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.

Well, it's not exactly as if this was the first time the videogame has been alluded to or discussed in this very thread. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 Albertorius wrote:
Well, it's not exactly as if this was the first time the videogame has been alluded to or discussed in this very thread. Quite the contrary, in fact.

The issue isn't that a Heavy Gear video game being discussed in a Heavy Gear thread, it was the non-sequitur nature of it and lack of explanation.

Edit: We are veering wildly off topic. There really isn't anymore to say about it.

Agreed. In other news, the Pod has just posted pics of the final test sprues for the CEF.

They look better quality than the last batch of photos, but the pic's quite small, and they are the CEF models, so I may not be proved correct in the long run.

http://www.dp9.com/content/kickstarter-update-final-cef-plastic-sprues-preview

Gaaaaaaaaaaasp Assault has yet another roadbump. Maybe there's only so much karmic goodwill out there for Heavy Gear and only one property can have it at one time.

Quick question - in the current beta rules, how widely available are the under-barrel attachments? Are they limited to the LAC / MAC / HAC weapons or available for rifles too? Perhaps the attachments increase a weapons size, thus limiting which gears can use them?

I ask because I just saw a picture of the Leopard and I really like the look of the MAC with under-barrel frag cannon. I'd love to model my other gears with them, but in the event that I ever play HG again, I'd prefer to avoid having 'illegal' weapon setups.

Is there actual support for "under barrel" weapons in the current rules as opposed to just a second weapon? In blitz it was just another weapon (maybe occasionally with limitied ammo) and no different than if you had one of each in each hand.

 warboss wrote:
Is there actual support for "under barrel" weapons in the current rules as opposed to just a second weapon? In blitz it was just another weapon (maybe occasionally with limitied ammo) and no different than if you had one of each in each hand.

Not in any version of HGB, no. They're just additional weapons. Back in older editions, the Size of your Arms Perk limited the Max Size of the weapons you could carry.

 Albertorius wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Is there actual support for "under barrel" weapons in the current rules as opposed to just a second weapon? In blitz it was just another weapon (maybe occasionally with limitied ammo) and no different than if you had one of each in each hand.

Not in any version of HGB, no. They're just additional weapons. Back in older editions, the Size of your Arms Perk limited the Max Size of the weapons you could carry.

Ah, ok. And I think I was mispoke about the LA trait above as it should be a lack of the reloadable trait instead for the underbarrel weapons.

On an unrelated note, in this day and age of impending plastic HG, is there a use/market for the old Rafm scale minis? Someone locally is selling some and I'm considering buying them for nostalgia only apparently as I have had no practical use for more gears or even my current gears for years. God help me but I'm considering getting some of those old lead bricks.

I suppose if you get enough of both sides, you could use the old RPG rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

Or paint 'em up appropriately and use them as walkers in a "superscience WW2" game. The Northern and Southern designs would work well as British and German vehicles, respectively (or perhaps German and American).

He could use the original Blitz rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

 warboss wrote:
On an unrelated note, in this day and age of impending plastic HG, is there a use/market for the old Rafm scale minis? Someone locally is selling some and I'm considering buying them for nostalgia only apparently as I have had no practical use for more gears or even my current gears for years. God help me but I'm considering getting some of those old lead bricks.

Heh. I have some. In case you're interested to know, those are more or less the same size as Tau Battle Suits, so count-as would certainly be doable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
He could use the original Blitz rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

Honestly speaking, in most cases if you want a detailed skirmish game with few minis (say, 5 per side) you're probably better off with 2nd edition Tactical and cherry picking the Blitz rules that are actual improvements over those.

AndrewGPaul wrote:I suppose if you get enough of both sides, you could use the old RPG rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

Or paint 'em up appropriately and use them as walkers in a "superscience WW2" game. The Northern and Southern designs would work well as British and German vehicles, respectively (or perhaps German and American).

Ironically, I did play in a few demo playtest games of exactly that at Gencon that later became Gear Krieg. They iirc used Rafm HG minis with little toy model WW2 soldier helmets over the heads along with 15mm traditional minis like t-34's and tigers.

JohnHwangDD wrote:He could use the original Blitz rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

I'm not sure I could anymore. I'd probably get bored with the complexity.

