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.

Kickstarter rewards arrived today. Images in my Flickr page, link in the signature. It's a lot of stuff (6 cores, half is mine, half belongs to friends). FWIW, it's packed pretty darn tight - not tight enough to smoosh minis, but tight enough that the only packing material included was a small wad of paper to keep stuff from rattling around inside the book box (6 books and counters/patches/decals and stuff inside that).

Was it in retail packaging? Or plain boxes?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Was it in retail packaging? Or plain boxes?

Plain ziploc baggies. Much like many other KS (esp Mantic) I've backed.

Oh, OK. Thanks for clarifying.

Glad you got your stuff!

I can also confirm that plastic glue (the stuff that dissolves the plastic to weld it together) works on the plastic used.

Cool! Was it packed efficiently without wasted space/cost? Robotech's core box and add-ons for the base pledge were particularly bad at that.

 warboss wrote:
Cool! Was it packed efficiently without wasted space/cost? Robotech's core box and add-ons for the base pledge were particularly bad at that.

Jam packed. No extra air in the bags, just enough to not smush minis, one small paper wadding to keep the box the books (from multiple cores) were in from sliding around.



It looked like this all the way down to the bottom. For reference, there was six cores plus a few extras in this box:



That's a Mantic terrain mat it's sitting on. The box is 14"x14"x11"(tall).

So, had it taken a hit on the corner or edge, product would have been damaged?

Looks like you got some good gear there, mate!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
So, had it taken a hit on the corner or edge, product would have been damaged?

Depends how hard it gets hit. These sprues aren't big, so the outer ring of plastic on each is pretty strong (rigid). If your corner or side gets staved in, you'll probably see some damage. If you just get a crunched corner or dent, the product will probably just shift inside its own bag. They did a decent job of taping the edges, which should help. And the baggies are probably freezer bags, not sandwich bags (thicker plastic).

Pretty much a catch-22 situation, though. If they overpack to prevent damage, shipping costs go further up. The box is as sturdy as any KS box I've gotten in the past 3-4 years. The books and patches and decals came in a smaller folding cardboard box (plenty sturdy). but again I had 6 cores so it kind of needed its own box for books.

OK, thanks.

Yup, thanks John Prins. That looks pretty tightly packed without space wasted. If they pack the international packages that way then they really did all they could in saving money at least in regard to shipping by package volume.

 warboss wrote:
Yup, thanks John Prins. That looks pretty tightly packed without space wasted. If they pack the international packages that way then they really did all they could in saving money at least in regard to shipping by package volume.

Yeah, it look pretty decently done, all in all. Still, not sure how much volume would affect the equation for the canadian mail in the case of international backers if they're doing a bulk shipment.

Is it pretty easy to tell what's what? For example, are all the sprues for a particular army packed together in one bag?

Each army is in its own bag. The book has a page identifying all the weapons on the sprues for each faction, though not the location on the sprue, just the appearance. Not hard to figure out. I think the only place people might have problems is with the Caprice minis and the leg armor, but I've just finished putting together 100TV of them and it wasn't hard.

Thanks for letting us know that your stuff arrived! I'm really excited now because mine is probably sitting in my mailbox.

DP9 has put up an assembly guide (free) on DriveThruRPG.

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/192252/Heavy-Gear-Blitz--Plastic-Miniatures-Assembly-Guide

I've started assembling my Caprice miniatures, which can be seen here:

http://panther6actual.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/russian-federation-walkers.html

So... I can't go to the Pod forums and ask so I'll put it here in case anyone can answer (Brandon?).

Apparently the Arkrite forum is down, it throws a security certificates expiration error. So... what's the deal?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ah, nevermid. It's up again.

Yeah, security certificate got messed up somehow, but Greg fixed it.

Sorry, I've been working hard on something of late, and just yesterday whatever virus has been floating around in my system finally decided to kick into overdrive on me.

I'm fighting it off right now, but I don't plan to let this slow me down.

This is part a fluff question, part a rules question, and I'm happy to hear back about both.

When building a squad for HG, is it better to have as many of the same variants together to maximize the squad's role, or have a wide variety to cover a wider range of situations?

