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.

Link to a battle report using the new Alpha rules: http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=16094

Link to the Arkrite Press' blog concerning the new timelines being opened:
http://arkritepress.com/2014/03/26/destination-terra-nova-and-beyond/

Link to the discussion on the timeline differential on the DP9 forums:
http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=16069&page=2#entry282163


In reference to the video game, Mektek has closed their forums and opened an Alpha countdown for those who wish to help in the creation of the video game by donating $40. All who donate will be able to participate in the Alpha. The links are provided on Dream Pod 9's and Arkrite Press' Facebook pages, and I'm sure they are also on their Twitter pages as well.

-Brandon F.

Riker's battle report was very cool and well done, but it's no substitute for the developer staying on top of issues raised in the test. The last Alpha release had a lot of errors introduced and Dave's been responding to them in a pretty limited fashion.

warboss wrote:I haven't even downloaded the newest version to be honest. Until I get an actual game scheduled, there is no point.

I'm a bit on-hold myself, to be honest. I like the core mechanic of the Alpha rules, but am not sure that the amount of setting-detail being changes is for the best. I figure the setting detail is the part of the game people generally like so let's focus on that, not change it. But that's just my opinion, of course.

warboss wrote:I did see an intersting post though else about some massive schedule of books that they're planning for the RPG. Considering the team responsible is used to putting out 1-2 projects a year (one book and gear up), laying out plans for so many is a bit... ambitious to put it nicely. The only analogue I can think of is the most recent 2013 Palladium books catalog that hawked 20+ books for the year despite them at best coming out with 3-4 yearly and only got out 2 (neither of which was actually on the list).

It is quite ambitious. I wish the guys (Jason and Greg) well and I hope they're realistic. I'm hopeful some of the projects (like the fiction) are 'easy' to produce as they don't require playtesting or as much layout, but I expected they'd start a bit smaller to be honest.

warboss wrote:
While I applaud the ambitious expansion plans, I think they would have been better off playing those a bit closer to the chest and focusing on the relatively current era (TN1930+/-20) instead of getting people's hopes up for books spanning thousands of years.

Yes... I had suggested (the last time I talked to them, which would've been September-ish) that they look at FFG's route and do a focused game instead of something sprawling. I am a little concerned they're looking at this as a 1990s RPG publishing project, where a huge product line was a good thing, versus 2014 where there's a lot of room for 'one and done' or otherwise bite-sized product releases.

As a disclaimer, I haven't talked to those guys in a while and they might have some sort of resources to pull this off... I don't know either way.

warboss wrote:
As a side note, does anyone follow the HGA video game or pledged for it? I lost track of that one months ago and decided to go to their forums... which are now closed. They've got another countdown going for something else though. Hopefully this one won't end with a wimper and wah wah wah waaaah trumpet noise like the last one where the website was Error 404 for most of the day post 30 day countdown.

I'm a Mac user, and they've dropped mention of Mac since the Kickstarter crashed, so I'm not pledged for anything. Again, as with Arkrite. Also, as with the above, not thrilled that they're barely using the iconic designs. They've got some talented guys, but I'm wondering what direction they're going and if they're being realistic about it.

I wonder if the Forums thing was to deal with the constant questions about their old Mechwarrior stuff that they weren't really able to support any more?

 Balance wrote:
I'm hopeful some of the projects (like the fiction) are 'easy' to produce as they don't require playtesting or as much layout, but I expected they'd start a bit smaller to be honest.

I'll be blunt there: fiction is like a game. It's only easy to produce if you do not care about quality. With a few exceptions (looking at you, Asimov), it takes a while to write something good. There's a reason that good authors usually only have a few publications, in the order of 1-2 novels per productive years, in their entire careers.

So, given Jason's track record at DP9 (Jason's responsibility for his previous work does not disappear because he's technically independent now), I expect that this fiction will be at the level of bad self-insert fan-fiction. That's what TPS's fluff was, after all, and that's the level of "quality" he considers acceptable.

Some quotes:

Albertorius
2014/03/27 AT 7:54 AM
I like what I see, but right now it looks a bit overly ambitious. It feels like the plans from a much, much bigger company.

