Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'd have preferred an xcom turn based style mech combat game or barring that a third person mech shooter like gears of war. The former, especially if a mobile title, would have been a hell of alot cheaper and easier to make and would have proven that Stompy could successfully get a full product out. The latter could have been a titanfall total conversion with gears instead of titans and grels instead of pilots.

Eithrr of those appeal to me more than an esports AAA FPS. Ymmv.

 Vertrucio wrote:
They can, and it's not an either/or decision.

However, look back through all of this thread and try to tell me that this discussion is really accomplishing anything besides stirring up more pointless generic rage.

The game's devs aren't listening, that's assuming they should even listen. The remaining player base isn't listening, and again that's assuming the points here are worth listening to. It's just a roundabout death spiral of anger and hatred, like two people arguing by plugging their ears and running around each other in a circle. So the game isn't going to change course, that leaves only the disgruntled players to change course.

I dunno about that. We've seen the pod modify significatively miniature renders presented as final in the last months due to comments over here and elsewhere, so it seems that they at least listen to some of the comments.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warboss wrote:
I'd have preferred an xcom turn based style mech combat game or barring that a third person mech shooter like gears of war. The former, especially if a mobile title, would have been a hell of alot cheaper and easier to make and would have proven that Stompy could successfully get a full product out. The latter could have been a titanfall total conversion with gears instead of titans and grels instead of pilots.

Eithrr of those appeal to me more than an esports AAA FPS. Ymmv.

I'd love to see Harebrained Schemes' take on a HG game, TBH. I'm having lots of fun with their Shadowrun games.

 Vertrucio wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 HudsonD wrote:
AoS ? Modern ? Yeah, nope, if you are to copy something, at least copy something good.

Compared to Blitz? or pre-Blitz HG? AoS is modern by comparison. And the AoS engine is good. It's very clean.

You AoS haters need to separate the engine from the implementation. If you just focus on the 2 pages of how to play AoS, it's great for skirmish games.

LOL

You AoS lovers need to separate the company line from the game. If you just focus on the game itself, you'll realize that top to bottom it's a poor quality cash grab made for people who can't see it.

When you're saying "cash grab", I have to assume you're talking about the Heavy Gear KS, for which the Pod received a huge (for them) cash infusion to produce what are clearly inferior models under an abyssmally bad rules system.

GW got ZERO out of me to play my Dogs of War under AOS, but at least I'm playing.

I'll take exception to the bad rules system. I actually have playtested it several times since it began.

It is fun. Granted, I keep mixing up the Infinity reactive fire and clumping my Gears together for fire support to put down my Jägers, but it plays well enough. And like most companies the rules will remain free from here on out. So just the models need to be purchased.

As for the clearly inferior models, I'll be happy to provide you with comparison shots when I receive my shipment. Starter kit plastic next to the metals.

"I have an opinion"
"Your opinion is wrong and let me show you why"

We're back to this?

 doc1234 wrote:
"I have an opinion"
"Your opinion is wrong and let me show you why"
We're back to this?

There has definitely been a (thankfully) small number of folks posting views as if what they say isn't far more extreme in actuality than what they're commenting against, while downplaying or outright ignoring most any inconvenient truth that gets said no matter how small the point.
But oddly enough even they themselves manage to point out on occasion how that is happenstance on any internet venue.

Those individuals obviously don't want to interact with most of those here, clearly don't want much any of those here talking elsewhere, and have even stated in various ways at different times as to why they don't want to comment, yet are themselves still commenting all the while.
The gist of the matter seems to be, as per usual with such folks, that the beliefs of another are only permissible if it matches the beliefs they themselves hold.

When all is said and done, there cannot be any compromise with those who demand and fully expect you to agree with them one hundred percent on every matter.
And when one expectation is how everyone else is supposed to absolutely and unquestionably support a game, setting, or company despite any number of personal reservations but not talk about it otherwise if not walk away entirely..... yeah, not seeing a middle ground in there.


I think Ice probably said it best though in the KS thread when it comes to those folks;

 IceRaptor wrote:

 warboss wrote:
I guess we'll have to take your word on this really positive feedback that differs so much from both dakka and the official dp9 forums. Are you on the facebook group?

Dude... don't feed the troll.

But I'm reasonably sure I'm not saying anything here that you don't already know for yourself, judging by your previous postings.
Sometimes you do just want to talk Heavy Gear [or insert other game/setting name here], and you can only do that where 'like-minded' people are willing to talk to you.

_
_

BrandonKF wrote:
In spite of Dave coming around and answering questions, in spite of updates being given, in spite of repeated attempts at proving that the company was changing directions.

