Author Topic: More of the old, less of the new  (Read 24042 times)

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
More of the old, less of the new
« on: 03 June 2013, 13:15:27 »
Maybe it's because I'm an old-school Mechwarrior who picked up this game in the golden age of 2nd/3rd Edition...maybe it's just because I hate the Jihad / Dark Ages developments so very much, but to me the best Mechs are the older ones.  TRO-3050 is the benchmark for good design in my eyes, and while there are new models in every TRO which I like, the further from 3050 you go, the fewer they become.  From 2750 thru 3050, I would be hard-pressed to find more than two or three designs I wouldn't use, and easily I'd say 75% of my Inner Sphere armies are made up of these core models.  That in mind, if I could have one wish from Iron Wind Metals (aside from re-releasing the original unseen...yeah, not gonna happen) it would be for more sculpts and better sculpts of these often-neglected older models.

The problem with having only one miniature design of any given Mech is that your armies get to look very bland and repetitive, and it is even worse when those multiples of the same Mech are the sort of single-piece casting like the Javelin or Hunchback.  At least when the arms are separate pieces like a Trebuchet's you can reposition them for some diversity.  But when I started buying the Project Phoenix mechs I absolutely fell in love with how much more flexible and customizable these newer sculpts were.  I have three Phoenix Hawks, and each is distinctly different, same with my Thunderbolts and my Archers.  Even newer non-phoenix resculpts like my newest Atlas have more ways to assemble and pose, and I just love it.

Most of the older Mechs still need this same treatment, specifically in the Inner Sphere lists (the 3050 Clan resculpts are amazing, thank you IWM).  The 3025/3039/3050 era models are the backbone of the game, and after decades of playing, I still can't get a proper Grand Dragon model, the 3025 Catapult exists as a mini but is only available in the Fire Lance pack, and none of the dozen official variants of the Hatamoto-Chi exist.  Core Battletech is largely being overshadowed by the Jihad and Dark Ages, while much of the original stock has been relegated to the Archives.  I was stoked when IWM put up the new Charger, Awesome, Panther and Banshee sculpts, and I hope this is just the beginning of some new love for the classics of "Classic" Battletech.  If I could get more poseable miniatures, maybe some upgrade kits for variants, and/or remakes of now-archived designs I would be tickled pink, and probably repurchase half my armies just to mix things up.  Maybe it's just me, maybe not.  Anybody here in the forums who feels the way I do should speak up, because IWM might actually listen.  Iron Wind is an awesome company who makes great products, but for that sizable chunk of my paycheques they take from me, it's not the new XTRO sculpts or the WOB Celestials I go after, it's the Centurions and Jenners and Guillotines.  As I said, maybe I'm not alone in this...

And for Kerensky's sake, bring back the Quickdraw and save the Guillotine!

Berzerker

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 52
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #1 on: 03 June 2013, 18:14:29 »
I largely agree with you. For me, 3050 to 3058 is the peak. That said I am having fun with jihad. Not interested in dark age though. Not even a little.
Someone has to play Jade Falcon or it is just a bunch of wolf on wolf action.

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #2 on: 03 June 2013, 21:12:13 »
I largely agree with you. For me, 3050 to 3058 is the peak.

Don't get me wrong, there are some mechs in 3055/58/60 I would die without (not literally).  Definitely the Gallowglas, Bushwacker, and Ha Otoko top that list.  But the further down the timeline you go, the less and less I seem to care about the new models.  3067 is the last TRO I've cared enough to buy, and except the Hammerhands, I doubt I'll ever touch anything past '67.  And I'd trade all the Hammerhands in the world just to get a Grand Dragon or a better sculpted original Dragon.  I'd probably also sell my roommate to Rim Worlds pirates if it got me a Dervish with his missile-racks open (the way the re-seen Archer's is).

Raggedy_Man

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #3 on: 04 June 2013, 02:01:57 »
Ditto on the Gallowglas.  I'd love to see a resculpt that looked more like a proper heavy and less like a stick figure.  (I think the Battleforce-scale model is a step in the right direction ... just the wrong scale).  I really want one--not badly enough to sell my children to a Dickensian-era factory--but pretty badly.

I'd also love to see a reworking of some of the other sculpts that were a little too spindly--especially the Gunslinger.

Overall, I agree with the OP.  Since most of my disposable income is not for gaming, I'm pretty discerning about the 'mechs I buy--I want to be able to play in any era and at any rules.  So I'll buy an Awesome before I'll buy a Warlord--I can play in 3025 with an Awesome loaded with PPCs, or I can play in 3075 and load it up with HPPCs and capacitors if I want. 

