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.

 warboss wrote:
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.

I was thinking more in terms of engagement range than effectiveness. But you are absolutely right. auto cannons get burst, which means more dice, which means more likely to hit. Moreover, those extra dice increase the chance of a higher MoS which can easily add up to more damage than the rifle would have done.

The problem with HG "sniper" weapons is range.

A modern .50 cal sniper has an effective range of a half mile. Confirmed sniper kills go out to a mile... and a half. On the tabletop, that would be... 50 feet.

And those are just the man-portable rifles. In the HG universe, these are Gears with much heavier weapons with what should be far higher ranges.

For my game, I've been converting stats, and I typically treat HG range as "point blank", without any maximum.

Maybe it's not a linear scale.

Yeah, most mini games tend to claim some sort of logarithmic scale. Also, they tend to claim that the figs are oversized for the scale that the combat rules take place in.

Though I totally agree that if I were to make a tabletop game using HG figs, I'd toss range out. Maybe keep it in for a very select set of weapons.

My homebrew game system has two ranges: minimum for things like artillery, and a set of ranges for weapons that disperse over distance. Most ranges are so short (48" equals 576' at the 1:144 scale) that I'm thinking of eliminating most forms of artillery, as the boards are shorter than their minimum range. That or force them to direct fire.

So, what do people think of this new landship scale heavy gear game? I'm trying to figure out the relation to DP9.

 Vertrucio wrote:
So, what do people think of this new landship scale heavy gear game? I'm trying to figure out the relation to DP9.

The guy behind Fusion Core Studios, Wunji Lau, is IIRC the same guy that did the Jovian Chronicles fleet game for DP back in the day (Lightning Strike). He's not part of DP now, and apparently has licensed the setting of HG to do a fleet scale new game.

According to the KS, the molds and actual sprue pops will be done by the same companies that did it for the HGB Kickstarter, so you probably should expect a similar quality/detail level, although for designs that on a first blush seem to be quite a bit easier to mold.

Brandon, the guy promoting the game here, is a writer for both Fusion Core Studios and Arkrite Press (The company doing the new edition of the Heavy Gear RPG... well, eventually).

Looking at the price and the stuff inside the box, though, the first thing I wonder is, why plastics at all? I mean, being a fleet scale game and all, it seems quite fit for a resin release, I think...

Hey, Al. We noticed your question (Wunji did), and he gave me an answer to your question.

In regards to resin, it would be more expensive for the customer, and not a great long-term investment for a company. A resin landship would retail for around $20-25, at least, making a reasonably-sized force around $200. The goal is to get the army cost down to about 25% of that.

BrandonKF wrote:
Hey, Al. We noticed your question (Wunji did), and he gave me an answer to your question.

In regards to resin, it would be more expensive for the customer, and not a great long-term investment for a company. A resin landship would retail for around $20-25, at least, making a reasonably-sized force around $200. The goal is to get the army cost down to about 25% of that.

Wow, that high? I was looking at Firestorm Armada's ships for reference, and the impression I got is that it seemed a bit of a wash. I guess that they must have some kind of numbers advantage there.

Thanks for the answer

EDIT: I gather that you're gunning for a 8-10 landships per side regular size game, then, by your price point? That's... larger than I was thinking, TBH. Then again, a target of around $50 for that seems pretty decent even if I would prefer a different kind of battle than you seem to be going for.

EDIT 2: For reference, I was thinking of this when I comented about the material
http://gnclv.fjgyd.servertrust.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=FTBB01

While I can't speak for Firestorm Armada, Halo fleet battles ships are a bit more pricey in resin for similar sized ships (and sold in two packs or more typcially) but there is the added cost of the Halo license involved in that. I wish Wunji luck with this (even if he did tell me at Gencon that their new original blitz rulebook would last for years!). I didn't know he was responsible for Lightning Strike which I enjoyed despite not finding an opponent.

For completeness, here is the link:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1438910159/heavy-gear-dreadnoughts-plastic-miniatures-wargame


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrandonKF wrote:
Hey, Al. We noticed your question (Wunji did), and he gave me an answer to your question.

In regards to resin, it would be more expensive for the customer, and not a great long-term investment for a company. A resin landship would retail for around $20-25, at least, making a reasonably-sized force around $200. The goal is to get the army cost down to about 25% of that.

I'd stress the added benefit of having someone else pay for the relatively huge proportion of the total cost that is upfront with plastics. With resin, the ongoing "tail" costs are much more prominent and the company, not strangers on the internet, is responsible for those. Ten years ago, something like this absolutely would have been made in resin in North America with the risk entirely on the shoulders of the company. Nowadays, with crowdfunding, letting the backers risk their money for hopefully a shared benefit like a discount is business as usual. I'm a bit jaded though with the whole idea of crowdfunding due to Robotech so apply salt as needed.