That said… very interesting

Greg
2014/03/27 AT 1:27 PM
These are obviously multi-year plans, but we’re aiming high and we want to grow.




Rhoderic
2014/03/27 AT 8:30 AM
This sounds really, REALLY ambitious. If I’m reading you right, you’re planning at least 13-15 sourcebooks in addition to the material in the core rulebook. One sourcebook for each of the five eras before Blood on the Wind, and one for each of the other colonies in the Distant Shores era makes 13 already. And that’s not counting a “base” sourcebook for Blood on the Wind, a sourcebook for the WfTN, or the “regional guides” and “army sourcebooks” you’ve also mentioned. And the novellas and fiction anthologies on top of that.

I sincerely hope you’ll still manage to keep things fairly light and airy, in line with the “quality over quantity” mentality that (judging by my limited experience) seems to prevail in the RPG scene today, in contrast to the “sourcebooks, sourcebooks, sourcebooks!” mentality of 15-20 years ago. Some sort of middle ground to comfortably stand on.

How “heavy” will a typical sourcebook be, in terms of the information contained within it (or, simply, page count)?


Jason
2014/03/27 AT 11:51 PM
The plan is to concentrate on the core setting first. That would cover Blood on the Wind to Distant Shores. That being said, there’s a ton of material still in print out there covering that period. We do have some ideas about game resources for the core period that we’d like to do, and the never published colony books are at the top of that list. There’s one particular colony book that will be completely overhauled and re imagined, while the others will be updated, tweaked, and expanded. As far as the other eras, we will be testing the waters with the fans on what Era they want to see next, and all of the eras will see fiction in either novella or anthology format with supporting gaming material included.

Greg and I want to hear from the fans on what eras or supplements they would like to see. Please leave your comments and feel free to ask questions.


---

-Brandon F.

I'm glad they're starting with the current era as it meshes better with the minis as well. Personally, pre/during/post WOTA is my favorite era and what I consider "true" HG. Thanks for reposting the info.

I don't think I can handle how insanely crazy terribad the Alpha forum was.

Decided to drop in and peek after a few weeks of ignoring the damn thing, seeing what's changed.

What I get is a thread where some guy legitimately thinks it's a good idea to make a roll to see if your guy can get the cover bonus when he's already in cover, to simulate 'ducking at the right time'. God, it's just painful. The rest of the forums are more random balance tweaks for a game that doesn't even have it's movement, shooting and damaging rules figured out yet!

If anything, it's gotten substantially worse.

That's a good example of a DP9 playtest, yeah.

Edit : I understand my answer might sound sarcastic. It's not. It really is a typical DP9 playtest. The only difference is that it's public, for everyone to see.
As for your interrogations, well, asking why base rules aren't tested is ground for expulsion in a DP9 playtest.

Update on Arkrite Press: Interstellar Map Updated to TN 1948

http://arkritepress.com/2014/04/03/interstellar-web-map-tn-1948/#comments

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3753/13595846964_7304f16e7c_o.jpg


It's a work in progress, but definitely better news.

-Brandon F.

 Killionaire wrote:
I don't think I can handle how insanely crazy terribad the Alpha forum was.

Decided to drop in and peek after a few weeks of ignoring the damn thing, seeing what's changed.

What I get is a thread where some guy legitimately thinks it's a good idea to make a roll to see if your guy can get the cover bonus when he's already in cover, to simulate 'ducking at the right time'. God, it's just painful. The rest of the forums are more random balance tweaks for a game that doesn't even have it's movement, shooting and damaging rules figured out yet!

If anything, it's gotten substantially worse.

I have mostly given up on the playtest completely by now, must admit. I don't even read it anymore most of the time unless pointed to it. Which is a shame.

I'll just ask and see.

BrandonKF wrote:
I'll just ask and see.

Sure, but ask what ?

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=16113#entry282535

In addition, Aurora Magazine just released its 8.2 edition.

http://dp9forum.com/aurora/Issues/Aurora_Magazine_Issue_8_2.pdf

And there's a lot inside.

