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 don't have any 15mm infantry or 10mm either. From just eyeballing it on various google image searches over the years (I've looked into it too), it's a difference of 1mm in either direction (the HG infantry are inbetween). The old HG infantry in metal weren't very bulky like the newer style CAD ones but I've never seen them side by side to see if the new ones are taller. I guess you'd have to specify if you have the old or new HG ones.

I haven't got any HG infantry yet, but I'm thinking about getting some of the newer ones, probably GREL since they seem to be cheapest. I do have a few 15mm figures though and my concern would be that the HG figures would be too small to be effectively compatible.

These figures are the ones I'm most concerned about with compatibility. They run on the smaller side of 15mm.

I don't think they've redone the GREL yet in the new CAD style so that's likely why they're the cheapest. They're the much thinnner a bit more truescale than guys in bomb suit armor new guys.

I think the robots would do fine in a 15mm game.

I don't know how the infantry would look if you mixed them.

I'll snag some pics this weekend.

Awesome! That would be a great help.

I made a couple of DP9's papercraft buildings last night and they seemed almost perfectly scaled to my various brands of 15mm figures. So, that gives me hope for cross compatibility.

Remember where I'd said I was working on "KOG light" as an ultralight version of Heavy Gear?

Alpha version 1 is done as of this evening!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/668519.page

Yes, I boiled down the rules to 3 pages, with less than 2-and-a-half pages for the initial army lists. Some bits are a little rough, but this is the first release.

Conceptually, KL owes a lot to AoS, in terms of having and following extremely tight page limits to drive clarity. Unlike AoS, I kept the points values and a few universal special rules. KL gives a good idea of what I meant when I said that HG could use a radical AoS-like streamlining.

Anyhow, I'd be very thankful if anyone would please check it out and let me know what they think. It's only a few pages, so how hard could it be?

I'll take a look ASAP

So, pic time! I took pics of some different scales infantry units to compare with each other and with a northern Jaguar Gear (which is a bit bigger than a regular Hunter, but smaller than the support ones):

First, complete lineup:



From left to right, we have: 6mm Space Marines, 10mm DZC infantry, 12mm old HG infantry, 12mm new HG infantry and 15mm FoW infantry.



In this one it might be easier to notice the differences

Now, comparison of each unit with a northern Jaguar:







Would this work for you?

To be honest I think the 15mm minis look pretty good alongside the Gears and you can still see a 15mm pilot fitting in the chest of the Gear. Infantry at that scale might look a little odd alongside ground vehicles from the HG range though such as the Badger.

Thanks for the pics! I think all but the epic SM would look fine in HG as long as you're consistent and use the same scale without mixing and matching.

The DZC stuff looks close enough to the old HG infantry at tabletop length but I'd hesitate to use them with the new. The 15mm ones look ok next to the new HG infantry but I wouldn't use them with the old ones. I guess it depends on which ones you're trying to match them with from the official line.

I think all of the sizes from 6mm up to 15mm work for the Gear, although I do find the 15mm to be a bit large for how I "know" a Gear / AT is supposed to work.

On the tabletop, I doubt anybody would notice the scale issue, unless they knew the Gear as supposed to be 12mm scale, and had seen pictures of the Gear with 12mm infantry.
____

re: KOG light, I will probably split that off into a different topic for the next (Beta) version. If there are conceptual gaps in the Alpha, please PM me directly - at this point, the rules development can go a bit quicker.
____

Done! KL has its own topic, to separate from HG:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/668519.page

Those pics were really helpful. Thanks for posting them.

FRP seems to be putting a lot of the recent boxed sets on sale right now, and they just put up a bunch of infantry sets as well. Most of the prices are... okay. Not as good as some of the clearance prices I've gotten in the past, but they're passable.

Has anyone picked up one of those boxed sets? They mention that they have Beta rules with them. Those any good?

