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.

The KS comments have gotten a lot more interesting.

I particularly like this one:

Bill 'Wystan' C. wrote:So if I have 2 Core pledges I lose:
2 Tigers
2 SideWinders
2 Sets of Drones
and I gain what Exactly?
2 Acco Mounts

Seeing as I wanted Mechs here more than Mounts I am not overly happy with this. I think that another sprue of models should be given to replace the ones lost. Heck, give one additional set of sprues from one of the 5 for each Core Set (They cost pennies on the dollar to cast once the molds are paid for and we did pay for the molds right?)

And he goes on to add:

Bill 'Wystan' C. wrote:@Phillip - Hence my Point. I would love to see Sprue Collection 1, 2 or 5 added. 5 Gives back the drones and gives back 4 Mechs as well...

Mold 5 will include the Ferret (with 3 Drones), F2-25, Kodiak, and King Cobra

This would have been the correct fix. Upgrade the Tiger and Sidewinders to King Cobras & Kodiaks, and tossing in a F2-25 and Ferret as compensation for the reduction in variety.

 warboss wrote:
They probably chose the easiest route and if the world economy hadn't gak on the Canadian dollar (and of course they hadn't had their own delays) they'd have been ok. In this case, they weren't.

Except that the drop started during the Kickstarter. It has gotten worst since, but it was obvious at that point that the drop would continue at least for the next couple of year, and that they had to take measures immediately, or they would end up in the mess they have to deal with now.

In fact, I assumed at the time that this was the first thing DP9 did, since they had to deal with currency fluctuations between CAD and USD for a while.
Turn out that, once more, DP9 managed to surprise me with their incompetence.

Man alive, all of these financial geniuses are popping out of the woodwork. If only somebody could have advised the Pod at some point over the past year...

I took a peek at the official forums to gauge the response there and found this nugget:

http://dp9forum.com/index.php?showtopic=17304&page=2

We should keep the pledge manager open until the end of February. We'll do some reminder updates in the coming weeks.

So no rush in tweaking things.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Man alive, all of these financial geniuses are popping out of the woodwork. If only somebody could have advised the Pod at some point over the past year...

Any qualified accountant who looked over things after they got their funding should have pointed out the currency risk to them.

Speaking as a Canadian, we all (that is, the commoners) knew this was coming. We're all just used to having our dollar be a bit of a joke. Maybe not THIS bad, but the loonie was never going to stay up there.

I've been watching this thread for quite some time and a few things occur to me.
First, let me say that i've "dabbuled" with HG since the RAFM days, and i love the fluff of the game, the newer miniatures, and i am happy with the last(printed) version of BLITZ.

Does anyone play "non competitive" games of HG anymore? Seems most of the bitching on this thread is about the competitive side of the game. I don't see much about "just for fun, grab some gears and lets mosh" kind of game my son and i like. just wondering about that.
And why the hate for the pod people? Mean to say, can't we all agree that gak happens, and cut this company a bit of a break? The head pod guy comes here, members mock him, does'nt seem inviting. I doubt i'd come back.
Lastly, alot of people here seem to wish dp9 would "tank".Thats kinda crappy. People losing jobs is'nt something to happily hope for. I'm very sure the dp9 people want their game to be successful.Attacking the company does'nt make scense to me.

I have, never, ever played HG competitively.

Hell, I don't even know how you could even do that, over here.

Hate for the Pod People: I certainly don't hate anyone from the pod. I'm just very disappointed with them, and that? That they have earned in spades.

dp9 tanking: Never hoped that. Them getting their gak together? More times I can remember. And I think nobody can say I haven not been willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Repeatedly, even.

bound by glory, what you seem to not really get is that most of the "haters" here are like that for very valid reasons. And that they weren't haters. Actually, most of the people here have been staunch supporters, or have worked there, or have been playtesters. Or all of that at the same time.

Here's 71 pages of why people generally don't trust Dream Pod 9 anymore.

Well, if you think you have not "mocked" and "hated on" dream pod 9, my only and best advice is to re read those "71 pages".

Did you read them? Are the comments untrue? Did the Pod not push nice minis with terrible rules, unrestrained creep and excessive churn? Are you thinking they deserve kudos for that?

