!

MagickalMemories wrote:

B) Is this a good idea or not (and in some cases, WTF is this game idea really?)

Well, obviously we think it's a cool idea, but we're not doign the best job of communicating it, so we're working to improve it. A few topics:

*snip*

Eric

Eric, I really want to respond to all of your thoughts, but I think as CEO I'm not the best choice to get to the level of detail you're looking for. Asking for designers to weigh in on it. Not ignoring you.

SunSword wrote:Eric, I really want to respond to all of your thoughts, but I think as CEO I'm not the best choice to get to the level of detail you're looking for. Asking for designers to weigh in on it. Not ignoring you.

What?
No, dammit! I want answers NOW! INSTANT GRATIFICATION!
Isn't that what the Interwebz is all about?

LOL
It's all good. Answer everything or nothing... I was just throwing out every thought or idea that hit the brain pan. : )
I know that some/many/all of the things I asked about might/could increase costs, since it would require more code. Can't hurt to bring it up, though. I think more game designers could benefit from the direct input of their actual or potential consumers.

I appreciate the response & look forward to their answers.


Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:
*major snippage*

We saw all your comments up-to-this point and rather than respond to each one, I'll just say "thanks for the thoughtful feedback." We're open to changing the name, although we do like the logo. We had to come up with something catchy, but right now, we're more concerned about nailing the info on the game itself. Entirely new kickstarter movie going up shortly.

Those aside, here are some comments/questions I have for you, SunSword:

Will you be able to use one mini simultaneously in multiple games, or will it be unavailable for secondary games, once a primary game is initiated?

From Todd: This has been highly debated, but the current answer is "Yes, you can use it in multiple games."

Why not some sort of ability escalation?

From Todd: The problem I see with this is that with over a hundred minis, trying to keep up with leveling individual minis would become a pain in the ass very quickly. Secondarily, a leveling system for the minis would make the collection mechanic awkward and require a lot more dependency analysis. We have some experience with this from the "minions" system in Gods and Heroes. Once you get a character of a certain type, and invest in leveling her up, you suddenly don't need a reason to have another one. Additionally, part of the problem is playing at different levels. Some dungeons are going to be level 2 dungeons, and if I’ve leveled all my minis up to level 10, I suddenly can’t play that dungeon anymore.

But, if I have 3 level 10 minis and 20 level 2 minis and 5 level 5 minis, or whatever, I can play in any dungeon of any level with any of my friends, regardless of how far they’ve gotten through the game.

For privately created games, why make the DM have to furnish all the treasure, etc? If he's taking the time to create a dungeon, why not 'front' a certain amount of treasure, based on the monsters he's including, and allow him to add other treasures from his collection, if he desires?
For that matter, why not reward DM's who make their creations public for ANYONE to play by furnishing the monsters AND treasures for that dungeon? He determines what monsters will be in the game (perhaps he has to "own" those monsters first, so you can still monetize it) and, if he makes it a public dungeon, you supply those monsters and, just like my previous suggestion, appropriate treasure? Essentially, he does the creation work and you get (a) the money for the monsters he's had to buy and (b) a free dungeon for all of your members/subscribers/players to use, thus increasing the value to them, since they now have more game play options.

Todd: This is a debatable point, and one that I think we were talking about anyway, because of the point Anthony made the other day about being able to say, “I just started the game and I want to make scenarios for my friends, but I can’t.”

Why not have the models come pre-painted, but allow them to be repainted? Some people won't want to take the time to paint their own models, and this would help them... that, or have a "pre-designed" template or 2 for each model that they can just click on.

Todd: We’ve talked about having 3 different “presets” for each mini. Certainly, you will be able to choose to have the default textures and then customize from their.

Will a player have the ability to have his collection visible to the public? If so, you could have an 'emulate' option, so someone could just click it & have their model match? Maybe the owner of the original model has the option to allow emulation but, if he does, you give him a tiny amount of game credit?

Public collections: Yes. A system for "copying" someone else's paint job via some system or economy is pretty interesting. They're discussing.

