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.

Just a quick request for the old timers out there that might still be reading this thread... does anyone have the old fleet scale gear counter models that you can post a scale pic of? I did some google searching and found very little beyond the pic attached below. I was hoping to see if I could use them as Dropzone Commander Wolverine counts-as models. If someone could post a pic of the HG fleet gears next to either HG infantry or DZC infantry (or even better the DZC UCM wolverines), I'd appreciate it.







The infantry above looks like it might instead be 3mm but that is the best scale pic I can find. I also realize that PHR has walkers in the game that I could use instead but the overall aesthetic of UCM appeals much more to me.

 warboss wrote:
Just a quick request for the old timers out there that might still be reading this thread... does anyone have the old fleet scale gear counter models that you can post a scale pic of? I did some google searching and found very little beyond the pic attached below. I was hoping to see if I could use them as Dropzone Commander Wolverine counts-as models. If someone could post a pic of the HG fleet gears next to either HG infantry or DZC infantry (or even better the DZC UCM wolverines), I'd appreciate it.

I don't play UCM, so I can't give you the exact comparison, but I'll try to get a picture of some fleet-scale gears and tanks next to PHR scouts and belt-fed artilleries tonight.
I don't think they would work as Wolverines.

mrondeau wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Just a quick request for the old timers out there that might still be reading this thread... does anyone have the old fleet scale gear counter models that you can post a scale pic of? I did some google searching and found very little beyond the pic attached below. I was hoping to see if I could use them as Dropzone Commander Wolverine counts-as models. If someone could post a pic of the HG fleet gears next to either HG infantry or DZC infantry (or even better the DZC UCM wolverines), I'd appreciate it.

I don't play UCM, so I can't give you the exact comparison, but I'll try to get a picture of some fleet-scale gears and tanks next to PHR scouts and belt-fed artilleries tonight.
I don't think they would work as Wolverines.

Thanks! It's much appreciated. I realize they're a bit taller and not as long but I was hoping to use two gears on a base for one wolverine. I'm also not sure how the old gear counters are packages in the blisters. I found an old ebay auction that said there are "5 pieces" but I wasn't sure if that meant 4 gears and one stone head or 5 bases of two gears and one stonehead each. I edited the post above with a couple more pics I found while you replied as well. I saw that PHR has scout walkers that came out since I last looked at the line that would probably be a more accurate size if not to the gears then the fleet scale striders. I don't need them to be the exact same size (although I fully admit to being pretty clueless as to how a size change would affect the models in DZC whether better or worse) but I would prefer that the DZC infantry actually look like they could fit into the chest of the gears.

 warboss wrote:
Just a quick request for the old timers out there that might still be reading this thread... does anyone have the old fleet scale gear counter models that you can post a scale pic of? I did some google searching and found very little beyond the pic attached below. I was hoping to see if I could use them as Dropzone Commander Wolverine counts-as models. If someone could post a pic of the HG fleet gears next to either HG infantry or DZC infantry (or even better the DZC UCM wolverines), I'd appreciate it.

Thanks! Do you happen to recall how many of the counters (two gears and a stonehead on a base?) were in each blister?

 warboss wrote:
Thanks! Do you happen to recall how many of the counters (two gears and a stonehead on a base?) were in each blister?

I think it was 10 gears and 5 bases, but that was years ago. The Fleet scale minis were available before the fleet scale rules.

Rules whose publication should have been a major warning sign, in retrospect, but I'm getting on-topic.

mrondeau wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Thanks! Do you happen to recall how many of the counters (two gears and a stonehead on a base?) were in each blister?

I think it was 10 gears and 5 bases, but that was years ago. The Fleet scale minis were available before the fleet scale rules.

Rules whose publication should have been a major warning sign, in retrospect, but I'm getting on-topic.

HG 2nd edition so soon after the inaugural 1st edition release with so very few changes charged at full price should have been a major warning sign as well. In any case, I suspect this is now the general all purpose HG (complaint) thread. Any utility from the poll in the first post has long past as I started it to provide constructive criticism in a neutral setting for DP9 to or ignore at their leisure. I might end up changing the title of the first post to reflect that. The KS specific discussion has the KS thread whereas this one might be better suited to the defunct games in the line and general questions/complaints/ideas.

The 10 gears and 5 bases jives with the most common sense interpretation of the old ebay auction I found. Thanks again for the pics. It looks like they'd be a better sub for PHR scout walkers size-wise (as a pair) but they also seem about halfway in height between the wolverine and the janus. It seems like two hunters on a base at least from above are a decent approximation. I'm not sure how the height factors into LOS in DZC but my first instinct is to mount all the models in DZC on bases anyways to protect the paint jobs on the bottom surface of the models from wear. I'm still not sure what I'll do though as I like the idea though of having a four man squad of gears dropping out of a raven dropship as scouts. The weapons are an OK substitution given that the wolverines have an autocannon OR rockets (whereas the gears have both). It's a bit theoretical though given I don't currently have a DZC opponent or an army.

