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.

I've come to the conclusion that Palladium, during the Crisis of TreacheryTM, were bought out by Dunder Mifflin (who heard about them by supplying their printer with paper) and are run remotely by the Scranton office. Kevin is actuality Michael in disguise and that Akashic guy on their forums is Dwight.

That... would actually explain a lot.

Warboss you are my hero of the day. I actually lol'd.

I think it is telling that they couldn't even be bothered to put proper bases on the minis they're bringing to show retailers at the biggest retailer/distributor convention in their industry. Is it a major thing that they just used whatever they had laying around even though it didn't match remotely what they'll plan to offer instead of just driving down to an FLGS to buy *any* circular bases? Or at a minimum just go to a Hobby Lobby or Michael's store and buy generic wood 1" circles if they didn't want to use another company's products? (not sure who made the squad bases) It is a symptom of the problem there that despite working 80+ hours a week for months on end that they frankly have nothing to show for it. No RPG books except for a 48 page pamphlet for Dead Reign over the past 6 months... no minis despite 3 delivery estimates (October, Nov/Dec, Feb) rolling by with nothing in backer hands. They don't even have any new pencils or mugs to sell for all those man hours supposedly not spent playing Angry Birds or Candy Crush in the office.

Also, here are some truly well designed and dynamic minis. I'm not a backer as frankly I have no use for soft core porn fantasy models but the detail and thought put into the layout of the sprues is what I had been hoping for with Robotech.

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/03/kingdom-death-pinups-of-death-unboxed.html

Instead... I'm seeing cheap looking gashapon that I have to additionally put in alot more effort to make game worthy. If the poses and sculpts were instead more dynamic and though out it would be worth it but frankly not for cheap looking gashapon. I'll still assemble a bunch but I doubt I'll do more UEDF models than I'd need for X-wing games especially as I'd have to deal with 3 models for each "fieldable" one with veritechs. I'll likely finish up my Zentraedi though just to have something to show for the multiyear affair.

Warboss, I understand being frustrated but I find the base argument/complaint kinda a waste. Nobody has even mentioned the bases until now. I don't see a problem with him picking up whatever he could at a local hobby shop and using them, and that is exactly what he did.

Mike1975 wrote:
Warboss, I understand being frustrated but I find the base argument/complaint kinda a waste. Nobody has even mentioned the bases until now. I don't see a problem with him picking up whatever he could at a local hobby shop and using them, and that is exactly what he did.

It's about the presentation; they spent the money to go to the convention with a primary goal of advertising/selling their product to their main customers (stores and distributors). If you don't bother "dressing up' the product correctly, you don't make a very good impression especially when you're already over a half year late and the buzz about your product's quality is turning negative. If, lets say, you've got someone at your workplace pitching you a product and they don't bother with proofreading their Powerpoint presentation and the handouts they give you have pages in the wrong order, would you subcontract to them?

 warboss wrote:

Mike1975 wrote:
Warboss, I understand being frustrated but I find the base argument/complaint kinda a waste. Nobody has even mentioned the bases until now. I don't see a problem with him picking up whatever he could at a local hobby shop and using them, and that is exactly what he did.

It's about the presentation; they spent the money to go to the convention with a primary goal of advertising/selling their product to their main customers (stores and distributors). If you don't bother "dressing up' the product correctly, you don't make a very good impression especially when you're already over a half year late and the buzz about your product's quality is turning negative. If, lets say, you've got someone at your workplace pitching you a product and they don't bother with proofreading their Powerpoint presentation and the handouts they give you have pages in the wrong order, would you subcontract to them?

I wouldn't hire them, but not for the bases, I wouldn't hire them because they are not experts on minis, they did not spend more time making sure the minis were properly glued together and preferably painted when brought to the show. The bases are the least of the things to worry about. I remember a meeting where someone brought a cake. He asked if someone wanted a piece. Everyone raise their hands as the cake was immaculate and looked quite delicious. He took out a plate and cut the piece of cake out carefully with a cake knife. He the repeated the question with the same results. When the next person got up to the front he got out a plate exacly like the first with a fork and all. This time he grabbed a handful of cake and plopped it on the plate.

It's all about presentation. But again, I say the bases were the least of their worries. If you show up without shaving and combing your hair in a wrinkled up shirt, nobody is going to care if your shoes are not shined.

Mike1975 wrote:

I wouldn't hire them, but not for the bases, I wouldn't hire them because they are not experts on minis, they did not spend more time making sure the minis were properly glued together and preferably painted when brought to the show. The bases are the least of the things to worry about. I remember a meeting where someone brought a cake. He asked if someone wanted a piece. Everyone raise their hands as the cake was immaculate and looked quite delicious. He took out a plate and cut the piece of cake out carefully with a cake knife. He the repeated the question with the same results. When the next person got up to the front he got out a plate exacly like the first with a fork and all. This time he grabbed a handful of cake and plopped it on the plate.