I'd love to see the sculpts the OP mentioned given the same attention to detail (and newer sculpting/rendering technologies) as some of the better JHS/Dark Age-era minis, and would generally buy those over minis from later TROs. 


IAMCLANWOLF

  • Freelance Artist
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3537
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #4 on: 04 June 2013, 09:12:05 »
maybe it's just because I hate the Jihad / Dark Ages developments so very much

This is fine, but I think you would do better to be slightly less abrasive in typing out your request for new sculpts. I know everyone has their favorite era, and passionate does not come close to defining some folks love for the game. Still, it's important to realize that there are new, and old players that enjoy different aspects of the game. If you've already decided that you "hate" anything circa DA, or Jihad then there is nothing that we can do to change you. I would hope though that there is enough room for all fans of Battletech, regardless of what tech we prefer. Mech on.

 

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #5 on: 04 June 2013, 10:09:23 »
Ditto on the Gallowglas.  I'd love to see a resculpt that looked more like a proper heavy and less like a stick figure.  (I think the Battleforce-scale model is a step in the right direction ... just the wrong scale).  I really want one--not badly enough to sell my children to a Dickensian-era factory--but pretty badly.

I'd also love to see a reworking of some of the other sculpts that were a little too spindly--especially the Gunslinger.

Man, oh man.  I always loved the Gallowglas, but the miniature was rather lackluster.  Blame it on TRO-3055; the art for that book wasn't up to the usual standard.  Now we have the second revision (3050 Upgrade) and even once-ugly Mechs now look just sweeeeeeet  The Gallow specifically became one of the most impressive redraws in the book.  Though I still would prefer 3050's era seeing the reworkings I spoke of above, 3055 is definitely a candidate for resculpts as well.  If they could capture the new style of 3055U in metal-form, again, I'd just have to repurchase oh so many of my 'Mechs.


I think you would do better to be slightly less abrasive in typing out your request for new sculpts. I know everyone has their favorite era, and passionate does not come close to defining some folks love for the game. Still, it's important to realize that there are new, and old players that enjoy different aspects of the game. If you've already decided that you "hate" anything circa DA, or Jihad then there is nothing that we can do to change you. I would hope though that there is enough room for all fans of Battletech, regardless of what tech we prefer. Mech on.

You are very right about passion being inadequate to describe the love of the game, and I won't begrudge those who do like the post-Bulldog plot developments their own sense of taste, but using the word "hate" is me greatly censoring how I feel about Dark Ages and the Jihad.  As a life-long player of the games (tabletop, RPG and computer), and as someone who has an almost complete collection of the novels (BTech and Mechwarrior), I have invested a sizable chunk of my time, money, life, and soul into this game.  The last few novels before Fasa died off were a literal kick to the nuts, Dark Age was a dying company's desperate attempt to stay afloat by copying Dungeons & Dragons' switch to prepainted plastic figures, and the Jihad storyline was Catalyst's way to segue between the Battletech everybody loved and the Dark Ages that they were now stuck with.

Now as I said, I don't begrudge or think less of those who do like the Jihad/DA developments.  There is room for every kind of fan, and much of how I feel about the Jihad, older Mechwarriors felt exactly the same way when the Clans showed up and ruined their nice little Inner Sphere / Succession Wars plot.  Change happens; some people like it, some don't.  The one major kudos I will give to Catalyst/Topps is that they realize that these different eras appeal to different players, and haven't abandoned them.  Splitting the timelines into Star League, Succession Wars, Clan Invasion, etc, is the best move they could have made, and they publish material for more than just the newest era.  This is awesome.  It's still a little skewed towards the later developments, but at least we weren't forgotten or abandoned.  And with IWM pumping out all those awesome new (old?) Star League-era warships, the old can be played on the same epic scale as the new.

This is getting a little too long-winded.  I shut up now.
« Last Edit: 04 June 2013, 10:15:52 by Khell »

Psycho

  • CamoSpecs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1723
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #6 on: 04 June 2013, 10:39:18 »
3067 is the last TRO I've cared enough to buy, and except the Hammerhands, I doubt I'll ever touch anything past '67. 

So 10 years since you've bought a TRO? I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you haven't bought other products that also deal with the post-3067 time line. That is your choice, but you have to understand that 10 years is a long time and a lot of product to avoid.

  The 3025/3039/3050 era models are the backbone of the game, and after decades of playing, I still can't get a proper Grand Dragon model, the 3025 Catapult exists as a mini but is only available in the Fire Lance pack, and none of the dozen official variants of the Hatamoto-Chi exist.  Core Battletech is largely being overshadowed by the Jihad and Dark Ages, while much of the original stock has been relegated to the Archives.

