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.

 shingouki wrote:
Anyone else think this hamza mini is a rip off of solid snake or is it just me?Slap some hair on add and bobs your uncle.I only say this as it was the first thing that sprang to mind as soon as i saw it.

I think that you need to expand your exposure some. I would guess that you are younger and mainly got exposure to sci-fi through video games. No insult intended there, just a bit of speculation. There have been many, many bodysuit-with-armor wearing characters, and honestly the details of this figure don't look much at all like the character you posted.

 chris_valera wrote:
I'm *really* not all that positive about it. Deal with it.

You certainly don't have to be positive about it, but you could dial back the confrontational attitude about it a bit. It's not doing you any favors, and certainly won't help get you heard by the "fanboys".

As for the BGoA game and Kickstarter:


But I need to see more. A couple of the names attached to this project don't inspire confidence in me and I'll need to see more actual product before I pony up cash.

~Eric

 chris_valera wrote:
I'm having fun over at the Gates of Antares official forums:

I also like how my ideas for plastic zombies are dumb, when just a box of plastic zombie was one of the few kickstarters that succeeded, and going by (failing) kicktraq, this supposedly unique futuristic universe can't have them. No zombies and xenomorphs allowed you guys! Plastic zombies are also doing well for Wargames Factory, who made two boxes of them, as well as Mantic Games.

If WGF makes zombies, and Mantic makes zombies, and even a successful, unnamed kickstarter makes zombies, why would DSC want to make more zombies? I agre that they need to put something out there, but that something needs to be the wardrones that every faction in the game will use. That will be the backbone of their miniatures line, and the much-needed shto int he arm for this project.

 JoshInJapan wrote:

 chris_valera wrote:
I'm having fun over at the Gates of Antares official forums:

I also like how my ideas for plastic zombies are dumb, when just a box of plastic zombie was one of the few kickstarters that succeeded, and going by (failing) kicktraq, this supposedly unique futuristic universe can't have them. No zombies and xenomorphs allowed you guys! Plastic zombies are also doing well for Wargames Factory, who made two boxes of them, as well as Mantic Games.

If WGF makes zombies, and Mantic makes zombies, and even a successful, unnamed kickstarter makes zombies, why would DSC want to make more zombies? I agre that they need to put something out there, but that something needs to be the wardrones that every faction in the game will use. That will be the backbone of their miniatures line, and the much-needed shto int he arm for this project.

They need to make zombies because the male zombies that WGF makes are true 25mm scale and the ones Mantic makes are 28, but they're clearly fantasy zombies. There's a market for 28mm zombies, and zombies are things you need a ton of, anyway.

Also, I now know why I didn't realize Hansa was the promo fig, the figure itself looks completely different than the sillohuete shown on the various backer levels images. The sillohuete shows the guy totian a massive chain-gun or something, Hansa has just a rifle. They may wanna fix that, actually put his picture on the various backer images.

Also, they might want to add a five-pound option for people who want to order just the LE figure, or multiples of him. From what little I've seen of the rules, I'm not down for the rules either. The Hansa figure looks okay, the 70s porn-stache and silly butt-plates notwithstanding.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

Also, I now know why I didn't realize Hansa was the promo fig, the figure itself looks completely different than the sillohuete shown on the various backer levels images. The sillohuete shows the guy totian a massive chain-gun or something, Hansa has just a rifle. They may wanna fix that, actually put his picture on the various backer images.

Those silhouettes are just representational, they are not meant to look like the figures.

The Hansa figure looks okay, the 70s porn-stache and silly butt-plates notwithstanding.

Reading today's update on weapons/armour, it seems as if the butt-plates might just be part of the harness used to generate Hansa's hyper-light forcefield. Somehow, knowing they're not supposed to be actual armoured arse cheeks, makes me like them a lot more.

 chris_valera wrote:
There's a fan-made d20 Aliens supplement called Alians: Game Over that provides rules and stats, and going by what we know now, the Aliens are bio-engineered predators and are indeed quite dangerous. There are no shortage of zombie movies proving the same about zombies.

I disagree. There is no shortage of zombie movies proving that writers will cheat their asses off to make zombies suck less, but it is only that cheating that allows a slow, stupid, clumsy beast that can't even reproduce without human assistance to be a threat to any civilisation that has invented the Maxim gun.