How will you handle dungeon vs. character "levels?" How will you be sure that your dungeons, or the dungeons created by others, are not overpowered? Will the system compute a recommended level (by player or by party) based on the contents of the dungeon? Or, vice versa, will there be limits on what can be used by dungeon creators, based on which models he inputs that his players will be using? I don't want to be playing my "common" halfling thief with an equivalent character level of 2 in a dungeon where you walk around the corner and, "SURPRISE! Ancient Red Dragon! You die!"

Todd: We have a system for putting enemies and traps into dungeons that ensures that the player level vs. the dungeon level is on par. We aren’t going to let players shove a Red Dragon into their level 2 dungeon. We continue to play test this.

What kind of treasure will there be? Will it all be in the vein of "game credits/gold," or will there also be magic items that can be assigned to a model, either permanently or swappable between minis? If it's swappable, will there be a limit on which minis can use it? A cloak of invisibility and ring of ice resistance would NOT be fair on the aforementioned ancient red dragon.

IF there's non-monetary treasure and IF it's permanently assigned to whichever model you give it to, what happens if you trade that model? Do you have to trade the items with it or are they unassigned and, therefore, able to be assigned to someone new?
Hmm... Saw this on your KS page:

Defeat the Adventure Map objective to win Items, Minis, and Gold! Gold can be used to buy new Minis, usable items, Adventure Editor pieces and creatures as well as user generated Adventure Maps.

The Minis with Enemies Bazaar is a marketplace where you can browse and buy Minis, Adventure Maps, Set Decorations, Tile Sets, and other items using your in-game Gold and cold hard cash!

Okay... I'm partially answered. There are usable items. The SPECIFICS of my question re: items is unanswered, but I know there will be items, at least.
What about those Adventure Editor pieces? Will those be dropped as random treasures at the end? If so, what if I don't want to create my own maps? Can I opt out of certain treasure types? Will there be a gold/credit value associated with each, so I can swap it out for something else? If so, could I swap out 2 or 3 things for ONE item that's equal to their total value (or less)? Would there, otherwise, be a "trade zone," where 2 players could agree on a trade, enter their items, and the system automatically processes the trade?

Me: There's gold, MINIs, usable items and dungeon props (traps, trees, chairs, etc...). There is no equipment (i.e. an axe that would change both the visual look and stats of a MINI). There's currently a debate on whether or not we want to provide dungeon props as a reward or if dungeon creators will just get access to all of the common stuff available in a given purchased "Campaign." So if you buy the "Silverbrush Campaign" you get all the common stuff in build mode. There's a pretty serious divide in the office about whether to have "uncommon" props that are provided as rewards or additional purchases. If we were to go that route, once you get that item, you can use it in as many custom maps you want to make.

From a previous post of mine:

The "miniatures" in these packs come unpainted. Will you HAVE to paint them before playing with them? If not, how soon until we see a rise of people criticizing you and refusing to play you with your gray, unpainted digi-models?

If you're not familiar with the community surrounding Warhammer 40K and the like, there are many people who will refuse to play against people who do not have completely painted armies. So, really, I think this is a valid question and something you should explore. My earlier questions/suggestions re: painting could do wonders towards solving the issue.

Would someone be able to "play" as any of the available minis or are some restricted to being dungeon fodder?

I think you're restricting your potential market a little by not implementing character leveling, even to a limited degree with equipment upgrades.
As much, as you say, as it would be a pain to level up your beloved half-dwarven milk maid to level 50 and then not be able to run her through any level 10 dungeons, there are surely systems that would allow leveling that wouldn't _force_ leveling. So "coins" that you earn in battle or whatever can be spent on upgrading your character in some limited way that wouldn't make purchasing other minis redundant. They can also be spent on other things entirely, or perhaps on visual upgrades that don't alter a models level.

Right now I'm seeing a much bigger draw from the DM side of things than from the player pushing his mini through a dungeon side of things, which I think would needlessly shrink your player base.

Sunsword!

Sorry to keep tossing my hat in front of you but the more I think about this the more excited I become. One thing you have going in your favor is your willingness to make an online presence and your dedication to interaction on the forums. Great stuff!