On the contrary, many would argue that the backbone of BT is the ever-evolving story line. It's not a specific set of designs or era, but the story that drives development. Everything else grows out of that. There will always be certain designs that resonate more strongly, and players may gravitate to one era or play style more than others. That's okay, as long as those players recognize that it is their choice. Taking some time to hang around the boards, and even (perish the thought!) getting into some of the newer products may help alleviate some of your concerns. For example, the Catapult is product number 20-930 at IWM. Buy it up to your heart's content. If you're willing to use the Project Phoenix minis, I would suggest at the very least looking into TRO:Prototypes and some of the XTRO series (there will be some overlap in content); did you know there were new minis of the Hunchback, Grasshopper, and Victor released in the past year? There are also Hatamoto, a Hunchback, and a Grand Dragon variant minis in the Kurita Sword & Dragon lance pack (10-034).

GunjiNoKanrei

  • CamoSpecs
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 822
  • tired ... very tired ...
    • darklined.com
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #7 on: 04 June 2013, 10:45:40 »
I agree, resculpts of some of the old(er) miniatures would be welcome. Very welcome actually. But at least miniatures do exist. So lets give the current timeline fans some toys to play with before revisiting the old ... ;)

Besides, even the single-piece castings can be modded into different poses and/or variants with a little time and effort.

By the way, wouldn't "core BattleTech" be what is most relevant (common) to (in) the current timeline?

IAMCLANWOLF

  • Freelance Artist
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3537
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #8 on: 04 June 2013, 11:19:03 »
If you're willing to use the Project Phoenix minis, I would suggest at the very least looking into TRO:Prototypes and some of the XTRO series (there will be some overlap in content); did you know there were new minis of the Hunchback, Grasshopper, and Victor released in the past year? There are also Hatamoto, a Hunchback, and a Grand Dragon variant minis in the Kurita Sword & Dragon lance pack (10-034).

Don't forget the Primitive XTRO Volumes. These should help to appease the 'old dogs' since it's all about the very beginning. Doesn't get any older than that...for mecha anyway. 

Still not old enough; I would suggest TRO 1945. Yes I said 19.

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #9 on: 04 June 2013, 13:17:24 »
So 10 years since you've bought a TRO? I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you haven't bought other products that also deal with the post-3067 time line. That is your choice, but you have to understand that 10 years is a long time and a lot of product to avoid.

Forgive my poor phrasing.  2067 isn't the last TRO I've bought, just the furthest numerically.  ie, I haven't bought '75 and '85, or any of the .pdf-only TROs (mind you, in a large part, I haven't bought those XTROs as much because it's physical copy or bust for me).  As recently as last month I got my Upgrade edition of 3058, and 3060u is slated for my next online shopping binge.  And the nice thing of Catalyst's "upgrade" reprints (aside from the better art) is that the fluff text is written from the perspective of someone way up there in the late Jihad / Dark Ages era.  So yeah, I have a pretty good understanding of the core plot developments, etc.  I don't just dislike Jihad/DA because I'm a stubborn old goat, I dislike them because I actually know the plot direction and don't enjoy it.  And thanks to wonderful places like Sarna.net, I do know all the things I'm missing.

For example, the Catapult is product number 20-930 at IWM. Buy it up to your heart's content.

Different Catapult.  That's the 3039/3050 LRM20 and/or Arrow model.  Check out the Fire Lance.  It has a skinnier LRM-15 model which is a dead-on match for the 3025 original.  The problem is that it only comes in the lance pack (much like the other models you mentioned, most of which I have).  I had to buy three Fire Lance packs just to get the trio of Catapults I needed for my Liao force.  It would be just the best if these packaged sculpts could be bought singly, even if only online.

And that "Grand Dragon" in the Sword & Dragon pack is not really a Grand Dragon, just a regular Dragon with a few changes to the torso.  It lacks the hand on the left and the elbow joint on the right arm.  That's no small detail, kinda like if you removed the elbow of an Orion or put regular fingered hands on the Crab or King Crab.

Burning Chrome

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 849
  • One of the Vocal Minority
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #10 on: 04 June 2013, 13:56:44 »
I find it...humorous...that the same crew attempts to challenge anyone who has a (possibly) negative opinion about any aspect(s) of Battletech.  Mind you I'm not opposed to anyone expressing their opinions.

Maybe my perception is off, but I didn't get the same impression from the original post that started all of this (once again).