-Brandon F.

That's so cute.
This poll is so rigged it's not even funny. What are you trying to prove there ?

HudsonD, I am asking whether people understand the basic rules, whether they could explain them to new players. Which was what you, Killionaire and Albertorius were discussing.

That isn't rigging.

-Brandon F.

BrandonKF wrote:
HudsonD, I am asking whether people understand the basic rules, whether they could explain them to new players. Which was what you, Killionaire and Albertorius were discussing.

That isn't rigging.

-Brandon F.

First of all, this is not what Killionaire, Alberto and others -myself included- were discussing. At all. Assuming your statement was made in good faith, you might want to spend more time trying to understand what people actually wrote.

Secondly, even if we were, your poll was written to allow only positive answers, which is as blatant a rigging as can be.
If you can't differenciate between asking "Is it easy to understand ? Yes/No" and "Name the parts that are easy to answer !", you're beyond redemption.

Last, but not least, your zeal in promoting the latest Aurora is starting to look suspect...

It was made in good faith.

Now how is my promotion suspect, Hudson?

-Brandon F.

BrandonKF wrote:
It was made in good faith.

Sadly, I have no trouble believing you did this in good faith. That's not a praise, by the way.
I'm now very curious, which recent post(s) lead you to believe the main issue facing the current playtest is ease of learning ?

BrandonKF wrote:
Now how is my promotion suspect

Heavily promoting a production without mentionning it features your own work is unethical. That you did so in genuine good faith is telling...

Killionaire wrote:I don't think I can handle how insanely crazy terribad the Alpha forum was.

Decided to drop in and peek after a few weeks of ignoring the damn thing, seeing what's changed.

What I get is a thread where some guy legitimately thinks it's a good idea to make a roll to see if your guy can get the cover bonus when he's already in cover, to simulate 'ducking at the right time'. God, it's just painful. The rest of the forums are more random balance tweaks for a game that doesn't even have it's movement, shooting and damaging rules figured out yet!

If anything, it's gotten substantially worse.

HudsonD wrote:

BrandonKF wrote:
It was made in good faith.

Sadly, I have no trouble believing you did this in good faith. That's not a praise, by the way.
I'm now very curious, which recent post(s) lead you to believe the main issue facing the current playtest is ease of learning ?

I posed the question to ask if people felt comfortable with the movement, shooting and damaging rules because Killionaire brought up the fact that the game 'doesn't even have its movement, shooting and damaging rules figured out yet'.

I asked if people felt those rules were good as-is, or if they needed work. You're more than welcome to say so there.

BrandonKF wrote:
Now how is my promotion suspect

Heavily promoting a production without mentionning it features your own work is unethical. That you did so in genuine good faith is telling...

I wasn't aware that was considered unethical. Where I come from, you can be excited about something, but seeing as how there are others with their own work involved in the creation of Aurora I did not want to say "Oh, here's my stuff." and leave out the fact that Mr. Dickerson and Mr. Perkins both had an interview involved about the Heavy Gear Universe, and also having Mr. Jakar's very fine Gear Krieg artwork dismissed, or the new D6 rules for Peace River being given a pass.

So, I post the link.

You're aware that the first order of business that Arkrite Press LLC is up to is Rumble in the Jungle, Volume 1.



I have been heavily promoting everything that Arkrite has given, not just Aurora 8.2. You can go on my Google+ account and see how many times I've shared this to communities of roleplayers, every single blog update out of Arkrite's Arkana blog, and also on my Facebook profile, where I have re-posted the updates on my wall, in the personal community Heavy Gear Pictures that I made for fans of the game, and also in Infamous Pod Squad San Diego, Tabletop Skirmishers and Gamers on Games, with Knighthawk Games. I've also re-posted every single Arkana update on my own personal blog, to help add exposure. Am I very excited about this? Yes. 100 percent. Does it make me unethical? I don't believe it does. It makes me someone who genuinely wants to get the word out.

-Brandon F.

