Robotech® RPG Tactics™-License lost, the end is near!

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.

**paulson games**

Joyboozer wrote:
But according to WRRD, it's all because ND chose China, surely that's not incorrect?

If you take Defiance Games at their word everything was the fault of China as well.

**Joyboozer**

As someone who regularly gets stuff done by "the Chinese" I've never had a problem or found them to be any different to any other manufacturer in other countries.

**Mike1975**

Joyboozer wrote:
But according to WRRD, it's all because ND chose China, surely that's not incorrect?

Well, if you read what Jon wrote. ND did it all in XBrush which uses .STL files and those are not common in the industry in China for manufacturing plastics. From what I understand PB honestly thought ND was going to do things domestic. Since obviously PB likes to have others do the heavy work and just try to bring in the cash it makes sense that they did not check all the details before going into working with ND. Also evidenced by the handover after the KS and also the problems with the files in China. So the dots in this case do connect.

So
1. PB does like to do things cheap.
2. They don't check stuff but depend on others too much and that causes additional problems. (we have plenty of evidence of that)
3. By not properly managing things they get into a mess like wave 2.
4. They appear to be trying to fulfill obligations at least in word but lack of solid info on wave 2 puts doubts to that.
5. WRRD, as much as some complain, in this case, all the evidence supports what he was saying, go figure.
6. PB needs to get off the pot and learn to self-manage so that can manage their business.

**warboss**

Mike1975 wrote:
From what I understand PB honestly thought ND was going to do things domestic.

That seems like a very basic question to ask your subcontractor about the million dollar project you're hiring them for. I doubt that many people when asked about cheap plastic toy figurines instantly jump to the conclusion of "made in america" outside of palladium.

**Alpharius**

What's a "WRRD"?

**Joyboozer**

An arse.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
To put if fairly it's the guy who approached PB. He has a "they can do no wrong" attitude.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
The basics of any tender, China or not, are the same, you state what you require, and companies respond with how they meet those requirements and what it will cost. You check out the company you think best matches those requirements, make sure they're reputable, and sign a contract.
The type of files that would be provided should have been in that process.
Exactly how have Palladium managed to bypass that entire process?
If when the project was in obvious trouble, they had admitted their were problems ( including WRRD) solutions could have been offered.
Instead we got everyone stop hating Palladium, it's on track and will deliver early.
Now here we are, and they still haven't hired a project manager.

**chaos0xomega**

paulson games wrote:
The key to all these problems is that PB wanted things on the cheap, you can get just about anybody to produce a zbrush sculpt for bottom dollar. But what they didn't understand is that you can get a zbrush file (or any other type of file built for video game/display) just about anywhere but that doesn't mean it's viable for printing much less plastic milling. Like a lot of other companies they only see upfront dollar signs and don't understand the value of what an experienced hand will end up saving save them in the long run. Rather than pay X they end up paying X+Y+Z due to fixing repeated problems caused by working with inexperienced 3d artists. They get stuck bumbling their way though things and having to learn those modelling requirements the hard way on the fly. They had been in contact with somebody who could have walked them through that process much better, but Kevin is all knowing and all seeing so he never makes mistakes and certainly never ignores sound advice grown from hands on experience.

Some artists are incredibly good at hard surface modelling in zbrush, they use zbrush because it suits their workflow much better. It's a giant pain to learn all the various interfaces to work in the 3d field as you need to know how to use about 4-5 programs at a minimum. AT least two programs for for the modelling, 2-3 programs for lighting rendering, and photoshop for layering and editing, that's all without any animation elements. Most of the interfaces for stuff like Maya, Rhino, Blender etc all have some common ground but Zbrush is completely alien so if you spend the majority of your workflow using zbrush it can be easier just to do all of the hard surface stuff in there too, assuming you have the right skills and brush sets. Zbrush also offers a pretty advanced set of tools for making stamps and detailing within the matter of minutes which take significantly more time in other programs. For instance if I want to make a standardized "cog" to be on each joint I can extract the geometry from a vectored drawing in the matter of seconds vs having to build the geometry by hand and taking 15-20 minutes.