"Hate" is used by many with different meanings/interpretation to everyone no matter the official definition.

Why is it surprising that someone doesn't purchase things they don't like or have any interest in?  Their choice, and it sounds like an informed one in this instance.  Personally, I think Khell is missing out buy not purchasing TRO 3075 and 3085...some excellent stuff in there, quite a bit of which could apply to the era's he prefers. 

Like Khell, I too prefer the "older" eras of Battletech and have no interest in the Jihad and Dark Ages.

My gripes about minis are well know and "appreciated" by many.  I'll leave that subject as is for this post. :D

The Primitive series and most of the other XTROs are awesome as are most of the sourcebooks released in the past few years.  Rule improvements, mech/vehicle Perks and fluff have really added new life to this classic game.  After years of L2 and L3 play, our group has found L1.5 (Mostly L1 with some L2 tech/rules/perks now and then) to be the most enjoyable, especially with some of the Primitive designs being used.

The latest TROs (Liao, Kurita, Davion) have some neat stuff, but nothing we're eager to use at this point in time.  We're hoping for more of the Primitive stuff and "The Bar" was definitely raised with the last one.  Awesome art and fluff.

I get what you are saying Khell.  Some of the Phoenix resculpts are excellent.  I hope IWM can find a way to modernize their operations, especially as 3D printing comes into its own.  Having Battlemech minis that could be posed more uniquely, or configured as a variant would be awesome!
"Matchup of the century: desire to play vs. resentment"

Psycho

  • CamoSpecs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1723
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #11 on: 04 June 2013, 14:27:59 »
Different Catapult.  That's the 3039/3050 LRM20 and/or Arrow model. 

Ah, so it's not that there isn't a 3025-era Catapult available individually. I thought that was the issue there. I think the wall you're running into is that it's impossible to please everyone. The new stuff sells, the old doesn't - that's why so much (even through 3067) has been archived. It just doesn't move anymore aside from a few designs that have managed to hold onto their appeal. This come partially from looks, partially from being good minis, and partially from periodic upgrades to the stats that keep the chassis viable in-game. Now the challenge is to figure out how to convince IWM that spending the money to re-do these designs is worthwhile when their sales numbers say it isn't. At the moment, I don't have an answer for that.

Rtifs

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 554
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #12 on: 04 June 2013, 15:04:26 »
I would like new sculpts too – if they are multi-piece pose-able models.  I really like the celestials for this reason. 

I rather like the new TROs especially 3075.  I think the art hit a high point in 3050, and a low point in the 3055-3058 era, then started coming back up.  But I digress. 

TigerShark

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5042
    • MekWars: Dominion
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #13 on: 04 June 2013, 15:09:57 »
One finds this "older is better" philosophy in just about every gaming system and it usually (in my observations) extends from when a person began interacting with the game. Players who were introduced to the 3025 designs back in the 1980s/1990s seem especially attached to the old Battledroids setting. Any changes are met with resistance, just as they are by Star Wars who disliked the prequels, Star Trek fans who dislike the JJ Abrahms universe, etc.

The game itself has gotten more complex, but the core dynamics have not changed. New units still play by the old rules and tend to shy away from the 'critically flawed' design philosophy which created a polarization of units in Intro Tech. A MAD-3R is a horrible 'Mech when placed next to a MAD-3D and we all know why. Some find this to be "interesting" while others simply avoid these units during play. A more balanced and common sense approach seems to have been taken during the modern TROs; we don't have TDR-5S standing next to RFL-3Ns any longer.

The other point to ponder is marketing. These older designs have more name recognition and are placed on box covers and into period art more often. Everyone knows what an AS7-D looks like, but the Parash draws a puzzled 'huh?' from even long-time gamers. Because they're so well known, and because Intro Tech is the intended "introduction" to BattleTech, people will always see these designs as a 'core', despite being less than 1% of the full roster of units in the BT universe.

It's not a case of 'better' -- It's what you're used to seeing and interacting with.
« Last Edit: 04 June 2013, 15:18:20 by TigerShark »
  W W W . M E K W A R S - D O M I N I O N . C O M

  "You will fight to the last soldier, and when you die, I will call upon your damned soul to speak horrible curses at the enemy."
     - Orders of Emperor Stefan Amaris to his troops

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #14 on: 04 June 2013, 15:10:37 »
I get what you are saying Khell.  Some of the Phoenix resculpts are excellent.  I hope IWM can find a way to modernize their operations, especially as 3D printing comes into its own.  Having Battlemech minis that could be posed more uniquely, or configured as a variant would be awesome!