BrandonKF wrote:

I posed the question to ask if people felt comfortable with the movement, shooting and damaging rules because Killionaire brought up the fact that the game 'doesn't even have its movement, shooting and damaging rules figured out yet'.
I asked if people felt those rules were good as-is, or if they needed work. You're more than welcome to say so there.

So, let me get this straight.
Out of the whole pages of posts that lambast the playtest, its processes, its direction, etc... You've only managed to register a single sentence, and then managed to misread it out of context ?
I'll be helpful, and quote the only bit you should work from :

I don't think I can handle how insanely crazy terribad the Alpha forum was.

In other words, "this playtest is FUBAR". Is that clear enough ?

BrandonKF wrote:

I wasn't aware that was considered unethical. Where I come from, you can be excited about something, but seeing as how there are others with their own work involved in the creation of Aurora I did not want to say "Oh, here's my stuff." and leave out the fact that Mr. Dickerson and Mr. Perkins both had an interview involved about the Heavy Gear Universe, and also having Mr. Jakar's very fine Gear Krieg artwork dismissed, or the new D6 rules for Peace River being given a pass.
(...)
I have been heavily promoting everything that Arkrite has given, not just Aurora 8.2. You can go on my Google+ account and see how many times I've shared this to communities of roleplayers, every single blog update out of Arkrite's Arkana blog, and also on my Facebook profile, where I have re-posted the updates on my wall, in the personal community Heavy Gear Pictures that I made for fans of the game, and also in Infamous Pod Squad San Diego, Tabletop Skirmishers and Gamers on Games, with Knighthawk Games. I've also re-posted every single Arkana update on my own personal blog, to help add exposure. Am I very excited about this? Yes. 100 percent. Does it make me unethical? I don't believe it does. It makes me someone who genuinely wants to get the word out.

Oh, what you are trying to tell us, is that you chose not to reveal the release you were promoting involved your work, out of modesty ? How virtuous of you !
I suppose the same selflessness and modesty explains why your last paragraph eagerly promotes Arkrite press, without specifying you're working for them in an official capacity ?

Yes, I am now writing. I am very pleased for the opportunity. I am happy to be able to help, and I also pray that those who read my stories will enjoy them greatly. I also promise to do my utmost to make what I write the very best that I can make it. These are things are I intend to do.

Now, do I expect your personal support, HudsonD? No.

Honestly, as much as I would like to argue with you, it isn't going to change your opinion. So I will put my all into writing well. Good day and God bless you.

-Brandon F.

Edit: To be clear, the reason why I did not include the fact that my own writing was involved was because I wanted this to be the more 'official' announcement. Suffice to say, I wasn't involved in the creation of Arkrite Press LLC, and I was only recently approached to do some work for them. However, as you wish to make this whole thing about me, HudsonD, I will make it very simple. I just got involved, I'm excited to be involved, and this is the first time I will be given an opportunity to be published. So if that somehow smacks of 'unethical' to you, than I am quite sorry for your extremely low opinion of me as a person.

Look, this isn't about you, and you seem to have forgotten the purpose of this thread.
You've been consistenly misreading or downright ignoring whole paragraphs, posts and even pages. This thread is intended to list the major, crippling issues affecting DP9, and instead you've decided to use it as your personal tribune to praise the company and yourself !
Now, there's nothing wrong with self-promotion, as long as it's clearly labelled as such. That's the difference between "this company is awesome (and I work for them) !" and "this company is awesome". The former is called sharing your enthusiasm, the later is called lying by omission if you happen to actually work for said company.

In light of the above, I also note you chose to speak about yourself, and not about the consensus on the playtest's disastrous state...

I don't think it's fair to say it's a consensus that the playtest is a disaster. Majority opinion on this thread, sure. But there's a lot of activity on the DP9 forum, which is not the sort of thing you'd expect if the general consensus was that the playtest's a disaster.

The playtest is way too disorganized and should have been done in a more structured way. But even in its current extremely rough state, I still prefer the Alpha rules to the previous Blitz rules. So even for that fact alone I for one can't call the whole endeavour a disaster.

