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.
2014/09/17 14:58:29
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Funnily enough, a bunch of people selling on the secondary market might help them. While it could initially hurt Retail demand/sales, it also gives people a KS'ish (give or take) price point to get into the game. It might not be "$140 for 97 models" good, but a core box for $50 instead of $70 might attract some interest, and once they have the beginning stuff, a few expansions here and there could follow.
But that's completely unknowable until we start seeing things arrive and move (or not).
And entirely agreed, Warboss. I think it may well be a far stretch to really drive this as an 'omg I must have hundreds of figures' kind of game, which makes the skirmish being an afterthought all the sadder.
The ability to play small scale games easily and enjoyably can lead to larger scale games as a gradual evolution. My friends started playing Malifaux with 20-35 soul stone games, but eventually were playing 50-70+ SS mass battles across ever growing collections. We started with 50-100 point battles in X-Wing, now we can field 6+ 100 point lists for mini tournaments, or 300+ points per side for epic fights without even remotely capping out on figures.
The small stuff can lead to the large stuff. The emphasis on going big is short sighted and could be a gamble.
2014/09/17 15:08:17
Subject: Re:Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
I would be more than happy to pay $50 for a Battlecry, and I have 14 boxes coming, and am one of the few in actual possession of a boxed set. If you have a BC ON HAND and want to sell it for $50, PM me, and I'll buy it.
Speaking of, its ALMOST done. I have 4 more battloids and half of 4 more guardians, plus the 2 tomahawks (which are mostly done). I'm having some serious issues figuring out arm poses.
Using plastic models glue, the seams almost vanished on most of the obvious places. The notable exception is the front of the defender. However, the mini is only 1" tall, and if you have eyes good enough to see that seam on a painted miniature 2' away you are a freaking superhero.
I have many, many, many, many miniatures, all of them have seams somewhere. These are just flat robots so they are easier to make out, but EVERY miniature I have has seams. The only real issue I have with the RRT miniatures is they are a crapload of parts, and some of the parts are too small for me to handle and trim.
I plan on spray painting primer (OD Green, I'll have yellow/purple/blue/white highlights) on my zentraedi this weekend, and *HOPEFULLY* will get the arm issue figured out and get all my UEDF stuff painted black (with red highlights) painted. Granted, this is just a first contact, but its a start.
I'll then go run a demo and film it, well, after I run through a demo a few times to get really familiar with the rules. I'll put the video up which will hopefully be my last, as I think my videos suck but since nobody else is making them (and I got the free first contact and all), I kinda feel obligated too :(
My impressions right now, after having this for a few weeks:
- The miniatures are very time consuming to put together and not for new modelers.
- I don't care for the card design, and they aren't real durable. They feel the same as X-Wing cards though, so I guess its just me as people love X-Wing.
- The rules seem pretty nice and well put together. The book is easy to read and the rules are pretty easy to learn.
- The game is not for folks wanting competitive tournaments. If you are one of those folks, and want to play RRT in big competitive tournaments, I think you'll be disappointed.
- The box for a first contact is huge, and I'm 99% sure you could get some foam and put your assembled miniatures in it and use it as a carrying case. Battlecry isn't so lucky.
- I'm happy with it overall, and think it'll be fun.
My current concerns:
- The destroid sets that say you can build 4 destroids as EITHER tomahawks or defenders. Based on the sprues, I'm betting the sets end up being 2 of each, and that kinda pisses me off.
- Lessons won't be learned on the miniatures by the time wave 2 stuff is ordered, meaning wave 2 miniatures will still be a huge PITA to assemble
- The MSRP for the addons is WAY too freaking much, this will hurt game future :(
- Finding players, I have a hard time finding players for any games in Dallas. I have found a BT group, but even X-Wing is hard to find. If I don't play magic I'm SOL, and card games are stupid to me.
- I fear for the game having enough success for the next 2 generations, so I won't have alphas/invid/etc in the same scale.
- I don't think the game has much life in it. There aren't that many units, not that many factions, and after you play a few dozen games I see it becoming what Zombicide has become to me.... boring :(
- Regardless of what I was told in person, Palladium doesn't seem to be learning from some of their mistakes, an that is disconcerting. I will try to call them this week and say "wtf?".
2014/09/17 15:13:31
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
1 Mini size is the beta rules?
2 Size of the squadrons is the beta rules?
3 I don't remember those rules, but I didn't pledge until later. Sure, it has *roots* in the RPG, but that's a different thing than saying the "Minis game is a Morph of the RPG game".
4 ZOMG ORG CHARTS. Have nothing to do with the price of tea in China. Try again?
5 Yay more force orgs!
So the only evidence you have to support your statement that, and I'll quote it so I'm not accused of putting words in your mouth,
They did show the beta rules during the KS. So honestly it should not be a surprise to anyone that the Minis game is a Morph of the RPG game. Nobody seemed to blink twice when the beta rules were released. If they had looked at those and seen the RPG rules they would have realized all the rest.
