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.

Oh I do still like the Gears. *sigh* I hope this all works out. Thanks for sharing those, Brandon!

Most welcome Firebreak. Although I put these in the wrong thread, I had intended for them only to go into my personal 'Gear-finity' thread, though now I suppose it's a happy accident of drinking too much Monster and not enough attention to detail.

It's okay though. I'll keep posting progress everywhere.

The night ends, our watch begins! Gear up!

-Brandon F.

 IceRaptor wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:
There is a beta edition out for the new edition of Heavy Gear. I haven't read the entire thing yet, but when I'm talking to Robert D. at Gencon and the most exciting thing he can talk about is that you don't have to track ammo anymore in the new edition... well, there went my high hopes.

Bad_Syntax wrote:
I spoke with both Robert Dubois and.... ummm, some other important guy at Gencon about it for like 30 min. I showed my frustration, but they were all about moving forward with this new blitz, saying "its faster!".

Robert's a damn fool; thats what he mentioned? I swear every time I think that man can't screw up his company any more than he already has, he says something stupid like that. *arrgh*

The biggest issue I still see with any kind of Kickstarter attempt by Dream Pod 9: Quite a number of folks are making the assumption that Robert Dubois is reading over, listening to, and above all understanding the assorted feedback and suggestions.
Plus, as was pointed out to me elsewhere, there isn't anyone left who will stand up to the man and try to explain what all is being said, especially when reality diverges from what Robert wants to hear or has already decided to do.


Because after two Skype conversations and multiple email conversations over the better part of a year when he could be bothered to do so I, and others, have absolutely no need to make up anything regarding el presidente's level of competence involving "his" gaming title.

In fact, I think one reason it's been so hard to get across just what Robert is really like and why the company under his "leadership" has done so poorly isn't due to a small handful of folks drinking the cool-aide who'll defend him at every turn no matter what, but rather more that what stories have been related about his decisions and directives actually do read like attempts to make things up.

New fan or player blood, let alone the potential for new employees that a KS might make possible, is irrelevant, as the exact same person will still be making all of the necessary decisions in the manner he has repeatedly made them over the past decade.

 Tamwulf wrote:
[..] but the point of the comment was still lost. In a setting with such technology possible, why is a medium bazooka the best weapon in the game?

My thought on the matter, in case you or anyone else talking here rather than visiting the Pod forums hasn't seen it:

Snubs and Bazookas...plus faction benefits

_
_

It's that time again ? I feel like yawning, I've written this post before, more than once, in this very thread.
Every few months or so, we get a bright-eyed eager new DP9 initiate that comes in here to prove himself by lecturing us old bags about how we complain too much, the past is the past, and if we really wanted to improve things, we'd lend a hand to make the game better and all, etc, blablablabla...

Been there. Done that.
Read the 39 pages for a more detailed accounts of all the things we tried and experienced. Nothing worked. No amounts of efforts and selfless dedication made any difference past the cosmetic. Why ? DP9™.

Walk away Hudson.

What else are you here for other than being a pain?

The new initiates try to do something that you've given up on. Heck, you hardly even post anything helpful in the forums at all anymore at DP9, you just lurk.

Second Edit: Put Hudson on Ignore. I'm through trying to talk things out with him. Sorry guys.

What can I say ? Some people just can't handle the truth...

Look, everyone knows that, when you put your hand on a red stove, and it hurts, you have to touch the stove again! It does not matter that it's still glowing red, or that there's no reason to think it had time to cool down.
You keep putting your hand on it until it does not hurt!

Incidentally, I may get to visit a third degree burn and a psychiatric ward soon.

mrondeau wrote:


Incidentally, I may get to visit a third degree burn and a psychiatric ward soon.

Also known as your friendly local MILICIA requirement centre.

BrandonKF-



I've actually been a forum member at DP9 since Jul 2010. I've played Heavy Gear in some form or another since the mid 90's and rolled with Heavy Gear and the company since then. Heck, I'm still listed as a member of the Pod Squad!

As far as the playtest goes, here is what I posted in the DP9 Forums in December, 2013:

Ok, here is an issue I'm seeing right now:

People are discussing game balance with the units. More TV, less TV, what about this weapon, what about that weapon, this Gear should have X rule or Y ability…. these are all end game balance issues and are very easy to fix AFTER the actual rules have been ironed out.