I can't comment about the rules but I will comment about FRP. They overcharge for shipping by ALOT compared to other stores. I remember when they had a 50% off HG sale and I picked up 3 blisters and the shipping came to almost as much as the actual cost. I complained and IIRC they took $1 or $2 off the price. For what they shipped me, I personally could have paid half using a flat rate priority box for faster shipping compared with the lower business rates they get for shipping slower that they were charging more for.

That must've been some time ago, because FRP has flat rate shipping. Miniature Market used to charge a lot for shipping as well, but they're also flat rate now.

I'm glad that they changed since because it was pretty bad both times I ordered from them (for their clearance HG deals). With the 50-70% off they were offering, it was still the best deal even with their infated shipping but it certainly dropped those discounts down alot. My last order from them (and HG minis purchase overall) was about 2 years ago btw.

I want to throw an idea into this, and it's not an attractive one.

Is Heavy Gear fundamentally a failure, a "toxic IP", if you will?

Dream Pod 9, StompyBot, and Arkrite are all trying to put out products using the IP. All of them are late, have missed dates, or outright failed and had to start over, in some cases. While there is a little bit of overlap of people involved, it's mostly separate groups. So that says to me that it's not incompetence, because everyone that touches this experiences problems.

Is it all just a series of unfortunate coincidences weighing down small companies? It legitimately could be.

But what if the IP itself is to blame?

Is there something about Heavy Gear that just makes it hard to work with? Is it too dated? Too anime? Too weighed-down with 20 years of what came before?

 Firebreak wrote:
Is there something about Heavy Gear that just makes it hard to work with?

I think you consider the common denominator: the Pod.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Firebreak wrote:
Is there something about Heavy Gear that just makes it hard to work with?

I think you consider the common denominator: the Pod.

Or us!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Firebreak wrote:
I want to throw an idea into this, and it's not an attractive one.

Is Heavy Gear fundamentally a failure, a "toxic IP", if you will?

Dream Pod 9, StompyBot, and Arkrite are all trying to put out products using the IP. All of them are late, have missed dates, or outright failed and had to start over, in some cases. While there is a little bit of overlap of people involved, it's mostly separate groups. So that says to me that it's not incompetence, because everyone that touches this experiences problems.

Is it all just a series of unfortunate coincidences weighing down small companies? It legitimately could be.

But what if the IP itself is to blame?

Is there something about Heavy Gear that just makes it hard to work with? Is it too dated? Too anime? Too weighed-down with 20 years of what came before?

I think it's too early to make a call on the tabletop game. I've been a vocal critic of many things but, for better or worse, the alpha'beta'soup edition had (at least for a while) reinvigorated community involvement with the tabletop game. I can't comment with any certainty on the months since I stopped checking in on the forums regularly or reading the latest updates to the rules and never was a facebooker so can't comment on Brandon's group's current level of activity. My gut feeling is that the testing phase of the rules has gone on a bit too long but I guess we'll see this gencon when we'll likely have the rules in print if not the plastic minis. The KS has stalled somewhat with updates of chibi gear drawings and desktop backgrounds instead of sprue renders and production updates but it's still within the acceptable range IMO. If 6 months past the due date the moulds haven't been made and sprues aren't being punched for the likely big premiere at gencon, I'd say start looking through the barn for the pitchforks and gathering kindling (but don't go poking anyone/thing or lighting a fire just yet until 1 year post delivery date has passed). YMMV but I'm fine with a few months delay (up to 6 months) as part of the wiggle room in trying out something new like this. We're not at the Robotech Palladium level failure by any means but with multimonth delays already present we, as backers, need to be vigilant to guard or at least forewarn against reaching those levels of incompetence.

As for the RPG, I really don't follow those except for mainly checking out the webpage once a month or so (which I did prior to posting this). Apparently, as posted over in the dp9 forums, the rpg website is not only lacking in any real updates for many months but also simply not working...

http://arkritepress.com/heavy-gear-universe/

You're obviously aware of that, Fire, as you've posted there but it came as a surprise to me. The last time I checked it was just an outdate zombie page with "more info soon!" ringing hollow after many months. Maybe they bit off more than they can chew or maybe real life and primary work caught up with them but at a bare minimum they should at least post honestly and openly about the lack of apparent progress and the reasons for it... or at a minimum keep the webpage working. I don't know if there is some secret backer insider page or facebook thing that has taken the place of the website but it definitely doesn't bode well.