While I'm pretty much 100% fine with the detail level for stompy robots, I don't think it'll translate as well to ship models 4"~5" long. Especially compared to Halo and now Dropfleet Commander plastic ships, those renders just don't look nearly on the same level. The robots you can pose and have multi-part assemblies to help hide the lack of detail and you can fake the rest with painting and decals, but on a ship you kinda need that sculpted in. Unless you plan on using a lot of decals to make up the difference, like with the Star Trek/Federation Commander ships. The concept art looks great, I just think they need to step up the 3D modelling a bit. I'm in full if they unlock the infantry tho, an army of 8mm tall Gears? Oh hellz yeah!

 Kalamadea wrote:
While I'm pretty much 100% fine with the detail level for stompy robots, I don't think it'll translate as well to ship models 4"~5" long. Especially compared to Halo and now Dropfleet Commander plastic ships, those renders just don't look nearly on the same level.

How about we look at the BFG Cruisers from nearly 20 years ago?


Those were only a few inches long, and I thought they were nicely greebled for what they were... back in 1999!

This is fine. Put details where there needs to be details, you don't need greebles everywhere, and those 3D models don't have lighting, better to look at the sample miniatures.

I like the idea of this and I liked the idea of HG fleet back then. Not sure if this concept really needs the Heavy Gear license as honestly, it limits the game more than the license helps.

Not sure if I'm seeing the scale correctly, but will the unit models be smaller or bigger than the original? Chalk me up for someone who wants smaller models, with multiple models on a base.

 Mmmpi wrote:
My homebrew game system has two ranges: minimum for things like artillery, and a set of ranges for weapons that disperse over distance. Most ranges are so short (48" equals 576' at the 1:144 scale) that I'm thinking of eliminating most forms of artillery, as the boards are shorter than their minimum range. That or force them to direct fire.

Most artillery guns have some sort of ammo for use in emergancies, like if the battery was suddenly attacked by tanks/light scout type vehicles or infantry.

In late 1944, a battery of German "Hummel" SP guns was suddenly attacked by a platoon of Soviet T70 light tanks, which had slipped through a gap in the lines several miles ahead. The Hummels were just deploying for expected fire missions when the T70's came across the field and began firing on the battery.

The Hummels would have been destroyed if not for the HEAT rounds the unit had for just such an emergency. The 3 T70's were destroyed with only one SP gun damaged.

I was doing some surfing for dreadnought content and swung by Brandon's facebook group. Everyone's favorite youtube channel that resembles an annoying over ad bannered repeating pop up window website is now looking for the public to buy the models for him.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/302254736538781/

Sigh... it's bad enough that he shills for pretty everyone that hands him a dollar by prefaces videos with a half dozen ads that in he past were at times LONGER than the actual content on top of stripping other channel's HG videos of their logos/intros without telling them and reposting them... but now he won't even buy his own models. IMO he's putting the cart before the horse in this case and should be making the content and THEN asking for funding. Too bad he's a mod on that group (who in the past has deleted content that didn't paint him in a good light like with the aforementioned "borrowed" videos that got him a 6 month no ads copyright strike after which he ragequit youtube.. but not really) so you can't even comment honestly about it.

I wasn't aware of that. Wish you'd said something sooner, warboss. He's no longer a group admin.

BrandonKF wrote:
I wasn't aware of that. Wish you'd said something sooner, warboss. He's no longer a group admin.

I'm glad he's not an admin anymore. I don't frequent facebook much so it may take months for news to reach me from there like with this). Are you're refering to the "borrowed" videos (and there was more than just one)?

I'm referring to content being deleted. If there were objections, I didn't hear about them. And while I have a lot of admins there, I'm the owner. I had to trim some of the inactive admins anyway.

BrandonKF wrote:
I'm referring to content being deleted. If there were objections, I didn't hear about them. And while I have a lot of admins there, I'm the owner. I had to trim some of the inactive admins anyway.

After a simple innocuous comment about it being an older reposted video on both youtube and one of my only ever posts on your group disappeared, I mentioned it here in this thread right after you posted and even PM'ed you about it here on dakka. In any case, you made the right call in his case.

I apologize. I must have completely missed those replies... my bad.

BrandonKF wrote:
I apologize. I must have completely missed those replies... my bad.

No worries; that part is old news. You may not want to allow him to cyberbeg though on the group as allowing him opens the door for others to do the same. Posting actual content and THEN asking for patronage is a different story and not the same thing as just panhandling. I know times are hard but it's a bad precedent to set. YMMV.