I understand we need stats on models to play test, but the last thing we should be testing right now is unit balance. We need to be focusing on how the rules work or don't work. It doesn't matter that a Grizzly has too much movement or can shoot clear across the table. Big deal! That issue can be ironed out later. What matters is how EW interacts with cover and locks. Or are the modifiers to hit a moving target in cover too much, or too little?

The new rules are a significant change over the old system and really, really need to be play tested to the maximum extent possible. Once the rules are established, it becomes very, very easy to create units capturing the flavor/vision of each unique faction in the game. But this can only happen after the rules are solid.

Really, it would be a much better play test if we were given very generic Gears with no obvious affiliation with any of the armies on Terra Nova (or beyond). We would be less concerned with how "our" army is going to play in the new rules, and be more focused on how the rules actually play out.

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=15785&page=1

I was taken to task for making this post by more than one of the employees of DP9 at the time and by some of the "Old Hats/Neckbeards". I was astonished that I was told to STFU, and that I didn't know what I was talking about. Right then and there, I knew this edition of Heavy Gear was going to be a failure. That marked the end of my active participation in the DP9 Forums and play test. When the play testers won't accept criticism or feedback, then why bother?

I applaud your enthusiasm for Heavy Gear and the game, and wish you the best! For me, I'll still buy the occasional model, and if I can find a game, I'll play. My enthusiasm for the game has waned considerably after being taken to task one too many times from die-hard neckbeard veterans that are so entrenched with DP9, that they can't see the forest for the trees and by staff that have become "Yes Men" to Robert D. in the extreme. It would not surprise me if DP9 announced they were building Dreamland Amusement Park and inviting the little children over to play and drink some Jesus Juice.

The fact is however that the sub-lists are not meant to be balanced with the base faction list, they are meant to augment that list in a characterful and flavorful way.

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=16411&page=3#entry286745

Oh boy... looks like we'll have a repeat of the talons in RTCE's original release. They sure were flavorful and characterful without a hint of balance! I guess Paxton keeping their starting extra d6 on defense for absolutely no cost and nucoal's sublist that gets extra MP for no added cost are here to stay! In the meantime, other factions get the ability to have you, the player, spend more money.

Tamwulf, I have send numerous emails and PMs to DP9, about proper testing procedures.
I tried using hand-wavy descriptions of the problems and simple improvements. It did not work.
I tried using more technical descriptions and proposed more reliable, and systematic, procedures. It did not work.
I tried to point out that the previous use of their procedure failed. It did not work.
There's a reason I'm using a repetitive sentence structure: I'm trying to give you a taste of trying to get then to improve!

I tried, more than once, to get them to actually test. They don't want to.

I think that they believe, despite having no experience with game design, or design in general, they are experts. After all, they have played games for decades.
That make them automatically experts! That's why I'm an expert in video game programming, 3d modelling, acting, singing, space exploration and rocket science.
I have been using the end product for decade, so I'm an expert!

... Wait, no, that's ridiculous.
I'm not an expert on any of those things, nor am I an expert on game design. Ironically, I could probably become an expert in video game programming relatively rapidly, because I spent a lot of time learning maths and programming, when I was not playing video games.
It's also that experience that makes me look at DP9 testing procedure and recoil in horror. It's the kind of procedure I would use to deflect responsibility for the bugs, or to pretend that my proposal improves performance; it's definitively not the kind of procedure I would use to find and fix bugs, or to prove that my proposal improves performance.

BrandonKF wrote:Walk away Hudson.

What else are you here for other than being a pain?

The new initiates try to do something that you've given up on. Heck, you hardly even post anything helpful in the forums at all anymore at DP9, you just lurk.

Second Edit: Put Hudson on Ignore. I'm through trying to talk things out with him. Sorry guys.

HudsonD wrote:What can I say ? Some people just can't handle the truth...

mrondeau wrote:Look, everyone knows that, when you put your hand on a red stove, and it hurts, you have to touch the stove again! It does not matter that it's still glowing red, or that there's no reason to think it had time to cool down.
You keep putting your hand on it until it does not hurt!