As for competitive play, first, you need multiple players who are invested to the point that they want to compete, in a game that supports multiple competitive builds... HG isn't on the shelves. Impenetrable rules stop 80% of the potential players who buy the minis. Gross imbalance and creep kills the competitive potential. Why bother?

bound for glory wrote:
Well, if you think you have not "mocked" and "hated on" dream pod 9, my only and best advice is to re read those "71 pages".

I know it's difficult to at that length of a thread but lots of folks listed concrete factual reasons as well as very dissatisfying personal interactions with the members of the pod (past and present) in the thread. Originally, this was actually a constructive criticism thread that I made up here on a third party site specifically because, during a period of supposed openness and willingness to change, the pod was pruning pages of constructive criticism (not "hate" mind you) while at the same time asking for it. The poll on the top of the page was put there to give them (and future customers) a view of what the problem areas were with the game and the company's general policies and procedures. It did admittedly morph into a complaint thread and back into a general topic thread but heated posts don't negate the remarkably unfriendly and short sighted things the pod has done for DECADES nor the direct effect those actions have had on customers. Alot of "haters" you see posting here used to be frequent contributors to the original forums, demo and convention volunteers, playtesters, and even creators of aspects of the game you like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

bound for glory wrote:
I've been watching this thread for quite some time and a few things occur to me.
First, let me say that i've "dabbuled" with HG since the RAFM days, and i love the fluff of the game, the newer miniatures, and i am happy with the last(printed) version of BLITZ.

Does anyone play "non competitive" games of HG anymore? Seems most of the bitching on this thread is about the competitive side of the game. I don't see much about "just for fun, grab some gears and lets mosh" kind of game my son and i like. just wondering about that.

Except for about a half dozen down to two people at gencon depending on the year, I don't recall seeing a mention of a competitive scene for heavy gear (aka tourney formats). I had seen postings about large active game groups at one point or another in Las Vegas (alien's group on the forums) and another in one of the Carolina's (can't recall that member's name) but I don't know if they still exist years later or if they ever ran actual tournies. As for "competitive" themed casual play (a bit of an oxymoron but it exists in gaming), I can't comment about that much as I never saw it. Whenever folks got beyond the superficial in the rules, the cracks really started showing and the support from the pod would come in fits and spurts. The Black Talons were hideously broken and undercosted yet were an incredibly popular army (low model count, easy to paint, great fluff, tie in to the video games) and the "fix" for them was a SERIES of points increases (because the first "fix" didn't increase them enough) that were technically voluntary. When I finally met a BT talon player to try the game (he bought the minis after a gencon mini demo), he didn't want to "nerf" his army. I instead offered to only play a double game with him where we EACH took turns playing his talons and both were land slides in his favor against a "balanced" opfor. Nucoals prices were also incredibly out of wack and necessitated a band aid fix for everyone else until they got their new books (a third of the factions never did). Playtesting was a mess with nepotism rampant and folks consisently looking out only to upgrade their own favorite faction (while being "strict" on others). FAQ's and Errattas were promised on a regular basis but you'd be lucky if you got one update a year. None of that really lends itself to a "competitive" scene.

Finally, balanced rules and good support from the manufacturer don't just help the competitive scene. You're not saying it but I've found that fans of certain companies (like DP9 and Palladium) use the perjorative terms like that as derogatory words and a crutch as if having solid rules and support somehow hurts non-competitive gamers. Just in case as an FYI... they don't. If anything, they help them substantially more as those casual players in my experience just flat out drop the game when they encounter the cracks inevitably (whether at the hands of a "competitive" player who trounces them over and over or on their own). The HG blitz rules *SEEM* well thought out and intuitive until you actually start playing and realize the things that should surivive don't and alot of what you end up doing is nothing when you think it should be epic.

And why the hate for the pod people? Mean to say, can't we all agree that gak happens, and cut this company a bit of a break? The head pod guy comes here, members mock him, does'nt seem inviting. I doubt i'd come back. Lastly, alot of people here seem to wish dp9 would "tank".Thats kinda crappy. People losing jobs is'nt something to happily hope for. I'm very sure the dp9 people want their game to be successful.Attacking the company does'nt make scense to me.