That's not the "beta rules". That's a quick start, and it says on every page "Rules still in development and subject to change." Pardon me if I don't take those at face value.
Additionally, the rules presented in that quick start aren't that bad. Sure, there's a couple things I have issues with (specifically the number of HtH attacks) but it's not horrible overall.
So how about you (finally) get off your high horse and understand that what was presented is not what is being sold. This isn't the miniatures wargame with an RPG tie in (what it should have been). It's a bunch of crap.
Plus it also depends on what you consider Morphing the rules. Many would agree with that statement others not so much since that is a relative term. So if you want o read the RPG and then the rules and then everything else we have and be surprised that's all up to you.
You were the one that used the word "morphing" - I just repeated you. And you admit that your statement of "So honestly it should not be a surprise to anyone that the Minis game is a Morph of the RPG game." was out of line and incorrect?
And remember, you said that people shouldn't have been surprised because of information received *during the kickstarter*. So "everything else we have" was pretty damn limited. Robotech RPG Tactics does not (to me, or many other people) say "Here, have some miniatures to use our RPG rules with." It, instead, says "Here's a miniature game that you can convert your RPG characters into to help cinematize your battles! Plus, it works on its own!"
The "surprise" you keep referring to isn't there for you because - and you might not be aware of this - you had more information than 98% of the people backing this kickstarter. I know - amazing right? Being involved with the play test rules gave you more insight than what the rest of us had. Shocking. And when you reported how the rules were, what were the responses you got? Mostly surprise that the crap RPG system was so prevalent in RRT.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bad_Syntax wrote: - The rules seem pretty nice and well put together. The book is easy to read and the rules are pretty easy to learn.
- The game is not for folks wanting competitive tournaments. If you are one of those folks, and want to play RRT in big competitive tournaments, I think you'll be disappointed.
These two statements should never be together. Ever. Because if the rules are nice and well put together they'll work fine in tournaments.
If they don't work in tournaments, they aren't "pretty nice and well put together".
- Regardless of what I was told in person, Palladium doesn't seem to be learning from some of their mistakes, an that is disconcerting. I will try to call them this week and say "wtf?".
No way - PB has failed to learn? I'm so surprised.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/17 15:17:17
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
2014/09/17 15:18:57
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Lunar Toy Store is the only US e-tailer that will be carrying it, otherwise, you'll have to import it yourself. $105 for the SDF-1, city base, and the 2 SD Veritechs is a really good price, I just think I'll have to pass because of how many things are already coming out in October.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/17 15:25:03
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
2014/09/17 15:52:00
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
These two statements should never be together. Ever. Because if the rules are nice and well put together they'll work fine in tournaments.
If they don't work in tournaments, they aren't "pretty nice and well put together".
Sorry, but that is your opinion. Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility. There are MANY game systems out there without points, without tournament abilities, without any hope of balanced game play (fact). I've played many napaleonics, ww1/2/3 micro armor ground/naval/air, many tactical games in various time periods, etc, etc, that did not have this ability. The extremely popular ground zero game system Dirtside and Stargrunt specifically avoid point usage (and have a paragraph or two in the rules stating why). The whole concept of game balance leads to boring games and unimaginative scenarios, not to mention absolute game balance where dice (and terrain) are involved is completely impossible and just an illusion. These are all facts and are easily determined to be so, nothing in this paragraph is my opinion.
So yes, I can say the rules are pretty nice and well put together, without them needing to be "balanced" and "tournament friendly". In any game where some good tactics and unit placement can wipe out half the enemy force before they get a chance to act is balanced is simply not possible. Sure, you can play RRT in tournaments, it has point costs, it has scenarios, and it'll work. But just like most other tournament games, there will be temper tantrums, arguments, people arguing over rules interpretations to suit their competitive attitude, and all sorts of other things that, hurt the game industry more than it helps. This is something you should be doing for fun as it is a "game", taking it too seriously is silly. This paragraph represents my opinions, and you are free to disagree.
As for finished pics, I will post some new ones when I'm done with EVERY miniature, but here are some with all the Zentraedi done:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xqxop7hyphpz2bd/AADbXIrG7Je1DoJWTRuKkhMca?dl=0 - Disclaimer: This was with my phone, and I am not claiming to be a photographer, so sorry if they suck somehow.
I can't mount my stuff on bases until I get my shipment from Litko though, so I can't be 100% "done". Well, I do have 8 bases, so I may try to mount up a few things.
2014/09/17 16:05:11
Subject: Re:Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: - The destroid sets that say you can build 4 destroids as EITHER tomahawks or defenders. Based on the sprues, I'm betting the sets end up being 2 of each, and that kinda pisses me off.
This is the second time you've mentioned this. Exactly where is it saying you can build 4 destroids as either? Are you still referring to the Kickstarter itself, which unilaterally changed it, and didn't (to my knowledge) publicly state it? Or are you going off a description on the box set or other packaging? Because they've known that was going to be the case (2 Toma/2 Def) since at least August 29 2013, when I got my KS Message from Jeff, a little over a week before the Pledge Manager closed.