As for the video game, I think this thread and the response of the whitest knight of all (IIRC he was the one who came here to post then badmouthed us as a hive of scum and villainy or somesuch over there) say it best:

http://forums.heavygear.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1117/bots-a-i

Werewolf486
November 17

When you enter the server the bots have found spots to get stuck in and you have to go find them. That or the server has crashed and the timer is stuck at which point you won't find anything.

So you basically have to play against the devs one night a week as your only chance of multiplayer because otherwise you're playing with yourself (and not in that way you perverts!). For single player/horde mode, you have to hope you can find the server (apparently a big issue), hope that it is actually up, and hope that the AI isn't stuck running into a wall. That esports experience sounds so much better than if they had instead made an XCOM style android/IOS/PC boardgame style game instead as a first step! And it'll only cost you upwards of a $100 to NOT be able to play most days! YAY!

I don't think the issues are actually with DP9 on this one but rather firmly with the licensees. I'd say the licenses might be DOA given how they're (not) progressing but I don't think it's fair to count out the tabletop game just yet as I think it's way still too early. By this summer though I think we'll at least start to see whether or not this is the case. Although as I said with Robotech, you can't fully judge a new tabletop edition or game until around a year has passed IMO post release.

 warboss wrote:
snip

That's a fair assessment. The tabletop is lagging but not exactly disastrously behind. The chibi garbage is uninspiring but I suppose at least they're communicating at all, and there are renders and minis here and there. But DP9, of course, has its own Sword of Damocles hanging over its head that makes a delay from them, however short, raise bigger questions than usual companies would.

I just wonder if maybe this game is too unworkable for people to make something of. You're right though. Summer and then T+1 year will tell the most.

Here's hoping for the best.

Since the IP is not attractive anymore, it`s cheaper, and probably better, to design an equivalent from scratch than to try and get a licensing deal with DP9.
Because of that, licenses only get sold to the fanatics, the desperate and those who do not have a good business plan, but that's not the main problem.
The main problem is that, ultimately, all the decisions, including who gets a license, come from the same places, and competence and realism are not valued in that place.

It's all interwoven as well in a way but really only in the case of success IMO. If the video game fails, they're largely catering to fans of the old video games seemingly so if they fail it shouldn't affect the tabletop game's profits much. If the tabletop game fails, it won't affect the videogame much either as the small tabletop community likely already knows about the video game and no real further cross over will take place. If either one was a success though, I'd expect a bigger cross over effect (especially video game to table top). Likely the same is true with the RPG as well although there WAS a tighter bond between the old RPG and tabletop games because they used to be in the same book. I'm not sure that same level of interdependence though still exists after 10 years of blitz and 0 years of RPG.

Yeah, the TLDR at least for me is follow 6/12 month ruleTM. Start worrying at 6 months and start gathering the mob at 12 months (both for KS delays and for seeing if a new product is DOA).

 warboss wrote:

Yeah, the TLDR at least for me is follow 6/12 month ruleTM. Start worrying at 6 months and start gathering the mob at 12 months (both for KS delays and for seeing if a new product is DOA).

Why do I feel like, if that happens, we'll still be getting an earload of "be positive!!!11!"

mrondeau wrote:
Since the IP is not attractive anymore, it`s cheaper, and probably better, to design an equivalent from scratch than to try and get a licensing deal with DP9.

Heh, that's precisely what I'm doing with KOG light. With any luck, I'll be "done" by year's end.

 Firebreak wrote:

 warboss wrote:

Yeah, the TLDR at least for me is follow 6/12 month ruleTM. Start worrying at 6 months and start gathering the mob at 12 months (both for KS delays and for seeing if a new product is DOA).