1) I agree with a number of the other gamers here worrying about the lack of upgrades for a discovered mini. While it's true that it would partially negate the desire to purchase new MINIs perhaps it could also increase the desire to play games and purchase equipment? Granted, for all I know finding Bracers of Strength + 1 might be considered an expansion feature, I think it would greatly enhance the game in terms of depth. Plus, you needn't exactly have to deal with experience if you use your treasure accordingly. A great example of this is how the purchased upgrades for cars works in Nitro Nations phone game, Drag Racing.

Example:

A mini at level one can have a total of 10 upgrade points. My favorite character, Larry the Lawyer, has a mighty Briefcase of Health, which gives him a whopping 10 hit points. It costs 5 upgrade points. If Larry also equips his Rolex of Reflexes +2, which costs 15 points, he will now be usable in a lvl 2 campaign. If I want to play him in a level 1 game, something has to give.

This is easily monetized in two ways.

First, you can now put items in a marketplace that eat up free coins which now will be supplemented with real cash.

Second, you can put a maximum number of upgrage points on certain minis. Say Larry is a common. Give him a max of 30 points. He can be played at level 1 2 or 3, whichever. Now Taxman Timmy on the otherhand, he's a rare MINI! He starts at level 10 and can have up to 50 additional points, making him playable at levels 10 through 20! Might make people more willing to go after the rares.

Granted this assumes a lot about your system, but I can foresee a lot of lost interest in no progress for your MINIS. Who would play Pokemon without leveling up or evolutions? If you didn't want to do a limited or unlimited xp earning system, at least a bunch of magic items could give peoples favorites a more playable shelf life. And hopefully the added balance of class roles (Fighters, Thiefs, Wizards, Clerics etc..) would give people reason to train up and use multiple minis anyways.)

TL;DR: Even if you didn't use XP, which would be a shame even if minis were limited in their leveling up, using significant items could add a lot of depth without breaking your game.

This idea = death throes of a failed company. You jumped on the Sam Jackson wagon too late, maybe.

The reason minis don't level up is because they know you'd stick with one and they see "collecting" as something that makes the seemingly deep-pocketed wargaming crowd moist. This "mini reward" system is how they shoehorned collecting in there.

I think you're entitled to your opinion, but I certainly don't see anything labeling their company as dying or already failed.

Just because you see it as a shameless smack at money doesn't mean they don't have a target audience. I'd buy and play for sure.

I just hope they hit their fairly high target number.

Thunderfrog wrote:TL;DR: Even if you didn't use XP, which would be a shame even if minis were limited in their leveling up, using significant items could add a lot of depth without breaking your game.

Gotta agree with the frog on this. I can live with the lack of levelling if there is something i can give my mini to help them out, be it a stat changing item like Braces of Armour to buff Defence or a Thong of Luck to buff the chance to find rare minis.

I can see this as a bit of a level limit to the items. Say levels 1 to 3 can only have 1 item, 4 to 8 can have two items, 9 to 15 can have three items etc. The idea of items as a monetizing stream is cool because it gives you a whole new pool of items (possibly not even needing to be rendered, but it would be better if they were) that you can buy.

It also gives people the options of something like this:

I love my Barbarian but he has sucky X. This dungeon has killed me 3 times because of X traps so I have to use a Dwarf which I hate but has great X. Lame!

becomes

I love my Barbarian but he has sucky X. This dungeon has killed me 3 times because of X traps so I will equip/buy a Headband of X resistance and try again! Go Barbarians!


EDIT: It also gives people some power of customisation and allows for people for feel empowered about their character rather than just being a Halfling Rogue #255235. This sort of engagement and choice is what is going to keep people playing. How many people argue the pros and cons of builds on dakka? Would we have such animated discussion if there was only static options?

Ok let me throw my thoughts on leveling. If I have played the game and leveled my minis beyond the effective dungeon level and I have none left to play with my friends. Why institute one of 3 things, the ability to buy multiples minis of the same design but let players customize them (items and gear, name), or let players buy a reset scroll to reset them to that level, or even allow players to clone the minis at a lower level.

Seems complicated BUT each option opens the door to a online store system where your selling more then minis and maps.

I really do like the idea of being able to get props from dungeons. For some reason I see a diorama with all of my minis looking like there about to do battle with a dragon and props I have collected are all over this stage, the stage rotates lazily allowing a 360 view and that is just the main screen you see after logging on.