I think you'll find people expressing their anger because they've given the company a LOT of breaks and keep getting screwed over. It isn't just "gak happens" but rather why does the pod traditionally choose to always gak right in front of their customers so that they have to step in it. Dp9 has a history of trying to make their game a "short term" success in terms of a quick cash in at the expense of their fans and the long term health of the game/company; that is a valid target for criticism. After so many supposed new leaves turned over and changes of course that always seem to hit the same field of icebergs over and over again, some fans just think the only chance of success for the IP is to separate it from the current owners. It worked for D&D, right? (at least for a time until they started to repeat the same mistakes again a decade later)

bound for glory wrote:
Well, if you think you have not "mocked" and "hated on" dream pod 9, my only and best advice is to re read those "71 pages".

Well, apparently I need to quote myself here, then:

 Albertorius wrote:
Well, after much prodding, I'm compelled to post here (and over at DP9 apparently xD)

I don't play anymore for a lot of reasons. There's the fact that I basically need to make new players to be able to play, or that the minis and the books are both GW-level expensive and almost impossible to get over here (I've lost count of the times a prospective player has ran away after seeing the prices). There's also the fact that the current rules have a lot of holes, and there's no rules support whatsoever. And the power creep between "armies the designer play/like" and "armies that don't", which can get ridiculous. Or the fact that the new southern book basically broke all my southern armies (and no, I didn't do 4-gear cadres). Or the "improved" army creation rules that are even more convoluted and leads to... weird lists (as most games tend to go PL3, the best way to do gear lists tend to be with armor regiments, and viceversa, for example). Or the variant names that mean different things all the time...

Well, you get the idea.

I actually stopped paying attention to the game during the release of the southern book, but to be honest, the breaking point was the NuCoal book and the new fluff.

See, I'm a HG setting nerd. And the NuCoal fluff makes no sense whatsoever. None at all. Worse, to buff it up, they basically killed off another faction, for no net gain I can think of, and adding convolute migration and stupid ball tossing all over Terra Nova, clearly demonstrating that the writer didn't have a working understanding of what distances and surface means at all.

One of the things HG needs is to have two universes. It needs a rpg setting and a very distinct wargame setting. They did it once, with Lightning Strike. But they apparently can't anymore (yes, yes, this is assuming the rpg is not dead, which it is :( ).

Anyways, maybe THIS TIME it will be the time. Maybe THIS TIME they'll do a good job with the core system. Maybe THIS TIME, they'll give rules support that doesn't fiddle out in two weeks after the uproar. Maybe THIS TIME they actually make a wargame.

...yeah, well. Once fooled and all that.

That post is from... two years ago next week. Good god.

Not enough has changed to make me change my posture.

I have been ignoring the main threads about the KS on DP9 site for a while (still read the ones about the rules development) due to most comments sounding like Apple fanboys saying thank you Steve Jobs for giving me phone that I can't hold like a phone, so I decided to take a look after this fiasco.

HA!

So in other words, you swap $12 worth miniatures for a $5 miniature + the added deception of not having the 2 models pledgers paid for?

This is awsome, i'm so excited, thank you very much.

Shrugging has become the default response to every DP9 Kickstarter update. Something will be shipped someday.

I guess i did'nt mean "competitive" as in "lets have a tourney".

What threw me was the talk of constantly "unbalanced"lists and books that never got finished.

Also, is there that much problem with their playtesters?

I'm sure their tiny handful of playtesters are doing their absolute best to ensure that their particular collections of models are super effective. Whoever gets the last word in, wins.

This is a side effect of HG being an unpopular game - it's a highly incestuous relationship between the Pod and it's White Knights.

bound for glory wrote:
Also, is there that much problem with their playtesters?

I'm sure their current playtesters are alright enough, as always. Many of the people posting here has been a Pod playtester one time or another.

The problem is (and never has been, not really) their playtesters. The problem is their playtesting methodology. Which can be more or less summed up by JHDD's post, really, although you'd probably need to change "playtester" there for "playtesting coordinator", which are the people that filter the playtesting reports and then feed them to the rules developers.

 Albertorius wrote:

bound for glory wrote:
Also, is there that much problem with their playtesters?

I'm sure their current playtesters are alright enough, as always. Many of the people posting here has been a Pod playtester one time or another.