It's all about presentation. But again, I say the bases were the least of their worries. If you show up without shaving and combing your hair in a wrinkled up shirt, nobody is going to care if your shoes are not shined.

I agree that it isn't a major thing (and said so in the initial post) but it is yet ANOTHER thing to add to the ever growing pile of incompetence that certain folks (not yourself) keep trying to equivocate away. It's the wrinkled shirt on top of the typo filled presentation and misnumbered handouts. It just happens to be something that has been largely ignored because of bigger problems (like crappy looking minis) taking precedence but is indicative of the quality of effort (as opposed to quantity since they're working 80+ hours a week on a project delayed over half a year and counting). I'm curious to see what the painting guide that the guy was working on for 6 weeks will look like (that's a hell of a long time for one likely small section of a book).

Mike1975 wrote:
Warboss, I understand being frustrated but I find the base argument/complaint kinda a waste. Nobody has even mentioned the bases until now. I don't see a problem with him picking up whatever he could at a local hobby shop and using them, and that is exactly what he did.

I think what he is trying to say is you want to show an "attention to detail" when selling a product to a customer (especially us picky bunch).

It just seems sad that an item as simple as a base (which they are making and need) they could not bother to get done to showcase the other models.

I remember commenting on them playing with a Dropship Commander cityscape: you should not draw attention to your competition's stuff.
You should literally act like the only game in town.

I understand they are no GW but they could employ some creative type to make whatever they want with any material at hand, many of us here could do that.

I see a problem with their inability to put their best foot forward, it conveys one of two messages: we do not care what you think OR we did not think how it would look.

A very practical friend told me once: I can work for a smart/evil boss, you can convince him through logic of his own self interest, I can work with a good/stupid man because I can get him to trust me BUT a stupid/evil person their is nothing redeemable there. In this parallel I wonder what PB is.

Oh, I understand the attention to detail, hence the cake story.

The bases thing bothered me. It was also tbe very first thing my wife noticed when watching that video. "Why are some of them on square bases?"

The second question from her was "Where is their tiny demo table?"

She isn't even interested and she notices this stuff. People pay attention to the little things in a game involving tons of little things.

And it doesn't have to be purely based on the major issues drowning out the minor ones.

The minor ones are still there. "Death by a thousand cuts" style, there will be people who can overlook gaps you can fit a dime in but feel the grocery list of issues that plague this project to be offputting. Sometimes one big thing is a showstopper, other times it's the dozens of little niggling things that get in the way, or a mix of both.

It's a very subjective thing, and no, there's no way to please all the people all of the time, but there definitely ways to please more of the people more of the time.

 Swabby wrote:
The bases thing bothered me. It was also tbe very first thing my wife noticed when watching that video. "Why are some of them on square bases?"

The second question from her was "Where is their tiny demo table?"

She isn't even interested and she notices this stuff. People pay attention to the little things in a game involving tons of little things.

Your wife is officially more of an expert on minis games than Palladium's 50+ years worth of experience RPG veterans on their first related tabletop crossover. Of course, since they've been screwing up their chosen subniche specialty of RPGs for over a decade, I'm not sure that is a surprise.

@Swabby: Thanks! I was watching reruns of the Office last week and I kept thinking that it just needs the boss running around on payday asking people what they thought of the latest project to be complete.

 Forar wrote:
Woah. No digital copies at all for anyone?

They... they said they had hundreds of playtesters. I cannot imagine the time and cost that would've been involved in mailing out updates weekly or even a couple of times per month after compiling playtester feedback.

So many dead trees...

Or I guess they could've expected people to just write in/post it note their existing copies, but a couple of revisions in that'd just be a giant mess. Wyrd's Malifaux 2.0 beta test had weekly updates based on playtester feedback for adjustments to both game and figure mechanics. Put out to the community in general, openly and for free once the closed Beta ended, I might add.

"It's been thoroughly playtested" was one of their declarations, but man, I can't imagine being one of those playtesters pencil'ing in notes that this figure now has a PIL of 2 and a GUN of 4 and the character section should just be thrown out and replaced with a big X and the subtitle "HERE BE DRAGONS" etc, etc, etc.

At this point, I seriously doubt they even playtested the game outside of PB. I hope the majority of the ruleset is from Alessio, but I'm not holding my breath. I don't know anything about the RPG, but don't want it to be an RPG. I want it to be a miniatures game.

Mike, I don't know what your other gaming habits are, so could you expound, so that we can ask you how in depth it feels, in comparison to other miniatures games?