MrThud wrote:
I don't think it's fair to say it's a consensus that the playtest is a disaster. Majority opinion on this thread, sure. But there's a lot of activity on the DP9 forum, which is not the sort of thing you'd expect if the general consensus was that the playtest's a disaster.

There's really not a lot of activity on the forum, or in this thread. In both case, there's a few posters talking in circle.
That being said, I would not use the DP9 forum as an indicator of general quality. DP9 spent the last few years going out of their way to get rid of anyone critical of them. The few that remain are more or less automatically ok with DP9's way of doing things. They think like DP9.

Essentially, concluding that the consensus is that the playtest is not a disaster based on DP9's forum is like concluding that everyone would vote for <insert favourite political party here> based on the opinion of <favourite party>'s convention. That's sampling bias (ironically, one of the thing that's making the playtest useless.)

MrThud wrote:
I don't think it's fair to say it's a consensus that the playtest is a disaster. Majority opinion on this thread, sure. But there's a lot of activity on the DP9 forum, which is not the sort of thing you'd expect if the general consensus was that the playtest's a disaster.
The playtest is way too disorganized and should have been done in a more structured way. But even in its current extremely rough state, I still prefer the Alpha rules to the previous Blitz rules. So even for that fact alone I for one can't call the whole endeavour a disaster.

I suspect we're not disagreeing as much as you think. There are two things there, the product, that shows potential but is still very much in a rough state, and the "playtest" itself, which is the process intended to improve and refine the product. As much as the product itself has a good potential, the playtest process is disorganized mess that has little chances of reaching its goals (ie. A finished, well-polished, balanced product). That's what we are complaining about, there.

If patterns repeat themselves from previous projects, and by every measurable aspects they still are, the playtest is already pretty much done, and the current product, save for a few cosmetic elements, is what will end up released and sold to the public. A rough, unfinished, unbalanced mess.

(P.S : The DP9 boards aren't what I'd call very active, either.)
(Edit : Ninjaed on the board activity bit)

Congrats to Brandon for getting published in the fanzine and apparently more content at a latter date in the official RPG reboot!

After posting in a recent Battlefoam bag thread, it reminded me to check out the HG bag status since last Christmas season it was out of stock after the 75% off sale. Unlike other bags, it is still out of stock 5 months later so apparently they were just getting rid of the stock with a clearance and it is unlikely they'll restock them in the future if they haven't done it in the months since.

edit: Additionally, it looks like we finally have new Northern rules published!.... for the d6 Aurora fanzine rules. Still no word apparently from DP9 as to the status of the Blitz northern book. I guess the DP9 staff is doing an extra thorough job at making sure that Paxton still is better for less TV at every possible step.

I didn't actually say that the consensus is that the playtest is not a disaster. i just said that there is not a consensus that the playtest is a disaster. The burden is on the person making the claim there is a consensus opinion, which was not me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 HudsonD wrote:
I suspect we're not disagreeing as much as you think. There are two things there, the product, that shows potential but is still very much in a rough state, and the "playtest" itself, which is the process intended to improve and refine the product. As much as the product itself has a good potential, the playtest process is disorganized mess that has little chances of reaching its goals (ie. A finished, well-polished, balanced product). That's what we are complaining about, there.

If patterns repeat themselves from previous projects, and by every measurable aspects they still are, the playtest is already pretty much done, and the current product, save for a few cosmetic elements, is what will end up released and sold to the public. A rough, unfinished, unbalanced mess.

(P.S : The DP9 boards aren't what I'd call very active, either.)
(Edit : Ninjaed on the board activity bit)

Okay, fair enough. I actually have a lot of the same issues with DP9's behaviour and policies as others do on this thread. The running gag that is the release date of Northern army list PDF is a real case in point. I just think that I'm okay with baby steps. Dave is responding to issues raised by testers on a more or less weekly basis, which beats standard DP9 rules issue response times by a factor of what, 100? 1000? The fact that there's even an open forum that is being monitored by DP9 rules staff in any way at all is a real step forward.