I'm on the fence whether 3D printing will be a good or a bad thing for Battletech and similar games.  There is definitely the potential for it to financially cripple the companies like Iron Wind, and that ain't a good thing.  But from the gamer's perspective, there are plenty of good reasons to move in that direction, such as being able to print infinite different variants of a model.

In the end, I'm too fond of metal miniatures to switch over to the kinds of plastic home-user 3D printers work with.  If I wanted a bunch of cheap plastic figures, I'd have stuck with Warhammer.  But I can't say for certain that I wouldn't use the odd variant part on an otherwise metal frame.

I think the wall you're running into is that it's impossible to please everyone. The new stuff sells, the old doesn't - that's why so much (even through 3067) has been archived. It just doesn't move anymore aside from a few designs that have managed to hold onto their appeal. This come partially from looks, partially from being good minis, and partially from periodic upgrades to the stats that keep the chassis viable in-game. Now the challenge is to figure out how to convince IWM that spending the money to re-do these designs is worthwhile when their sales numbers say it isn't. At the moment, I don't have an answer for that.

From what I've heard, the reason a mini gets archived is because it doesn't sell more than a certain number in a year.  I've heard that number is six, which makes me wonder if they mean six actual blisters, or six boxes, or what?  And I also don't know if that includes only online sales, or distributor stock, etc.  It seems odd that any miniature couldn't shift six individual blisters a year - I mostly assume it has to be six packages or something.  Anyhoo, I have a feeling that the reason so many good minis are in the archive while some lackluster ones are still available in retail is because distributors don't know a damn thing about the games they're stocking, and most stores don't either, and just re-order whatever sells.  It's the old "you can't sell what you don't carry" problem, where X store never brings in the Savage Coyote, so nobody buys the Savage Coyote.

Actually, it would explain a lot.  Stores bring in the newest stuff because that's what they think the fans want, and they can only carry so much stock, so the oldest products are just never re-ordered, and then IWM thinks they aren't popular and archives them.  The new stuff sells, as you said, but largely because it's the only thing on the shelf.

You are right...No, you cannot please everybody.  But I have to wonder if bad data is giving them the wrong impression of what anybody really wants.

TheDean

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 450
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #15 on: 04 June 2013, 15:12:08 »
I don't know, I guess I just like progress.

GunjiNoKanrei

  • CamoSpecs
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 822
  • tired ... very tired ...
    • darklined.com
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #16 on: 04 June 2013, 15:24:38 »
As far as I know it is six blister and includes direct sales and orders placed by distributors. Or in other words all sales directly involving IWM.

IAMCLANWOLF

  • Freelance Artist
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3537
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #17 on: 04 June 2013, 15:28:09 »
I agree, resculpts of some of the old(er) miniatures would be welcome. Very welcome actually.

I know some are in route. Though not direct re-sculpts of 3025/3050 art. For instance, I know the primitive Thunderbolt was funded a while back. But it has new art being the primitive concept for the unseen. I think a few others too, but I don't have a definitive list for you. The problem is; 96% of sculpts require new art. The newest Atlas, the Drew Williams sculpt being one of very few exceptions to this. I do believe someone high-up mentioned previously that more primitive TRO's are in the pipeline.     

Raggedy_Man

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #18 on: 04 June 2013, 15:52:33 »

The last few novels before Fasa died off were a literal kick to the nuts, Dark Age was a dying company's desperate attempt to stay afloat by copying Dungeons & Dragons' switch to prepainted plastic figures, and the Jihad storyline was Catalyst's way to segue between the Battletech everybody loved and the Dark Ages that they were now stuck with.


(snip)

At the risk of derailing the thread ... wasn't the Word's universe-wide nuclear-cyborg tantrum kind of always in the works, since the days of the unseen, even?  I seem to remember reading in a Battlechat somewhere that TPTB had always planned out the storyline, an that the Jihad in some form had always been part of the plan. 

Anyway, I shared your thoughts on the Dark Ages for a long time--absolutely hated the WizKids clicky-tech era in the early/mid-2000's.  However, the products that have come out since then have gone a long way towards making up for that--enough that I have even begun putting together a Republic faction to paint, and have played a number of games in the post-Fortress era. 

And hey, at least one good thing came out of the Dark Ages--cheap battle armor minis! 

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #19 on: 04 June 2013, 16:04:17 »
I don't know, I guess I just like progress.
And I guess the punch-line here is that the Jihad and Dark Ages is a plot based around regress, not progress. =p

As far as I know it is six blister and includes direct sales and orders placed by distributors. Or in other words all sales directly involving IWM.