2014/09/17 16:09:14
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: Sorry, but that is your opinion. Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility. There are MANY game systems out there without points, without tournament abilities, without any hope of balanced game play (fact). I've played many napaleonics, ww1/2/3 micro armor ground/naval/air, many tactical games in various time periods, etc, etc, that did not have this ability. The extremely popular ground zero game system Dirtside and Stargrunt specifically avoid point usage (and have a paragraph or two in the rules stating why). The whole concept of game balance leads to boring games and unimaginative scenarios, not to mention absolute game balance where dice (and terrain) are involved is completely impossible and just an illusion. These are all facts and are easily determined to be so, nothing in this paragraph is my opinion.
Please, cite facts backing up the underlined statement. Since you've asserted it's unarguable, you must have evidence of this. And the bold is not what people look for.
And I love that you jumped straight to "balance". That's not what I mentioned at all. Perhaps you need to read closer?
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
2014/09/17 16:14:41
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility.
This cannot be overstated. A lot of historicals don't care about concepts like balance because they are primarily interested in simulation. Something similar is the case here, except it is a matter of emulation. The game is supposed to emulate the show. It's not so much a matter of, say, favoring the UEDF or something. It's just that the rules are or at least seem to be primarily designed to allow players to recreate what they experience watching RoboTech.
I argued in that thread about what seemed better and more reasonable as a matter of emulation in my opinion; not about how to fix something unplayable. Indeed, judgedoug, Swabby, and I often brought up the distinction between what needed to be clarified versus stuff we would prefer to rewrite.
Bad_Syntax wrote: Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility.
This cannot be overstated. A lot of historicals don't care about concepts like balance because they are primarily interested in simulation. Something similar is the case here, except it is a matter of emulation. The game is supposed to emulate the show. It's not so much a matter of, say, favoring the UEDF or something. It's just that the rules are or at least seem to be primarily designed to allow players to recreate what they experience watching RoboTech.
Actually, the question I think needs to be answered here is "does this game emulate the show it is based on?". I'd personally think it's a more important question for my interests (never going to play this in a tournament), and seeing all the "ported over from the RPG" (which, by the way, is absolutely horrid as a Robotech series emulation) melee moves and the like, I'm thinking it might not be.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/17 16:39:12
2014/09/17 16:43:29
Subject: Re:Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: - The destroid sets that say you can build 4 destroids as EITHER tomahawks or defenders. Based on the sprues, I'm betting the sets end up being 2 of each, and that kinda pisses me off.
This is the second time you've mentioned this. Exactly where is it saying you can build 4 destroids as either? Are you still referring to the Kickstarter itself, which unilaterally changed it, and didn't (to my knowledge) publicly state it? Or are you going off a description on the box set or other packaging? Because they've known that was going to be the case (2 Toma/2 Def) since at least August 29 2013, when I got my KS Message from Jeff, a little over a week before the Pledge Manager closed.
I am not aware of that being said at any time. The daedalus pack had a pic of 8 tomahawks, and that throws off the counts of what I ordered. If they did say it somewhere and I missed it that is on me, but I'm not aware they ever said that... got a source?
rigeld2 wrote:
Bad_Syntax wrote: Sorry, but that is your opinion. Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility. There are MANY game systems out there without points, without tournament abilities, without any hope of balanced game play (fact). I've played many napaleonics, ww1/2/3 micro armor ground/naval/air, many tactical games in various time periods, etc, etc, that did not have this ability. The extremely popular ground zero game system Dirtside and Stargrunt specifically avoid point usage (and have a paragraph or two in the rules stating why). The whole concept of game balance leads to boring games and unimaginative scenarios, not to mention absolute game balance where dice (and terrain) are involved is completely impossible and just an illusion. These are all facts and are easily determined to be so, nothing in this paragraph is my opinion.
Please, cite facts backing up the underlined statement. Since you've asserted it's unarguable, you must have evidence of this. And the bold is not what people look for.
And I love that you jumped straight to "balance". That's not what I mentioned at all. Perhaps you need to read closer?
Balance is presumed with any tournament set of rules, can't have tournaments without balance... well, you could, but the complaints would put the KS comment thread to shame.
As for boring games and unimaginative scenarios. Games where both sides have equal "points" and roughly equal tactical ability come down to games of who rolls better when it counts. I have seen many, many, many 40K games and other tournaments being played. I don't see massive excitement, I don't see the game store owner telling them to keep quiet, I do not see that level of excitement. However, those tables that aren't doing "tournaments" and playing other miniature games that happens often. People have fun and get passionate, instead of just overly competitive and angry when things don't go their way. I'm sure you'll come back and say how much fun you and your table has, and how all the games are exciting, and people write up big scenarios before each, but based on the rules themselves and the way you have to do scenarios in tournaments, well, there is no way to have that kind of versatility in games where half a dozen scenario types are possible.