Example one: Cobra fire support squad (Spammed): Role Indirect fire support

Razorfang Junglemower Support Cobra, Junglemower Support Cobra, Support Cobra, Support Cobra


Fit's the southern idea of multi-purpose, (Has AT, a pair of HRC's for short range anti-not infantry, and a relatively heavy indirect punch), but is definitely focused on indirect firing the LFG's.

Cobra fire support squad (variety): Role indirect fire support

Razorfang Spitting Cobra, Support Cobra, Flamm Cobra, Slashing Cobra


Still multi-purpose, but the indirect fire options have different capabilities for a wider range of targets. They also have different optimum ranges and difficulty getting them all in the "Sweet spot".

Example Two: Grizzly Support squad (Spammed): Indirect Fire support

Thunder Grizzly, Grizzly x3

Again, all of the indirect weapons match both for range and role. (model to model, not MGM to MRP)

Thunder Rabid Grizzly, Grizzly, Grizzly Destroyer, Chaingun Razorback


For this one, there is more variety in weapon's role and range of targets, but like the 2nd squad above there might be difficulty getting all the guns to bear in the optimum band. Fluff wise, I'm not sure how this squad would work for the North, as it's definitely more of a multi-role squad (Primary: indirect, 2nd: Assault (MGL/HRC), AT (HBZ))

What's the consensus for squad building?

What does the fluff say?

(for those of you who frequent both this and the PodBay's forum I posted this in both)

(edited to reduce size of text box)

The answer is for both rules crunch and backstory fluff that it depends. I realize it sounds like a cop out but it really isn't. In terms of old rpg fluff, one polar faction was described as preferring generalist squads whereas the other favored specialist squads (although I can't recall which was which). I don't think they ever commented on badlands and off world factions but I'd guess generalist given the fluff on interstellar travel weight limits and supposed badlands manpower deficiencies compared to polar forces (which is completely ignored in the rules).

Gameplay wise, it depends on your personal playstyle. I prefer specialists squads because I rarely find generalists to be worthwhile. In 40k, id lump antiarmor marine devastators together because if I didnt then half the squad felt useless (heavy bolters pinging off of a tank with no chance of damaging while 2 lascannons did the real work). In hg, it's less of an issue because you can split fire but you still lose synergy bonuses sometimes when doing so. I think my opinion is best summed up by the full phrase of "jack of all trades, MASTER OF NONE".... most folks leave off that last part. Sorry about the poor format but I'm posting from a cell.

Historically, North and South has had differing doctrines, when talking about unit profiles.

The North has usually preferred to make specialist units, heavily reliant on the rest of the detachment to get the work done, but much better at it than any generalist can be. They tend to go for heavy sinergy between units, in a way similar to.. Eldar, you might say.

The South, OTOH, has always preferred to have either more generalist units or just plain more units (in case of conscripts, infantry and the like). Due to the way they tend to use their units (particularly Gears), they usually prefer their units to be as self reliant as possible.

This tend to come from the way the two polar powers deploy their stuff, Gears in particularly. Northern doctrine dictate Gears to be used in a way that you could say it's "infantry+", that is, taking combat roles very similar to regular infantry units with vehicle support, only without the need for vehicles. They tend to view their Gear forces as a sort of super infantry, and they deploy them as such.

OTOH, the South doctrine tend to be more radical in that regard. For starters, their forces have a much bigger percentage of regular infantry and armor, which makes their armies bigger. This has changed somewhat since the WotA, but historically speaking, the South has used Gears much like super special forces, particularly as paratroopers: meant to be a more elite force than the regular troopers, self reliant, and deep within enemy territory. That's why they usually are kitted to be more independent than northern units. Fluff wise, they usually get away with it because they hit the backside of the enemy, so to speak. Which doesn't translate so well on the tabletop, admittedly.

From what I've been looking at, considering the interaction between rules and fluff (and based on your answers).

While 4 stock cobras and 4 stock grizzlies have roughly similar load outs, on the grizzly the machine gun is a defensive weapon, while on the cobra it's only a "mostly" defensive. A northern commander wouldn't send the grizzlies in to machine gun infantry as a point of doctrine, and unless him doing so really saved everyone's bacon would probably get a talking to from his superiors about knowing the role of his weapons (aka the grizzlies), while the southern commander would only hear about it afterwards if he messed up.

I've been looking at this view recently because so many gears on both sides have several roles worth of equipment available to them on each variant.

