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.

If it's not going to work, they'll pull the plug a couple days before close.

warboss wrote: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.

What's wrong with the Republic? LOL

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.

I've come to recognize that folks will often question what is 'innovative'.

What I can say is that Gears, striders, tanks and aircraft are included, and in fact play a large role as attached ground forces.

The landships are centerpieces, yes. However, they act more in the style of an amphibious assault carrier, combined with a forward operating base, or FOB. They retrieve the attached ground and air forces (when the weather permits) and act as anchors for the maneuvers of the entire detachment.

Toward that end, to avoid the comet trails of SW Armada, the various capabilities are kept simple.

There's a few basic terrain types that one uses on the tabletop.

You get Clear, Rough, Difficult, Impassable, and Urban.

The cardboard templates for terrain you lay out until both players are satisfied with the set-up.

Depending on the type of terrain one is in, the attached ground force's capabilities (mobility, maneuver) fluctuate. So, a tank formation on Clear ground has an overall superb advantage in dice compared to an infantry counter on Clear terrain. Flip-flop that for urban areas.

I disagree with you strongly on Heavy Gear Blitz Living Rulebook being arcane or or complicated, but then that's your decision and tastes. Not everyone enjoys 2nd edition anymore, and everyone had various opinions about the editions preceding the Living Rulebook.

Having discussed it with Wunji, the initial idea for gameplay is simplistic enough that it could rival OGRE in some forms.

The older generation of landships (destroyers, frigates) are still around, but they are outdated, and instead usually form as escorts for the new classes. New class descriptions represent their particular 'strengths', and overall are streamlined to operate independently from any tenders. Instead, they can deploy for prolonged periods and use their ground forces to collect what resources they absolutely need to stay in operation, although after a while, they begin to wear out.

So, the original 'idea' of landships as 'super-sized aircraft carriers' (which really only applied to the Vortex-class, and that was a medium-class carrier at best), is now being replaced with this new, more modern fleet.

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

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.

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?

Game companies using KS for new stuff is reasonable for marketing and demand estimation, but there had best be some sort of real discount or bonus for fronting money on a promise vs waiting for retail. When concepts are unclear, discounts are stingy, delivery is spotty, it's just best to wait.

Nothing wrong with more fleet games, provided that they are good. At least BFG was good.

The problem is that we don't know if this game is any good. In 2016, if the game isn't print & play, it's a non-starter. We're long past the point where people should be throwing money at creators based on a few renders and sculptures, on a promise of a great game. Sedition Wars taught me that lesson.

HG Blitz is indeed awful to resolve. NuBlitz is unnecessarily overcomplicated in its resolution, due to all of the modifiers that carried over from OldBlitz. For the scale of this game, one would hope for a further streamlining, but I'm pretty skeptical.

Streamlining what game? The Living Rulebook, or Dreadnoughts?

BrandonKF wrote:
Streamlining what game? The Living Rulebook, or Dreadnoughts?

Streamlining "NuBlitz" vs. "OldBlitz". It's like all the old, clunky modifiers are still in the game, but they are just renamed! The weapons table still looks like the old one, just with some different numbers. Heck, a column was even added- the Code column. Still three pages of model and weapon traits! Four pages of reference tables! I've never seen a more complicated movement system- and I've played Battletech and Full Thrust. Another thing that I can't believe made it- Silhouettes and Lock- such an abstract, totally over complicated way to draw line of sight to a model. And cover- seems to be better, until you realize that you have partial cover, and full cover, and each cover now has Light, Heavy, and Solid cover for a combined total of 12 different types of cover! Then you have models used as cover, and area terrain as cover too. And they all tie back into Silhouettes, Lock, and the new, "fun" ECM and hiding rules.

Back to the weapons- I really liked the Optimum range, and the maximum range. And then I started to read the Penetration rules, and all I could think of was "Really?", and then there is the sub-optimal range...

Then I got to 8.2, Detailed Attack Action Summary and Timing:
Specifically, F.-K. and Calculate damage. That's when I realized nothing had changed in NuBlitz. I couldn't get past section 9.4 Overkill. Sorry, I put the rule book down, and haven't looked at it since.

I will say one bright spot that made me happy was that army construction rules seem way, way better then OldBlitz. Thumbs up there for sure! Although all I did was scan it and not really read it.

HGB is still a complicated, clunky rules system that makes little intuitive sense. There is probably no other game currently in production on the market that comes even close to this kind of complication/abstraction on the table top. At least, none that I know of (and I play quite a lot of games). I hate to say it, but one of my favorite table top games right now is Age of Sigmar, and it only has 4 pages of rules. If NuBlitz could have pulled that off... but alas. It was not meant to be.

I hope to get to my Kick Starter models over the Holidays painted and play my first real game of NuBlitz aoon after. Something tells me it's still going to play like the OldBlitz, just with a lot of new terms.