Why do I feel like, if that happens, we'll still be getting an earload of "be positive!!!11!"

Haters gonna hate while white knights gonna gleam. It's the way of the internet... and the majority of the fanbase will just make their decisions on their own (which for Blitz traditionally was closer with the "haters") and either pick up the game or ignore it (or pick it up and THEN ignore it after trying it) without a peep. I wish them well and hope they turn the ship around. I still have several thousand points each of both poles and around 1500pts of the middle (nucoal) painted up and ready to go.

 Firebreak wrote:
[..]But what if the IP itself is to blame?
Is there something about Heavy Gear that just makes it hard to work with? Is it too dated? Too anime? Too weighed-down with 20 years of what came before?

Looking at things that way, it might just be that HG itself is too much a derivative of Gear Krieg, only with a very mild overlay of anime sci-fi while retaining a heavy handed WW2-vibe rather than attempting to create something entirely new and representative of future combined arms warfare/technology.
I think the fluff/background being so tied to merely rewriting VOTOMS or other similar ''easter egg'' sources is probably a contributing factor as well; what really is there to differentiate HG from a (relatively) better known title such as say Gundam, Maschinen Krieger, or etcetera.

In sum, as an IP it's trying to operate as if there actually is a horde of fans out there instead of the reality of being based on material directed in the first place at only a niche, and a rather small niche at that, of the stompy robot fandom.
The low overall turnout (as compared to other properties) in both $$$ and backers of the respective PC and miniature Kickstarters should have amply demonstrated that fact.


But yeah, the word instead from on high is always ''Be positive.'', ''Be patient.'', and ''Spread the word for us.'' because I guess if only just a few more folks would become fans things would really take off to make it all worthwhile.

_
_

Stupid question, but, didn't HG come out before GK?

1. AT VOTOMS as inspiration
2. HG first
3. GK later

No?

GK Wargame [2000] was published a few years after HG 1e (95), but as best I recall from snippets here and there posted by the original old-timers of Pod-land the titles were conceived/developed at pretty much the same time.
Being based in Canada I wouldn't think helped matters any with regards to availability and exposure back when either, on top of the needless typos, retread of source material, and layout/printing goofs.


[Albertorius got Pod history right and more complete in his post.]
I've always had this impression though that given the similarities GK is the game the early Pod folks wanted to make, with HG as just an offshoot idea that unexpectedly gained a bit of popularity.

 Albertorius wrote:
But that Pod ceased to exist a lot of years ago, so...

And yeah, there is that too.... a company shouldn't just throw away building on all that work and then ever expect to gain back their following because they chose to exclusively explore non-gaming areas that didn't work out so well, let alone count on new exposure as a given.


Ice had some interesting posts about the Pod not recognizing/adapting to the realities of the market they wanted to expand more into with HGB! back on pages in the late ~30s (and page 17) I think.

_
_

As far as I know, GK was developed after HG made a somewhat big splash in the mecha arena of the 90s (to the point that Battletech released the protomechs as a reaction to it), even if some work was made beforehand.

The first book published by DP9 as a company was indeed HG 1st edition, but before that they were called Ianus Publishing, and made a lot of stuff since 1992. They did a lot of alternate reality CP2020 stuff (the Night's Edge series), the ship books for Macross II, the Jovian Chronicles setting for Mekton (plus Europa Incident), and in 1995 their very first game, Project A-Ko, that was also the first book that used Silhouette.

Gear Krieg was released in 2001, six years after HG 1st edition, 4 years after JC Silhouette's 1st edition and 3 years after Tribe 8 first edition.

But that Pod ceased to exist a lot of years ago, so...

FWIW, I played in Dp9 run playtest games for what became Gear Krieg in the late 1990sat gencon. At the time, they obviously didn't have the GK specific minis but rather used iirc Rafm HG minis with plastic kit WW2 helmets on top of the gear heads. . It was kind of cute to see Jagers running around with Russian helmets and Hunters with German helmets.