Most of the artists that are being contracted out for freelance work on minis are coming from a zbrush background for character and animation design, they have very little background in the technical side of having to make things for printing and even much less for milling which is highly technical and not taught in the typical 3d college courses. I've been attending Gnomon which is pretty top end for 3d design, they on ocassion mention 3d printing and prototyping but it's not a main stream topic or focus of classes as it's usually a footnote at best. Given how much reach it currently has and will grow to be they really should cover it a bit more extensively as it'll be a huge field in the very near future. Most of the classes are focused on 3d as a tool for film, video games and display, there's definitely some cross over due to 3d printing, but 3d milling work tends to draw more on the CAD background which tends to attract more technical minded artists and fewer of of the creative/free form type artists if that makes sense?

Makes perfect sense. I come from a CAD background. 3DS, Maya, Blsnder, and to a lesser extent Rhino (which I received some instruction in as its used in industry for some things) have been a nightmare for me to figure out and seem completely unintuitive. Zbrush on the other hand has been a breeze, I think it only took me a few hours to figure out how to make it do what I wanted it to do.

**Mike1975**

warboss wrote:
Mike1975 wrote:
From what I understand PB honestly thought ND was going to do things domestic.

That seems like a very basic question to ask your subcontractor about the million dollar project you're hiring them for. I doubt that many people when asked about cheap plastic toy figurines instantly jump to the conclusion of "made in america" outside of palladium.

Completely Agree....but we are talking PB and they have a history of doing things just as bad so.....

**stanman**

Mike1975 wrote:
warboss wrote:
Mike1975 wrote:
From what I understand PB honestly thought ND was going to do things domestic.

That seems like a very basic question to ask your subcontractor about the million dollar project you're hiring them for. I doubt that many people when asked about cheap plastic toy figurines instantly jump to the conclusion of "made in america" outside of palladium.

Completely Agree....but we are talking PB and they have a history of doing things just as bad so.....

Palladium, the gold standard in doing things wrong.

**Conrad Turner**

And if you thought this weeks 'update' would contain any information, think again.

We'll all be dead of asphyxiation fomr holding our breath and then they'll be able to say "We don't have to worry about Wave 2, all the backers are dead."

Someone at PB really ought to get put on a course in sound engineering. Then maybe we'd get someone capable of changing the record!

**Krinsath**

stanman wrote:
Palladium, the gold standard in doing things wrong.

See all you haters? You were saying Palladium can't do anything right, but I think everyone agrees they are *excellent* at mis-handling things. This seems appropriate to link as well, as it's another lesson PB should internalize.

The shop talk on 3D modelling-to-tooling has been most enlightening, so I wanted to give a thanks to all the guys who contributed there. As someone only familiar with the computer end of the equation it's always fascinating to see how the pixels on a screen become lumps of plastic I can hold.

**Albertorius**

So... looks like I might end up doing something with (some of) my RRT minis after all:

**warboss**

I fully agree with that pic!

**Albertorius**

warboss wrote:
I fully agree with that pic!

Well, a friend of mine (and the guy with whom I might end up playing X-Wing the most) is completely allergic to everything and anything Star Wars... but loves to bits the X-Wing system. And we both love Macross, so...

**Asterios**

25mm or 40mm ? that is the question, should I put the ShockTrooper on a 25mm base or a RRT 40mm base (which it is on now)?

**Talizvar**

Asterios wrote:
25mm or 40mm ? that is the question, should I put the ShockTrooper on a 25mm base or a RRT 40mm base (which it is on now)?

Hard choice.
Depends if you will have cyclones fielded on one stand or not: do they fit ok on 40mm or 25?
I think it would look strange with the ShockTrooper on 25 then cyclones on 40...

First reaction is it is fine on the 40 and would look cramped a bit on a 25, I think you would see some overhang off the base but GW has been conditioning us into that being OK for years.
OR they are putting out 30mm bases and I bet it would fit perfect.

Or you can forget the whole thing and play with that Battlestar Galactica model...

**Asterios**

Talizvar wrote:
Asterios wrote:
25mm or 40mm ? that is the question, should I put the ShockTrooper on a 25mm base or a RRT 40mm base (which it is on now)?
Hard choice.
Depends if you will have cyclones fielded on one stand or not: do they fit ok on 40mm or 25?
I think it would look strange with the ShockTrooper on 25 then cyclones on 40...