@Tamwulf - have you looked at N3? It weighs in at over 300 pages of hair-splitty rules, and has unlimited reactions to movements to grind gameplay to a halt.

That said, if you want to play with your toys in a much simpler way, there's always KOG light, which I specifically wrote to replace Heavy Gear... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/668519.page

Well, Tamwulf, here's a list of known battle reports I've seen shared of late, detailing matters.

https://ideaswithoutend.wordpress.com/2016/11/15/heavy-gear-blitz-battle-report-150tv-north-vs-south/

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

http://battlesforterranova.blogspot.com.au/2016/11/lasers-for-days-battle-report-cef-vs.html

Also, there's more shared on the Terra Nova DMZ.

As for Dreadnoughts, the resolution sounds closer to what you personally desire, although in a strategy situation, rather than a skirmish scale.

As a general rule, I only care for innovative new rules when they offer distinct improvements over the old stuff they're intended to replace, so there's that.

As to the little we know about Dreadnoughts' ruleset, so far it feels like it would be much better served with a classic "hexes & chits" game, which is not a slam against the game in any way or form, as I'm right now rekindling my affection for that kind of games (and well, the old tactical rules are the only HG rules I keep playing nowadays, so).

Given the scale you want to go for, and what you've commented about resource expenditure, an hex and chits game feels like a much better fit, and would allow the addition of supply chains and the like.

@Albertorius:

Obviously I agree. I wish them well but I just don't think the game is for me. I would have preferred a more minis-centric feeling game to go along with the minis instead of a classic board game that *sounds* like it clashes instead with them thematically. As you said, there is nothing wrong with board games (both newer style streamlined ones with minis and older style chits and crunch avalon versions) but I just don't think the combo of the two works in this situation. If they cancel to reorganize, I'd recommend picking either a board game (with stretch goal smaller metal/resin fleet scale minis using the same designs b[/img]ut made by DP9 in house) or making it a proper plastics minis game in both theme and mechanics.

If they go full minis game, I'd recommend changing the scale to 5km per inch with a turn taking roughly an hour in game time scale. You'd still have an appropriate sense of scale with Brandon's previously mentioned landship arty lob to 80km possible on a 3'x4' table and hopefully most of the mechanics can transfer over that fit in that new timescale. Instead of a typical game being the month long Battle for Indiana, it'll be the first day of the Battle for the Greater Metro Indy Area (referencing the location of the company for both game and time scale).

Again, all of the above is of course based on reading the tea leaves of Brandon's and Wunji's posts since unfortunately no gameplay video was posted to my knowledge; apply salt as needed. Here's also a helpful quick chart from Kicktraq on the project.





@Brandon:

Does Wunji have a dakka account? If so, I'd recommend him posting as well. It's not that you haven't been doing a good job but rather that it's in his best interests to do so as well; I don't think we've been too harsh on the subject to interact with. Let him know that he can set up both a company account under the company's name in case his personal one has an inappropriate or unhelpful name (i.e. WeirdbutWunji).

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@Tamwulf - have you looked at N3? It weighs in at over 300 pages of hair-splitty rules, and has unlimited reactions to movements to grind gameplay to a halt.

Ah, Infinity. The height of rules interaction and complication. How many times have you forgotten whose turn it was after resolving all the interrupts? Just to mess with my opponent one time, every time he moves a model 1", I'd interrupt and try to perform some action. He was getting frustrated and pissed and I was a total troll about it laughing my off! It was all in good fun though, and my "strategy" worked- he totally forgot what he was going to do with that model and his plan for the turn in general.

Metagaming FTW!

Ha! Too funny, but definitely doable. Too bad, as the models are pretty.

Same core issue with GW and HG - pretty models, gak rules.

I think you'll both find that the most common opinion (certainly not unanimous or even a large majority though) is quite different on both the Infinity rules and AOS here on dakka at least.

 warboss wrote:
I think you'll both find that the most common opinion (certainly not unanimous or even a large majority though) is quite different on both the Infinity rules and AOS here on dakka at least.

Infinity is a great system! Very complicated, but its solid. The rules make sense to me.

AoS is a fantastic game! I've liked it since it game out, though I was very sour on the army construction rules. Now, with the General's Handbook out, all my gripes and complaints about AoS are gone. My comment was that if HGB could have followed what GW did with Fantasy and then AoS, it would be an outstanding game with people lining up to play it.

Heck, they couldn't even be bothered to change the name to what everyone else calls the game: Heavy Gear. The only people I've ever met that called it Heavy Gear Blitz was the employees and some of the Pod Squad.

There is no other game out there right now that I want to be so much better and so many more people playing than Heavy Gear Blitz. But they take one look at the rules and say "no way".

 Tamwulf wrote:
Heavy Gear Blitz. But they take one look at the rules and say "no way".