Hudson, Yeah, I shouldn't have come to this Negatively themed thread, "[Heavy Gear] Why did you stop or never start playing it?" , to try to see if there is anybody here that might want to save this. Fine. You don't like it. Let it burn, but please go stand across the street while the rest of us try to save the structure.

Yeah, I started playing in 2012, when L&L was on. No, I didn't immediately start going on to forums looking for drama. I just wanted to play, and I only really wanted my friends and I to play. I only started hitting the forums because I had rules questions.

Now, now I'm stuck in the middle of the debate, at least over on DP9s forum. I've pissed some people off, Cerberus_02 being a key one. Now I've gotten some of y'all all up in arms, though I think you were to begin with. Should have learned be inconspicuous, the enemy may be low on ammo. I get your arguments and complaints. But I don't give up, I'll be bailing on the Titanic. It's just the way I was raised, the way I wast trained, it's in my DNA. Ask my wife, my old Platoon Sergeants, and my Boss now. Stubborn should be on tattooed on my shoulders, to serve as warning for the rest of you. But I'm not some jack*** who just digs his heels in arbitrarily.

I'm not taking Robert Dubois side. Yeah, I've had a couple email conversations with him, and he was completely, "Just wait, it gets better. We have big things in store. Will we see you at GenCon this year? You can email me any time with a question, I love talking to fans. " Seemed like a nice guy, but appearances can be deceiving. And I've had emails be completely ignored from both Dave and Robert. Cool, whatever. I'm sorry that you think those of us who went, hey, this is a fixer up / rescue dog. Maybe with enough love and discipline we can save this poor creature. Yeah, I'm seeing the cracks in the plaster. I see the mange. I just won't give up hope.

At this point, you seem to want it to fail. Let it fall then, but it isn't your job to help push it over. I guess my side of it is, if the company is going to fail because there primary product fails, and they are in dire enough straights that it drags them down, has anybody given thought to at that point swooping in and trying to save the Universe? If and when the business fails, then we could get together and approach the owner of the IP and offer to buy it. Where would the controlling interest go? Arkrite Studios who are making the RPG? Stompy Bot / Mektek who are developing the next generation of PC games? Where does that leave the IP as far as tabletop gaming?

Look, I'll come with ideas all day long. Like I said, I'd still be bailing on the Titanic. I'm a fighter, and I don't go down easy, or back out.

That's an interesting point. If the Pod fails, who retains the IP/IP rights to Heavy Gear?

mrondeau wrote:
I think that they believe, despite having no experience with game design, or design in general, they are experts. After all, they have played games for decades.
That make them automatically experts! That's why I'm an expert in video game programming, 3d modelling, acting, singing, space exploration and rocket science.
I have been using the end product for decade, so I'm an expert!

... Wait, no, that's ridiculous.
I'm not an expert on any of those things, nor am I an expert on game design. Ironically, I could probably become an expert in video game programming relatively rapidly, because I spend a lot of time learning maths and programming, when I was not playing video games.
It's also that experience that make me look at DP9 testing procedure and recoil in horror. It's the kind of procedure I would use to deflect responsibility for the bugs, or to pretend that my proposal improve performance; it's definitively not the kind of procedure I would use to find and fix bugs, or to prove that my proposal improve performance.

You bring up really good points. I'm not "read in" as the CIA likes to say, into the whole situation. I got jumped up and down on when I had an original thought the other day, and what I believe to be Rob D and companies cheerleaders kept telling me that trying to get new, casual gamers by presenting the rules in a logical and progressive manner is idiocy, because this is a HARDCORE game for HARDCORE GAMERS and that is the market the company needs to appeal to. I had a few people that thought I was trying to get them to dumb the rules down, when infact, I just wanted to make them progressive. Start with simple army construction, move to target lock, movement and shooting direct fire. Then bring in IDF, FO, Guided trait and target designation in the next chapter. Then add.. etc. You read 3 chapters, you can play a basic game of heavy gear. Myself and others fleshed the concept out in another forum thread, but I'm starting to get a sense that I should have done this here, or on another forum entirely, because it'll probably get picked to death by the Company, and not get introduced as a cohesive whole that will work. But instead will have, "this concept, and this concept and *flip flip flip* this concept. Throw the rest away" Oh well. Maybe Robert and Dave aren't reading my thread, so I shouldn't worry too much.