As for the illusion thing, yeah, sorry, but once you incorporate terrain, unit deployment, and dice into a game true balance is a mathematical impossibility. Sure, it may be close, usually, but there will be times when the balance is lost before the game starts, or by one person rolling better just a few times, at critical points. That lucky shot on turn 1 that took out that mega-unit worth 25% of your army just cost you the game, and it didn't matter how good you played or the equilibrium in point values of armies. Technically, true balance is probably mathematically impossible in any game between 2 people, though "pretty close" is not too hard.
But how can I say "I'm #1" when a lucky die roll or two won me that final game against my opponent, who was tactically better, had a better force, better positioning, but the "force was not with him" when it came to die rolls? Its an illusion of superiority.
rigeld2 wrote:Which is fine from a *balance* standpoint.
My point was that the *rules* and the *balance* are two different things.
Tournaments can create a balanced environment if the rules are good. Also, PB said they would have tournament support.
A game designer saying they have "tournament support" means they have "point costs for units". Heck, that isn't even a 100% requirement, you could have tournaments without even that. However PB has point costs, army formation, and scenario deployment, so in my book and many others sure that is "tournament support".
I'm saying that the game will not work in competitive tournaments. I saw this in a demo at Gencon. Carmen, the game designer, sat down for a demo with 2 guys. He asked "Do you want me to be nice, or be an a-hole?". They said "be an a-hole". The zentraedi didn't get a single kill, lost both of their glaugs, their gulnau, and most of their regults on turn 1 before they even got to move or do anything. This means they ended up with no command points, further reducing their capability. Turn 2 the UEDF took out all the buildings on the table (I'm a firm believer that the buildings should have 10x the MDC they do) and then proceeded to finish off the zentraedi. This was an "equal points" game, and even if the zentraedi was an ace player they couldn't have prevented what happened.
So sure, go play a tournament, have fun with that when your army is wiped from the map before you get a chance to do *anything*, and there is not a darned thing you can do to prevent it.
2014/09/17 16:49:59
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
1 Mini size is the beta rules?
2 Size of the squadrons is the beta rules?
3 I don't remember those rules, but I didn't pledge until later. Sure, it has *roots* in the RPG, but that's a different thing than saying the "Minis game is a Morph of the RPG game".
4 ZOMG ORG CHARTS. Have nothing to do with the price of tea in China. Try again?
5 Yay more force orgs!
So the only evidence you have to support your statement that, and I'll quote it so I'm not accused of putting words in your mouth,
They did show the beta rules during the KS. So honestly it should not be a surprise to anyone that the Minis game is a Morph of the RPG game. Nobody seemed to blink twice when the beta rules were released. If they had looked at those and seen the RPG rules they would have realized all the rest.
That's not the "beta rules". That's a quick start, and it says on every page "Rules still in development and subject to change." Pardon me if I don't take those at face value.
Additionally, the rules presented in that quick start aren't that bad. Sure, there's a couple things I have issues with (specifically the number of HtH attacks) but it's not horrible overall.
So how about you (finally) get off your high horse and understand that what was presented is not what is being sold. This isn't the miniatures wargame with an RPG tie in (what it should have been). It's a bunch of crap.
Plus it also depends on what you consider Morphing the rules. Many would agree with that statement others not so much since that is a relative term. So if you want o read the RPG and then the rules and then everything else we have and be surprised that's all up to you.
You were the one that used the word "morphing" - I just repeated you. And you admit that your statement of "So honestly it should not be a surprise to anyone that the Minis game is a Morph of the RPG game." was out of line and incorrect?
And remember, you said that people shouldn't have been surprised because of information received *during the kickstarter*. So "everything else we have" was pretty damn limited. Robotech RPG Tactics does not (to me, or many other people) say "Here, have some miniatures to use our RPG rules with." It, instead, says "Here's a miniature game that you can convert your RPG characters into to help cinematize your battles! Plus, it works on its own!"
The "surprise" you keep referring to isn't there for you because - and you might not be aware of this - you had more information than 98% of the people backing this kickstarter. I know - amazing right? Being involved with the play test rules gave you more insight than what the rest of us had. Shocking. And when you reported how the rules were, what were the responses you got? Mostly surprise that the crap RPG system was so prevalent in RRT.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bad_Syntax wrote: - The rules seem pretty nice and well put together. The book is easy to read and the rules are pretty easy to learn.
- The game is not for folks wanting competitive tournaments. If you are one of those folks, and want to play RRT in big competitive tournaments, I think you'll be disappointed.
These two statements should never be together. Ever. Because if the rules are nice and well put together they'll work fine in tournaments.
If they don't work in tournaments, they aren't "pretty nice and well put together".
- Regardless of what I was told in person, Palladium doesn't seem to be learning from some of their mistakes, an that is disconcerting. I will try to call them this week and say "wtf?".
No way - PB has failed to learn? I'm so surprised.