This has been the case since I got my first HG minis during the Tactical era. Every time we've sat down to play it, it's been a chore. And those were the guys who were kind enough to give it a try, vs outright refusing.

Well, the KS got 210$ in pledge yesterday. I guess the market just wasn't ready for fictious big ships and fleet actions in an exotic setting.

In the meantime, Spartan's Dystopian War KS, a game of fantasy big ships in an exotic setting just brought 51K $US, almost triple the amount, in barely 3 days.
To be fair, even DW isn't doing as well as they should, but they should reach their goals and then some.

I do feel that by now there kind of is a fleet action game glut, TBH. Not sure in how many more slices can that pie be cut.

Of course, that's another reason to split from the group and do something different, like a hex based strategical fleet boardgame with pretty gaming pieces.

 Albertorius wrote:
I do feel that by now there kind of is a fleet action game glut, TBH. Not sure in how many more slices can that pie be cut.

Of course, that's another reason to split from the group and do something different, like a hex based strategical fleet boardgame with pretty gaming pieces.

Quick! Someone relaunch ADB's SFB with plastic minis!

I wish Spartan Games all the best in their endeavors.

I'm going to focus on getting things written up for folks interested in Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts, and hopefully more will support it.

Edit: Happy Thanksgiving.

BrandonKF wrote:
I wish Spartan Games all the best in their endeavors.

I'm going to focus on getting things written up for folks interested in Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts, and hopefully more will support it.

Edit: Happy Thanksgiving.

Happy Post Thanksgiving Brandon.

Just to clear some things up- the actual game play for Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts isn't actually done yet? Hasn't been written or play tested yet? Is that what you are saying?

I think you will find that expanding out into the fleet based games will be a challenge. Without some kind of innovative, exciting rules, the only thing this game will have going for it, is that it's set in the Heavy Gear universe, a universe known for it's mechs, not it's Landships, and trying to get those prospective players into the game will be difficult at best.

IMHO, and take it or leave it as you see fit, gears will have to play some kind of viable, key role in the game. And you won't be able to just have a token with some generic gear silhouettes that add +1 to your combat modifiers when in base contact with the Landship for example. If you make this game with the Landships/Dreadnoughts as the central theme, it will fail. Create a game with at least equal importance placed on the Gears + Landships and it will succeed.

So... what's the contingency plan if any?

Oohh.... That's turning ugly. Another day in the red and it's time to pull the plug.

The image I posted is continuously updated instead of static so it shows today's totals despite being posted yesterday here in the thread... and it doesn't look any better. Unfortunately, this is roughly the progression that I alluded to earlier on that I expected but hoped wouldn't happen. I suppose the next question is whether or not the feedback received will be incorporated into a reboot of the campaign +/- cancellation (which may or may not be too little too late regardless after this false start) or whether or not this vision is simply the only version that Wunji, Brandon et al. dreamed of making. While the second option is reasonable, I hope they go for the first and incorporate some of the feedback here in the thread and elsewhere online into the next campaign. The big bullet points for me would be in a dakka style KS post mortem for the campaign:

1) Game scale/mechanics matching the game components. The size of the models simply doesn't jive with the chits and tokens style gameplay alluded to in the game. Smaller scale resin tokens made in the same scale as the old Fleet game match the old board game mechanics more than massive minis game miniatures. The game should have started with FFG card/xwing style tokens for units with stretch goals to add fleet scale physical models... and if funding had a massive start then eventually add larger plastic models. Instead, the cart was put before the horse (and in this case it was a cart made for oxen to begin with).

2) Show, don't allude to, the game. I really am surprised there was no starter rules PDF and/or gameplay video available at launch. We've been hearing about the noncommittal, legally nonbinding yet we want you to pledge real money gameplay and game mechanics "impressions" and "inspirations" posted by Wunji instead of seeing the actual rules either in print or in action.

3) This one is a bit presumptive and an educated guess based on Dave's and Wunji's posts about the KS... Set a real goal instead of an artificially low one. The funding goal for an all plastic box with big models seemed mighty low. This is a common *BAD* practice in the industry since KS came around with low stretch funding goals to appeal to backer's fragile wills with the hopes that momentum will carry the project through to the real funding target. Several projects in the past exceeded their posted low stretch goals yet were cancelled suddenly because it became evident that the real much higher funding total would never be reached. That won't be the case here as the funding total never approached the goal but the statement about artifically low totals (if that is the case here as I suspect) stands.

That's all I can think of at the moment.

Yeah, I know it's dynamic, which is helpful. I just saw that it was 2 bad days (and accelerating), and noted that a 3rd bad day is usually the point at which a campaign should be cancelled by the creator. It looks like we're getting that 3rd bad day.