From a squad building perspective, I like the more specialized squads too. Both in game as it's easier to run them in a distinct role, and in fluff (a modern military standardizes, and heavy gear is presented as a modern military).

Recently they had a test battle report of a spam list using all armor here:

http://battlesforterranova.blogspot.com.au/2016/11/armoured-tide-battle-report-prdf-vs-cef.html

Thanks for the link, Brandon. I'll be checking it out. In related HG news, Heavy Gear Assault is supposed to hit steam sometime next month apparently.

http://www.mmorpg.com/interviews/heavy-gear-assault-launching-to-the-battlefield-in-december-1000011300

Unfortunately, the publisher of the game (Stompy Bot) is being sued by some company I've never heard of for a breach of contract in the meantime.

http://thecse.com/sites/default/files/investorx/BOT/1611111347096827.pdf

So I've been reading through the quickstart rules and the current version of the LRB and I think I have a handle on most of it (with the exception of E/W because there seems to be a ton of stuff you can do with that).

Mostly I have been trying to figure out what sort of 150 TV force I want to work my way up to, and how best to build the Hunters etc from my pledge so that they will be useful to me later and not simply for my first few ~40 TV demo games.

Can someone more familiar with the current edition rules tell me if I have done anything horribly wrong here? Most likely this will be a WFP list:

CG1 Primary Unit: Recon
Weasel (CGL/CO)
Sniper Ferret
Sniper Ferret
Riotmaster Wildcat

CG1 Support Unit
Thunder hammer

CG2 Primary Unit: GP
Headhunter (CGL)
Assault Hunter
Hunter Gunner
Hunter Gunner

CG2 Support Unit
Scorpion (not sure if this can be a support unit or if it has to be in its own CG)

CG3 Primary Unit: Paratrooper
Para Strike Headhuter (CGL)
Leopard
Leopard
Koala

This weighs in at 147 TV which would appear to leave me with enough TV to upgrade the Thunder Hammer to a vet (Tested in Battle), the Para Strike Headhunter to a vet (Family Ties) and then give the CO the vet ability Electronic Warfare Specialist (since I can nominate that upgrade as part of Family Ties and the Weasel is a vet already).

The idea being that the Recon team hangs back and mostly snipes, spotting for other models including the mid field GP squad and the off-table Thunder hammer. The GP squad makes up for its lack of heavy firepower with the circling Scorpion and the Para squad will just have to drop in and do as much damage as possible, largely unsupported.

Does that sound feasible given the gear choices and combat group structure?

There was a long discussion months back on the official forum that proved weapons that you'd think would be long range "sniping" types like rifles were absolutely not but instead medium range beatsticks and worse in every other situation. I don't know how many of those models use rifles but that may be important to keep in mind. Only advanced weapons like lasers were true snipers in both name and actual rules and did a better job for the same price. I can't comment on the list other than that since I haven't crunched any numbers yet let alone actually played.

 warboss wrote:
There was a long discussion months back on the official forum that proved weapons that you'd think would be long range "sniping" types like rifles were absolutely not but instead medium range beatsticks and worse in every other situation. I don't know how many of those models use rifles but that may be important to keep in mind. Only advanced weapons like lasers were true snipers in both name and actual rules and did a better job for the same price. I can't comment on the list other than that since I haven't crunched any numbers yet let alone actually played.

That does sound about right - when you look at the squads that get rifles, they tend to be close or mid range units rather than units who stay on the other side of the table, so I suppose they fill more of the DMR role than an actual sniper. As rifles go, I'm not sure that the slightly longer range, one extra point of penetration and the ability to win ties (again) if the target has agile is a good trade off for the extra dice you would be rolling if you just had the equivalent auto cannon. However, in a recon squad your options seem pretty limited. Fortunately, the only two gears with rifles are the hilariously named "Sniper" Ferrets with their bad-ass gunnery skill of 5+. However, I can't justify a unit of four gears that sit around for half the game playing cards and occasionally running away while one of them (the Weasel) spends all his time on the phone to the Thunder Hammer.. so I guess having two gears plinking away is better than waiting for something nasty to get into pack gun and frag cannon range. Sniper Ferrets, away!

Just to reiterate, they're not DMRs as rifles are paradoxically LESS LIKELY TO HIT than other weapons including ACs in heavy gear. When they do hit, they hit slightly harder but only at medium range because of the combined hit/damage mechanics.