The problem is (and never has been, not really) their playtesters. The problem is their playtesting methodology. Which can be more or less summed up by JHDD's post, really, although you'd probably need to change "playtester" there for "playtesting coordinator", which are the people that filter the playtesting reports and then feed them to the rules developers.

The main problem with their playtesting methodology is that's it's not a playtest methodology. It's perfectly designed to generate a lot of noise, not data.
The end results is that those interpreting the playtesting reports can say it means more or less anything they want it to mean.
In fact, if I wanted to create a playtesting procedure to be able to deflect blame for any and all problems on the playtesters, while doing whatever I wanted to do, I would use DP9's testing procedure.
Even if I assume that doing so is not the intention, and that it is just incompetence, DP9 playtesting methodology just results in confirmation bias.

Strangely enough, whenever there was a change of methodology, none of the changes touched the core problems (that is, the absolute refusal to do basic math, to tell the playtesters what is supposed to do what, and to control variables during the playtest)

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Smilodon_UP wrote:

maceria wrote:
[..] Points for transparency, but anti-points for what that transparency shows.

Oddly, the not friendly/critical comments are still there on both the KS comments and specific update, and even the official forums, but everything disappeared overnight on their FB page update notice.

Dun-dun-dun!
It appears that the Pod is learning from the Robotech Masters...

 warboss wrote:
I guess they consider facebook their broadest casual community involvement and wanted to cleanse it. The official forums tend to attract the dedicated players who will find out the scoop regardless so no point in cleansing that as it would likely have the opposite effect of stimulating more discussion. They don't have any control over the KS comments (and admittedly I haven't looked there to see the reaction but every time I did look in 2015 the comments were pretty much a ghostown) unless someone blatantly violates the terms and then they can only flag it for someone else.

To be as fair as I can be, the FB comments appear to have resurfaced, so their disappearance was either a glitch or because the post got otherwise deleted/modified/whatever happens to comments left on a timeline entry (Yet another of too many reasons I stopped bothering with FB years back).

maceria wrote:
I have been ignoring the main threads about the KS on DP9 site for a while (still read the ones about the rules development) due to most comments sounding like Apple fanboys saying thank you Steve Jobs for giving me phone that I can't hold like a phone, so I decided to take a look after this fiasco.

One quote here this afternoon poses an interesting question; is all of the $$$ completely gone, because rereading the update would seem to indicate refunds being few and far between, if at all.

Jake Staines, about 6 hours ago, wrote:So now I have a load of credit in Fundafull but I don't actually want any of the other available add-ons. Is it safe to assume that you've spent it already and I can't get it back?

edit: Looks like no, there will be no refunds period, even if backers want nothing at all from either the KS add-ons or the online store.

DP9, about 5 hours ago, wrote:[..] This money can't be refunded as the majority of it is being used to make the plastic injection molds and have the plastics popped for the Backer Reward Packages.
[..] Now all that being said, we can't do refunds, but we can make available special orders for the Dream Pod 9 Online Store. If there are no other Add-ons in the pledge manager that interest you as replacements to the plastic Tiger and Sidewinder sprues Add-ons which are no longer available.

bound for glory wrote:
[..] The head pod guy comes here, members mock him, does'nt seem inviting. I doubt i'd come back.

In all likelihood, that has to do with the questions still being asked here, such as those about things pointed out almost literally two years ago for the Alpha public reveal on the DP9 forums that remain unfixed (and the comments/questions largely removed on that venue).
Some other things removed from the official forums include Dave's thoughts on Gencon not revealing ''any problems'' with NuBlitz & force construction, because nobody took him out drinking to have a chat.

Dave, 30 Sep 2014, at 7:17 PM wrote:This is an announcement thread not an invitation to air grievances. That's what the bars at Gencon are for, which no one invited me out to so I assumed everything was fine. I am locking and sweeping this threat. Please keep it civil and on topics gentlemen or my mod hammer will have to get powered up. I believe that the beta is a very open and welcoming process. If you are at all unclear as to how to contribute drop me a note, I will be happy to offer some suggestions.

TPTB in Pod-land like to come across as ''accommodating'' to the folks paying to play the game they are trying to produce, but every now and then either of them will let slip some comment or gripe beyond just ordinary frustration that reveals another side entirely.

bound for glory wrote:
[..] People losing jobs is'nt something to happily hope for.