Kinda funny that your even freaking out on this point. Yes after January 2014 I had more information. Before then no. Even before I had the RPG books and used them to finish out the rules with as much as we had and I literally had the RPG books there and could see the stats and how they were converted. So more information not really, more drive and knowledge of Robotech and the RPG, that very well could be true. Bad_Syntax who does not play the RPG much if at all and MANY others also managed to make the connection right away. I'm sorry if you or others did not. I won't feel sorry one bit since it was a far cry from just me figuring that out. All I can say is, too bad for you? Nothing was ever hidden or secret about the origins of the game. Even the opening video on the KS says that it's based off the RPG. So if this is a sore point, note that its a not something that many of us see as a surprise.
Again though, who gives a crap what the official name/nomenclature is when in fact in the end it is a miniatures game in fact. It's made and designed for large battles and ill suited for many other systems like Heavy Gear and others as has been pointed out. I pointed out the origins to show that the game would not exist if it had not gone through the hands of PB as it is today as a Tactics/Miniatures version of the RPG.
And most of those fixes are for rules lawyering and tournaments and are easily fixed with errata which is now in the hands of PB and going through the approval process. Thanks to Manchu for setting that up.
Not seeing any major issues in all of that thread.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/17 16:56:53
Quite often. Breetai literally kicking and body slamming Rick's VF-1J, Spartans punching Regults. Khyron's Glaug flailing on a Valkyrie Battloid, and many other scenes.
Even more so in DYRL when Maximillian literally punches open a Regult and blasts the Zentraedi in the face and his skull bits go flying, when Kamijin kills Roy Folker, when the N-Gers capture Hikaru and Minmay, etc.
Robotech and Macross are full of close combats. If the ruleset had no melee, it would be pretty far divorced from the source material.
"...and special thanks to Judgedoug!" - Alessio Cavatore "Now you've gone too far Doug! ... Too far... " - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke
2014/09/17 16:59:12
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility.
This cannot be overstated. A lot of historicals don't care about concepts like balance because they are primarily interested in simulation. Something similar is the case here, except it is a matter of emulation. The game is supposed to emulate the show. It's not so much a matter of, say, favoring the UEDF or something. It's just that the rules are or at least seem to be primarily designed to allow players to recreate what they experience watching RoboTech.
Actually, the question I think needs to be answered here is "does this game emulate the show it is based on?". I'd personally think it's a more important question for my interests (never going to play this in a tournament), and seeing all the "ported over from the RPG" (which, by the way, is absolutely horrid as a Robotech series emulation) melee moves and the like, I'm thinking it might not be.
I'd add the plethora of anti-missile rules into that as well. Granted the lasers on the veritech head and back of the pods have been called an anti-missile system but I don't recall them ever being used that way (and if they were it was likely only once). I do however recall them being used as cutting torches and once as a sniper system in a totally action movie cutscene where Roy blows away a flying by zentraedi in Macross City. The only thing that was missing was him casually walking away from an explosion afterwards.
What I do see when reading the rules is a minis game system that is meant to emulate the RPG rules, not the show. There is nothing in the show about being unable to dodge more than 4 missiles but it is in the RPG so it is in the minis game. There is nothing in the show to indicate that a plethora of close combat attacks are needed but it is in the RPG so it is in the minis game. It feels like the rules were meant to emulate the RPG rules mechanics and a few chosen minutiae from the original source material technically drawings/info. I'm reserving final judgement till I actually play but it doesn't feel like it emulates the show much to me from reading through it. The obvious thing is the complete lack of the main squadron for the middle portion of the series, Vermillion, in the official rules.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/17 17:01:39
2014/09/17 16:59:14
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility.
This cannot be overstated. A lot of historicals don't care about concepts like balance because they are primarily interested in simulation. Something similar is the case here, except it is a matter of emulation. The game is supposed to emulate the show. It's not so much a matter of, say, favoring the UEDF or something. It's just that the rules are or at least seem to be primarily designed to allow players to recreate what they experience watching RoboTech.
Actually, the question I think needs to be answered here is "does this game emulate the show it is based on?". I'd personally think it's a more important question for my interests (never going to play this in a tournament), and seeing all the "ported over from the RPG" (which, by the way, is absolutely horrid as a Robotech series emulation) melee moves and the like, I'm thinking it might not be.
YES! After having played many games the rules copy the Anime style of the cartoon pretty well. The main difference you will see is how squadron tactics will be more important than a bunch of one on one fights that you saw in the cartoon. A lone hero will likely die a lone hero.
I especially love the parts in the cartoon where the battlepods line up around the RDF and kick them to death after shooting the intervening buildings. Or the epic kung fu duel between Roy and Miriya where they fly around jump kicking each other... no, wait... that was Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. I guess I can emulate that here though!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/17 17:05:25
2014/09/17 17:04:11
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Quite often. Breetai literally kicking and body slamming Rick's VF-1J, Spartans punching Regults. Khyron's Glaug flailing on a Valkyrie Battloid, and many other scenes.
Even more so in DYRL when Maximillian literally punches open a Regult and blasts the Zentraedi in the face and his skull bits go flying, when Kamijin kills Roy Folker, when the N-Gers capture Hikaru and Minmay, etc.
Robotech and Macross are full of close combats. If the ruleset had no melee, it would be pretty far divorced from the source material.