 Forar wrote:
And it doesn't have to be purely based on the major issues drowning out the minor ones.

The minor ones are still there. "Death by a thousand cuts" style, there will be people who can overlook gaps you can fit a dime in but feel the grocery list of issues that plague this project to be offputting. Sometimes one big thing is a showstopper, other times it's the dozens of little niggling things that get in the way, or a mix of both.

It's a very subjective thing, and no, there's no way to please all the people all of the time, but there definitely ways to please more of the people more of the time.

Didn't you mean to say: "Death by a thousand seams!"

Well played.

Yes, that's much better.

That is ironically probably about as many as you'd have to putty up in the most common Battlecry pledge with its 100+ minis...

I bet this is all a plot. Dunder bought out a putty factory and sales were slumping, so he cooked up this scheme to sell ALL the putty and take care of all those 6 year old whiners once and for all!

It is funny but that hit the nail on the head for me:

You feel like a turkey for taking offense to little issues, the problem is that there are so many of them you get fed-up and label the whole thing as messed up beyond redemption.

I think:
I can wait,
the money I can float,
I knew it was PB but Ninja Div is helping out,
I can handle not knowing what the models will look like,
I am ok with limited poses: I am a modder!,
I am ok with seams: nature of the beast right?,
I am ok with the ton of tiny parts: these are models that are a challenge!,
I can handle no communication: they are busy right?,
I got a deal so they needed to charge more for shipping: it is understandable,
They will ship in waves to get the models to us faster!,
This is their first time with models: issues are expected,

Ahhhhhhh..... I am a putz!!!!! No more excuses!!! Give a date without lying or I want my money back to give to someone who has an iota of business skills and customer management experience!!!!! REALLY! Bunch of amateurs that deserve to fail as a business.

I feel better, thanks...

Might be time to retire part of your sig. Maybe come back with

"Resources for Robotech Tactics: grief counselling services international"

Great idea Forar, but you would have to run that business from Japan or the big bad HG lawyer hitsquad will come after you!

It plays pretty quickly and is realy simple to learn. The dies rolls and reasons for them are simple and make sense. I've played several games in my garage so far. Here is an older rules set that is pretty close to theirs that I wrote up myself.

You roll init.
You pick a squadron, move it, fire its weapons and do damage, then the other player does the same with one of his squadrons. Squadron sizes are based off of force cards that balance out squadrons sizes and power somewhat.

When you attack you roll one D6 and add you gunnery. If successful the other guy can atempt to dodge by rolling a D6 and adding his piloting skills.

Thanks Mike.

Have you seen anything in the rules that translates to the RPG or vise-versa?

There are some rules at the end to transfer characters that I have not spent much time on other than glance at them. My focus has been on the tabletop rules. The units stats are translated from the RPG. Damage of a weapon/20 is damage in game in MDC as well as MDC of main body of a unit/25 = MDC in game. Ranges have been fudged a bit to make them work well with a mini game as well as speeds are not exactly direct translations. I also have a number of unit stat cards and more. Anyone that really wanted to could download a few things off the Facebook page or ask for a copy from me and have enough to play out quite a few games in the garage. Many others have been doing just that as most of the recent demos and garage games by fans have used these rules.

Okay, y'know what? I'm finally going to do it. I'll read the rules.

So, let's delve in.

First off, "Robotech® RPG Tactics™"? Breetai save us if that's how it shows up every single time in the official rules.

Next; stealing initiative is for chumps. Spend 1 Command point per core squadron still on the table and only succeed on a roll of a 6? So 3-5+ command just for a 16% chance of success? Forcing a re-roll or adding a third die (with the option for an opponent to add one as well) off hand feel like more elegant ways to do it.

Not sure how big a fan I am of the half dozen tie breakers rather than just using a roll off. Going to the cards seems like an easy way for someone to overlook that their character actually has Leadership 4 or something. Simply re-rolling feels more elegant, but I understand wanting to influence the roll with more than just luck.

But stealing initiative is seriously a losing gambit. I get that it's supposed to be risky as all get out, but I can't imagine using it unless I was about to be tabled, and the point where I have few enough squads standing to not care about the loss of command points, it's probably already a desperate gambit anyway.

But lets move on... to movement! Changing facing costs 1 inch per 90 degrees? Like the debate we had on "49% versus 51%", it seems to me like it might be more elegant to either ignore changes of facing entirely, or simply charge 1" to change facing. Letting players get bogged down in what does or does not constitute 91 degrees might be asking for trouble.

The need to compare the height of the mech to the height of the water to determine the affect on movement feels more RPG'y than "fast paced miniatures game'y".