I have some UCM stuff at home (the stuff from the starter), but until the weekend I won't be able to take some pics.

 Albertorius wrote:
I have some UCM stuff at home (the stuff from the starter), but until the weekend I won't be able to take some pics.

Thanks in advance. I'm still a bit worried about the height (not sure how much height matters in DZC though) so a pic of the HG fleet gears next to the tanks should be a big help as well.

 warboss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
I have some UCM stuff at home (the stuff from the starter), but until the weekend I won't be able to take some pics.

Thanks in advance. I'm still a bit worried about the height (not sure how much height matters in DZC though) so a pic of the HG fleet gears next to the tanks should be a big help as well.

I think I have all the HG stuff back there, so I can even make some comparisons with those, too (was thinking about using Gears as proxies for PHR walkers. I even have a Red Bull for the big scorpion thingie).

I don't have and haven't seen a Red Bull in person beyond the display case at gencon years ago and have ever seen the big PHR scorpion walker but they definitely could work as a swap as can the NG heavy walker (thunderhammer?) whose name escapes me at the moment. Mrondeau's size pic above has the smallest (and apparently newest) PHR walker and the other ones are about double the width and 30-50% taller than those.

Yeah, I kind of have the same problem, I'll have to try it sometime.

As for your pics, would this work for you? (taken with the kinda crappy phone camera):






Unrelated to this... oh Robert, don't ever change

 Albertorius wrote:

Unrelated to this... oh Robert, don't ever change

Do I want to know ?

Thanks for the pics! They make me alot more comfortable combined with Mrondeau's pics on the height of the models. If anything, those pics make me think that the infantry are way too big for the scale of the vehicles instead!

 Albertorius wrote:

Unrelated to this... oh Robert, don't ever change

BwahahahahahAHAHAHAHAHAH.
...
Héhéhéhéhé.

mrondeau wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

Unrelated to this... oh Robert, don't ever change

Do I want to know ?

I kind of want to but I'm in the dark currently... On an unrelated note, the HG KS update went out but there was no mention of them continuing the funding period nor officially ending it either. Previously, Dave kept saying that the post KS campaign would be open during January and February which officially ended yesterday.

mrondeau wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

Unrelated to this... oh Robert, don't ever change

Do I want to know ?

Nah, it's just usual shenanigans. Nothing out of the ordinary, really ^^

Albertorius, do you have any of the previous size apcs from HG? You dont need to post a pic but do you think they make a good sub for the dzc ones? I'm guessing the current ones are too large by far but I'm not sure about the old previous sculpts like the HG northern apc. I also considered using the fleet scale landship on a flight base as a dzc drone carrier.

Woop, wrong thread, nevermind me, you saw nothing.

 warboss wrote:
Albertorius, do you have any of the previous size apcs from HG? You dont need to post a pic but do you think they make a good sub for the dzc ones? I'm guessing the current ones are too large by far but I'm not sure about the old previous sculpts like the HG northern apc. I also considered using the fleet scale landship on a flight base as a dzc drone carrier.

I have an old Badger and an old Caiman, and I'd say they will probably be too big for DZC. I was kinda surprised on how tiny DZC vehicles were, TBH, although I only have physically seen the UCM and Scourge starter stuff so far.

You might be able to use a Badger as a replacement for the command UCM APC, I think, but it still will probably be a bit too high. OTOH I think the Caiman might be a good sub for the PHR APC (Again, it might be a bit tall).

Thanks, I may skip the apc idea then. In any case, the starter comes with plastic APCs so it is less of an issue (although the bear command apc has an additional trailer). All this recent talk of HG got me thinking about the HGA style hunter model that was supposed to come out. I took a peek on their website and didn't see any news on that 3d print front since last summer when they announced it. While I really do like the new HGA hunter (and if released in HGB scale I'd buy/use it as a Hunter XMG), I saw the gears below whose designs I'm really, really, really not a fan of.

https://www.heavygear.com/store




They look like odd mad-max pointy pike plate armor robots with the "heavy gear" label slapped on to justify the license. YMMV but I had hoped my interest in the hunter would be more indicative of the future designs and not the Jaeger released at the same time that I didn't like. It seems like the latter was more indicative.

They look how I'd expect them to look, honestly. Like deviantart speedpaints. We can at least be thankful the over-saturated blue/orange combo that was all the rage in sci-fi art a few years ago didn't make its way into this, I guess.

 warboss wrote:

Spoiler:

They look like odd mad-max pointy pike plate armor robots with the "heavy gear" label slapped on to justify the license. YMMV but I had hoped my interest in the hunter would be more indicative of the future designs and not the Jaeger released at the same time that I didn't like. It seems like the latter was more indicative.