Very True. Although 8 options seem a bit much. In Battletech you have Punch, Kick, Axe/Club, Sword, Death From Above(Jump Kick) and Charge....RTT add Power Punch and Power Kick and Stomp and you lose the Sword option so they really are not far off from each other as one would be led to believe. I'd have to check Mekton to remember what HtH options it has.
Bad_Syntax wrote: Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility.
This cannot be overstated. A lot of historicals don't care about concepts like balance because they are primarily interested in simulation. Something similar is the case here, except it is a matter of emulation. The game is supposed to emulate the show. It's not so much a matter of, say, favoring the UEDF or something. It's just that the rules are or at least seem to be primarily designed to allow players to recreate what they experience watching RoboTech.
Actually, the question I think needs to be answered here is "does this game emulate the show it is based on?". I'd personally think it's a more important question for my interests (never going to play this in a tournament), and seeing all the "ported over from the RPG" (which, by the way, is absolutely horrid as a Robotech series emulation) melee moves and the like, I'm thinking it might not be.
I'd add the plethora of anti-missile rules into that as well. Granted the lasers on the veritech head and back of the pods have been called an anti-missile system but I don't recall them ever being used that way (and if they were it was likely only once). I do however recall them being used as cutting torches and once as a sniper system in a totally action movie cutscene where Roy blows away a flying by zentraedi in Macross City. The only thing that was missing was him casually walking away from an explosion afterwards.
What I do see when reading the rules is a minis game system that is meant to emulate the RPG rules, not the show. There is nothing in the show about being unable to dodge more than 4 missiles but it is in the RPG so it is in the minis game. There is nothing in the show to indicate that a plethora of close combat attacks are needed but it is in the RPG so it is in the minis game. It feels like the rules were meant to emulate the RPG rules mechanics and a few chosen minutiae from the original source material technically drawings/info. I'm reserving final judgement till I actually play but it doesn't feel like it emulates the show much to me from reading through it. The obvious thing is the complete lack of the main squadron for the middle portion of the series, Vermillion, in the official rules.
|
Yeah, Normal Anti-Missile Need a 6 and you pay a command point. That is if you don't have any Anti-Missile Weapons.
Anti-Missile like the top turret on the pod or the head lasers on the VT can shoot without paying Command Points and you need a 5+
Missiles used as Anti-Missile like the missiles on the Tomahawk need a 4+ and can shoot without paying Command Points
3 Options that are pretty straight forward. I don't see that as a problem
What I do NOT like.
1. The 4 Missile cannot be dodged deal
2. If the attack roll hits with 3 missiles and you try to dodge your roll must match or exceed the highest of the 3 rolls. I would prefer that if you roll enough to dodge 2 of the 3 then you be allowed to dodge 2 of the 3. Jeff did say that this is how it worked. It's like you are trying to dodge one missile that is in your face and lose concentration on the others. I don't buy it.
Being a port from the RPG the 4+ missiles thing was brought over. I don't like it but I can kinda see the point but I do agree that in Macross and Robotech we have seen mecha dodge 6 or more missiles.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/17 17:13:04
Quite often. Breetai literally kicking and body slamming Rick's VF-1J, Spartans punching Regults. Khyron's Glaug flailing on a Valkyrie Battloid, and many other scenes.
Even more so in DYRL when Maximillian literally punches open a Regult and blasts the Zentraedi in the face and his skull bits go flying, when Kamijin kills Roy Folker, when the N-Gers capture Hikaru and Minmay, etc.
Robotech and Macross are full of close combats. If the ruleset had no melee, it would be pretty far divorced from the source material.
Very True. Although 8 options seem a bit much. In Battletech you have Punch, Kick, Axe/Club, Sword, Death From Above(Jump Kick) and Charge....RTT add Power Punch and Power Kick and Stomp and you lose the Sword option so they really are not far off from each other as one would be led to believe. I'd have to check Mekton to remember what HtH options it has.
Oh, I agree the sheer volume of melee options is absurd, but I definitely want to have Breetai punch, kick, and throw a Battloid against the wall, then crush it's head in. Or Khyron tearing apart a Destroid in his N-Ger suit. While an abstracted system has it's place (Bolt Action, which has the quickest melee in the history of ever), I do _kind of like_ a little variety for an anime game, even though half of the ones in RRT are kind of redundant. But, hell, even Rick charges through a cluster of Regults and knocks them over with his shoulders. Looking at the PDF, Body Block and Grab make sense, but Kick/Punch/Club/Power Punch could have been combined into "Melee Strike" that does like 3 MDC , +1 if using a club, +1 if moved x" that turn, +1 if a CP is spent. But this is probably better for the rules thread.
"...and special thanks to Judgedoug!" - Alessio Cavatore "Now you've gone too far Doug! ... Too far... " - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke
2014/09/17 17:16:10
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
I would have preferred if an anti-missile system on the mecha just gave you a flat +1 defensive bonus versus missles instead and that more than 4 missiles gave you a -1 penalty. I personally think that addition of a separate roll was the worse choice but nothing I can do about that.