I dont know its just me

SunSword wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:
*major snippage*

We saw all your comments up-to-this point and rather than respond to each one, I'll just say "thanks for the thoughtful feedback." We're open to changing the name, although we do like the logo. We had to come up with something catchy, but right now, we're more concerned about nailing the info on the game itself. Entirely new kickstarter movie going up shortly.

Yeah... I'm known for my potential for verbosity. LOL

Thanks for the response. I like it when game developers (though, I'm usually referring to miniature games or RPG's) take the time to get involved with their audience and hash things out.
I think your interest in nailing the info on the game first is a good idea. That should be your focus, anyway. Names can always be changed, even at the last minute.

Why not some sort of ability escalation?

From Todd: The problem I see with this is that with over a hundred minis, trying to keep up with leveling individual minis would become a pain in the ass very quickly. Secondarily, a leveling system for the minis would make the collection mechanic awkward and require a lot more dependency analysis. We have some experience with this from the "minions" system in Gods and Heroes. Once you get a character of a certain type, and invest in leveling her up, you suddenly don't need a reason to have another one. Additionally, part of the problem is playing at different levels. Some dungeons are going to be level 2 dungeons, and if I’ve leveled all my minis up to level 10, I suddenly can’t play that dungeon anymore.

This makes sense to me, and I can definitely see how a "leveling up" system would not coincide well with your plans for the game.
Considering some of the feedback I've seen following your post, though, it might be something for you to keep in mind fir future endeavors; perhaps, as a follow up to MwE. Maybe a game where everything's collectible except the characters, which can level up?

Todd: We have a system for putting enemies and traps into dungeons that ensures that the player level vs. the dungeon level is on par. We aren’t going to let players shove a Red Dragon into their level 2 dungeon. We continue to play test this.

This is good to know. I'm sure the bottom line answer is (or is similar to) "we'll create a system that will analyze the encounters in a dungeon and assign a level" or "we'll create a system that allows a certain degree of difficulty to be put into a dungeon, but will cut the creator off after he hits a certain point," and that's good enough for me. It's good to know that you foresaw that private dungeon creation could have level issues (the aforementioned dragon) and proactively moved to deal with it.

Me: There's gold, MINIs, usable items and dungeon props (traps, trees, chairs, etc...). There is no equipment (i.e. an axe that would change both the visual look and stats of a MINI). There's currently a debate on whether or not we want to provide dungeon props as a reward or if dungeon creators will just get access to all of the common stuff available in a given purchased "Campaign." So if you buy the "Silverbrush Campaign" you get all the common stuff in build mode. There's a pretty serious divide in the office about whether to have "uncommon" props that are provided as rewards or additional purchases. If we were to go that route, once you get that item, you can use it in as many custom maps you want to make.

Without being pushy, can I request more details on "usable items?" I'm not asking for secrets. : ) I'm just wondering how that is defined. For example, you could be referring to potions and scrolls, which are 1-shot items, or other "usable" items which wouldn't really affect the appearance of a mini. Rings, bracers, etc., would all be presumably more permanent, but could be ignored when it comes to showing them on the model.
Also, would those "usable items" be swappable within my collection? If I take an Elf Swashbuckler into a dungeon and prop him up with a half dozen potions of healing that he doesn't use, will those be able to be removed and kept in an centralized inventory list at the end of the adventure?

For the record, I think dungeon props would be a kind of sucky reward. Especially, if they're one use items. I don't want to get a chair for completing a dungeon if I've got no intent of creating dungeons. Hmm... Thinking about it, I just don't want a chair as a reward. LOL
I like the idea of buying the "campaign" and getting the goodies with it better.
I think you'll hear a lot of griping from people who are strictly players (gamers like to complain LOL) if you use dungeon props as rewards, unless you include some sort of option that allows them to swap those for other, equal rewards. Maybe there could be options? "Check here if you want Dungeon Props included in your potential rewards." Just a thought.

Will my mini revert to normal after the game ends? What if it "dies" in the game? I presume it's not lost, entirely?

Yes

Good news. Thanks.
It would've sucked, otherwise.