Remember, this kickstarter is a rare opportunity to have plastic figures made. I believe the best figures, and the ones most likely to sell in bulk are plastic unit figures. And if you want cheap unit figures, which I do, zombies and aliens are where its at.

If you want sci-fi characters Hasslefree, Infnity, Alpha Forge, and to a lesser extent Reaper have you covered. If you want cheap unit figures, which I do, zombies and aliens are where its at.

Nobody wants "cheap unit figures", they want cheap unit figures for specific units they'd like to build. I want plastic kits for female infantry; plastic kits for xenomorphs or dead people are not a substitute. You want plastic kits for zombies and xenomorphs; plastic kits for female infantry are not a substitute.

 shingouki wrote:
Anyone else think this hamza mini is a rip off of solid snake or is it just me?Slap some hair on add and bobs your uncle.I only say this as it was the first thing that sprang to mind as soon as i saw it.

I can't say I did. The first thing that sprang to mind for me was that he's got the same sort of HUD as my avatar on their forum.

They need to make zombies because the male zombies that WGF makes are true 25mm scale and the ones Mantic makes are 28, but they're clearly fantasy zombies. There's a market for 28mm zombies, and zombies are things you need a ton of, anyway.

They need to make zombies since you want them to make zombies. Mantic zombi-parts are that generic that it was no problem turning them into nazi zombies. And excuse me, but why from a financial pov does it make sense when nearly everyone else does make zombies, even space zombies. If the zombies bring something new to the topic they might be an investment with a future, but simple the 1100st zombie-line won´t do it. And propably ther just waits another valera round the corner that would deride them because they are doing zombies all over again that others have already done.

For anyones whos intrested, Beast of War just posted a video interview with Rick Priestly about GoA

Heres the link: http://www.beastsofwar.com/sci-fi-wargaming/bow-interview-gates-antares-rick-priestley/

Enjoy

I look forward to seeing how this KS runs over the coming weeks. I feel that it is too early for people to be commenting on whether or not the company made a mistake with their timing, when they came out and told everybody that they have a schedule in place and it is slow. It may seem too slow for the people looking in, but the schedule may be working for the actual creators. Some people also are debating whether a collaborative effort is worthwhile. The nice thing about the company offering this effort, is it makes feedback seem more important, even if others choose not to use it. I also don't understand people supporting projects only for minis that they plan on using for something else, I would think that the styles used by each group would be meant to work with their own project rather than mishmashing minis together. To be fair I'm very new to the wargaming hobby, and I am interested in seeing what else is available (not just the GW, PP offering). I was very interested that some of the people from the project took the time to join us here at Dakka and tell us what they thought of all of our ramblings, especially since they have their own forums to keep track of. I think that shows a commitment to the user/gamer and it is a good attribute for a mini company to have. I hope everybody else stays interested in this thread, and we continue to offer new ideas to BtGoA and each other.

Fiore wrote:

Also, I now know why I didn't realize Hansa was the promo fig, the figure itself looks completely different than the sillohuete shown on the various backer levels images. The sillohuete shows the guy totian a massive chain-gun or something, Hansa has just a rifle. They may wanna fix that, actually put his picture on the various backer images.

Those silhouettes are just representational, they are not meant to look like the figures.

The Hansa figure looks okay, the 70s porn-stache and silly butt-plates notwithstanding.

Reading today's update on weapons/armour, it seems as if the butt-plates might just be part of the harness used to generate Hansa's hyper-light forcefield. Somehow, knowing they're not supposed to be actual armoured arse cheeks, makes me like them a lot more.

As an illustration it damn well should look like the model your getting. The guys on the forum hand-waved it, like oh, those are the old illustrations, before we had the figure green. That's a very GW way of doing business. These guys don't have GW's track record, nor should they be saying, "Oh don't worry about the lack of proof-of-concept, just hand over your cash, kids!"

Futuristic technology or not, the butt-armor is still dumb.

>I disagree. There is no shortage of zombie movies proving that writers will cheat their asses off to make zombies suck less, but it is only that cheating that allows a slow, stupid, clumsy beast that can't even reproduce without human assistance to be a threat to any civilisation that has invented the Maxim gun.

I disagree with your disagreement. Look at New Orleans, and how quickly things go to hell if there's no authority, or if there's a panic. There's no law and order, and food and water at a grocery store run out very quickly, and resupplies don't happen for some time.