Firebreak wrote:That's an interesting point. If the Pod fails, who retains the IP/IP rights to Heavy Gear?

I'll volunteer for that. Anybody else want to join me, maybe help get a business loan? Any body an expert on international Copyright Law? I know it's a Canadian company. But there seems to be a strong interest in a distributed Network that seems centered on the US. or maybe we just have the biggest mouths.

Being eager, and being useful. Two different things.

 HudsonD wrote:
Being eager, and being useful. Two different things.

Thanks Hudson, for that great nugget of... something.

Input, that's not right...

Snark? No, it wasn't really all that clever, just a little.

Ah, Interference, that's it. You were hindering the idea I was bringing to the table. You were being the exact opposite of useful. You were being a hindrance, a road block, what Marine officers like to refer to as "Friction".

Thanks for that. I'll treasure it always, like the scars I've earned. As a lesson to be remembered.

You might have gotten a more positive reception if you had not started by dismissing your interlocutors and their experience, while trying to silence them.

Warphound wrote:
Hudson, Yeah, I shouldn't have come to this Negatively themed thread, "[Heavy Gear] Why did you stop or never start playing it?" , to try to see if there is anybody here that might want to save this. Fine. You don't like it. Let it burn, but please go stand across the street while the rest of us try to save the structure.

So... let me get this straight... you've come to post to a "negative" thread to... tell people to piss off and stop talking? Hm. That's... something. Not sure what.

I thought this thread was intended to be constructive for newcomers.

Warphound summed up my feelings pretty well in most respects. I am not, repeat, not telling anyone to STFU. But I have reiterated often that those who worked with Dream Pod 9 in the past have had serious headaches. I get that, but as Warphound said, if you feel so burnt, why not just let it be?

Tamwulf, sorry you got such a reception at the forums. I have always strived to make the online community welcome... particularly since it is a very public face to all the Internet comers and goers.

My enthusiasm is sometimes stepped on.

Right now though it appears that there are hard questions to ask about the Beta, which I will poll in the Development forum.

I know we are not going to get what we all want, but I do want to help show we aren'the a bunch of neckbeards. *checks neck* Nope, still clean shaven mostly.

My basis for much of my defense of the game has been the story. Heavy Gear has a lot to offer new players who want to get in on a mecha genre game that has more crunch than Gundam, Macross, or in some cases Mechwarrior/Battletech.

Is it in need of updating? Yes. My military background often leads me to use inference and writing what I know about present day combat to help new players get the feel for the story.

I don't want the game to burn down, flush down or self-destruct. I want it to grow.

As far as who retains the IP rights, my understanding is that the Pod still is the original holder, Firebreak.

Warboss, I am thinking that that question about army creation and sub-lists will help grow the game. Lots of guys have pointed out that the sub-lists need improving, so I will see about asking other poll questions for play testers and newcomers to sound off.

As far as systematic, mrondeau, I don't have the mathematics background that you do. If you can confer with Ice raptor about his maths, perhaps you could give everyone a better math-based understanding of the probabilities?

Edit: To answer my own question at the beginning, I think most of those who have posted here do want to see the same success for Heavy Gear as I do.

BrandonKF wrote:

As far as who retains the IP rights, my understanding is that the Pod still is the original holder, Firebreak.

Wouldn't it be a horrifying world in which tabletop games had the same clauses as movies - don't make one for X number of years, lose the rights! The atrocities we would see would make GW and the Pod's worst mistakes seem like walks in the park!


(I have no idea who they would hypothetically lose the rights to, in that case )

BrandonKF wrote:
Walk away Hudson. Heck, you hardly even post anything helpful in the forums at all anymore at DP9, you just lurk. [..] I'm through trying to talk things out with him.

Warphound wrote:
Fine. You don't like it. Let it burn, but please go stand across the street while the rest of us try to save the structure.

BrandonKF wrote:
I am not, repeat, not telling anyone to STFU. But I have reiterated often that those who worked with Dream Pod 9 in the past have had serious headaches. I get that, but as Warphound said, if you feel so burnt, why not just let it be?