Will there be options for "mid-game' joining? If I die, can I rejoin the game with the DM's approval?

From Todd: The three types of Blister Packs he talks about are almost exactly what’s in our design document. And yes, I agree, never discontinue models. It sucks.

Thank Todd for me. : ) He understands collectible mini games.

PlasticTrees wrote:Would someone be able to "play" as any of the available minis or are some restricted to being dungeon fodder?

Excellent question. It's one I meant to ask in my earlier novel, but forgot.
Not sure how I might feel, adventuring along side a Red Dragon. LOL Then again, I'd love PLAYING it. ; )



Eric

I'll answer a few more questions, later today, but I thought you should know there have been a few more updates, as well as the first render of a MINI. It's a dwarf!


http://kck.st/M3mK7A

Pretty cool.
Is that a final product or WIP?
If it's a final product, I think you'll hear some criticism of "lack of detail." While there is some detail, there are a lot of places where more could be.

Eric

It's definitely a WIP, untextured. Just to give an idea of the feel we're going towards.

Well, I think the concept is nice.
Any word on the playability of all models vs. "character" models?


Oh... and I was thinking about something earlier...
Why are there only 20 common miniatures? If they are common, I'd expect there to be more along the lines of 40 to 60.

Thanks.

Eric

scarletsquig wrote:There really is nothing to see here, it is just a video game idea, like the hundreds of other kickstarter video game ideas that do not get funded... developers spam them in the hopes that eventually they'll find enough people to pay them $100k to fund an easy flash game-style project that will take them 3 months to make, and then make them a ton of money on release via microtransactions after that.

QFT.

Most forums I frequent, DevAdSpam like this gets locked and nuked.

Thanks but I'd rather a thread I'm interested in not get locked due to bitching.

If you don't like it go away and let them communicate with those of us who do.

Dakka might be unique in allowing developers to post about their own products, but I personally really like it. There's no special treatment given, but they can post and give more information, which is extremely helpful.

I wish someone could convince Dave at Hawk Wargames to do so regarding Dropzone Commander!!

scipio.au wrote:Most forums I frequent, DevAdSpam like this gets locked and nuked.

It a short slide to locking/nuking the Sedition Wars thread by that logic. Mike turns up and answers questions there doesn't he?

Is that your endgame Scipio? Is it?

Sure it is not your cup of tea, and it is from the ground up a business venture rather than an act of love (unlike that epic game or McVey wanting to get his minis out there for peeps) but that doesn't mean it doesn't have some value to others.

Sure I would agree with you if they kept making thread after thread of their stuff, but so far it has been limited to this one thread and there is at least the implication that feedback is being taken so I do not see the harm in it.

Oh, I'm not too worried about this being locked or not personally. While I don't appreciate the tone used by Thunderfrog, I have no issue with his message.

But then, the forum I'm thinking of the most is one that frequently gets lots of people with no intent on being a part of the community pop in to either ask for money or expect to be treated like Rockstars. On the other hand, we have active devs who are just part of the community, and not only there to look for accolades or funds for their latest project.

SunSword wrote:I'll answer a few more questions, later today, but I thought you should know there have been a few more updates, as well as the first render of a MINI. It's a dwarf!
<snip>

I honestly found the pitch confusing: "Minis with Enemies is everything you want in a tabletop miniature game." - except for being a tabletop miniature game, right? Because quite possibly the reason I play tabletop miniature games is for the tabletop and miniature aspects... Digitizing this seems pointless, but power to you if people are actually interested in that.

More importantly though, I'd like to know where you got the silhouettes for your logos. There was an accusation on Frothers (http://frothersunite.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39852&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=bf44f042e2908edd22f0ea37883aea71) that you simply took images of Reaper Miniatures and blacked them out.

Knowing Frothers for what it is, I spent a couple of minutes on Reaper's website and found Anvall Thricedamned, who looks a lot like the sixth figure on your logo. More checking found this dwarf, similar if not identical to the last silhouette on the logo. Are they all copies of Reaper Miniatures, or is the artwork based on original concepts and designs?

@ scipio

You are correct. My tone was both surly and reeked of asshatery. A simple "Well, I hope that doesn't happen here!" would have sufficed. My apologies.