Words are not actions. I can tell you all day long that I'm going to drop 50lbs - but after 30+ years of being overweight, you'd be wise to bet against me rather than with me. Once the company delivers on some promises, claiming the company has changed becomes valid. Until that point, it's just spin. They appear to be working in the right direction (though it's gotten dark recently), but until they do it, their track record is the only thing we have to judge them on.

BrandonKF wrote:
I'm tired of it. Many of those who are fans are tired of it. Which is why this place has become a long-winded tunnel of empty shouting, and is labeled as being filled with hate.

That's one perspective. Another is that dismissing your opponent as 'full of hate' is a propaganda technique (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonizing_the_enemy) to avoid having to deal with the facts of an argument. Vilify 'this place' as much as you want, wash your hands of it and consider us outcasts as scum - but don't then come back and try to 'manage the news' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managing_the_news) and expect us to be grateful for it.

Like most stories, DP9s' has more than one side. And it changes over time. But some of us will wait to see what they achieve, instead of assuming it will be great. That skepticism hardly seems worth a 'scum and villainy' label, but hey - knock yourself out. Most of us will suffer worse labels in life, I would assume.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vertrucio wrote:
However, look back through all of this thread and try to tell me that this discussion is really accomplishing anything besides stirring up more pointless generic rage.

You've been on the internet before, right? 90% of it is either porn, or 'pointless generic rage'. That's sorta the internet's thing.

 IceRaptor wrote:

Like most stories, DP9s' has more than one side.

 IceRaptor wrote:

You've been on the internet before, right? 90% of it is either porn, or 'pointless generic rage'. That's sorta the internet's thing.

I would argue that the first makes this thread something other than 'pointless generic rage'. It allows potential new customers to see the problems with DP9 before they spend money.
So it's purposeful generic rage!

 IceRaptor wrote:
and consider us outcasts as scum

Things went pretty great for the scum, anyway.

If/when the Pod creates a version of HG that actually plays smoothly *and* looks good, I'll consider them changed.

What are your play-test experiences with the lastest HGB?

 Vertrucio wrote:
However, look back through all of this thread and try to tell me that this discussion is really accomplishing anything besides stirring up more pointless generic rage.

The game's devs aren't listening, that's assuming they should even listen.

The bolded parts are yet to be determined in all fairness and the former is completely dependent on the latter.

like two people arguing by plugging their ears and running around each other in a circle.

Sounds like original blitz at anything outside of point blank range so ironically that makes it pertinent and poignant.

Just an FYI, I'm also selling a metal painted 3,000+ pt (in blitz points) Southern Heavy Gear army to sell as a complete lot.. It's not in my swap shop thread yet but if anyone is more interested in the old sculpts, send me a pm and I'll send you the link to my blog here and the gallery with the pics. I'll still have two other smaller armies to (not) play so no worries about me; I'll still have things to gripe about when the new rules come out! I've also got a UEDF part of a Robotech Starter (including the rulebook) plus four more destroids (all NOS) for sale soon if anyone is interested in that as well.

 warboss wrote:
I'd have preferred an xcom turn based style mech combat game or barring that a third person mech shooter like gears of war. The former, especially if a mobile title, would have been a hell of alot cheaper and easier to make and would have proven that Stompy could successfully get a full product out. The latter could have been a titanfall total conversion with gears instead of titans and grels instead of pilots.

Eithrr of those appeal to me more than an esports AAA FPS. Ymmv.

Those are the games I would've liked to see, maybe there's hope with Xcom2, they've said they want to support more modding. Though it remains to be seen if it will actually have decent mod support.

EDIT:
And I've seen the alpha gameplay vids of Heavy Gear Assault. The game looks terrible still, I'd maybe try it if it was free to play, but I'm definitely not going to give them any money to try to change my mind, when what I see doesn't look good.

ferrous wrote:
[..] And I've seen the alpha gameplay vids of Heavy Gear Assault. The game looks terrible still, I'd maybe try it if it was free to play, but I'm definitely not going to give them any money to try to change my mind, when what I see doesn't look good.

For myself, if a title offers something I'm interested in, most of the time I haven't found around $10USD all that big of a deal really to try a game on Steam, or off Amazon, etc etc etc, even if I later end up not liking or barely playing it.
When it comes down to it, less than a twenty is pretty much just skipping some snacks or a meal out, or some other non-essential want.


But while it seems you can purchase individual Gear model 'blueprints' on the storefront for $9 to $16USD, the two Gear package of $40USD (Hunter + Jäger) is the smallest 'game pack' that allows you access to actually play.
Which interestingly enough has been a clarification question asked a time or two on almost every venue StompyBot has going, whether that be G+, Facebook, or their own forum - despite clearly being marked as 'required for play' on the storefront.