To be frank, this isn't one of el presidente's dictatorial fiefdoms where he or his disciples can mod or ban at will without objectivity (some mods are exceptions to this obviously) - folks here are free to say most anything they want at any time.
No one is forcing their views on anyone else, or not to the extent that keeps happening over on the Pod forums as ever fewer folks bother to post anything, at least for those that haven't already been modded until they leave if not banned outright.

Everyone is also perfectly free as well to use or not use what gets posted, or just /ignore one another at will.

As I think mrondeau said before, part of the intent here is not just to talk things HG, but also to keep alive discussing what the Pod has done wrong, and why, so that knowledge exists for folks to find, whether they be an existing fan or a potential/new player.
And given how people tend to never read beyond the last few pages, if that, I think keeping going exactly why this thread got started in the first place actually is kind of important.

People should always be able to get multiple viewpoints on something before deciding to spend their own $$$, rather than simply see an almost endless series of nigh-perfect reviews or supportive posts that may not reflect reality.

 warboss wrote:

The fact is however that the sub-lists are not meant to be balanced with the base faction list, they are meant to augment that list in a characterful and flavorful way.

Oh boy... looks like we'll have a repeat of the talons in RTCE's original release. They sure were flavorful and characterful without a hint of balance! I guess Paxton keeping their starting extra d6 on defense for absolutely no cost and nucoal's sublist that gets extra MP for no added cost are here to stay! In the meantime, other factions get the ability to have you, the player, spend more money.

Going back to allowing a "generic" faction kind of boggles me, considering that starting with NuCoal in 2011 it became impossible to not pick a sub-faction during force creation.

I don't have L&L on the PC right now, so I don't remember for sure if folks had to pick a sub-faction back then too, or if they could just play a primary faction and simply not use a set of League-specific swaps or rules.

Warphound wrote:
[..] when the business fails, then we could get together and approach the owner of the IP and offer to buy it. Where would the controlling interest go? Arkrite Studios who are making the RPG? Stompy Bot / Mektek who are developing the next generation of PC games? Where does that leave the IP as far as tabletop gaming?

 Firebreak wrote:
That's an interesting point. If the Pod fails, who retains the IP/IP rights to Heavy Gear?

The Generalissimo may hold the license(s) personally after the previous DP9 folks left en masse.
I'm pretty sure he mentioned something like that while talking about what lawyers the Pod had on retainer during a Skype meeting about updating the VASSAL module, although what might be used to actually pay them could be an interesting topic point.

I also recollect somewhat, as I don't have the email or Skype message anymore, that at least one person told me they looked into getting the rights to [JC] but Robert asked for such a ridiculous sum that the attempt went nowhere.

But I suppose it's only to be expected when the guy has no qualms about trying to get interest in a KS going prior to announcing part of the funds would go to staff costs, all without mentioning he would be one of those folks himself because he can't keep employees or freelancers.

_
_

It is my belief that a company that knowingly sells a flawed product isn't ethical, and should be warned against, for recommending people toward such a business is just as unethical, if not more so.
I understand that not everyone shares that belief, and that's ok, I'm not easily intimidated.

As for DP9, first they lost the original files for 2nd Ed, and couldn't be arsed to salvage them. Funny how they boast about "listening to the fans", yet the most commonly asked product is thoroughly ignored by the Pod. Hmmmm.
Then, as if that wasn't enough, they've actually lost the master for some minis !

Making new silicon molds of the masters is only possible if you still have the master which is not the case here

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=16369&p=286817

At that point, there isn't going to be anything left to salvage when they go belly up...

Things happen.. masters get dropped or damaged when removed from the mould. If the model isn't popular, I can see why they wouldn't want to redo do it for the limited sales it generates. I'm more curious as to exactly which models he is referring to (just the Recon Hunter or others as well?). The last time I bought multiples of an older sculpt from an online store, I pretty much got very old models that had been sitting around for years. The art was from the old L&L days and the pewter used was much duller than the last 5 years of new sculpt offerings. If folks want the older models that they've can't sculpt any more, there is a good chance of still getting them through 3rd parties.