If it's only six actual blisters a year, I wonder how many archive (or ASR) orders would be needed to justify pulling something back into production?  Hell, I've got plans for ordering at least 8 Quickdraws, 12 Typhoons (6 blisters), and close to two companies worth of archived VTOLs...  Why oh why were all the VTOLs archived?...  And I can't believe the Mackie has survived this long.  If anything, that would have been the first mech I'd expect to see tossed under the bus, when its own TRO entry basically says it's useless and extinct except for in museums.

At the risk of derailing the thread
Believe me, the rails ended somewhere back in Texas, and I'm pretty sure I just saw the Statue of Liberty fly past us.
« Last Edit: 04 June 2013, 16:06:03 by Khell »

HavocTheWarDog

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1903
  • Lead or Follow, but get outa my way!
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #20 on: 04 June 2013, 16:13:44 »
I loved the Jihad as much as I did the Succession wars, I'm very interested in the happenings of the Dark Age, The Chaos factor intrigues me!!!! Furthermore I cannot wait to find out what's in store for the Universe after the Dark age!!!!!
"Veni Vidi Vici"

Psycho

  • CamoSpecs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1723
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #21 on: 04 June 2013, 23:03:26 »
It seems odd that any miniature couldn't shift six individual blisters a year

Why? There are over 1000 active skus. That's a whole lot of choice to be had. Some minis are ugly, others are highly specialized in game terms, others are of designs that are very restricted, some designs just suck... some minis have more than one of those factors working against it. An even bigger factor is the second-hand market: it'll be cheaper to nab an unpopular mini from eBay than to buy one new from IWM. That will put the mini into some else's hands without it showing up on IWM's sales charts.

Actually, it would explain a lot.  Stores bring in the newest stuff because that's what they think the fans want, and they can only carry so much stock, so the oldest products are just never re-ordered, and then IWM thinks they aren't popular and archives them.  The new stuff sells, as you said, but largely because it's the only thing on the shelf.


That's true to a point. Stores want products that move. They want to know that what they order will get sold and make them profit. If they haven't had anyone ask for a Savage Coyote (or insert any archived mini here) in the past five years, they won't stock it because they know it won't move. New minis can be duds too; IWM jumping on some DA-era sculpts before we had stats didn't end well for most of those minis, but overall I think you're giving IWM too little credit when it comes the archive choices. They've got the numbers. They know how much they've produced in a year. If people wanted those minis that badly that often, they'd make a point of ordering them. You don't put off ordering the mini you really really want because there's a new mini you don't care about on the shelf. Or am I the only one that could resist the lure of the Targe?  ;)

GRUD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3178
  • Quinn's Quads - 'Mechs on the March!
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #22 on: 05 June 2013, 02:32:19 »
I'm one of those "Old Farts" that started playing BT in '86, so of course I started off with 3025 'Tech. The group I was in broke up in early '92, and we had barely started dealing with the Clans. While I like the Clan TECH, I've NEVER cared anything for the "Clans" themselves.  :P I've continued buying the various print products over the years though, to support the Company, whether it was FASA, Fanpro or CGL. I buy minis based on whether or not I like the looks of them, rather than because they're the newest thing for Faction "X". I've bought minis that were Clan designs because I liked how they looked, NOT "Because" they were a Clan mini. I will point out that I've never bought any House Kurita, House Liao, or WOB designs. Like many others, I also care nothing for the MWDA game, though I actually liked the novels, even the one that was more of a "CSI" novel than BT.  ;D   I Think it was Blood Avatar?  Then again, I actually liked Far Country also.  :D


The Beautiful thing about BT (or any other game not sold by GDW, for that matter), is that you can do as you will with everything. If I had a group to game with, and the skills necessary to run a campaign, I'd make use of Clan tech, but without all the "Clan Trappings" that come with it. I'd be using the Clan DHS, Streak LRMs and ER weapons, but you'd not see hide nor hair of "Clan Wolf" or "Clan Ghost Bear". It would simply be more advanced Tech, like you see occuring naturally here in real life. As for the "Dark Age" Era I'd be like "What Dark Age? We kept the lights on!", and I'd ignore all that mess.  :D


I agree somewhat with the OP about wanting resculpts of some of the 3025-Era 'Mechs. I think it would be money better spent than on newer "types" of infantry, for example. I don't see the need in several "Different" sculpts of figures that are 1/8th of an inch tall. I realize I don't have to buy them, but I feel IWM is wasting time and effort messing with them that could be better spent elsewhere.  ANYWHERE else actually, even on WOB Designs, and I HATE WOB.  :P    ;D
To me, Repros are 100% Wrong, and there's NO  room for me to give ground on this subject. I'm not just an Immovable Object on this, I'm THE Immovable Object. 3D Prints are just 3D Repros.