2014/09/17 17:19:31
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
warboss wrote: I would have preferred if an anti-missile system on the mecha just gave you a flat +1 defensive bonus versus missles instead and that more than 4 missiles gave you a -1 penalty. I personally think that addition of a separate roll was the worse choice but nothing I can do about that.
I've messed with alternate AM rules but those would be for casual play. I like the idea of better pilots having a better chance of shooting the missiles down.
warboss wrote: Or the epic kung fu duel between Roy and Miriya where they fly around jump kicking each other... no, wait... that was Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. I guess I can emulate that here though!
Interestingly, both are very heavy in melee/close quarters combat.
"...and special thanks to Judgedoug!" - Alessio Cavatore "Now you've gone too far Doug! ... Too far... " - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke
2014/09/17 17:23:56
Subject: Re:Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Bad_Syntax wrote: - The destroid sets that say you can build 4 destroids as EITHER tomahawks or defenders. Based on the sprues, I'm betting the sets end up being 2 of each, and that kinda pisses me off.
This is the second time you've mentioned this. Exactly where is it saying you can build 4 destroids as either? Are you still referring to the Kickstarter itself, which unilaterally changed it, and didn't (to my knowledge) publicly state it? Or are you going off a description on the box set or other packaging? Because they've known that was going to be the case (2 Toma/2 Def) since at least August 29 2013, when I got my KS Message from Jeff, a little over a week before the Pledge Manager closed.
I am not aware of that being said at any time. The daedalus pack had a pic of 8 tomahawks, and that throws off the counts of what I ordered. If they did say it somewhere and I missed it that is on me, but I'm not aware they ever said that... got a source?
I think you're misunderstanding me (and I think you may have the wrong link there, unless I'm missing something), or I'm misunderstanding you.
To my knowledge, PB have never clearly publicly stated that there was a change to the Tomahawk/Defender Destroid pack. I've asked many times for a quote from people who've disagreed, and I've only heard "They did, I saw it!". The best anyone came up with, was a quote from PB saying the Pledge Manager listings were accurate. Which it was. It listed 2 Tomahawks + 2 Defenders. But that was at a time when there were at least 3 other things that weren't accurate (the VEF/1D components for one), and it was asked for clarification, and again, to my knowledge, it was never given publicly.
I did ask, using the Kickstarter Messaging system, because I felt it was a big deal, given it was established on at least the second day of the campaign. The private message I got back (quoted below) confirmed it to me, and I've used this to answer people who have asked it, but given I am in no position of authority with PB, it's still second hand (at best) information, and shouldn't be taken as gospel.
Hi Morgan,
The VF-1D / VEF-1 issue has been clarified in recent updates. The Destroid issue of now having 2 of each type is due to manufacturing issues and parts not being compatible. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Jeff Burke
Palladium Books
You said "The destroid sets that say you can build 4 destroids as EITHER tomahawks or defenders.". My question was, were you basing the "destroid sets that say" off the information you have gotten from the Kickstarter, or, given you've actually received product, is there a physical printing (on the main/expansion box, in an inventory sheet, etc) that states that it's "4 as either". Because THAT would be a bigger problem.
2014/09/17 17:24:27
Subject: Robotech Kickstarter Funded at $1.44 Million!
Quite often. Breetai literally kicking and body slamming Rick's VF-1J, Spartans punching Regults. Khyron's Glaug flailing on a Valkyrie Battloid, and many other scenes.
Even more so in DYRL when Maximillian literally punches open a Regult and blasts the Zentraedi in the face and his skull bits go flying, when Kamijin kills Roy Folker, when the N-Gers capture Hikaru and Minmay, etc.
Robotech and Macross are full of close combats. If the ruleset had no melee, it would be pretty far divorced from the source material.
Very True. Although 8 options seem a bit much. In Battletech you have Punch, Kick, Axe/Club, Sword, Death From Above(Jump Kick) and Charge....RTT add Power Punch and Power Kick and Stomp and you lose the Sword option so they really are not far off from each other as one would be led to believe. I'd have to check Mekton to remember what HtH options it has.
Oh, I agree the sheer volume of melee options is absurd, but I definitely want to have Breetai punch, kick, and throw a Battloid against the wall, then crush it's head in. Or Khyron tearing apart a Destroid in his N-Ger suit. While an abstracted system has it's place (Bolt Action, which has the quickest melee in the history of ever), I do _kind of like_ a little variety for an anime game, even though half of the ones in RRT are kind of redundant. But, hell, even Rick charges through a cluster of Regults and knocks them over with his shoulders. Looking at the PDF, Body Block and Grab make sense, but Kick/Punch/Club/Power Punch could have been combined into "Melee Strike" that does like 3 MDC , +1 if using a club, +1 if moved x" that turn, +1 if a CP is spent. But this is probably better for the rules thread.
I see little use for "Power Punch" and "Power Kick" other than cinematics but that is why those moves cost command points. Now when the Invid come to into play HtH will get dangerous and likely have to be revised. I've already made some suggestions but it's too early to worry about that.