Wow. Those are... indescribably fugly. And there isn't a chance I would've been able to identify them if they hadn't been labelled.

Just finished reading this marathon thread; it has been enlightening, but not entirely surprising. I came to the conclusion many years ago that the company I knew as DP9 in the 90s is long gone, with all the serious talent (who injected the stuff I love into HG, JC, and Tribe 8) having moved on. I tried sticking with Blitz!, but even early on it was clear there were problems. A couple iterations of that meant that Arena was the last straw for me.

Looking over the new beta rules I can see how they're trying to change the system to address a lot of the problems Blitz! had, but...ehhh. I think the new system is just not for me. I've gone back to Tactical recently, and realised I'd forgotten how smooth it is in comparison, even on the tabletop (i.e. Skirmish scale). It's also remarkably easy to teach someone how to play, unlike Blitz! One of the only holes, I'm finding, is the lack of army lists in Tac for pick-up-and-play games. I started looking at the barebones stuff in SilCore Miniatures as a starting point, and tried to solicit feedback on the DP9 Forums, but the Older Miniatures Rules forum is pretty dead over there. I'd be interested in any house-ruled lists anyone has come up with for Tac or SilCore over the years, or any feedback anyone can give on the structure of the SilCore Miniatures' lists.

On another note, I've decided to expand my Heavy Gear miniatures collection again after selling off a lot of my older stuff; I still sometimes cry myself to sleep at night over selling all my 1/87 minis! I looked at the Kickstarter, but DP9's track record made me deeply uncomfortable with supporting them on that platform (to be clear, I've supported a number of other Kickstarters; it's about the Pod). Seeing some of the decisions they made (e.g. backing off a stretch goal when an unusually small percentage of pledges failed to fund, immediately turning around and starting a secondary campaign) has also made me glad I didn't back. I hope it works out for everyone who pledged, but the whole thing left me with a bad feeling, especially after there've been almost no releases for a while, and they apparently needed a Kickstarter to even fund printing a book. It smells to me like an attempt to keep the doors open with backers' money, as opposed to a project to get tooling made. I hope I'm wrong. Even if the tooling moves forward, though, they're going to have a hard time of things between what they promised, how much they raised, and the relative fall in the Canadian dollar. And I say this as someone with many, many years of experience in the plastic injection tooling industry. But, hope springs eternal, I guess...

Anyway, if anyone has Heavy Gear miniatures they're looking to part with, please feel free to PM me.

bobloblah wrote:
And I say this as someone with many, many years of experience in the plastic injection tooling industry.

... Color me interested.

bobloblah wrote:

 warboss wrote:
[SNIP!]

They look like odd mad-max pointy pike plate armor robots with the "heavy gear" label slapped on to justify the license. YMMV but I had hoped my interest in the hunter would be more indicative of the future designs and not the Jaeger released at the same time that I didn't like. It seems like the latter was more indicative.

Wow. Those are... indescribably fugly.

Looking over the new beta rules I can see how they're trying to change the system to address a lot of the problems Blitz! had, but...ehhh. I think the new system is just not for me.

I looked at the Kickstarter, but DP9's track record made me deeply uncomfortable with supporting them on that platform (to be clear, I've supported a number of other Kickstarters; it's about the Pod). Seeing some of the decisions they made (e.g. backing off a stretch goal when an unusually small percentage of pledges failed to fund, immediately turning around and starting a secondary campaign) has also made me glad I didn't back.

I hope it works out for everyone who pledged, but the whole thing left me with a bad feeling, especially after there've been almost no releases for a while, and they apparently needed a Kickstarter to even fund printing a book. It smells to me like an attempt to keep the doors open with backers' money, as opposed to a project to get tooling made. I hope I'm wrong. Even if the tooling moves forward, though, they're going to have a hard time of things between what they promised, how much they raised, and the relative fall in the Canadian dollar. And I say this as someone with many, many years of experience in the plastic injection tooling industry. But, hope springs eternal, I guess...

Agree. The "new" minis are terrible - is that what the Pod will deliver, vs the "classic" sculpts presented in the KS? A bait and switch? Not that anybody here would be surprised by the Pod promising one thing and delivering something completely different, a day late and a dollar short.

I put in a Canadian buck, and they keep thinking I'm going to pay more without seeing any actual progress? Nope, not gonna happen until I see photographic proof that the Pod will actually deliver. Right now they're all talk, no game.

Given that they will have to pay for tooling in strong USD using their weak CAD, this should be amusing. I wonder if the Pod will renege on the $170k unlock. After all, they reneged on the KS unlock, so it's not like they don't have precedent for promising one thing and then changing their mind to not deliver what they said they would. The lack of trustworthiness is the biggest issue for me. The Pod actually has farther to go to get my money post-KS, than they did at the time I threw the first buck in the jar.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Agree. The "new" minis are terrible - is that what the Pod will deliver, vs the "classic" sculpts presented in the KS? A bait and switch? Not that anybody here would be surprised by the Pod promising one thing and delivering something completely different, a day late and a dollar short.