Something to bear in Mind. Defending the BT IP is Frowned upon here.

Remember: Humor is NOT Tolerated here. Have a Nice Day!

[spoiler]Hey! Can't a guy get any Privacy around here![/spoiler]

dirty harry

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 947
  • Make my day
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #23 on: 05 June 2013, 07:11:59 »
In most cases it is the question 'do we need additional miniatures?'.
I for myself buy one sometimes two of the same, but not more. Usually that is all that i need to field a scenario unit, sometimes even both sides. So i have two Hunchbacks - do i need another one to play wysiwyg?
IMHO most of the time no.
Even if there is a need for additional minis - ask your friends if they can field one of those, especially the old ones. Usually someone has a gameready mini and if not use another one as a proxy. Not everyone is keen to proxys but it is better than skipping the scenario. Proxying is one major advantage of Battletech over any TT game.

So, even if IWM would recast some of the old minis, would i buy it? I must say no as i usually own the numbers i want. And that is the major problem with those old minis: the long time players already own their share of those minis and don't order another one and so on (yes... there are those who can't get enough of them... but they are the exception of the rule).
I must say i was stunned when i saw that the Reseen Ostsol was to be archived as well as several other longtime running minis, but keeping those points i mentioned in mind makes it easier to understand, why there are only extremly few sales of said minis.
(Most) people own their share of Ostsols, whether the reseen or not.


But there are some points i want to criticise IWM for.
Using a 3D-printer to speed up prototype production is not wrong. But using an unrefined 3D printed part to create master molds is totally wrong.
I just finished an Ostscout reseen. As it seems it was made from the 3D-prototype right away - including all the setting marks. It looked like it had a Zimmerit coating all over the body. Took about one hour to clean all those marks (on such a small body!)...
Multipart minis are not wrong, absolutely not. But splitting arms (e.g. reseen Marauder) or legs (e.g. reseen Thunderbolt) into three parts is just a pain to work with. I can handle it and i know how to use a pin vise, but that should not be a standard. It is what is needed for free posing, but glueing it without pinning or a third hand can get really hard. Some possibility to pose ok, but not to the last toe (why was the reseen Rifleman toe not casted to the mini anyway?).
Not everyone likes the static poses of old minis, i agree. But the new trend towards running poses is getting far to extreme looking at a primitive Shadow Hawk or the Morrigan, that are close to topple over their own feet. Some of the more normal 'walkers' are okay and if i can decide if it should stand, walk or run by using three parts (two legs, one hip) i am happy, too. But please, no more pseudo ballerinas (e.g. Nyx or said primitive Shadow Hawk). That is plain stupid. And getting it to stand without pinning it to the base is another problem.
Speeding up the production process is economic. But selling blisters with wrong parts, missing parts, massively misaligned parts or just broken parts right from the start is not a display of technical expertise. So please add some time for your quality management. That should lower your expenditures for replacements as well.

Just my two cents...

Khell

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #24 on: 05 June 2013, 12:31:59 »
Why? There are over 1000 active skus. That's a whole lot of choice to be had. Some minis are ugly, others are highly specialized in game terms, others are of designs that are very restricted, some designs just suck...
Which again baffles me that the Mackie hasn't gone Archive yet.
 

Stores want products that move. They want to know that what they order will get sold and make them profit. If they haven't had anyone ask for a Savage Coyote (or insert any archived mini here) in the past five years, they won't stock it because they know it won't move.
It's more complex than people not requesting a mech.  I have an online store where I buy about half of my Battletech, and they are wonderful in that they don't really pre-stock any mechs, but will bring in any models I ask for if their distributors have them.  But the distributor doesn't carry about half of what I want.  So even requesting it from the store, I can't buy an in-print mini, ergo it doesn't sell.

And the only local store I have that carries Battletech is run by a guy who knows absolutely nothing of the game.  I had to educate him on what the hex bases were and how important it was to carry them, because he only ever stocked one blister.  This guy goes to his distributor and tells him "give me fifty random units".  So it's rare you find anything you like in his store because it's basically an even mix of whatever's newest, and whatever the distributor wants to be rid of.

For about half of my miniatures, buying from IWM directly is basically the only option.  But their freight rates to Canada are highway robbery.  $14USD to ship a $10USD mini?  Get real!  So the only way to order from IWM is to put together a huge $200 order for the free shipping, which means you don't order often, and you don't buy on impulse the way you would in a store.  So that Savage Coyote I might have picked up on a whim gets overlooked because for my $200 I have to make sure that I get only the minis I need most.