It's poor practice not to have gameplay video and rules at launch. There's no reason to believe that these rules will be good without evidence via print & play. Although there was some fair amount of high-level chatter by the creator, saying it's going to have X, Y & Z isnt' the same has having actual rules for X, Y & Z, much less working rules for X, Y & Z...

It's OK to have a low goal, for a minimal product set. If it's like BFG, with 1 "big" model design per side, and Gears / whatnot as bitz - just 2 small sprues, 4x6" each. $30k might just cover that tooling. However, I think the campaign is more ambitious than that.

I glanced through the comments last night, and people were saying that the ships were miles long? Supercarrier-sized land vehicles? In an ostensibly "hard" SF universe? I play Ogre Miniatures, and taking it that far is just beyond ridiculous. Does nobody understand the square-cube law?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

I glanced through the comments last night, and people were saying that the ships were miles long? Supercarrier-sized land vehicles? In an ostensibly "hard" SF universe? I play Ogre Miniatures, and taking it that far is just beyond ridiculous. Does nobody understand the square-cube law?

I'm guessing folks less technically inclined were confused by the conflicting game and model scales. 5" long model and 1"=20km game scale = 100km long landship visually. The seeing mismatch in the mechanics and the components in action (further muddied by the lack of actual gameplay videos upon release).

JohnHwangDD wrote:Yeah, I know it's dynamic, which is helpful. I just saw that it was 2 bad days (and accelerating), and noted that a 3rd bad day is usually the point at which a campaign should be cancelled by the creator. It looks like we're getting that 3rd bad day.

It's poor practice not to have gameplay video and rules at launch. There's no reason to believe that these rules will be good without evidence via print & play. Although there was some fair amount of high-level chatter by the creator, saying it's going to have X, Y & Z isnt' the same has having actual rules for X, Y & Z, much less working rules for X, Y & Z...

It's OK to have a low goal, for a minimal product set. If it's like BFG, with 1 "big" model design per side, and Gears / whatnot as bitz - just 2 small sprues, 4x6" each. $30k might just cover that tooling. However, I think the campaign is more ambitious than that.

I glanced through the comments last night, and people were saying that the ships were miles long? Supercarrier-sized land vehicles? In an ostensibly "hard" SF universe? I play Ogre Miniatures, and taking it that far is just beyond ridiculous. Does nobody understand the square-cube law?

I'm reminded of the square-cube law every time Gearstriders are brought up.

There were explanations given for landships in the past fluff, and the current fluff was going to give an even greater in-depth explanation, which I feel was on-point.

The individual who alluded this comment: "I understand the scale vs scope in this game (and in others). I am quite the scale junky. These ships are so huge they must be self sufficient. Imagine how many crewmen it takes to staff one of those landships. The bathrooms...think of all the bathrooms 60 mile by 30 mile wide ship has? Do not forget all the dining facilities too. How many janitors and cafeteria staff does a ship like this need to function? Supposedly the NC1701D Enterprise only had one bathroom in the middle of the ship. I hope these landships are not designed that way. What a cruel joke for the head engineer to play. CHances are his high school bullies are assigned to the ship. This is his revenge against them.
What do you do if you are 20 miles away in ZZZ1789D deck and you have to have an emergency anal evacuation? It is a good thing there are like 500,000 janitors on the ship. They need it.
I bet that is a mark of pride to be on leave in your janitor dress uniform. The girls really go for those guys with the sanitation engineer insignia.
I also cannot help but think about Rimmer going on a 3 week hike through the red dwarf with those little robots. Every time I see those model ships I think of Rimmer's slide show.
Thank you, you guys are the best. Enjoy the rest of the show
I've got merch in the back."

That's him joking around.

It was also his first time backing a Kickstarter. Of the four comments he left, one was an interest in making 2mm-3mm Gears, the rest spent defining the 'super-scale' of the Dreadnoughts.

All of which were a joke.

Yes, the largest landships were up for grabs first, and yes, the Susano-O class rivals a Nimitz-class supercarrier (roughly 300 meters). It's not the most offensive thing to hard science fiction.

Tamwulf wrote:

BrandonKF wrote:
I wish Spartan Games all the best in their endeavors.

I'm going to focus on getting things written up for folks interested in Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts, and hopefully more will support it.

Edit: Happy Thanksgiving.

Happy Post Thanksgiving Brandon.

Just to clear some things up- the actual game play for Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts isn't actually done yet? Hasn't been written or play tested yet? Is that what you are saying?

I think you will find that expanding out into the fleet based games will be a challenge. Without some kind of innovative, exciting rules, the only thing this game will have going for it, is that it's set in the Heavy Gear universe, a universe known for it's mechs, not it's Landships, and trying to get those prospective players into the game will be difficult at best.

IMHO, and take it or leave it as you see fit, gears will have to play some kind of viable, key role in the game. And you won't be able to just have a token with some generic gear silhouettes that add +1 to your combat modifiers when in base contact with the Landship for example. If you make this game with the Landships/Dreadnoughts as the central theme, it will fail. Create a game with at least equal importance placed on the Gears + Landships and it will succeed.