 Duncan_Idaho wrote:

They need to make zombies because the male zombies that WGF makes are true 25mm scale and the ones Mantic makes are 28, but they're clearly fantasy zombies. There's a market for 28mm zombies, and zombies are things you need a ton of, anyway.

They need to make zombies since you want them to make zombies. Mantic zombi-parts are that generic that it was no problem turning them into nazi zombies. And excuse me, but why from a financial pov does it make sense when nearly everyone else does make zombies, even space zombies. If the zombies bring something new to the topic they might be an investment with a future, but simple the 1100st zombie-line won´t do it. And propably ther just waits another valera round the corner that would deride them because they are doing zombies all over again that others have already done.

They can be converted but that takes time and effort. The mantic zombies can be combines with the corporation troopers as part of their deal, but it still takes a ton of work.

For zombies being over-saturated, they actually do quite well on kickstarter. Zombicide far exceeded its goals, and there was a box of zombie plastics that met its goals on indiegogo as well. Zombies are popular, especially now and it's as close to a sure thing as you can get on kickstarter.

 Rolt wrote:
For anyones whos intrested, Beast of War just posted a video interview with Rick Priestly about GoA

Heres the link: http://www.beastsofwar.com/sci-fi-wargaming/bow-interview-gates-antares-rick-priestley/

Enjoy

He does point out this kickstarter is more in the spirit of kickstarter, unlike other kickstarters which are basically a pre-order system, and let you see more.

He says it's truly innovative, but we haven't seen enough to tell whether it's truly innovative.

The interviewer should have asked them why they scrubbed all mention of "hard" sci-fi from their kickstarter page.

Should have asked them if they got tired of all the nerds going on about Clarke and Asimov on their forum, or maybe they just realized that this game isn't gonna sell if it does have plasma guns and railguns, and damn the sci-fi nerds' opinions. He mentions space opera near the end.

Should have asked them why the promo figure is a burly guy with a porn-star moustache, when so many people wanted a slim, dashing Han Solo, or Captain Sparrow type leader.

Rick mentions nanotechnology and force fields, should have expanded on that. Nano-machines in the water that make a cloud AI that decides on everything?

Again with the genetically engineered apes. I love zombies, but is there really that much a fanbase for futuristic ape-men?

AT-43 had better starting alien races, with the Therians and all. Of course, we haven't really seen much of the aliens yet. Or much of anything, for that matter.

They talk about interactive campaigns, but GW's track records wasn't too great with those. I remember Ork throwing quite a monkey wrench into the world during the Eye of Terror campaign.

No new images, either. No talk of any new greens being sculpted.

Talk of the action pool is nice, the Combat Intensity Level, and the action pool. Apparently they're structuring the game around 5-10 figures, like early Rogue Trader or Infinity. I like Infinity, but this doesn't interest me one bit.

They mention the Hansa figure butt-plates near the end! They say they're getting rid of them! That alone was worth sitting through the entire video.

They talk about a "pre-alpha" rulebook coming very soon.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

I'm not picking any fight here, but the comments about zombies does again make me worried about the "you design it" aspect.

Everyone is gonna think that they can use this company (and other similar attempts such as wargames factory, etc) to make their own pet projects or dream products

"But isnt that the point of this? To have fans help develop the game?"

Well yes and no. While giving ideas is what these companies intend, they have to fit in the framework of what the creators of the game intended. Otherwise well guess what someone is gonna yell "Hey can you make Sci Fi Greatcoat Germans?" And even if they could technically fit in, other people can provide an alternative, an alteration, or an argument against them. After all I could stroll right in the GoA forum and propose an all female clone army in skintight stealth suits armed with beam katanas (btw I would really love to have that....dont judge me). More plausible than say sci fi greatcoats or zombies? Possibly. Would the forum community/developers feel comfortable with that idea? I'm gonna go on a limb and say no.

Though as others pointed out majority rules can have its downsides. Design by committee can have some hazardous results, the early WGF forum days provide an excellent example. And at times it can be frustrating to have your ideas shot down by the majority, taking another example from WGF is their topic on Power Armor in which if you dare speak anything different then the same group of people will remind you with the same 5-6 images that have been posted over and over again on what the PA should be (no idea of WGF will even get around to that stuff). Reminds me a bit from Mass Effect 2 where there was a comment about the beauty of democracy, even if it made some people uncomfortable.