In any case, as long as existing players still get to use their models then I think the most important base is covered. If there is suddenly a demand for a particular model, they can recommission the sculpt again to meet it.

Ok, warboss, I know you got whole armies invalidated. Twice. I can sympathize. That sucks.
That being said, I think you are so focused on that that you are reaching for the other extreme.
What you are currently pushing for (i.e. being able to play anything) would have adverse effects too.
Game balance would become non-existent.
Faction identity would be destroyed.
New players would be lost in an amorphous cloud of models and choices.
Even worse, fixing it later by re-adding restrictions would hurt even more.
It would perpetuate the problem and make it harder to fix later.

At this point, what's needed is a well defined vision for the factions, with a well defined doctrine and toolbox for each faction, sub-list and combat group.
Each model need to have a well defined task, and to be only allowed where needed.
Then, when all that's done, it need to be refined and refined again.
Then, and that's the important part, it needs to be used for ever.

The restrictions are the symptoms; the illness is lack of vision and consistency.
Your prescription is to forget about vision and consistency altogether; mine is to actually have vision and consistency.

Retro-compatibility is important, but it has costs too.
Sometimes, it's better to break it.
That's usually when you are trying to be retro-compatible with many diverging standards.
It's better to fix the real problem.
A faction's doctrine and identity can be created to try and minimize the disruption to existing players.
That's better than losing game balance and severely increasing confusion for new players.

I would really like it if dakka implemented LaTeX-like formatting. It would be so much easier to write easy to read walls of text. I miss footnotes and well formatted paragraphs. Also, equations.

mrondeau wrote:

The restrictions are the symptoms; the illness is lack of vision and consistency.
Your prescription is to forget about vision and consistency altogether; mine is to actually have vision and consistency.

Retro-compatibility is important, but it has costs too.
Sometimes, it's better to break it.

Your prescription is an 1800's magic cure all tonic as it'll never happen in the current and perennial climate at dp9 whereas mine is a bandage for the gaping wound that is HG. You make some good points that I agree with but, again, they'll never happen. At best, DP9 will pick and choose the best parts in terms of their own short term profits (retrocompatibility is bad... especially if we broke the masters!) and forget the rest ("it needs to be used forever"). I'm just more grounded in my approach and admittedly am looking out for myself as well because DP9 has proven time and time again that they don't give a damn.

If they don't care, you might as well just stop playing. After all, even if they give you what you want now, they will just take it away later.
You'll just get to play an even more unbalanced game for a little bit longer.
It will be harder to recruit, because of the lack of balance, and because it'll also be even harder for new players to start.

Ultimately, after years of short time thinking and easy solutions that did not solve anything, only a magic cure all tonic can help HG.
I don't believe in magic. I just like to pretend I do.

mrondeau wrote:
Ultimately, after years of short time thinking and easy solutions that did not solve anything, only a magic cure all tonic can help HG.

On that I think we can agree. What remains to be seen is whether the kickstarter will turn out to be some magic beans that will grow into a gigantic stalk or just something that fits in one hand and gives everyone bad gas.

A more likely scenario.

Also, soak beans for a day, in cold water, rinse them until the water is clear and boil them well, and gas should not be a problem.

They've pretty much painted themselves into a corner. Due to stupid patch fixes and short term thinking, along with other imbalanced variants being added, they really have to invalidate some models and combat groups.

Example: Those all MBZK squads.

And I agree with mrondeau, they really needed to ensure that models and weapons have well defined roles. Blitz was terrible at this, because generally the higher damage, more accurate weapon was better versus everything, and superior in every way.

5 Ways to Ensure Mediocrity in Your Organization

Companies that operate in fear mode will never deliver great products and services to the marketplace. Their efforts will be hamstrung by their talent-repelling management practices.

( Note that 'companies' could just as easily be replaced by '[x] organization,' or even 'governments.' )


"Our reason is the director of our actions and also the spirit of our plan.... We must analyze its motive and discover where it has failed us; thus we shall turn errors to our advantage by compelling them to teach us."

"Why do we so persistently fail to do so? Not only because we lack imagination, but because we suppress the little that we have. If we wish to think clearly, we must cease imitating; if we wish to cease imitating, we must make use of our imagination." - J.F.C. Fuller

_
_