First reaction is it is fine on the 40 and would look cramped a bit on a 25, I think you would see some overhang off the base but GW has been conditioning us into that being OK for years.
OR they are putting out 30mm bases and I bet it would fit perfect.

Or you can forget the whole thing and play with that Battlestar Galactica model...

if i use a 40mm for the cyclones it will be like 4-5 of them per base was thinking of doing 3 cyclones per base as a unit and 2 invid scouts and one invid armored scout per base as a unit.

**Talizvar**

Asterios wrote:
If i use a 40mm for the cyclones it will be like 4-5 of them per base was thinking of doing 3 cyclones per base as a unit and 2 invid scouts and one invid armored scout per base as a unit.

I guess the thought being: do you want it a more large army type game or more skirmish?
Would these units tend to stick together or operate a bit more independently?
I would lean toward individual stands where possible until the models get too small.
They remind me of in size "protomechs" they had in Battletech.

**Asterios**

Talizvar wrote:
Asterios wrote:
If i use a 40mm for the cyclones it will be like 4-5 of them per base was thinking of doing 3 cyclones per base as a unit and 2 invid scouts and one invid armored scout per base as a unit.
I guess the thought being: do you want it a more large army type game or more skirmish?
Would these units tend to stick together or operate a bit more independently?
I would lean toward individual stands where possible until the models get too small.
They remind me of in size "protomechs" they had in Battletech.

well you see that Invid Shocktrooper? its about 2-3 times bigger then an Invid Scout.

**Talizvar**

Maybe 25mm for the scouts and 40 for the Shock?

Saw this guy's stuff for scouts and it looks about perfect at a 25mm:
http://thefacelessking.blogspot.ca/2012/06/dirz-and-15mm-sci-fi.html

Anyway, it your stuff, just thinking if I had the joy of your "problem" what would I do?
The difficulty is cyclones "punch above their weight" so a single stand of 5 guys represents a scary prospect.

I figure a cyclone is about the size of an epic scale space marine so here is single stands of bikes:
http://s189.photobucket.com/user/nmcastilho/media/Epic%20Space%20Marines/3rd-company-bikes-2-640px_zpsf788f6e8.jpg.html

I figure a cyclone when changed to the battlesuit is about a terminator size so these look good:
http://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2010/3/29/93586-Blood%20Ravens,%20Epic,%20Space%20Marines,%20Terminator%20Armor.jpg
I suspect they are mounted on a 1 cent coin or something around 15mm.
Packing about 4 of them on a normal epic scale stand is a bit congested:
http://store.wargamingtrader.com/system/files/imagecache/product_full/P2397%20-%20Epic%20Space%20Marine%20Terminator%20Detachment%20%20%20%20%2011-12-16.jpg
http://www.battletechengineer.com/misc/cyclone/Cyclone_Max.jpg

I can just imagine these little monsters buzzing around in a cityscape... it would be awesome looking.

**Mike1975**

You also use 1 Command Point PER base so that cyclones don't give a force hundreds of CP's. Another reason to group things like cyclones, APC's, and Tanks.

**Talizvar**

Mike1975 wrote:
You also use 1 Command Point PER base so that cyclones don't give a force hundreds of CP's. Another reason to group things like cyclones, APC's, and Tanks.

Hence why in Battletech "Proto-Mechs" are considered one unit that activates like a single model. 1 Command Point per base is an unfortunate wording of the rule in this case. Cyclones felt like character models rather than massed grunt squads.

The TV series always had a skirmish look to it even with those large scale battles: the focus was on only a few units.
It feels like lumping units together takes away from that a bit.
It feels right in some ways having a named squadron in SW: Armada for instance, but the game is appropriately large in scale.

I feel like I entered that "Should RRT be a larger scale?" debate again, I still say no.

**Forar**

Wouldn't it be easier to just follow the Zentraedi precedent and give them a renamed "Life is Cheap" that got around the 1 cp per base?