That indicates to me there might be more interest if HG:A could be trialed for just the $$$ of a single model, even if only for a limited time (perhaps a couple months) with minimal access (or no weekends maybe) like many other buy-ins/trials nowadays.

_
_

 Albertorius wrote:

I'd love to see Harebrained Schemes' take on a HG game, TBH. I'm having lots of fun with their Shadowrun games.

You're sort of in luck, HBS's next project is a new top down turn based battletech game, like mech commander was. www.battletechgame.com

Henshini wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

I'd love to see Harebrained Schemes' take on a HG game, TBH. I'm having lots of fun with their Shadowrun games.

You're sort of in luck, HBS's next project is a new top down turn based battletech game, like mech commander was. www.battletechgame.com

Oh I know, believe me. I've already earmarked the money for that KS .

Nicosa Renault has temporarily resurfaced after another long term undercover op and returned with another top secret dossier on Heavy Gear. She only did a dead drop of the info this time so no analysis on her part. The below are my admitedly layman's thoughts and would welcome reasoned discussions not entirely rooted in emotion (both pro and against) on the merits of what they just posted.

http://www.investorx.ca/Doc/RJK00J08T9/2015/09/02/stompy-bot-corporation/mda-english

http://www.investorx.ca/search/00036950/stompy-bot-corporation

Key portions quoted below:

Heavy Gear Assault
–
The Company has transitioned Heavy Gear Assault to Early Access, allowing consumers to purchase and access the product without having to sign a Non Dis
closure Agreement. Players can now share their experiences, screenshots and videos to their friends and
the public. This major milestone was accompanied by the launch of the Gear Bay Module and one
of Heavy Gear Assault’s most significant patches to date. With the Gear Bay Module, players can
customize nearly every aspect of their Gears and experience their vehicle’s new performance in
game. Additional updates include more weapons and Gears, a whole new user interface,
improved environments, a new movementmode, performance optimizations, and much more.


Armored Cock

Sabotage

Locke & Key

So they're working on three other games in addition to HGA.

Net revenue Six months ended June 30, 2015 $36,924

Operating expenses $1,069,320

For the three and six months ended June 30, 2015, the Company recorded a loss of $326,005 and $1,032,396
respectively compared to income of $50,062 and $53,526 respectively for the same period in the prior year.
The increase in the current period loss of $376,067 and $1,085,922 respectively was attributable mainly to an increase in
operating expenses related to the continued development of the games and expenses related to the Transaction

So it looks like they sold significantly less than 1,000 memberships to the closed HGA alpha during that time (as the minimum buy in was at least $40 iirc) and were a million in the hole within the same period. Hopefully the open early access will change that. That doesn't seem like alot for a "AAA" esports arena FPS but it was admittedly in an NDA saddled alpha.

And from the other file:

http://www.investorx.ca/Doc/T2DQ1J08T9/2015/09/02/stompy-bot-corporation/interim-financial-statementsreport-english

The Company's ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon its ability to attain
profitable operations and generate funds therefrom, and to continue to obtain equity investment
and borrowings sufficient to meet current and future obligations.
The Company has a net loss for the three months period ended June 30
, 2015 of $326,005 (three months period ended June 30,
2014, net profit of $50,062) and a net loss from the six months period ended
June 30 2015 of $1,032,396 (six months period ended June 30, 2014, net profit of $53,526)
.
As the Company continues to develop its core offerings, it will require additional financing to meet
its working capital requirements. These conditions, cast significant doubt about the Company’s ability to
continue as a going concern.

That sounds alot like the analysis Nicosa gave the last time that was retorted here subsequently but seems to now be in agreement. Hrmm... Also sorry about the text format above but the pdfs were very unfriendly to cut and pasting the text.

That... doesn't sound good, let's be honest about it. They seem to have lost almost $1.4M last fiscal year, which probably mean their expenses have shot up (which, incidentally, is absolutely logical taking into account how much it costs to make a game nowadays of the kind they're shooting for).

To correct that, they seem to have taken a two pronged approach: Early Access for HGA (to make it pull its way, seems like) and start making shovelware titles (...which is not a bad idea, but I guess any resources poured there won't go to HGA).

So yeah, let's see, but it seem that this year is going to be the one that makes or breaks them.

Any game company that doesn't have a publisher is pretty much operating at a loss until their game comes out. So it's not all that worrying if they have the cash to stay afloat until it's finished, and if and when it's finished they need enough marketing muscle/money to make a decent splash. And it helps if the game is good too.