Dream Pod 9 personnel includes two (2) somewhat full-time persons and one or two (1-2) interns.
Three (3) somewhat full/part-time personnel left for other HG related projects not part of DP9, along with the last few freelancers in 2013 as best I recall; it has been a long time since the same team worked on more than a single DP9 product.

If the KS fails, or goes wrong, then yes, in all likelihood what little of the company is left will be finished.
One question you should be asking is why have things come to that almost ''all or nothing'' impasse.
Another is; why are there so few potential employees and freelancers who're willing to work for the Pod, or even contribute to the Aurora e-fanzine.
Or how about; why are there so few employees and freelancers still working for the Pod from ten years back, if any, let alone previously associated folks who might have left on friendly terms.

bound for glory wrote:
[..] What threw me was the talk of constantly "unbalanced"lists and books that never got finished.
Also, is there that much problem with their playtesters?

Regarding unsupported legacy models and unbalanced gameplay, if you don't see it then you don't see it, and probably no one (nor comments in either the other Dakka thread or the one over on RPG.net) will ever convince you of either.

To my knowledge the only book ''finished'' (which few DP9 books actually are) more or less on schedule for the past, no idea really on the overall time frame but definitely more than five/six/seven years, was the Field Support Guide PDF.

The following book was the Northern PDF, which was gutted after turn-in to include a not playtested and undercosted Gear-Strider which followed a long string of similar models that required specifically tweaked stats to even function in gameplay.
The book before those was the Paxton PDF, which not only had gross power creep initially but received further (usually free) enhancements during each subsequent, and largely unsuccessful, supposedly error fixing ''edits''.


Probably the only HGB!-era book apart from the Field Support Guide that did not require significant edits or subsequent fixes was Drop Bears; and the FSG was almost entirely a collection of and updating for the Field Manuals of Gear-Up fixes to the L&L ruleset to close out OldBlitz.
Everything else talked about/planned, primarily for other factions and as yet unexplored (unpublished) colonies, during the L&L or Field Manual eras of HGB! was quietly dropped behind the scenes by the Pod.



On playtesting, I still think mrondeau said it best in a post of his to Dave about that very same thing, that never got a reply.

mrondeau, on Wed 29/Oct/2014 at 12:36:27 PM, wrote:[..] If I wanted you to fail, I would simply shut up.

And in agreement with Albertorius and John, they aren't kidding or underplaying what some test folks for the Pod consider adequate for the process, largely because nothing is ever said to them officially by TPTB to set a standard.

_
_

mrondeau wrote:

Even if I assume that doing so is not the intention, and that it is just incompetence, DP9 playtesting methodology just results in confirmation bias.

I certainly think the process is flawed, and it feeds into some bad behaviors that aren't being compensated for. In particular the limited play-test pool, combined with a free-form process means everybody gets to bring their own perspective to the party. So instead of having 'playtesters' you end up with 'associate designers', which sounds great (you're collaborating!) but weakens a consistent vision of where the game should be. Hell I was surprised they took my ideals whole-cloth instead of imposing some common set of constraints, or making them confirm to their own vision.

And that is what I think is the worst flaw in the process - there's not a strong opinion on where the game should be. That lets it be pushed around back and forth by people with strong opinions (like me!), which is probably not a great thing in the balance. You need some flexibility with respect to your customers wishes, or otherwise you're missing valuable clues. But you should be starting from a strong point of 'where does the company need to go' and I'm not sure this latest edition started that way.

 IceRaptor wrote:

mrondeau wrote:

Even if I assume that doing so is not the intention, and that it is just incompetence, DP9 playtesting methodology just results in confirmation bias.

I certainly think the process is flawed, and it feeds into some bad behaviors that aren't being compensated for. In particular the limited play-test pool, combined with a free-form process means everybody gets to bring their own perspective to the party. So instead of having 'playtesters' you end up with 'associate designers', which sounds great (you're collaborating!) but weakens a consistent vision of where the game should be. Hell I was surprised they took my ideals whole-cloth instead of imposing some common set of constraints, or making them confirm to their own vision.

And that is what I think is the worst flaw in the process - there's not a strong opinion on where the game should be. That lets it be pushed around back and forth by people with strong opinions (like me!), which is probably not a great thing in the balance. You need some flexibility with respect to your customers wishes, or otherwise you're missing valuable clues. But you should be starting from a strong point of 'where does the company need to go' and I'm not sure this latest edition started that way.