I've been very open that I'm against the present HtH since at the very least the power moves should go and some units should do more or less damage depending upon the units size and HtH as is does 1-2 too many points damage with a single hit. Reduce all HtH damage by 1 and you might completely eliminate the idea of a "Kickfest". I do note that this happened only once that I'm aware of and on a small demo table where the units were in each other's faces right off the bat.
Bad_Syntax wrote: Sorry, but that is your opinion. Game systems simply do not require tournament compatibility. There are MANY game systems out there without points, without tournament abilities, without any hope of balanced game play (fact). I've played many napaleonics, ww1/2/3 micro armor ground/naval/air, many tactical games in various time periods, etc, etc, that did not have this ability. The extremely popular ground zero game system Dirtside and Stargrunt specifically avoid point usage (and have a paragraph or two in the rules stating why). The whole concept of game balance leads to boring games and unimaginative scenarios, not to mention absolute game balance where dice (and terrain) are involved is completely impossible and just an illusion. These are all facts and are easily determined to be so, nothing in this paragraph is my opinion.
Please, cite facts backing up the underlined statement. Since you've asserted it's unarguable, you must have evidence of this. And the bold is not what people look for.
And I love that you jumped straight to "balance". That's not what I mentioned at all. Perhaps you need to read closer?
Balance is presumed with any tournament set of rules, can't have tournaments without balance... well, you could, but the complaints would put the KS comment thread to shame.
As for boring games and unimaginative scenarios. Games where both sides have equal "points" and roughly equal tactical ability come down to games of who rolls better when it counts. I have seen many, many, many 40K games and other tournaments being played. I don't see massive excitement, I don't see the game store owner telling them to keep quiet, I do not see that level of excitement. However, those tables that aren't doing "tournaments" and playing other miniature games that happens often. People have fun and get passionate, instead of just overly competitive and angry when things don't go their way. I'm sure you'll come back and say how much fun you and your table has, and how all the games are exciting, and people write up big scenarios before each, but based on the rules themselves and the way you have to do scenarios in tournaments, well, there is no way to have that kind of versatility in games where half a dozen scenario types are possible.
Yeah, no one has fun, or gets excited at the BAO, LVO, NOVA... And are you actually trying to say that 40k as a whole is balanced? Please tell me you are.
It's not just a "my table" thing. And I noticed you provided no evidence for your "factual" statement that "The whole concept of game balance leads to boring games and unimaginative scenarios."
Is WM/H boring? Is Flames of War boring? There's more, but hopefully you'll see that your "factual" statement isn't. And that I'm not attempting to address balance at all. If the rules set is well written, regardless of balance, tournaments can exist.
As for the illusion thing, yeah, sorry, but once you incorporate terrain, unit deployment, and dice into a game true balance is a mathematical impossibility. Sure, it may be close, usually, but there will be times when the balance is lost before the game starts, or by one person rolling better just a few times, at critical points. That lucky shot on turn 1 that took out that mega-unit worth 25% of your army just cost you the game, and it didn't matter how good you played or the equilibrium in point values of armies. Technically, true balance is probably mathematically impossible in any game between 2 people, though "pretty close" is not too hard.
And "pretty close" is all people ask for.
But how can I say "I'm #1" when a lucky die roll or two won me that final game against my opponent, who was tactically better, had a better force, better positioning, but the "force was not with him" when it came to die rolls? Its an illusion of superiority.
Rematches. How can the top poker players say that they're #1? By consistently getting there. If you're consistent - especially in a game where chance is involved - you're better overall.
rigeld2 wrote:Which is fine from a *balance* standpoint.
My point was that the *rules* and the *balance* are two different things.
Tournaments can create a balanced environment if the rules are good. Also, PB said they would have tournament support.
A game designer saying they have "tournament support" means they have "point costs for units". Heck, that isn't even a 100% requirement, you could have tournaments without even that. However PB has point costs, army formation, and scenario deployment, so in my book and many others sure that is "tournament support".
No, that's the bare minimum for a non-scenario game to exist. Calling it "tournament support" is laughable.
I'm saying that the game will not work in competitive tournaments. I saw this in a demo at Gencon. Carmen, the game designer, sat down for a demo with 2 guys. He asked "Do you want me to be nice, or be an a-hole?". They said "be an a-hole". The zentraedi didn't get a single kill, lost both of their glaugs, their gulnau, and most of their regults on turn 1 before they even got to move or do anything. This means they ended up with no command points, further reducing their capability. Turn 2 the UEDF took out all the buildings on the table (I'm a firm believer that the buildings should have 10x the MDC they do) and then proceeded to finish off the zentraedi. This was an "equal points" game, and even if the zentraedi was an ace player they couldn't have prevented what happened.
So sure, go play a tournament, have fun with that when your army is wiped from the map before you get a chance to do *anything*, and there is not a darned thing you can do to prevent it.
Again, you attack balance. Balance can be changed much easier than crappy rules.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
" - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke 