In the end I'm not saying "ooh dont suggest anything!", just keep in mind the general thought process of the community and the universe the devs have created. Who knows, maybe there might be a "totally a textbook zombie but they're not called zombies" race/disease in GoA.

 kenshin620 wrote:
I'm not picking any fight here, but the comments about zombies does again make me worried about the "you design it" aspect.

Everyone is gonna think that they can use this company (and other similar attempts such as wargames factory, etc) to make their own pet projects or dream products

"But isnt that the point of this? To have fans help develop the game?"

Well yes and no. While giving ideas is what these companies intend, they have to fit in the framework of what the creators of the game intended.

Due to the lack of info, the creators haven't intended much. It started out as hard sci-fi, like Asimov and Clarke, then that got scrubbed, and Rick mentioned space opera. So I guess Firefly, or a more realistic Star Wars?

We got some info about nano-technology that's in everything and a cloud AI in this video, but what little fluff there is is scattered across forum posts. It's a terrible way to try and launch a product. The lack of attention and planning at product launch was woeful.

Agree with you on design by committee, but if you come up with something, and the designer shoots it down, is it really a collaborative effort? Am I really designing a game with Rick Priestley, as they advertise? Rick really hasn't provided much of a framework to go by.

At this point, no one even knows what the game is supposed to be, other than sci-fi. It's not 40K, we know that, and it's not toy-like over-detailed models, which I'm guessing is a slam on Infinity and maybe Privateer Press, or maybe AT-43.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

 chris_valera wrote:
but if you come up with something, and the designer shoots it down, is it really a collaborative effort?

Well there can be an outrankign position. Just because someone does have a button to say "Sorry no" doesnt mean its not collaborative.

Its like say a congress or some other similar governing body passed a bill after some collaborating but a president or prime minister veto'd it. Another example is the video game company Valve and their Steam Workshop for their games Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2. People create things, other people can rate them on how much they like it but even the most highly voted items still have to be approved by Valve. These systems allows collaborating to create something but with position comes privileges and power. While this power could technically be abused I highly doubt someone like Rick or what have you would outright refuse anything.

Though irl congress is a bunch of blithering idiots who couldnt agree on how to tie a shoe and valve just keeps accepting the same people over and over again while ignoring some really well thought out submissions sometimes....

ok I admit those are some bad examples but I hope I didnt destroy my original comment


Btw though I do agree though that there still needs to be some concrete examples of what exactly is going on in this universe. I'm still quite skeptical on this project

 kenshin620 wrote:

 chris_valera wrote:
but if you come up with something, and the designer shoots it down, is it really a collaborative effort?

Well there can be an outrankign position. Just because someone does have a button to say "Sorry no" doesnt mean its not collaborative.

Its like say a congress or some other similar governing body passed a bill after some collaborating but a president or prime minister veto'd it. Another example is the video game company Valve and their Steam Workshop for their games Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2. People create things, other people can rate them on how much they like it but even the most highly voted items still have to be approved by Valve. These systems allows collaborating to create something but with position comes privileges and power. While this power could technically be abused I highly doubt someone like Rick or what have you would outright refuse anything.

Though irl congress is a bunch of blithering idiots who couldnt agree on how to tie a shoe and valve just keeps accepting the same people over and over again while ignoring some really well thought out submissions sometimes....

ok I admit those are some bad examples but I hope I didnt destroy my original comment


Btw though I do agree though that there still needs to be some concrete examples of what exactly is going on in this universe. I'm still quite skeptical on this project

Rick and the higher-ups being the final arbiter of what gets in remind me a little too much of GW's mishandling of the various player campaigns. It's lie, just have the stones to say your battles really do have an impact.

Look at d20. Aside from some base ground rules, they were no ground rules. You could create whatever. The game's been out for 10 years and 3.5 still gets play. Pathfinder, which is 3.75 essentially, is outselling D&D 4th edition and no-one seems to be very excited over the upcoming 5th edition. They too say they're taking fan imput very seriously, but i haven't heard much good about it.

Meanwhile, I just posted some design for the new Gulfstream G650 and the relatively new Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a plane notable for being the first plane since 1979 to be grounded due to ongoing technical issues. d20 Modern had been out for ten years now.

Maybe open-source is the way to go?

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

A collaborative effort doesn't mean that every idea will, can or should be accepted. To be fair, no-one is pledging to collaborate with Chris Valera on making a new ruleset, nor is it likely to get much in pledges.