Well, I was focusing on the testing methodology, since that's what I experienced first hand.
You are right for the lack of consistent and clear vision, but that's more of a design problem, and I have not experienced that part of DP9 first hand.

Essentially, what I saw is that, even if there is a temporary, designer specific vision that might or might not be relevant one year later, this vision will not be explained to the playtesters.

I guess i stand corrected.
I'm sorry for my ignorant comments. I had no clue the game or company were in such bad shape. I was looking at the game through the eye of the long time fan. I like the fluff, the models and for the most part, the game-play.
I guess if i sat down and really thought about the state of the game, i would have seen what you guys were on about.
No offense ment.

bound for glory wrote:
No offense meant.

I highly doubt that after some reflection anyone here took anything you said as a personal or group attack.
I know, for myself anyways but probably a lot of others as well, that those of us labeled ''detractors'' started off with the exact same perspective until eventually something happened to shake belief and respect in the company making the game we so admired.

One big problem with Dream Pod 9 as a company, as a primary something that is often pointed out, is how there has always been so few folks who've even heard of their titles, meaning that a lot of the imperfections tend to get glossed over by enthusiasm instead of being fixed.
Another big factor happened during the run-up to Forged in Fire being released; TPTB in Pod-land clamped down much harder both publicly and privately than had previously been the case on what kinds of criticism or negative reactions they would allow to be voiced on venues they controlled.

For other venues, a number of folks tried to drown out what little factual information, truthful perspectives, or pragmatic and not so pragmatic impressions were being discussed apparently in case it ever got viewed by any of the silent majority.
The practical effect of that though seems to have been both groups mutually ignoring each other and consequently everyone involved being ignored in turn by those not already invested in the setting.

I think because of those considerations there is admittedly very little middle of the road evaluations about Heavy Gear to be found; instead folks will find equally small amounts of glowing praise and point by point condemnations.


Yet quite a lot of the time, simply due to popularity and member count, BGG/Dakka/etc etc are the forums most outsiders will go to first to see who's talking about a particular game, and what they have to say about it good or bad.
Over time I've come around to believe the point of view that the folks at the Pod have never quite understood that reality.

However, just because it's the internet and involves people in general, there will always be a significant percentage of folks who not only never post anywhere but never go looking for information in the first place before deciding whether or not to buy into something based on looks alone.
Knowing what the silent majority actually thinks, if those folks simply haven't give up on the game or setting entirely when they encounter something they don't like, almost never ends up being discussed.

In fact, the KS backer numbers might be the first real indication of the current exposure of HG and DP9, yet even a few of those who did comment are not planning to use either the setting or any DP9-published ruleset.
The sum takeaway of everything being discussed here or elsewhere still appears to be that while there is a lot to admire in the setting of HG the company currently making it is facing a long hard road towards gaining an equal measure of status.

_
_

bound for glory wrote:
I guess i stand corrected.
I'm sorry for my ignorant comments. I had no clue the game or company were in such bad shape. I was looking at the game through the eye of the long time fan. I like the fluff, the models and for the most part, the game-play.
I guess if i sat down and really thought about the state of the game, i would have seen what you guys were on about.
No offense ment.

No worries. ^_^ Unfortunately many of us have been doing this a long time.

And besides, we've been called worse.

oops, Was it my turn to be unpleasantly contra-reactionary this week?

_
_

 Smilodon_UP wrote:
oops, Was it my turn to be unpleasantly contra-reactionary this week?

_
_

Yup

Looks like we need a spreadsheet

The whole "we unilaterally cut 2 models from the delivery, but are giving you bitz, because we fethed up the money thing" thing kinda pisses me off.

It's Robotech all over again. Feth the Pod.

The Pod shows their true colors in the Comments. Feth those guys.

At this point, it's pretty much certain I'm not funding beyond the $1 CAD. That's a bullet dodged right there!

Now that they start calling criticism "trolling", the words "criminal" and "fraud" enter the conversation:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/heavygearblitz/heavy-gear-blitz-war-for-terra-nova-starter-set/comments?cursor=12350436#comment-12350435

This should be fun!