The rules were written in large part, however, I hesitate to use the words 'innovative' or 'exciting', because quite frankly, it's almost a catch-phrase of Kickstarters today. That's not a ding against others who truly do come out with exciting Kickstarters, just that, as you have said, fleet-action games are often filled to the brim, and I don't like over-selling anything.

However, would I say they are innovative in their own way? Yes. The rules are simple, easily defined, and there were only a few pieces that needed massaging, largely involving Air Defense.

I personally felt that it could be defined as a combination of chess, OGRE, and Harpoon, though with some key differences.

Heavy Gears are a part of the wider combined-arms ground forces that would be involved. Their role is middle-of-the-road in the array of units. There was no "add +1 to combat modifiers". Each Unit has set Maneuver, Move, Skirmish Power and Engagement Power ratings. With certain Heavy Gears, that would change, depending on the Player's choices during their Turn.

A Turn gives the player one Order to spend, plus whatever Orders they wished to spend through their Command Point usage. Then it went to the other Player. Like chess.

Difference, you could give a Standing Order to one specific Unit, and that Unit would complete that Standing Order every Turn until you assigned a different Order to it. Once it had a Standing Order, you couldn't assign any further Orders to it, unless it was a Landship (for example, a Landship could Travel to Destination, its Standing Order, and then carry out other Orders through Command Point usage).

There are also several other things included (Mission Cards, Event Cards, and Weather Tracker), all of which were intended to be simple, yet powerful in their own right.

warboss wrote:The image I posted is continuously updated instead of static so it shows today's totals despite being posted yesterday here in the thread... and it doesn't look any better. Unfortunately, this is roughly the progression that I alluded to earlier on that I expected but hoped wouldn't happen. I suppose the next question is whether or not the feedback received will be incorporated into a reboot of the campaign +/- cancellation (which may or may not be too little too late regardless after this false start) or whether or not this vision is simply the only version that Wunji, Brandon et al. dreamed of making. While the second option is reasonable, I hope they go for the first and incorporate some of the feedback here in the thread and elsewhere online into the next campaign. The big bullet points for me would be in a dakka style KS post mortem for the campaign:

1) Game scale/mechanics matching the game components. The size of the models simply doesn't jive with the chits and tokens style gameplay alluded to in the game. Smaller scale resin tokens made in the same scale as the old Fleet game match the old board game mechanics more than massive minis game miniatures.

2) Show, don't allude to, the game. I really am surprised there was no starter rules PDF and/or gameplay video available at launch. We've been hearing about the noncommittal, legally nonbinding yet we want you to pledge real money gameplay and game mechanics "impressions" and "inspirations" posted by Wunji instead of seeing the actual rules either in print or in action.

3) This one is a bit presumptive and an educated guess based on Dave's and Wunji's posts about the KS... Set a real goal instead of an artificially low one. The funding goal for an all plastic box with big models seemed mighty low. This is a common *BAD* practice in the industry since KS came around with low stretch funding goals to appeal to backer's fragile wills with the hopes that momentum will carry the project through to the real funding target. Several projects in the past exceeded their posted low stretch goals yet were cancelled suddenly because it became evident that the real much higher funding total would never be reached. That won't be the case here as the funding total never approached the goal but the statement about artifically low totals (if that is the case here as I suspect) stands.

That's all I can think of at the moment.

1. Chits and tokens weren't the end goal, but seeing the response, I suppose things might flex now. I will have to discuss it with Fusion Core. I wasn't entirely crazy about the idea initially, and I'm still not. That's not a ding against all those who like chits and tokens, I just liked the vision of an open-format tabletop using board-game rules that could flex however players (including myself) wished to, with just a few cut-out terrain pieces, and perhaps some 'centerpiece' models, like a three-dimensional Catan mountain range representing a particular mountain peak. (Personally, I would have been fine with the small Fleet-scale Gears, tanks, and whatnot, rather than the larger single counters).

2. An oversight that will need to be remedied.

3. The goal for the original four vessels wasn't artificially low. The original goal for the molds was around the breakpoint. Personally, I wasn't interested in 'breaking folks' fragile wills'. I know Fusion Core wasn't, either. Some folks said that the goals set for the additional molds was too high, others, such as yourself, said it was too low. Just goes to show that individuals looking from the outside through different lenses will see matters differently.