The differentiation between Light, Heavy, and Dense woods is one of distance between trees? Too convoluted. Simply declaring a given area (using tree terrain bits, or green felt, or whatever) as light, heavy or dense seems more straightforward.

Oh god, no, no, I just got to the table of movement adjustments based on whether or not it's a mech, infantry, and has hands or not. Waaaay too many modifiers.

Look, I just got to page 6, and while I'm sure some will simply say "oh Forar, you've been complaining for months, surely this is just more of the same", there are some game mechanics choices here that are not leading me to feel the 'fast paced' action here.

Page six goes into detail regarding a Battlepod and a lake that I hope to Dolza I never encounter in a game. I have friends who are math averse that would run screaming from the room.

 Kendachi wrote:

 Forar wrote:
And it doesn't have to be purely based on the major issues drowning out the minor ones.

The minor ones are still there. "Death by a thousand cuts" style, there will be people who can overlook gaps you can fit a dime in but feel the grocery list of issues that plague this project to be offputting. Sometimes one big thing is a showstopper, other times it's the dozens of little niggling things that get in the way, or a mix of both.

It's a very subjective thing, and no, there's no way to please all the people all of the time, but there definitely ways to please more of the people more of the time.

Didn't you mean to say: "Death by a thousand seams!"

Actually, I'm more willing to bastardize Nietzsche.

"If you gaze long into the seams, the seams will gaze back into you"

 Forar wrote:
Okay, y'know what? I'm finally going to do it. I'll read the rules.

So, let's delve in.

First off, "Robotech® RPG Tactics™"? Breetai save us if that's how it shows up every single time in the official rules.

Next; stealing initiative is for chumps. Spend 1 Command point per core squadron still on the table and only succeed on a roll of a 6? So 3-5+ command just for a 16% chance of success? Forcing a re-roll or adding a third die (with the option for an opponent to add one as well) off hand feel like more elegant ways to do it.

Not sure how big a fan I am of the half dozen tie breakers rather than just using a roll off. Going to the cards seems like an easy way for someone to overlook that their character actually has Leadership 4 or something. Simply re-rolling feels more elegant, but I understand wanting to influence the roll with more than just luck.

But stealing initiative is seriously a losing gambit. I get that it's supposed to be risky as all get out, but I can't imagine using it unless I was about to be tabled, and the point where I have few enough squads standing to not care about the loss of command points, it's probably already a desperate gambit anyway.

But lets move on... to movement! Changing facing costs 1 inch per 90 degrees? Like the debate we had on "49% versus 51%", it seems to me like it might be more elegant to either ignore changes of facing entirely, or simply charge 1" to change facing. Letting players get bogged down in what does or does not constitute 91 degrees might be asking for trouble.

The need to compare the height of the mech to the height of the water to determine the affect on movement feels more RPG'y than "fast paced miniatures game'y".

The differentiation between Light, Heavy, and Dense woods is one of distance between trees? Too convoluted. Simply declaring a given area (using tree terrain bits, or green felt, or whatever) as light, heavy or dense seems more straightforward.

Oh god, no, no, I just got to the table of movement adjustments based on whether or not it's a mech, infantry, and has hands or not. Waaaay too many modifiers.

Look, I just got to page 6, and while I'm sure some will simply say "oh Forar, you've been complaining for months, surely this is just more of the same", there are some game mechanics choices here that are not leading me to feel the 'fast paced' action here.

Page six goes into detail regarding a Battlepod and a lake that I hope to Dolza I never encounter in a game. I have friends who are math averse that would run screaming from the room.

Never fear Forar, I build those movement rules from what I know playing Battletech. The actual rules are much simpler. Now that I'm home here is a more up to date version where I'm taking some of the real stuff and adding it on.

So these are just your personal rules, rather then the play test/actual rules.

AND No I have not updated the Movement rules yet. From about Page 12 on it's close but none of it is official yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The actual game has no turning costs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cyporiean wrote:
So these are just your personal rules, rather then the play test/actual rules.

More of a mix. I made my own based on what I thought they would be from what they released, which is damned close, I'm making changes hence the version number so that the rules are more in line with the official ones. I gotta see how far I am allowed to go. If it was up to me I'd post another set that is nearly word for word but I gotta get the all clear. Hopefully soon. As I go I will remove stuff that is way different and work on unifying the two.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In fact there are no costs for elevation changes either

 Talizvar wrote:
A very practical friend told me once: I can work for a smart/evil boss, you can convince him through logic of his own self interest, I can work with a good/stupid man because I can get him to trust me BUT a stupid/evil person their is nothing redeemable there. In this parallel I wonder what PB is.

You've just given me a new mantra to live by. lol