Albertorius wrote:
Heh. I have some. In case you're interested to know, those are more or less the same size as Tau Battle Suits, so count-as would certainly be doable.

Yup, I've seen Aegis' famous (at least in our little circle) pic of the kodiak next to a crisis suit. The scale is a bit of a novelty factor as is the idea of seeing the old proportions and the little bit of asymmetry in those old sculpts (the rocket pods and their decidedly not even spaced divots being a good example). It might be a moot point as the seller seems to have stopped responding which frankly is probably better for my wallet. I've still got a couple of northern gears NIB that I eventually hope to build and another dozen that I admit I probably wont ever unless a magical HG gaming group sprouts in my area.

 Albertorius wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
He could use the original Blitz rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

Honestly speaking, in most cases if you want a detailed skirmish game with few minis (say, 5 per side) you're probably better off with 2nd edition Tactical and cherry picking the Blitz rules that are actual improvements over those.

Sure. Just noting that 1st Blitz isn't nearly as streamlined as one would expect of a similar game for 2016.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
He could use the original Blitz rules for a more detailed skirmish game.

Honestly speaking, in most cases if you want a detailed skirmish game with few minis (say, 5 per side) you're probably better off with 2nd edition Tactical and cherry picking the Blitz rules that are actual improvements over those.

Sure. Just noting that 1st Blitz isn't nearly as streamlined as one would expect of a similar game for 2016.

Oh, agreed. Hindsight 20/20 and all that ^_^.

The Pod has updated the KS with pics of the last batch of CEF test pops assembled.

They look decent enough to me, particularly as gaming pieces, and some of the detail looks very crisp.

Two notes on assembly, though:
1) A lot of the "cuts" made to separate the pieces from the sprue look positively enormous. That's not ideal.
2) You guys should probably do some cleaning and mold line removal before sending them to paint, you know

 Albertorius wrote:
The Pod has updated the KS with pics of the last batch of CEF test pops assembled.

They look decent enough to me, particularly as gaming pieces, and some of the detail looks very crisp.

Two notes on assembly, though:
1) A lot of the "cuts" made to separate the pieces from the sprue look positively enormous. That's not ideal.
2) You guys should probably do some cleaning and mold line removal before sending them to paint, you know

Better or worse than when Palladium assembled their first batch of Robotech minis?

...

Actually better, aside from failure to clean the model.

But OMG, the hands!

Still, smart to lead with the CEF, which is all angular stuff and not popular. The South stuff is going to look pretty bad, I think.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Better or worse than when Palladium assembled their first batch of Robotech minis?

...

Actually better, aside from failure to clean the model.

Heh, heah, there's no contest, really.

But OMG, the hands!

First thing I noticed, yeah. The hands are basically blocks of plastic without any kind of detail. that's one of the reasons I said that they looked nice enough as gaming pieces.

Still, smart to lead with the CEF, which is all angular stuff and not popular. The South stuff is going to look pretty bad, I think.

If the original pics of the southern stuff are anything to go by (and they are: the final pops are from the same mould after all) they will look quite poor besides the current metal minis.

It remains to be seen if that will be good enough for new players.

The final price going forward for the next 10 years will likely be the key. I'm not impressed with the plastic gears (although strangely the caprice stuff looks nice) but the ease of assembly, conversion, and the price could easily overcome the bland static mannequin poses and softer details. It's odd but they've swung full circle back to the old Rafm days in which the gears were also almost universally legs spread appart arms at each side with one or both bent. I guess we were spoiled during the blitz era with things like kneeling, running, and across the chest arms. Some of those admittedly can be done with conversion though which is relatively easy in plastic.

@warboss - if it's broken up in to $25 single-faction starters, it might work. When you compare with GW's simplified models the new HG plastics are a large, clear step backward in design and execution. I mean, just look at the Dark Vengeance Chaos Dreadnought, and you'll see what I mean. These minis are pretty awful.

Conversion and posing is possible, sure, but that's for people who have so many minis that they need more pose variety than what's possible in the box. I don't see that being a major problem when the game itself isn't particularly compelling in the modern era. I mean, if you're playing X-Wing, and you see a HG starter, are you going to be impressed to buy it? How about after you download the rulebook?