The 'wills', I see in reference to what's going on with the Kingdom Death Kickstarter. Though frankly I don't believe said individuals are 'fragile', rather I see the kind of excitement I wish would be attributed to Heavy Gear, not merely for nostalgia's sake, but for genuine excitement. I imagine that the man behind that game is probably over-the-moon and also biting his thumb hard, realizing the immensity of what he is being given and entrusted with. Had that been me, I'd have dead-fainted for at least a couple hours, and then gotten to work. But, I'll still work things over here, in all respects. Perhaps things will turn around now, or perhaps not. If there is a cancellation, Fusion Core will reset, then resurrect later, with everything in place. It's a learning process, and I've learned quite a bit merely as a Collaborator in the project. It's an in-depth look at how a Kickstarter is run.

BrandonKF wrote:
I'm reminded of the square-cube law every time Gearstriders are brought up.

I resemble that remark!

BrandonKF wrote:

1. Chits and tokens weren't the end goal, but seeing the response, I suppose things might flex now. I will have to discuss it with Fusion Core. I wasn't entirely crazy about the idea initially, and I'm still not. That's not a ding against all those who like chits and tokens, I just liked the vision of an open-format tabletop using board-game rules that could flex however players (including myself) wished to, with just a few cut-out terrain pieces, and perhaps some 'centerpiece' models, like a three-dimensional Catan mountain range representing a particular mountain peak. (Personally, I would have been fine with the small Fleet-scale Gears, tanks, and whatnot, rather than the larger single counters).

I think you misunderstand me. Chits and tokens weren't a suggested end goal but rather the starting line on the way to the end goal of big plastic minis (and with intermediate stretchgoals of fleet scale resins). IMO it should have been the initial funding goal version of the game with the components getting more and more grand as more and more money rolled in theoretically instead of starting with the end.

2. An oversight that will need to be remedied.

Good to hear. It's not that we didn't appreciate your descriptions and wunji's broad game design thoughts but a moving picture is worth a thousand words (if I may mangle that old saying to the video age).

3. The goal for the original four vessels wasn't artificially low. The original goal for the molds was around the breakpoint. Personally, I wasn't interested in 'breaking folks' fragile wills'. I know Fusion Core wasn't, either. Some folks said that the goals set for the additional molds was too high, others, such as yourself, said it was too low. Just goes to show that individuals looking from the outside through different lenses will see matters differently.

The 'wills', I see in reference to what's going on with the Kingdom Death Kickstarter. Though frankly I don't believe said individuals are 'fragile', rather I see the kind of excitement I wish would be attributed to Heavy Gear, not merely for nostalgia's sake, but for genuine excitement. I imagine that the man behind that game is probably over-the-moon and also biting his thumb hard, realizing the immensity of what he is being given and entrusted with. Had that been me, I'd have dead-fainted for at least a couple hours, and then gotten to work. But, I'll still work things over here, in all respects. Perhaps things will turn around now, or perhaps not. If there is a cancellation, Fusion Core will reset, then resurrect later, with everything in place. It's a learning process, and I've learned quite a bit merely as a Collaborator in the project. It's an in-depth look at how a Kickstarter is run.

I'm guessing the fragile wills comment touched a nerve as you mentioned it three times... I just can't think of any other way to describe the herd mentality of gamer crowdfunding. If something is hot, folks back a project they have little to no interest in just to not miss out (and some who back for financial resell gain). If something instead plateaus, they accelerate the fall by backing out even though it won't cost them a dime to stay in on a project that isn't likely to reach its stated goal. I can't think of any reason why for the last four days the funding total should be decreasing. The update on the 23rd didn't contain any earth shattering revelations like Wunji's secret plans to binge on chasing loose women and gorging on poutine with the funds. The project is no better or worse planned or executed than it was days earlier when it began and the money flow was still positive. And yet the exodus started... that's what I refer to as the fragile wills of backers. YMMV but if you're kickstarting a project and are willing to put money down on it in the first few days then you should be firm enough in your resolve to weather a few folks leaving midway. Did they back but only on the value premise of all the stretch goals being met and added to their pledge for free and bailed when only the initial offering might happen? Who knows... it's about as stallwart a bunch as a herd of cats apparently.

As for the initial goal, if that is the break even point for just the moulds, what happens if there is an unforseen delay/complication like with HG? Wunji wouldn't have stretch goals to unilaterally renege on like Robert and Dave did to save money if he only met his initial goal. What about punching out the sprues? Printing the card and paper components? Multiple shipping (within China, to the US, to backers) steps? I mentioned in the beginning that he may have money set aside for that but that isn't what KS has accustomed backers to believe. The goal feels artifically low for what he was offering and that to many educated backers is a red flag. It's kind of the opposite cause but same end effect as above but from a different group/psychology of backers.

I look forward to hearing what eventually comes next though and wish you luck. This current project simply wasn't what I was interested in but maybe the next version will be.

Kingdom Death 1.5 launched on the 25th. It pulled $2M in 2 hours, and is now over $5M in under 5 days. That's what's sucking up all of the KS money.

SPM's Way of the Fighter got the same treatment, and collapsed for much the same reason.