The problem is in fact that using the word "collaborative" instantly creates a sense of entitlement and butthurt, so it's a poor choice of words on the part of Priestly, et al. Then again, they need a way to say "we'll take your ideas onboard, and listen to your feedback, BUT anything you help us create you hereby rescind your own creative rights to that IP,, etc etc.

I really like the concept and want to pledge. I just need more space monkeys... MOAR SPACE MONKEYS!!!

I eagerly await the armies of zombie smuggler space monkeys.

I sure hope the committee can design the perfect troop transport for them.

I wouldn't buy Zombies. I despise zombies, and note that I even play Tomb Kings, so this is a very specific hatred. However, I am interested in ape people and potentially interested in cat people, final aesthetic determining. I don't want Furryporn, but I would like interesting transhumanist models to paint.

I'm not sure why you're so keen on zombies, Valera. Considering that I struggle to think of many sci fi universes with them in - The Borg are one, though somewhat disguised, example; Sunshine* got slammed for being another example. Whereas I can think of several examples of uplifted animals, so they are in fact appealing to the sci-fi crowd here. Just not you. Perhaps you should get over it, rather than taking this thread up with endless confrontations.


* Great movie, but undeniably let down by the weirdly action-focused last segment. If it had kept on the mental disintegration angle, it would have been a better movie.

Actually I planned to give you an point by point answer, but your reactions towards others convinced me that it would be not worth the time since you would find another way to weasel your way out of a real discussion.

Just let me say that you want a lot but do not have that much experience with the production side of tabletop and nothing anyone of us will say will change your pov.

@AT-43
The apes were one of the races that really sold extremly well, so there must be a demand when done right. And actually the first "alien race" in AT-43 is not an alien race. If we count the Karman as human relatives the Cogs were the ONLY alien race in AT-43 (Kryg never went beyond sketches).

I agree with Valera, delete all factions, replace with zombies vs. monkeys IN SPAAAAAACE.

Zombie monkeys?

Taarnak wrote:

 shingouki wrote:
Anyone else think this hamza mini is a rip off of solid snake or is it just me?Slap some hair on add and bobs your uncle.I only say this as it was the first thing that sprang to mind as soon as i saw it.

I think that you need to expand your exposure some. I would guess that you are younger and mainly got exposure to sci-fi through video games. No insult intended there, just a bit of speculation. There have been many, many bodysuit-with-armor wearing characters, and honestly the details of this figure don't look much at all like the character you posted.


I think you need to wind your neck in a bit mate.The model is clearly a copy or in the very least "inspired by"solid snake .I want cool looking mini's as much as the next man not rip offs or dare i say the dreaded words ip infringement.The last thing we need is this projct getting funding from the community and then getting hammered by Konami.

And Konami will get sued by the producers of body armour cause they copied their designs, sure.

In for zombie space monkeys, personally. Now they've ditched any hard SF pretentions, what's wrong with out-GWing GW?

I want Zombie Space Monkeys.

I want Cyborg Pirate Badgers.

I want Nano-Cat Ninjas.

I want Ghostly Swashbuckling Stoats

I want Mutant Gunslinger Pandas.

Ready to pledge right now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
...in fact, BRB, setting up a Kickstarter, recruiting sculptors...

They might take the Nano-Cat Ninjas as an actual idea...

 Compel wrote:
They might take the Nano-Cat Ninjas as an actual idea...

Samurai Pizza cats?

Biker Mice from Mars!

I am a fan of the pedigree of the designers ( I have a signed copy of the original Rogue Trader!), but I don;t see enough meat in this kickstarter to make me want to pledge for it. Which is too bad, really.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I eagerly await the armies of zombie smuggler space monkeys.

I sure hope the committee can design the perfect troop transport for them.

That's pretty ironic, because the M2/M3 Bradley is arguable the best IFV in the world. It's fast, can bring infantry anywhere they're needed, is well-armored, and is powerful enough that a single Bradley can engage and defeat tanks. They are very robust, quick, and easy to repair; so much so that the US Government hasn't bought any in a decade or longer because any that are damaged are quickly repaired and back on the field.

So yeah give me a whole army of Bradleys.

 judgedoug wrote:


So yeah give me a whole army of Bradleys.

Just Bradleys? With no one inside?

Thats some army

Could be worse I suppose, an army of just Ospreys....

 kenshin620 wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:


So yeah give me a whole army of Bradleys.

Just Bradleys? With no one inside?

Thats some army

No ammo or fuel either. I plan to confound my opponent into their eventual surrender.