I think Stompy has enough cash on hand after being bought, however I'm not all that confident that Stompy knows how to market things, or that the game will be any good.

And they'll have to compete with actually F2P mech games like Hawken and MWO, as well as non-F2P mech games like Titanfall, and who knows when it's sequel will hit. (And honestly, the tank games (WoT, WarT, Armored Warfare) scratch the mech game itch for me better than any of the current crop of mech games. Heck, even WoWs is more fun for me than MWO.

ferrous wrote:
Any game company that doesn't have a publisher is pretty much operating at a loss until their game comes out. (...)

... Except that Stompy is officially a publisher.

Morgan Vening: 5 of 932, roughly 0.5%
Mmmpi: 7 of 932, roughly 0.8%
Maceria: 6 of 932, roughly 0.6%

I need to step up my contributions, not even 1%?




Also, for the record: I LIKE the new Heavy gear rules. I thought the last edition was unplayable complex (which is why I didn't play it). I don't think that they're ready for publishing, though the vast majority of that is (In my opinion) mostly clean up things, and tightening some of the quirkier rule holes. Dave seems to be fairly responsive on the forums, and several things I've mentioned having trouble with have ended up in the errata sections.

For the Hater haters, I spend my time here for two reasons. One, to remind me to keep my optimism in check. No need to give ANYONE a free reign with my investment. Before I contributed to the KS, I read ALL 36 pages. And It was helpful.

Reason two, is A few of you are cool, and most of the rest are tolerable. though there are a few curmudgeons.


Finally, I hope DP9 doesn't follow the GW rules model. I still play 40K, and that's the issue for me. I still play 40K. Why would I switch to a new system to keep playing 40K, when I can just keep playing 40K? And AoS is an abortion of a game. "Hey, you have 40 goblins, I have 40 dragons." "I don't out number you so you'll have to kill me to a man to win." Doesn't make a good game. and yeah, that's someone being a tool, but you get the same effect if someone drops 30 chosen chaos warriors against the same 40 goblins. When to people talk to each other, the game CAN be passably fun, but I'm not investing anything into the fantasy line until GW remembers that I play(ed) fantasy because it's an ARMY game, not a skirmish game. There are plenty of other skirmish games that are far cheaper to get into, with far better rules. Games like Malifaux, or even Heavy Gear.

But in the end that's just my opinion. (and .02$). I like the way the game is going, and hope you tired old men are pleasantly surprised when the finished product comes out. (And just as fervently hope the Podsters don't prove you right.)

 Mmmpi wrote:
I like the way the game is going, and hope you tired old men are pleasantly surprised when the finished product comes out. (And just as fervently hope the Podsters don't prove you right.)

That would indeed be the best result for all involved... and I wouldn't be a grumpy old man if I didn't point out that it would also be unprecedented for over 10 years and several editions.

 warboss wrote:


That would indeed be the best result for all involved... and I wouldn't be a grumpy old man if I didn't point out that it would also be unprecedented for over 10 years and several editions.

Well that went without saying. At least after following this conversation for 65 pages.


Well, I'm going to keep listening in Crazy Drunken Gamer Uncles.

I'm just happy that there's someone else being positive about HGB in this thread. Well, there's Brandon, but I'm not sure if he's still posting.

I'm waiting until you guys start posting pic of minis around November plus 5 weeks and counting to be positive.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Also, for the record: I LIKE the new Heavy gear rules. I thought the last edition was unplayable complex (which is why I didn't play it). I don't think that they're ready for publishing, though the vast majority of that is (In my opinion) mostly clean up things, and tightening some of the quirkier rule holes.

That's great to hear. I'm glad the new rules are working for you!

 Mmmpi wrote:

I like the way the game is going, and hope you tired old men are pleasantly surprised when the finished product comes out.

In the end I think it will end up being better than Blitz was from a playability perspective, which is a good thing. But I also think it's still going to have too much 'old thinking' about specific things, which makes me a bit sad. So it's a mixed bag for me - but then again, I'm not quite the target audience, either. So my opinion matter little.

I just hope they put out some new gear designs... I'm always hungry for those!

 IceRaptor wrote:

I just hope they put out some new gear designs... I'm always hungry for those!

If you haven't already, check out the HGA website. Careful what you wish for....

 IceRaptor wrote:

In the end I think it will end up being better than Blitz was from a playability perspective, which is a good thing. But I also think it's still going to have too much 'old thinking' about specific things, which makes me a bit sad. So it's a mixed bag for me - but then again, I'm not quite the target audience, either. So my opinion matter little.

Says the guy who created the rules they based the new rules on..

ferrous wrote:

Says the guy who created the rules they based the new rules on..

Why do you think the core is good ?