I'd strongly suggest cancelling now, getting the game rules into P&P condition, and then relaunching Feb-Mar, after people's wallets recover.

Albertorius wrote:

BrandonKF wrote:
I'm reminded of the square-cube law every time Gearstriders are brought up.

I resemble that remark!

So you do. Very often, in point of fact.

We will continue to discuss this, you know, until I'm dead and buried. Hopefully not for awhile.

warboss wrote:

BrandonKF wrote:

1. Chits and tokens weren't the end goal, but seeing the response, I suppose things might flex now. I will have to discuss it with Fusion Core. I wasn't entirely crazy about the idea initially, and I'm still not. That's not a ding against all those who like chits and tokens, I just liked the vision of an open-format tabletop using board-game rules that could flex however players (including myself) wished to, with just a few cut-out terrain pieces, and perhaps some 'centerpiece' models, like a three-dimensional Catan mountain range representing a particular mountain peak. (Personally, I would have been fine with the small Fleet-scale Gears, tanks, and whatnot, rather than the larger single counters).

I think you misunderstand me. Chits and tokens weren't a suggested end goal but rather the starting line on the way to the end goal of big plastic minis (and with intermediate stretchgoals of fleet scale resins). IMO it should have been the initial funding goal version of the game with the components getting more and more grand as more and more money rolled in theoretically instead of starting with the end.

Well, I made a faux pas of my own in my writing.

I was meaning to allude to the idea of hexboards.

Initially, hexes was the idea considered.

But I've grown rather fond of open boards, rather than the old 90s-style Battletech and hexboards of Heavy Gear. OGRE, I give a pass, because it's simple, quick, and plays fast.

Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts was intended to play much in the same way, only with more freeform templates. Cut out some cardboard, mark it with the terrain, maybe use a printed terrain sheet to represent the type of terrain in that area, lay it out on the battlespace, and voila.

While I suppose that using flat counters is fine for a starter set, or even as a freebie for aspiring players who don't have the funds, I'd much rather use miniatures, even if they're only a straight color plastic that can later be painted to the owner's desires. Heck, even OGRE Designer Edition's 2.5-dimensional OGREs were of interest to me when I see them.

Your point about the grander design as funds came in is noteworthy, and something I personally would have to keep in mind. Which brings me to the below:

3. The goal for the original four vessels wasn't artificially low. The original goal for the molds was around the breakpoint. Personally, I wasn't interested in 'breaking folks' fragile wills'. I know Fusion Core wasn't, either. Some folks said that the goals set for the additional molds was too high, others, such as yourself, said it was too low. Just goes to show that individuals looking from the outside through different lenses will see matters differently.

The 'wills', I see in reference to what's going on with the Kingdom Death Kickstarter. Though frankly I don't believe said individuals are 'fragile', rather I see the kind of excitement I wish would be attributed to Heavy Gear, not merely for nostalgia's sake, but for genuine excitement. I imagine that the man behind that game is probably over-the-moon and also biting his thumb hard, realizing the immensity of what he is being given and entrusted with. Had that been me, I'd have dead-fainted for at least a couple hours, and then gotten to work. But, I'll still work things over here, in all respects. Perhaps things will turn around now, or perhaps not. If there is a cancellation, Fusion Core will reset, then resurrect later, with everything in place. It's a learning process, and I've learned quite a bit merely as a Collaborator in the project. It's an in-depth look at how a Kickstarter is run.

I'm guessing the fragile wills comment touched a nerve as you mentioned it three times... I just can't think of any other way to describe the herd mentality of gamer crowdfunding. If something is hot, folks back a project they have little to no interest in just to not miss out (and some who back for financial resell gain). If something instead plateaus, they accelerate the fall by backing out even though it won't cost them a dime to stay in on a project that isn't likely to reach its stated goal. I can't think of any reason why for the last four days the funding total should be decreasing. The update on the 23rd didn't contain any earth shattering revelations like Wunji's secret plans to binge on chasing loose women and gorging on poutine with the funds. The project is no better or worse planned or executed than it was days earlier when it began and the money flow was still positive. And yet the exodus started... that's what I refer to as the fragile wills of backers. YMMV but if you're kickstarting a project and are willing to put money down on it in the first few days then you should be firm enough in your resolve to weather a few folks leaving midway. Did they back but only on the value premise of all the stretch goals being met and added to their pledge for free and bailed when only the initial offering might happen? Who knows... it's about as stallwart a bunch as a herd of cats apparently.

As for the initial goal, if that is the break even point for just the moulds, what happens if there is an unforseen delay/complication like with HG? Wunji wouldn't have stretch goals to unilaterally renege on like Robert and Dave did to save money if he only met his initial goal. What about punching out the sprues? Printing the card and paper components? Multiple shipping (within China, to the US, to backers) steps? I mentioned in the beginning that he may have money set aside for that but that isn't what KS has accustomed backers to believe. The goal feels artifically low for what he was offering and that to many educated backers is a red flag. It's kind of the opposite cause but same end effect as above but from a different group/psychology of backers.