The pics are from the PC videogame and not the tabletop game.

OK, thanks for clarifying.

bobloblah wrote:
I'd be interested in any house-ruled lists anyone has come up with for Tac or SilCore over the years, or any feedback anyone can give on the structure of the SilCore Miniatures' lists.

Welcome to the thread (and dakka)!

I've got some house rules on my blog (sig link below) for blitz but not for silcore or tact. It streamlines the blitz rules even more so I'm not sure if that is the route you're interested in going given that you're coming from the even more granular tactical setting. In any case, the table of contents are on the right side of the blog.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 HudsonD wrote:

bobloblah wrote:
And I say this as someone with many, many years of experience in the plastic injection tooling industry.

... Color me interested.

Achimovobots coming to kickstarter in 2015? Also, Half Life 3 confirmed!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
OK, thanks for clarifying.

No worries. They're still ugly as sin though but they're not coming to a tabletop anytime soon.

HudsonD wrote:

bobloblah wrote:
And I say this as someone with many, many years of experience in the plastic injection tooling industry.

... Color me interested.

It's nothing too exciting, but I did spend quite a few years manufacturing, then designing, then doing project management. The Pod is promising a lot of product for the money they have apparently collected; keep in mind that they don't actually get all that money, as others get a cut (Visa, Kickstarter, Revenue Canada, and ultimately Canada Post, that last one a "gotcha" that has humbled many a Kickstarter). One of the things I'm watching for at this point is whether they start selling anything from the early tools before delivering everything to backers.

You know, I wouldn't think as much of it if the company itself was stable, but with few recent releases, a stated need to Kickstart printing a black and white book, the disappearance of all but a couple regular employees/contractors... it just makes me think that the piggy bank is empty, and if that's the case money is going to be very tight. They'd better hope the Canadian dollar stabilizes.

warboss wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Agree. The "new" minis are terrible - is that what the Pod will deliver, vs the "classic" sculpts presented in the KS? A bait and switch? Not that anybody here would be surprised by the Pod promising one thing and delivering something completely different, a day late and a dollar short.

The pics are from the PC videogame and not the tabletop game.

Yes, I was aware of that, although the 3D renders for the Kickstarter were just another kind of ugly. And if they're going to digitally reproduce those renders in the tooling, that means the finished minis would be just as unattractive. Yet another reason I balked at backing.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warboss wrote:


Welcome to the thread (and dakka)!

Thanks!

 warboss wrote:
I've got some house rules on my blog (sig link below) for blitz but not for silcore or tact. It streamlines the blitz rules even more so I'm not sure if that is the route you're interested in going given that you're coming from the even more granular tactical setting. In any case, the table of contents are on the right side of the blog.

Cool. You might be right about my leanings, but I'll still definitely check them out.

bobloblah wrote:I did spend quite a few years manufacturing, then designing, then doing project management. The Pod is promising a lot of product for the money they have apparently collected; keep in mind that they don't actually get all that money, as others get a cut (Visa, Kickstarter, Revenue Canada, and ultimately Canada Post, that last one a "gotcha" that has humbled many a Kickstarter). One of the things I'm watching for at this point is whether they start selling anything from the early tools before delivering everything to backers.

You know, I wouldn't think as much of it if the company itself was stable, but with few recent releases, a stated need to Kickstart printing a black and white book, the disappearance of all but a couple regular employees/contractors... it just makes me think that the piggy bank is empty, and if that's the case money is going to be very tight. They'd better hope the Canadian dollar stabilizes.

the 3D renders for the Kickstarter were just another kind of ugly. And if they're going to digitally reproduce those renders in the tooling, that means the finished minis would be just as unattractive.

The Pod has raised $170k CAD, plus what they believed to be a separate amount for S&H / Canada Post (+$ 15 CAD US/CAN). From the way the Pod talks, I think this is after Visa takes their 3%, so the Pod may have $165k CAD for product, plus another $ 35k CAD on the side for S&H. By most metrics, $200k total should have at least $40k set aside for shipping, maybe $50k if located in a country with expensive post rates. $150k CAD is not a lot of money to tool 20+ distinct minis - that's an average of $7,500 CAD (less than $5,900 USD) per tool, especially if they are keeping the undercuts as rendered.

Money is going to be very tight for the Pod, so they need to move quickly and hope that the CAD strengthens. If they have to pay USD with even weaker CAD, they are in big trouble.

The renders were pretty true to the original designs, but they will not be easy to do in styrene. I am very curious how the Pod is going to resolve having undercuts everywhere.