Putting my money where my mouth is, I bought more CEF Frames. At 70% off, which I consider to be a fair price for the higher quality of the minis. And yet, I still held back, because those 6-16s and 2-21s are just awful looking.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@warboss - if it's broken up in to $25 single-faction starters

It almost certainly won't. They should do it, but most probably won't.

Well, that's because the Pod still has the same marketing geniuses that have been driving the game itself into the ground since forever.

If they had half a brain, these would be packed and sold as faction starters like Warmachine did when it first came out. An inexpensive impulse buy, with everything a new player needed to get started.

But we all know the Pod thinks they know best.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Well, that's because the Pod still has the same marketing geniuses that have been driving the game itself into the ground since forever.

If they had half a brain, these would be packed and sold as faction starters like Warmachine did when it first came out. An inexpensive impulse buy, with everything a new player needed to get started.

But we all know the Pod thinks they know best.

Oh, no, that's not what I meant. There will be faction starters, that's for sure. They'll just cost $65, just like in the KS. Or more, if they actually think of including physical books, rules and the like, instead of a link to the beta book.

I don't think they ever understood the value of a loss-leader (take a look at the prices of their old Blitz core books, for an example).

Gee, John, I can't think of why the Pod doesn't acknowledge that you know best.

 Albertorius wrote:

Oh, no, that's not what I meant. There will be faction starters, that's for sure. They'll just cost $65, just like in the KS. Or more, if they actually think of including physical books, rules and the like, instead of a link to the beta book.

I don't think they ever understood the value of a loss-leader (take a look at the prices of their old Blitz core books, for an example).

My guess from watching various kickstarters (although admittedly not backing many) is that the price will go up regardless even if the contents stay the same when it reaches retail. It'll be two years of increasing prices and with whatever variables the Canadian dollar has had since the precipitous drop late last year might affect their bottom line to the point where they'd want a bigger buffer. They might be fine with the margin when dealing direct now prior to the release (and needing cash up front) but the price may change even if the contents don't when they put another two levels of the traditional retail chain into the mix.

I don't think they need a loss leader. But they do need a cheap and easy way into the game. $65 is awfully high for a single player starter. That's really more like a 2-player intro set.

I wonder if this is just going to be at the same prices as the metal stuff, but with cheaper, lower-quality minis.

That's actually a quite probable development, yes. Even then, I suspect that at least Caprice will end up cheaper... because, really, trying to sell it at the current price hasn't worked out so well.

OK, I was browsing the stuff and have a question:

What's up with the beasts?

I see that NuCoal has these really weird (and possibly HUGE!) beast cavalry units, culminating in "Armadillo" beasts the size of a Southern Cobra.

Are these actually any good? Or are they just for funsies? Why do the models even exist?

It's very strange.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
OK, I was browsing the stuff and have a question:

What's up with the beasts?

I see that NuCoal has these really weird (and possibly HUGE!) beast cavalry units, culminating in "Armadillo" beasts the size of a Southern Cobra.

Are these actually any good? Or are they just for funsies? Why do the models even exist?

It's very strange.

IIRC an armadillo beast was around the size of a Gear, yeah. Back in Blitz, when they were first released, Barnaby mounted infantry was Size 5 and used a Walker 6/12 Movement with Imp. Off Road, which gives them interesting options compared with most other movement improvements infantry has acces too. They also had the equivalent to Ram Plates, which make then able to actually charge Gears and other vehicles.

Armadillo Beasts are even bigger (Size 6, the size of a regular Gear), with the same movement options but a tad slower (5/10). They also had Ram Plate equivalents, but theirs were Armor Piercing.

So... yeah, they still are infantry in HGB, so mainly for funsies (infantry in HGB has been historically sidelined a lot, unless they carry mortars, and from the looks of it, they won't be getting better in the new ruleset).

As to why do they even exists, I suspect someone though it would be fun.

Thanks for the info. Not sure if I should be getting either of them, as I'm not sure how I'd use them. HG's got some very strange stuff, that's for sure!

Well, the other shoe dropped. Pics of the assembled final northern sprues:



IMHO, they look serviceable as plastic counters for the game. But, having already HG minis of the other three metal variants (original RAFM, Tactical, Blitz), I would not pay money for those, as the proportions and the details look way off (they look like SD "almost chibi" [actually, uncanny valley] versions of the "true" ones).

But if they manage to sell them cheap, they could serve to kindle some new players' interest, so that's good?