@ angryboy

That's some find. I don't think there's any real question the silhouttes are ripped from existing Reaper Minis. Given how transparent the Devs here have been so far, I don't foresee them lieing, but merely dodging the question, as even a simple glance at your pics shows the logo for what it is.

If an answer is given, I assume the honest one will be along the lines of "We didn't have enough time. We did what we could and plan to replace the sihlouttes with proprietary ones later."

My interest in a project like this remains strong, I just hope it can weather it's initial growing pains and miraculously hit it's high requirement. I'd love a turn based minis game long the same lines as words with friends.

@ Frog - that's a pretty graceful and mature apology there - wish we saw more of that attitude on Dakka.

Padre^.

yeah,
The stolen IP shadows in the logo are pretty shocking... How hard is it to shadow out your own IP.

I'm also not sold on the 'minis' themselves.
Non-animated 3d models are a pretty lame thing to expect people to shell out real £££s for.
They could at least move like the holo game in starwars.

Not interested (yet).

Panic...


*clicks unsubscribe*

Makes me think back ...the coolest part of Battle Chess (anyone else remember that?) was the fact that the pieces moved, and actually hit one another.

RiTides wrote:Dakka might be unique in allowing developers to post about their own products, but I personally really like it. There's no special treatment given, but they can post and give more information, which is extremely helpful.

This is one of the things I like about Dakka. Prior to Necros' fund raiser, Kickstarter wasn't even on my radar. I mean, I knew what it was... but I never really bothered with it. Now, I've supported 2 (one by tagging on to a friend's, because I missed the cut off to do it on my own) and am looking at this one as a possibility (I just need a bit more convincing, since I'm not a video gamer). Heck, I've got this children's "pop up" book idea that's been floating around my head for a while, and I've even been wondering if I might even give it a go, myself. if it wasn't for Dakka allowing these threads to survive and thrive, I might not have ever done these things.

I'm not worried about spam. Ideas not worth supporting aren't going to live long. I know there's one on here somewhere that had someone wanting to open a store(?) and his indiegogo project was floundering HARD because his idea and project plan weren't solid or well communicated. On the other hand, Sedition Wars, Ogre, Zombiecide, Blackwater Gulch and other great games/ideas will thrive because they're excellent products and are well represented by their creators/developers.

One thing that I agree with Panic on (I like him, but we don't agree A LOT, so this is a big deal LOL) is the non-animated nature of the models. If it's been covered, I beg your apologies, as I've overlooked it, but are the models static in-game? If all I do is see my static-posed dwarf slide/move across the screen to the spot I choose, then I resolve any other actions (combat, etc.) in a side screen, etc, I won't be very impressed. It seems that animated walking, falling into a pit trap, swinging an axe, dying, etc. sequences would be a relatively easy thing for designers to create. It's what *I* want in a game, myself.

The more I think about this project, the more I worry for the designers. They're in a bad spot. They have to satisfy VIDEO gamers, Table-top wargamers AND RPGers with this game, all at the same time. If they fail, they lose a segment of their audience. Sure, there's lots of cross-over, but there are plenty who don't. Those of us who only wargame and RPG, for example, won't like the game if it doesn't appeal to at least one of those two aspects... and we can get static minis that we can hold in our hands. So, that's a big selling point for us.


Eric

P.S. Since it's just on the KS page, I'm not too worried about the mini silhouettes. I agree that they DO look like Reaper minis. If that's what they are, then I'm certain they'll be swapped out as soon as MwE has enough of their own minis to replace them. I doubt they'd risk the legal hassle of using Reaper model silhouettes on their OFFICIAL logos.
Speaking of MwE minis, I hope future minis are more dynamically posed.

Dear developers,

You've blanked out the images of the two models I've posted on several headers - though not all of them: they are still visible on the Loot and Rewards logo.

Does this mean that ALL the other miniature silhouettes are your own models and designs, or does it simply mean that I didn't search through enough of Reaper's catalog to find them all? Maybe you could (should?) mention Reaper on your Kickstarter page and thank them for kindly allowing you to use their figures in your logos.

While were at it, look at the one on the end.