I look forward to hearing what eventually comes next though and wish you luck. This current project simply wasn't what I was interested in but maybe the next version will be.

Two different groups to appeal to, that I understand. The fragile wills comment touched a nerve only in the regard that I wanted to properly express myself without appearing arrogant or condescending towards other Backers. As someone who has only of late been involved in Kickstarters, mostly small charities, and Heavy Gear, and some terrain boards, I would not presume to know why someone chooses to back out of a Pledge. Typically, when I've Pledged, I don't pull out.

Which leads me to the elephant in the room.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Kingdom Death 1.5 launched on the 25th. It pulled $2M in 2 hours, and is now over $5M in under 5 days. That's what's sucking up all of the KS money.

SPM's Way of the Fighter got the same treatment, and collapsed for much the same reason.

I'd strongly suggest cancelling now, getting the game rules into P&P condition, and then relaunching Feb-Mar, after people's wallets recover.

I have strongly disagreed with you in the past, Mr. John, but on this, I grant you that that might have to be considered. Strong as I might have my misgivings about our previous conversations, I do respect your experience and your weathered tone on these matters. I'm not Fusion Core, of course, so I have no capability to press the 'Cancel' button. I'm just the mouthpiece, so to speak.

I have regularly been checking in with multiple forums to see what kind of impact the announcements have had.

Here, on Dakka, there was a short period of excitement and interest and questions.
On Beasts of War, the post largely laid dormant until a couple individuals noted the plastic prototype miniatures.
WargamersAU, there were several individuals who mentioned that the looks of the miniatures were 'horrible'. When I responded by showing the prototypes, and invited them to ask questions, there was no response.
On TheWargamesWebsite, Rhoderic, an old fan, mentioned he didn't like the size, in particular, but was otherwise hopeful for the project, and of course, of late, has offered much the same advice as has been given here.
BGG, no response.
RPG.net, I misplaced the KS thread, but after it was placed in the appropriate forum, the post went by the wayside with no response.
On Facebook, lots of shares by hardcore fans in smaller Groups, but in larger Groups, the announcement gets lost in the noise of 'Superman vs. Batman, Goku vs. Superman' discussions.
On G+, folks occasionally notice and give it a +1, some have commented.
On Twitter, very little presence outside of my own tweets.

Of course, quite a few hardcore fans themselves mentioned that they just simply do not have the funds to Back at this time, and I understand that fully. And we do have to deal with the fact that we are in 'competition', so to speak, with other Kickstarters.

I do wish we could get something out in the larger gamer media outlets to provide folks with something more 'meaty', as there were several mentions of 'armadas', and I think that that is a loaded term. Learning curve.

BrandonKF wrote:
So you do. Very often, in point of fact.

We will continue to discuss this, you know, until I'm dead and buried. Hopefully not for awhile.

One could argue that I did it not often enough, taking it all into account. But it's not just me, as you know.

Right now I'm trying to provide alternate solutions for the problem, though.

BrandonKF wrote:
But I've grown rather fond of open boards, rather than the old 90s-style Battletech and hexboards of Heavy Gear. OGRE, I give a pass, because it's simple, quick, and plays fast.

Heavy Gear Dreadnoughts was intended to play much in the same way, only with more freeform templates. Cut out some cardboard, mark it with the terrain, maybe use a printed terrain sheet to represent the type of terrain in that area, lay it out on the battlespace, and voila.

You shouldn't really be looking at BTech or Heavy Gear in this instance, actually. That's not really what we're talking about when we say "hex and chits" games, even though we played those on hexboards. You should be looking to something more like... well, this:



Strategic level wargames, which seem to be the level you guys are going for. The above is a turn of Ardennes '44, but it's just an example. You can of course replace the actual chits for more pleasing minis, as long as you provide the same info in a similar way.

While I suppose that using flat counters is fine for a starter set, or even as a freebie for aspiring players who don't have the funds, I'd much rather use miniatures, even if they're only a straight color plastic that can later be painted to the owner's desires. Heck, even OGRE Designer Edition's 2.5-dimensional OGREs were of interest to me when I see them.

Minis as counters instead of chits is definitely very doable with the above.

Of course, quite a few hardcore fans themselves mentioned that they just simply do not have the funds to Back at this time, and I understand that fully. And we do have to deal with the fact that we are in 'competition', so to speak, with other Kickstarters.

It is a difficult time of the year, that's for sure. Black Friday, christmas sales and everything else eats up people's disposable income, so anything that people might find interesting but not that interesting probably falls by the wayside, or there's simply a need to prioritize. I would also advice to cancel now, rethink your strrategy and come back stronger come february or whereabouts.