How is the traffic on the group since the kickstarter delivered? Has DP9 started retail shipping yet?

I can ask. I'm focused on the writing for the RPG and Dreadnoughts. The Group is very active, we have had at least a half dozen battle reports of late, and more people painting. Of course, we still have to deal with the holiday season, which also will cut into folks backing the KS, but it was either now or mid next year in comparison to the competition.

Looking at the numbers, that KS is DOA, period. From the second update posted, Wunji knows it, too.

 HudsonD wrote:
Looking at the numbers, that KS is DOA, period. From the second update posted, Wunji knows it, too.

While I'm not thinking it is DOA, I do think that the current rate of funding and likely end amount barring a sudden surge of interest would have been more appropriate for a resin starter and not a plastic kit. There is this line from that update:

" It might not work, but that's the beauty of Kickstarter: if the market doesn't like it, we'll know before we drop a hundred grand on injection molds."
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1438910159/heavy-gear-dreadnoughts-plastic-miniatures-wargame/posts/1741565

Now.. you can assume that he is referring to the stretch goals but I'm not sure that is the best assumption because if the "market doesn't like it" at half that amount it still means it funded with a few stretch goals as well thrown in... so then what? Continue knowing it's be a "failure" despite funding? One option is that they're including their own money into that amount (i.e. if it funds for $30k, they've got $70k+ ready to thrown in already planned and set up) to reach the $100k. That's reasonable... except that Dave recently also said that he didn't want to address a different project until the kickstarter funding iirc 4x over (so $120k).

"Bad news first: The rules will be delayed. To exactly when I cannot say but this is to prevent conflict of attention with the Heavy Gear: Dreadnoughts game going live soon on Kickstarter. I promise a X-mas or New years present for you all for being extra patient (And I will drop the rules early if Dreadnoughts hits 400% funded!)."
http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17736

Two unrelated comments? Possibly. Dave just being nice and not wanted to steal their Thunder? Probably. The realist in me is suspicous after following closely dozens of miniature game kickstarter campaigns since Sedition Wars (albeit not funded them) and watched several cancel AFTER reaching their artifically low kickstarter funding goals of the same amount as Dreadnoughts because they didn't reach their ACTUAL secret goal needed to make the project. They set the initial goal low, pad some stretch goals with things they had always planned on including, and hope that they fund and the momentum carries them through to their REAL goal before the campaign ends. If they don't reach the real number or start backsliding late in the campaign when it loses steam, they cancel. I suspect that those two statements are related and that the real target number needed/desired is actually in the 6 digits for a full plastic starter. HG funded at not much over that and still had to cut back on stretch goals to pay the bills and that was over two years ago with prices rising in the meantime likely.

If they have their own funding ready to pick up the difference betwen 30k and 100k then they'll should be fine at least in terms of initial fulfillment. If they don't and the 30k goal is artificially low to encourage bidding and they don't exceed it by a large amount, I guess we'll see a KS cancelled for reorganization message in another two weeks. YMMV. Season with salt as needed. If your eyebrow is raised for more than four hourse, contact an optimist immediately.

At first, I was going to quote and respond in the KS thread for this project but didn't want it to seem like I was trying to actively discourage funding so posted here. I still think it is a worthwhile discussion to have though.

 warboss wrote:

Snip

Ahah, nope !
There's no way they have 70K $US set aside. I'd be amazed if they had even 10K saved for that purpose.

That Wunji posted "we don't need those plastic doodads anyway" just goes to tell you he's lucid about the KS hopes of success at this point. Whether he learns the right lessons from this is another matter...

 HudsonD wrote:

 warboss wrote:

Snip

Ahah, nope !
There's no way they have 70K $US set aside. I'd be amazed if they had even 10K saved for that purpose.

That Wunji posted "we don't need those plastic doodads anyway" just goes to tell you he's lucid about the KS hopes of success at this point. Whether he learns the right lessons from this is another matter...

The reality is that he is correct and doesn't need them judging from what he is posting.. I reposted his comment from the kickstarter over in the news and rumors thread. The game basically sounds like an old avalon hill chits and tokens style strategic game with some overly large minis shoehorned in to cater to the minis crowd. YMMV but it doesn't sound like the premise and mechanics for the game match the marketing and physical pieces. At most, it should have some small FFG style game pieces like in Fortress America (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/115293/fortress-america) but it's being crowdfunded and marketed like Descent instead. Again, this is all without the benefit of actual playtesting the game or even a gameplay video on the kickstarter (a big mistake IMO to not have one ready to go right away).

 warboss wrote:

The reality is that he is correct and doesn't need them judging from what he is posting.. I reposted his comment from the kickstarter over in the news and rumors thread. The game basically sounds like an old avalon hill chits and tokens style strategic game with some overly large minis shoehorned in to cater to the minis crowd. YMMV but it doesn't sound like the premise and mechanics for the game match the marketing and physical pieces. At most, it should have some small FFG style game pieces like in Fortress America (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/115293/fortress-america) but it's being crowdfunded and marketed like Descent instead. Again, this is all without the benefit of actual playtesting the game or even a gameplay video on the kickstarter (a big mistake IMO to not have one ready to go right away).