I mean, if that's the reason to avoid single or few cyclones per base, a similar answer already exists in the game.

**Mike1975**

Talizvar wrote:
Mike1975 wrote:
You also use 1 Command Point PER base so that cyclones don't give a force hundreds of CP's. Another reason to group things like cyclones, APC's, and Tanks.
Hence why in Battletech "Proto-Mechs" are considered one unit that activates like a single model. 1 Command Point per base is an unfortunate wording of the rule in this case. Cyclones felt like character models rather than massed grunt squads.

The TV series always had a skirmish look to it even with those large scale battles: the focus was on only a few units.
It feels like lumping units together takes away from that a bit.
It feels right in some ways having a named squadron in SW: Armada for instance, but the game is appropriately large in scale.

I feel like I entered that "Should RRT be a larger scale?" debate again, I still say no.

1. Cyclones were portrayed as Hero units when used by the main characters and rarely seen otherwise.
2. Giving each a CP would be insane and break the CP balance of the game.
3. Adding LIC or a renamed equivalent is an option, but adds complication to the game.
4. Cyclones have really short range and firepower and only as groups can they do anything serious.
5. Cyclones are cheap, on the order of a few points each, so having each one as an individual unit means you will have a crapload to move on the table.
6. If I do X command points per Y cyclones such as 1 per 3 or 4 you would have to count up all the units at the end of every single turn to see how many command points you have. When you have 4 or so per mech that can add up to a lot of counting.
7. Normal Infantry are 8 per stand, 4 cyclones or 1 leader is not that bad at all.

That, at least, is my thought process on them.

**Talizvar**

@Mike: Agreed on many points, since I keep forgetting it MUST be based on the RPG with all the pitfalls that entails.

Some comments to your points however:
1) Glad we agree.
2) I was recommending the unit of 5 use and get 1 CP even though they may be 5 separate models initially, I think now an alternative below may be better.
3) Since when were we ever afraid of complications? I could see using LIC on "red-shirts" and getting points for named characters. That could keep things down a bit.
4-5) Maybe "red-shirt" multiples on a single stand and character models on their own... like the Glaug with pods, they are a form of support/buff unit.
6) Character models generating their own points and on their own stands and with their own cards make totaling easy.
7) I think we are somewhat on the same page here... a "leader" could be on their own stand right?

I was also thinking in terms of the less models on each base then some of the supporting rules could come into effect. I could see two stands of two redshirts and a leader or hero on their own = 3 stands per group. Mind-you I am not looking forward to the "Cyclone punch-line" (tm).

**Mike1975**

Yeah, that is why I have support scouts and commanders as a single cyclone on a single stand.

When I get around to doing a Freedom Fighter faction we might see more individually based Cyclones since they will have some nasty upgrades and special abilities but less power units.

**Talizvar**

Side note: got contacted by my government, was assigned a "case number" and talked to an honest to goodness human being.
They seemed rather excited to delve into the world of kickstarters.
I organized everything including BBB stuff and FTC... I hope I do not scare them off...
Anyway, not angry anymore, just curious now what my silly government will do with it all... they do have a serious big-brother issue with the USA so they may just run with this... lord help us all.

**warboss**

I hope something positive (for you) comes from it. I don't mean that sarcastically either. Palladium needs to be shown that there are consequences for taking people's money and putting off completing their end of the contract for over two years with NO end in sight.

**Forar**

But there's totally an end in sight!

3-6 months! They've told us as much repeatedly, and despite having done so for the last half year or so, haven't adjusted that estimate more than adding a few months.

Seems pretty airtight to me. We should begin seeing pre-production prototypes any day now!

>.>

**warboss**

Forar wrote:
But there's totally an end in sight!

3-6 months! They've told us as much repeatedly, and despite having done so for the last half year or so, haven't adjusted that estimate more than adding a few months.

Seems pretty airtight to me. We should begin seeing pre-production prototypes any day now!

>.>

ZOMG! Totally. The end is in sight as long as you're the one holding the eye! I believe that is Alex, Kevin, and Wayne from L to R. The problem is that we, the valued backers, can't hold it so we have to rely instead on the updates that consist of casting chicken bones instead.

Spoiler: