Author Topic: Land-Air Mechs: a Vision (Read 16691 times)

JPArbiter · « **on:** 31 January 2011, 09:46:03 »

I just wanted to see some opinions.

if Ironwind was to create new LAM minis from TRO 3085, or some group of fans gave Irionwind a bunch of money when fan funding came back online *cough*, how would you prefer they go about it? would you just want the AirMech Mini and be done with it like the old days? or something else?

I have a unique Vision on this. in light of the Battleforce miniatures coming out, I think it would be awesome to do a full scale Battlemech mode Miniature, and then use the new Battleforce scale minis to make an air mech mini and a fighter mini. that would be cheaper then doing three full size minis per unit (two for the Shadow Hawk)

what do you guys think?

DaveMac · « **Reply #1 on:** 31 January 2011, 09:51:11 »

All three would be nice, perhaps as a set.

If not possible then a Battlemech mode one.

Wrangler · « **Reply #2 on:** 31 January 2011, 10:02:02 »

If they were done in the BattleForce size, i'd incline to go with both fighter/Mech mode things.

If were full-scale miniatures, i'd stay in Air-Mech mode, since thats going be most use in the game. How long does a fighter mode 'Mech stay on the field?

Lorcan Nagle · « **Reply #3 on:** 31 January 2011, 10:48:56 »

Either all three modes (released separately or as a 3-pack), or in a kit form that would allow you to pick what mode you assemble it in.

Stormlion1 · « **Reply #4 on:** 31 January 2011, 11:40:34 »

Two mini's, a mech version and a air-mech version. Don't really need a fighter version, how often would people use it?

JPArbiter · « **Reply #5 on:** 31 January 2011, 12:11:32 »

Quote from: Stormlion1 on 31 January 2011, 11:40:34

Two mini's, a mech version and a air-mech version. Don't really need a fighter version, how often would people use it?

I dunno, Wasp with Bomb Bay.... I would use em

Daishi411 · « **Reply #6 on:** 31 January 2011, 12:31:12 »

yeah, i agree, i would get enough use out of the fighter mode that i would want one just in case. right now, i'm partial to jp's idea, but i'm open to suggestions

JPArbiter · « **Reply #7 on:** 31 January 2011, 13:55:52 »

its also a question of whats cheapest. assume it costs 500 dollars per full sized mini regardless of situation to fan fund these puppies, that means the community would have to raise 5500 dollars to be satisfied with the full sized set of four LAMs.

what is using my idea the cost to fund could be knocked down by 25%, more if we cut the fighter out of the equation entirely...

which brings toi mind another question. if you had to choose between AirMech or Battlemech full sized, what would you do, keeping in mind the aesthetics of the Mk I's

megatrons2nd · « **Reply #8 on:** 31 January 2011, 17:06:58 »

I would prefer the Airmech mode version first. Although I would like, and use, each modes model in a game.

Centurion03 · « **Reply #9 on:** 31 January 2011, 17:48:30 »

Never having been able to use a LAM before I am greatly looking forward these new
versions being released.

I think perhaps the LAMs in AirMech mode would work best. It would be nice to have
all three modes, but from a cost perspective I would settle for AirMech mode.

ShockaTime · « **Reply #10 on:** 31 January 2011, 19:51:33 »

I like JP's idea, but i would change it to the Airmech mode in mech scale and the other two in smaller scale. the airmech mode is what makes LAM's unique.

Stingray · « **Reply #11 on:** 31 January 2011, 21:09:20 »

Quote from: ShockaTime on 31 January 2011, 19:51:33

I like JP's idea, but i would change it to the Airmech mode in mech scale and the other two in smaller scale. the airmech mode is what makes LAM's unique.

QFT

Honestly of the three the Airmech mode will sell the best IMHO... with Mech mode second, and Aerotech mode (most likely) a distant third.

Daishi411 · « **Reply #12 on:** 31 January 2011, 21:21:17 »

turns out i miss read what jp wrote, based on the last 2 posts, to make my opinion clear on the matter, the air mech mode is the most important part for me, the other 2 can be small

Sigma · « **Reply #13 on:** 31 January 2011, 21:36:31 »

I'm wondering how confusing it's going to get when we get the Celestial LAM's as well.

I'm betting at least 2 new chassis with a full 3 modes.

I'm thinking they'll do a pack honestly with all 3 modes. Because who wouldn't buy a pack? LAM's are a love-it/hate-it thing and something that most fans at least want to have one of. You know that even if they were not sold singularly that us fans would gobble up the triple packs.

That's also what's probably going to knock the releases way back. You have to prep and mold 3 minis per release. In order to keep all the minis very similar as well they are going to need to sculpt all the modes around the same time to keep all the proportions and little scaled details in line with the rest.

Not that I couldn't be wrong. "Place your bets folks. Place your bets!"

I am Belch II · « **Reply #14 on:** 01 February 2011, 00:50:45 »

I hope you can maybe by a 3 pack set, and have all 3 versions. Mech, Land-Air, and then Fighter mode!

Paint it Pink · « **Reply #15 on:** 01 February 2011, 04:48:55 »

Airmech mode is IMO the priority number one choice. Fighter mode might sell better made in Aerotech scale. Battlemech mode not really needed, except for the perfect collection people. Oh that would probably be me too. }:)

skumm · « **Reply #16 on:** 01 February 2011, 11:11:53 »

In order to keep my collection complete, I will have to buy whatever comes out no matter what. :/

JPArbiter · « **Reply #17 on:** 01 February 2011, 11:21:25 »

and that just makes evil plans more glorious.... }:)

Col.Hengist · « **Reply #18 on:** 01 February 2011, 13:21:50 »

I'm going to have to have all 3 modes on each,including the scorpion l.a.m. in regular BT size,battleforce size and AT2 size...I know,I'm a pig but I can wish.

I'm just imagning the scorpion l.a.m. flying out into space,transforming into a quad latching onto a warship with the claws and magnets in its feet and drilling holes into ... what? I can dream.

megatrons2nd · « **Reply #19 on:** 02 February 2011, 17:21:29 »

I believe Herb said Quad LAMs were not going to happen. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Col.Hengist · « **Reply #20 on:** 02 February 2011, 17:24:21 »

Last 3 words of my previous post.

Deathknight69 · « **Reply #21 on:** 03 February 2011, 18:25:49 »

I'm inclined to go w/ all 3 modes myself. I like the idea of a full scale AirMech, BattleMech modes and the smaller scale fighter mode personally :)

serrate · « **Reply #22 on:** 04 February 2011, 09:27:54 »

Ideally, I'd want an airmech, mech, and ASF mode. But I'll buy whatever they make.

JPArbiter · « **Reply #23 on:** 04 February 2011, 09:30:38 »

Quote from: serrate on 04 February 2011, 09:27:54

Ideally, I'd want an airmech, mech, and ASF mode. But I'll buy whatever they make.

yes, we have established that, but the question I originally posted was scale. since we have Battleforce scale mechs as an option and had microfighters forever, out of three, which one should be in mech scale and which other two modes should be in smaller scale?

maddyfish · « **Reply #24 on:** 04 February 2011, 19:32:34 »

All three modes would be nice, but airmech would be the ticket if it was only to be one.

Our play group has used all three modes in campaign play. Mercifully, our opponent wanted to see what lambs could do, so his Batu Bs let out lams in fighter mode escape.

And I converted to mech mode during a game just so I could say out loud

"CONVERT TO BATTLEROID MODE"

But they are mostly effective as airmechs.

Sigma · « **Reply #25 on:** 04 February 2011, 20:14:05 »

Quote from: JPArbiter on 04 February 2011, 09:30:38

yes, we have established that, but the question I originally posted was scale. since we have Battleforce scale mechs as an option and had microfighters forever, out of three, which one should be in mech scale and which other two modes should be in smaller scale?

All in mech scale. But all my aerospace fighters are in mech scale since I don't really play big space battles and don't have any fleet scale stuff so I'm probably biased.

But $50 for a LAM aerospace micro-scale sculpt is pocket change once fan funding opens again.

The_Livewire · « **Reply #26 on:** 05 February 2011, 19:47:18 »

I'd like them in Air Mech mode if i had to have only one mode.

Though a mech scale Airmech, Mech scale Mech mode, micro scale fighter mode would work best I think

serrate · « **Reply #27 on:** 05 February 2011, 23:05:25 »

Quote from: JPArbiter on 04 February 2011, 09:30:38

yes, we have established that, but the question I originally posted was scale. since we have Battleforce scale mechs as an option and had microfighters forever, out of three, which one should be in mech scale and which other two modes should be in smaller scale?

I want them all in mech scale, but if I actually had to pick just one, I'd pick Airmech. I just think of it as the iconic look of a LAM. If I have to bash together a mech mode option, I'll do it. I really don't care about the micro scale.

BirdofPrey · « **Reply #28 on:** 07 February 2011, 04:35:29 »

It doesn't have to be 3 separate minis; in fact that would be somewhat wasteful and expensive. Take advantage of the fact that airmech mode is in between battlemech mode and fighter mode. Just do the fighter and battlemech minis and use them to build the airmech.

Sculpt based on sections: battlemech torso, airmech torso/upper fuselage (the bottom being sculpted to fit the limbs), arms, legs(actually everything below the waist) and the lower fuselage (the bits that the limbs make when folded up, egines, guns, etc. sculpted to fit over the parts limbs would attach to in airmech mode). Attach the limbs to the battlemech torso to make the battlemech, attach the limbs to the airmech torso/upper fuselage to make the airmech, and attach the lower fuselage to the upper fuselage to make the fighter. As long as hey sculpt everything to fit together, they can just make minis for two modes and get the intermediate mode without having to spend the money to sculpt it separately. Put all the pieces in the same package and let us assemble either an airmech or a battlemech and a fighter or buy two packs and get all three modes.

I wouldn't be adverse to a smaller scale fighter mode mini as well.

JPArbiter · « **Reply #29 on:** 07 February 2011, 09:21:11 »

Quote from: BirdofPrey on 07 February 2011, 04:35:29

It doesn't have to be 3 separate minis; in fact that would be somewhat wasteful and expensive. Take advantage of the fact that airmech mode is in between battlemech mode and fighter mode. Just do the fighter and battlemech minis and use them to build the airmech.

Sculpt based on sections: battlemech torso, airmech torso/upper fuselage (the bottom being sculpted to fit the limbs), arms, legs(actually everything below the waist) and the lower fuselage (the bits that the limbs make when folded up, egines, guns, etc. sculpted to fit over the parts limbs would attach to in airmech mode). Attach the limbs to the battlemech torso to make the battlemech, attach the limbs to the airmech torso/upper fuselage to make the airmech, and attach the lower fuselage to the upper fuselage to make the fighter. As long as hey sculpt everything to fit together, they can just make minis for two modes and get the intermediate mode without having to spend the money to sculpt it separately. Put all the pieces in the same package and let us assemble either an airmech or a battlemech and a fighter or buy two packs and get all three modes.

I wouldn't be adverse to a smaller scale fighter mode mini as well.

would your plans work for the Mk I models in 3085 though? they were much more diligently designed to ensure a proper transformation, which means that some parts for a mini the way you were describingwould be in two different forms for two different modes.

wackrabbit · « **Reply #30 on:** 07 February 2011, 09:21:54 »

I want all three modes.

FedCom4Ever · « **Reply #31 on:** 09 February 2011, 01:06:06 »

You know it was easy to have the LAM's look like mechs that were already in production back in the '80's. Phoenix Hawk mini= Phoenix Hawk airmech. Now none of those LAMs look like any mech in production.

If I was Mike Noe, I think I might try building one LAM in all 3 modes and see how it sells. Whichever one of the 3 modes sells might give you an indication of how the whole line might go. If the airmech sells well but the others don't, then just slap it in the archive. Sometimes putting something in the archive increases demand. It's like putting it in the Disney Vault. :)

I would buy all 3 modes if they were available. In the likely hood only one out of three modes were going to be built, I would buy the airmech.

I would not buy one mech at regular scale and the other versions at Battleforce scale.

Col.Hengist · « **Reply #32 on:** 09 February 2011, 09:01:20 »

I hate the vault,there are many archived I want but won't get because of the price and length of time it takes to get them. I understand and accept the reason for it,doesn't mean I have to like it.

BirdofPrey · « **Reply #33 on:** 09 February 2011, 14:18:17 »

Quote from: JPArbiter on 07 February 2011, 09:21:11

would your plans work for the Mk I models in 3085 though? they were much more diligently designed to ensure a proper transformation, which means that some parts for a mini the way you were describingwould be in two different forms for two different modes.

I got the idea while staring at them. it's the reason I realized the fuselage would need to be in two pieces.

If you look closely you will notice some similarities in the transformations of all of them. From battlemech to airmech mode the torso hunches forward, the nose comes to cover the front of the cockpit and the wings are brought into position, the arms and everything below the waist stay pretty much the same so the same limbs could be used for both modes. Going to fighter mode the arms and legs fold up into the fuselage, the engines on the legs are moved into position and the guns on the arms are placed on the bottom of the fighter; these are the bits I was referring to as the lower fuselage (though admittedly there are some pieces that fit on the leading edge wing root and the tail section). Much of the fuselage shape for the fighter is the same as that for the airmech mode, so again this part can be reused for two modes.

The pieces don't have to fit all three modes, I am just pointing out that many of the pieces stay the same between two modes so you only have to add pieces for the third mode, and I was suggesting they take advantage of that fact by sculpting the two end modes and combining them to make the air mech mode. At its basic, airmech mode is a fighter with arms and legs sticking out so if you sculpt the fighter to accept the battlemech limbs and let the rest of the pieces for the fighter mode cover those glue points if you are going for the fighter mode, then you can easily get the airmech mode without having to explicitly sculpt it. Essentially you get three minis for the price of sculpting two.

Lorcan Nagle · « **Reply #34 on:** 09 February 2011, 18:19:29 »

Quote from: Col.Hengist on 09 February 2011, 09:01:20

I hate the vault,there are many archived I want but won't get because of the price and length of time it takes to get them. I understand and accept the reason for it,doesn't mean I have to like it.

Just so you know, a lot of the Archives minis are available from Ral Partha Europe...

Col.Hengist · « **Reply #35 on:** 09 February 2011, 18:47:37 »

isn't it about the same price to have them shipped to the US as buying the archived mechs?

ShockaTime · « **Reply #36 on:** 09 February 2011, 18:53:01 »

Quote from: Col.Hengist on 09 February 2011, 18:47:37

isn't it about the same price to have them shipped to the US as buying the archived mechs?

no, the shipping rates are actually very reasonable.

Daishi411 · « **Reply #37 on:** 09 February 2011, 18:55:37 »

Quote from: Col.Hengist on 09 February 2011, 18:47:37

isn't it about the same price to have them shipped to the US as buying the archived mechs?

trust the people who posted about ral partha, they really are good, cheap and fast, on top of that their sculpts are far better than getting it from IWM

Col.Hengist · « **Reply #38 on:** 09 February 2011, 19:03:23 »

no kidding, i'll have to check it out then.

sci teacher · « **Reply #39 on:** 12 February 2011, 16:11:38 »

We had a good experience buying from Ral Partha Europe. We just found about 6-7 minis we wanted that were archived here. Then we definitely came out ahead, even with shipping.

Rommel_Twee · « **Reply #40 on:** 12 February 2011, 22:37:25 »

Quote from: maddyfish on 04 February 2011, 19:32:34

All three modes would be nice, but airmech would be the ticket if it was only to be one.

A little bash using nothing but IWM parts from the old Proj-Dark Phoenix days...enjoy

Deathknight69 · « **Reply #41 on:** 12 February 2011, 22:52:00 »

I Love it. Did you use rare earth magnets, or did you have 3 PXH's lying around to bash??

ShockaTime · « **Reply #42 on:** 13 February 2011, 01:29:22 »

is that the head of a blood kite?

Wanderer · « **Reply #43 on:** 13 February 2011, 13:32:15 »

I'd honestly like to see the Airmech model, first foremost and above all.

The other two are distant seconds. Of course, it all really depends on when the new rules are out in completion for LAM's.

F T C · « **Reply #44 on:** 04 March 2011, 17:04:30 »

I like Lorcan and Birdofprey's ideas; one kit that makes all three. If I have to pick just one it is obviously the air-mech mode.

JWard · « **Reply #45 on:** 06 March 2011, 08:05:06 »

Quote from: Lorcan Nagle on 31 January 2011, 10:48:56

Either all three modes (released separately or as a 3-pack), or in a kit form that would allow you to pick what mode you assemble it in.

if that was done i would hope IWM would post a link to a site that sells rare earth magnets so you can use one fig all 3 modes

Lorcan Nagle · « **Reply #46 on:** 06 March 2011, 14:26:50 »

Oh yeah, I had magnets in mind when I posted that :D

Deathknight69 · « **Reply #47 on:** 06 March 2011, 16:30:57 »

I asked that earlier, lol... :D

JPArbiter · « **Reply #48 on:** 07 March 2011, 15:24:55 »

of course initial discussions are ongoing, but in my last chat with sawbones it is looking like if LAMs are funded it will be a two pack of battlemech and airmech modes...

oh and if you want to put your name in the rolodex for when fan funding opens up, go here. you don't have to pledge specific amounts yet
http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,2415.0.html

aka_mythos · « **Reply #49 on:** 17 March 2011, 08:40:28 »

The idea presented originally was to do Battlemech modes in mech scale, and the other two modes in battleforce scale. I think you lose a lot interest doing it that way.

Maybe I misread this, but I recall somewhere that the OP mentioned having the goal of seeing the Shadowhawk, or some other almost LAM, be done as an LAM. I think that is too ambitious and that focussing on the three main ones would reduce the monetary burden of getting this project off the ground... from the estimated $5500-$6000 to $4500-$5000. Even if we got $5500 pledged, I think most people would rather see the main three done right than to see all four done almost right; that whatever money might go to the imaginary LAM, would be better spent on the improved quality of the three classic ones.

Lorcans and Birdofprey's ideas, I think is the best one. It shows a better way of minimizing costs without compromising on the consistency of the scale. I think people would be happier with this. Further I imagine it could be even more simplified to a (1) set of legs, (2) battlemech mode torso, (3) aerofighter mode top half, and (4) aerofighter bottom half...
Where:
1+2= Battlemech
2+3= Air-mech
3+4= Aerospace Fighter

So now you're talking about 4 half minis instead of three full minis. I think to most this is a more ideal approach, assuming we couldn't get full mech-scale sculpts in all three modes.

Also lets be honest between the Wasp and Stinger, no one would complain if they had the same sculpt for the legs. Just one more way costs could be mitigated.

Quote from: JPArbiter on 07 March 2011, 15:24:55

of course initial discussions are ongoing, but in my last chat with sawbones it is looking like if LAMs are funded it will be a two pack of battlemech and airmech modes...

I dunno if I like that. Will they be available as individual miniatures as well?

As far as packaging, I the most ideal packaging is this:

Quote from: I am Belch II on 01 February 2011, 00:50:45

...a 3 pack set, and have all 3 versions. Mech, Land-Air, and then Fighter mode!

Most would rather spend $30 per "mech" in all three modes, than to have to buy two separate sets. For example some people want to build a squadron of one particular LAM, and not everyone will be happy with the lumped in models.

Its easier to accept the nature of the beast, when it comes to LAMs, is that you need to get three minis to represent three distinct modes, than it is to say you have to buy this second set of three to get that one Air-mech model you need to go with the one Battlemech model you wanted.

JPArbiter · « **Reply #50 on:** 17 March 2011, 09:20:08 »

my goal is to fund all four LAMs simultaniously

aka_mythos · « **Reply #51 on:** 17 March 2011, 10:30:33 »

Quote from: JPArbiter on 17 March 2011, 09:20:08

my goal is to fund all four LAMs simultaniously

Do you push for all for even to the detriment of the project as a whole? You come off a bit stubborn. I'm saying IF you can't do all 4... wouldn't it be better to do the three that count, and to do them right?

It seems several people have presented better ideas than you originally proposed. Yet you seem stuck on doing it "your way." Hope for the best, but plan for contingencies and be open to better ideas.

My goal is to see them done right.

JPArbiter · « **Reply #52 on:** 17 March 2011, 15:21:37 »

let me rephrase, I would rather seen them done all at once then in some sort of popular order, because I fear that if done in popular order I fear the project will fizzle out after the P Hawk gets done, and no one will give a damn about the rest.

My Original point to this thread was how to do the minis. and after speaking with Sawbones I have a pretty good grasp of how IWM will do the LAMs if funded. so really the point of this whole thread is moot. and you know what I am not stuck on "my way" because my way was the battleforce Airmech and fighter method and THAT WAY was vetoed and I am not pressing for that anymore.

you can contribute or you can step aside

megatrons2nd · « **Reply #53 on:** 17 March 2011, 21:48:31 »

If I get the assistant managers position(and it's pay increase) I will gladly help fund all the LAM's. I want multiples of each of them.

I would prefer the Airmech mode versions first, and the other 2 modes later.

aka_mythos · « **Reply #54 on:** 18 March 2011, 09:16:59 »

I think that's the consensus. The priority seems to be: Air-mech > Battlemech > Aerospace... in that order; that if the fate conspired against us and we could only expect 4 minis Air-mech mode is what we would all want.

@JPArbiter
I think its obvious I'm trying to contribute. I think though you're expecting alot of people to accept your conversations with Sawbones at face value, but you aren't giving much in the way of details. I realize there are things you can and cannot necessarily discuss and I'm not asking for you to break Sawbones confidence with you. Its more a matter that its obvious their are immutable aspect of this project that are set in stone or as close to it; while on the other hand there are likely details that are still open to feedback and opinions, but I don't think you've made clear what aspects we should really be discussing and which details are moot.

You don't have to go into the details just do something like this:
-They way they'd be released and packages is set.
-What particular variant of each, we've yet to decide.

That would let people know where we are with this and what sort of contributions can be made.

cavingjan · « **Reply #55 on:** 18 March 2011, 09:45:04 »

Details change and will no doubt change due to the nature of these particular units. I see no reason for us to know the details at this time since they will most likely change at least twice before money is even collected. This isn't a straight pay for molding X mech. This is a can of worms that is in IWM's hands since marketing and selling these things are going to be two large factors that the fans just shouldn't be messing with. I would expect to have details when money is being collected but not anytime prior to avoid any "but you said back here" arguments that will happen because plans change at IWM's needs.

Sawbones12 · « **Reply #56 on:** 18 March 2011, 14:40:28 »

For what it is worth:

I have spoken to Mike Noe about fan-funded sculpts in general -- virtually anything within reasonable size limitations that has art ( or a close description of a particular variant for those times when, like the Koschei 5I, the exact positioning/appearance of that variant's weaponry and jump jets beyond a leg/arm/torso location are conjectural rather than visualized in art ) can be done. Many will be online only releases ( like the infantry ).

I ( without actually formally proposing it to Mike ) speculated to JP Arbiter about LAM release blisters that would have both the airmech and mech modes in it ( but not the pure aerospace mode ) for each of the LAMs and that the pure aerospace mode would certainly be online only...

However, such a pack might be quite expensive ( north of $20.00 US at least ) and would force people to buy a mode they may not want. The pure aerospace mode would certainly be online only. All of these might best be done as online only releases that can be bought individually. If they are paid for, then they will be done. I do comprehend JP's fear that interest in funding could wane if the P'hawk LAM is done first and therefore getting others to sponsor the others to fulfill his vision may fall short. I personally feel that the Shadow Hawk LAM which never reached production is an expense ( $1800-2100 worth ) of sculpting that might hinder this project if it remains an "all four or no go" type proposition. Good luck!

Rob

Psyckosama · « **Reply #57 on:** 19 March 2011, 06:09:19 »

All three forms might not be impossible if the designs are made in CAD.

JPArbiter · « **Reply #58 on:** 19 March 2011, 15:34:52 »

Quote from: Sawbones12 on 18 March 2011, 14:40:28

For what it is worth:

I have spoken to Mike Noe about fan-funded sculpts in general -- virtually anything within reasonable size limitations that has art ( or a close description of a particular variant for those times when, like the Koschei 5I, the exact positioning/appearance of that variant's weaponry and jump jets beyond a leg/arm/torso location are conjectural rather than visualized in art ) can be done. Many will be online only releases ( like the infantry ).

I ( without actually formally proposing it to Mike ) speculated to JP Arbiter about LAM release blisters that would have both the airmech and mech modes in it ( but not the pure aerospace mode ) for each of the LAMs and that the pure aerospace mode would certainly be online only...

However, such a pack might be quite expensive ( north of $20.00 US at least ) and would force people to buy a mode they may not want. The pure aerospace mode would certainly be online only. All of these might best be done as online only releases that can be bought individually. If they are paid for, then they will be done. I do comprehend JP's fear that interest in funding could wane if the P'hawk LAM is done first and therefore getting others to sponsor the others to fulfill his vision may fall short. I personally feel that the Shadow Hawk LAM which never reached production is an expense ( $1800-2100 worth ) of sculpting that might hinder this project if it remains an "all four or no go" type proposition. Good luck!

Rob

thank you Rob, I felt I was teetering the edge of confidence here.

in all fairness, the Shadow Hawk was the least of the ones I wanted, it would be the cherry on the cake if we get it. My interest is getting the big three done first. also when I first made this thread, I had barely talked to Sawbones about this, just floated the idea of the Mk I LAMs. since then things changed details emerged, including his aforementioned speculation.

it seems to be that people want all three modes in full mech scale, and that makes me excited. I hope in May when I can start officially collecting money that you guys are willing to throw down enough money to make it happen with me. it would be awesome to see all modes of all LAMs purchasable online at any given moment.

I also realize push comes to shove and the project comes up short of funds that contributors will have to come together and discuss what happens next, what gets made first what forms, and what order. but that is a bridge that will be crossed when we come to it. in the meantime, I do want this to happen in the best way possible, and it seems plenty here do to. and that is reason enough to be excited.

Raven Claw · « **Reply #59 on:** 21 March 2011, 11:01:10 »

I think i would prefer the land air mech mode the most of the three but I would
surely also buy some minis of the other modes as well. The fighter mode might be the
least used so less people seem to want it. If the mech mode looks at least somewhat different
from the original that it was based from, I would definitely buy some of those too. But if it was mostly the same,
I would just use the original P-hawk or Stinger etc.

I think there are at least a few ways to go about selling them, such as selling the 3 modes separately
or doing a special deal online. For example, "sell the bubble pack for $20 and you can pick which 2 of the 3 modes you want
and we will send them to you" (Or whatever the price will be). I also like the idea of giving enough parts to allow
people to choose which mode they want to build, and letting them go from there

aka_mythos · « **Reply #60 on:** 21 March 2011, 14:54:16 »

That I think would get too complicated for IWM.

Wrangler · « **Reply #61 on:** 21 March 2011, 20:13:31 »

Its understandable people want all three-versions of the LAMs, but i think cost of production may need to be addressed. Maybe to keep cost down, that the Air-MEch mode for Mk Is should only be used for now.

Keep mindful, that other WoB will be out day too. My experience with the Project Phoenix Mechs assembly was not fun. Having less parts to have put together maybe better as well.

aka_mythos · « **Reply #62 on:** 22 March 2011, 05:56:06 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 21 March 2011, 20:13:31

...Having less parts to have put together maybe better as well.

Maybe I'm missing it, but as far as I've read no ones really suggested piles of little parts. So I don't think you need to worry.

BirdofPrey · « **Reply #63 on:** 22 March 2011, 06:35:19 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 21 March 2011, 20:13:31

Its understandable people want all three-versions of the LAMs, but i think cost of production may need to be addressed. Maybe to keep cost down, that the Air-MEch mode for Mk Is should only be used for now.

Keep mindful, that other WoB will be out day too. My experience with the Project Phoenix Mechs assembly was not fun. Having less parts to have put together maybe better as well.

That's why I suggested reusing sections for each of the modes, if sculpted just right, the parts for the ASF and battlemechs modes would be serviceable for use on the air mech mode, so you get three sculpts for the price of two. (granted that's an ovesimplification, since that would have to be part of the design, but it would still likely not be as complicated and expensive as all three modes being done 100% from scratch)

Also a torso/fuselage arms and legs is only 4 sections, not too horrible. I think one of the LAMs has some exhaust (or maybe it's intake) manifolds that rotate between the modes, but even if those are added as separate parts, they aren't load bearing, so they wouldn't cause too many troubles (unlike having to glue hips and ankles)

JPArbiter · « **Reply #64 on:** 08 April 2011, 16:02:47 »

for those that didn't know I got a final price on the Wasp, Stinger, and Pixie LAMs. check out the fan funding thread for details