Yeah, I'd fully agree with you, except for one thing... The minis are what makes the money these days.

Actual money is relative to costs and total funding. I'll reserve final judgement until if/when I see a gameplay video but right now I'm thinking they'd have been better off going with a Starfleet Battles style setup... chits and tokens strategic boardgame with a real $10k funding goal for a small initial print run for the actual game with existing fleet scale minis as optional add ons; if they fund beyond their goal, they followup with stretchgoals of 1"-2" new landship minis and eventually tiny epic 40k sized updated ground unit minis. That is admittedly the WFPA take on the premise; they seem to have opted instead for the SRA version of the game.

A game company should not rely on Kick Starters for every new project.

Land Ships in HG are these huge, land based super sized aircraft carriers. They were so huge that they had no stats in HG except for very specific scenarios and only for a small section of the ship. Sure, they were present in the fluff, but they were unplayable in the actual game.

Now consider that Heavy Gear is a Mech game, and along comes this fleet based game set in the same universe, but with no mechs. Where are the gears? How will they influence the game? Strike 1. In the fluff, these ships were rare, and the center of a Land Fleet (much like Aircraft Carrier groups of the US Navy). The idea of 3-5 or more of these fighting in the same battle... where are the escorts? The Cruisers, Frigates, Destroyers? Strike 2. The final strike: The gaming industry is becoming flooded with fleet based games: Firestorm Armada, Dystopian wars, Halo Fleet Wars, Dropfleet Commander, and Battle Fleet Gothic still has a huge following. There are a couple more out there as well. The KS shows nothing unique, or special about this fleet game besides it being in the HG Universe. Strike 3, it's out. There is no example game play. Is this a finished game? Will it use the incredibly complicated and arcane resolution system that the new version of HG Blitz has?

Basically, unless this game has some new, innovative game resolution system that just blows me away, I won't be interested.

 Tamwulf wrote:
A game company should not rely on Kick Starters for every new project.

Land Ships in HG are these huge, land based super sized aircraft carriers. They were so huge that they had no stats in HG except for very specific scenarios and only for a small section of the ship. Sure, they were present in the fluff, but they were unplayable in the actual game.

Now consider that Heavy Gear is a Mech game, and along comes this fleet based game set in the same universe, but with no mechs. Where are the gears? How will they influence the game? Strike 1. In the fluff, these ships were rare, and the center of a Land Fleet (much like Aircraft Carrier groups of the US Navy). The idea of 3-5 or more of these fighting in the same battle... where are the escorts? The Cruisers, Frigates, Destroyers? Strike 2. The final strike: The gaming industry is becoming flooded with fleet based games: Firestorm Armada, Dystopian wars, Halo Fleet Wars, Dropfleet Commander, and Battle Fleet Gothic still has a huge following. There are a couple more out there as well. The KS shows nothing unique, or special about this fleet game besides it being in the HG Universe. Strike 3, it's out. There is no example game play. Is this a finished game? Will it use the incredibly complicated and arcane resolution system that the new version of HG Blitz has?

Basically, unless this game has some new, innovative game resolution system that just blows me away, I won't be interested.

Strike 2: Not sure that is true in NuFluff for NuBlitz. Everythign is cranked up to 11, remember? NuCoal and Paxton grew like crazy overnight both in power and population so flooding the sands with fleets of previously rare landships is less of a stretch (but still a stretch). As a historical footnote, that sort of naval growth isn't unprecedented; see the US navy during WW2.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/us-ship-force-levels.html

The US navy had 8 aircraft carriers (fleet and escort combined) at the time of Pearl Harbor at the very end of 1941. By VJ day in mid 1945 less than three years later, they had 99! And that doesn't include the number that were built and sunk during that time either.

Strike 3: Nothing unique? Landships IMO by definition distinguish them from all of the above thematically as well as the close integration of ground units into the combat. I have no idea though if that new subniche will hurt or help the game though.

I agree that the lack of gameplay video with the rollout of the campaign is concerning. If this is a game different in scope (very strategic compared with the other games) as well as theme (landships!), an actual demo of a game could have helped... could... not sure if it would though given the discrepancies above. I'd have put that as strike 1 though.