There's been issues where Dave has been adamant about questionable design decisions and then backed down in the face of a lot of counter-argument. (Weighting TVs by faction was an egregious example of that.) Before this Alpha I have to say I have never seen anything like that from DP9, and it indicates that tester opinions are being listened to in some sort of aggregate way. So sure, I even agree it's a poorly designed process, but I won't go all the way to calling it a disaster.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, there are still major changes being made. The last couple weeks saw a major change to how Cover works. Now there's discussion about changing how Melee interacts with ranged attacks. Those are pretty big changes, so I wouldn't say the rules are down to cosmetic changes only yet.

MrThud wrote:
I didn't actually say that the consensus is that the playtest is not a disaster. i just said that there is not a consensus that the playtest is a disaster. The burden is on the person making the claim there is a consensus opinion, which was not me.

Sorry, I meant to say that DP9's forum is not a good indicator of quality in general. I was just using the consensus regarding the playtest as an example.

MrThud wrote:

I just think that I'm okay with baby steps. Dave is responding to issues raised by testers on a more or less weekly basis, which beats standard DP9 rules issue response times by a factor of what, 100? 1000? The fact that there's even an open forum that is being monitored by DP9 rules staff in any way at all is a real step forward.

The same setup existed previously, in the private playtest forums. All products tested this way ended up having glaring flaws. That's not a baby step, that's doing the same thing, only in public.

MrThud wrote:

There's been issues where Dave has been adamant about questionable design decisions and then backed down in the face of a lot of counter-argument.

Now imagine the number of similar decisions he's making that are not tested because they don't affect directly something that testers are caring about.
The only reason his (incredibly stupid, there's no other word) decision to weight point cost based on faction was contested and changed is because he mentioned it off-hand. If it was not for that comment, he would still be doing it. People would be complaining about point costs, resulting in random changes because the underlying issue would not be addressed.
This is happening with other decisions right now, and will keep happening because the playtest procedure is perfectly designed to hide the problems.
This is not a test procedure, it's a way for the designer to deflect blame on the testers!

mrondeau wrote:
The same setup existed previously, in the private playtest forums. All products tested this way ended up having glaring flaws. That's not a baby step, that's doing the same thing, only in public.

My understanding from other posters is that a lot of previous Beta testers were kicked out of the tests for pointing out flaws. Also that major issues raised were ignored. I don't really feel either has been happened for this Alpha. There's issues that have been raised that have so far been ignored, but overall the ones where there's been general traction that there is a real issue there (most recently with Cover and melee) have been at least responded to.

I just don't see the private cliques and banishment issues to the extent that people have described for previous tests. The current Alpha really is no better? I'm genuinely curious, because there seems to be some disconnect between how I've seen the previous tests described and how this one is running. A lot of problems with the current test I would ascribe to apathy and inertia more than intentional malice.

MrThud wrote:

I just don't see the private cliques and banishment issues to the extent that people have described for previous tests.

That's because they already occurred. The testers that remain are those that were not banned or disgusted by the previous playtests.
Not to mention that you can't really ban someone from a public playtest. You just ignore them silently.

MrThud wrote:

I'm genuinely curious, because there seems to be some disconnect between how I've seen the previous tests described and how this one is running. A lot of problems with the current test I would ascribe to apathy and inertia more than intentional malice.

Yes, there was no malice in the previous playtests. Just apathy and inertia, confirmation bias and random changes.
That's the thing: the designers want to make some changes. So they pick the test reports that justify those changes, and listen to them.
They ignore the reports that indicate that those changes would be bad.
If they like something as is, they pick the reports that say that all is well and ignore the others.
Once in a while, something is wrong enough that almost everyone is screaming, and that get fixed. Or not, if the designers really disagree. In that case, the reports saying that all is well are somehow more credible, or the testers clearly did not understand something.
They can do that without meaning to since they have to interpret a pile of uncontrolled reports, where all the possible variables are confused and with unknown biases.

No malice involved, just incompetence, Dunning-Kruger and confirmation bias.

EDIT: I would add that, as some point, when selling a product, incompetence and apathy are hard to distinguish from actual malice. I don't think that there's any malice involved, but that's because I know Dave.