Then again, I actually liked Far Country also.
Far country was awesome, no matter what people say.

The Beautiful thing about BT (or any other game not sold by GDW, for that matter), is that you can do as you will with everything.
There is truth to that, and in the past I used to play that way.  Every Mech was a custom design in Mechworks, the factions and fluff were cast aside and we just played the game how we wanted, with whatever we wanted.  Truth be told, that got boring.  Working with the story, using the proper mechs and equipment for your faction, it added to the game.  I've had as much fun puzzling over how to make the best Kuritan force with what they legally can use, as I do actually playing.  And learning to work with the older tech (non-ER non-Pulse, non-Streak) showed me just how much more balanced the game was before the Clans.  But that's just my take on things.  As you said, people can do what they want.

So, even if IWM would recast some of the old minis, would i buy it? I must say no as i usually own the numbers i want. And that is the major problem with those old minis: the long time players already own their share of those minis and don't order another one and so on (yes... there are those who can't get enough of them... but they are the exception of the rule).

Well I am definitely one of those exceptions to the rule.  I hate to proxy, and when I design an army, I buy the miniatures I need, even if a different army of mine has one of them.  This is my Kuritan Jenner, and these are my Davion Jenners - not this is my Jenner, I use it for both Davion and Kurita.  Again, that's just how I do things.  I like to see my collection grow, I like that in doing so I support the companies who bring me the things I love, and each new mini is another one to assemble (my favorite part of the hobby).



Multipart minis are not wrong, absolutely not. But splitting arms (e.g. reseen Marauder) or legs (e.g. reseen Thunderbolt) into three parts is just a pain to work with. I can handle it and i know how to use a pin vise, but that should not be a standard. It is what is needed for free posing, but glueing it without pinning or a third hand can get really hard. Some possibility to pose ok, but not to the last toe (why was the reseen Rifleman toe not casted to the mini anyway?).
One man's irritation is another man's glee.  I love the complexity of the new multi-parts.  They give me so much freedom to sculpt the hexplates with more features than just flock, and as I've previously said, just a few extra parts of articulation and I can make two of the same miniature look completely different - almost as good as having a second sculpt.  Some times the extra joints are a pain to work with (gods was the Marauder's hip-leg connection a pain), but in the end I still like the result.  Again, that's me.  For the folk who don't overly like the assembly process, there's always Dark Ages.

Psycho

  • CamoSpecs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1723
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #25 on: 05 June 2013, 13:15:25 »
It's more complex than people not requesting a mech.  I have an online store where I buy about half of my Battletech, and they are wonderful in that they don't really pre-stock any mechs, but will bring in any models I ask for if their distributors have them.  But the distributor doesn't carry about half of what I want.  So even requesting it from the store, I can't buy an in-print mini, ergo it doesn't sell.

Once you hit the distributor level, then you're talking a different scale of sales and product movement. Same cause and effect, just bumped up to the point where the occasional request for a mini isn't enough to justify carrying it.

I don't have an answer for the Mackie. The updated version shown in TRO3075 is passable, and was in service through the SL era, but it still doesn't appeal to me as a mini.

JadeHellbringer

  • Easily Bribed Forum Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21917
  • Third time this week!
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #26 on: 05 June 2013, 16:49:22 »
When I bought my (only) Mackie, it was a few years ago, and I tried painting it black and silver... and hated how it turned out. I tried again with SLDF green, and it still didn't look good. Finally, I decided to try an experiment, and painted it solid bronze with weathering... as a statue in honor of fallen Mechwarriors.

It looks better this way (odd, but better), and I did the same with the figures of Aidan Pryde and Aleksander Kerensky I ended up with later (likely to do the same with the Bounty Hunter when I pick that one up in my fall order), but yeah, the Mackie is a pretty difficult mini to get looking good, no matter how much you try to polish it up. Surprising that it's survived the archive.
"There's a difference between the soldier and his fight,
But the warrior knows the true meaning of his life."
+Larry and his Flask, 'Blood Drunk'+

"You know, basically war is just, like, a bunch of people playing pranks on each other, but at the end they all die."
+Crow T. Robot+

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 41417
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #27 on: 05 June 2013, 16:54:56 »
If it's not archived, it simply means people somewhere are buying it for whatever reason they choose. I know I could use a few more myself, both for SL usage and for AoW-era House forces.
My wife writes books

Sixteen tons means sixteen suits. CT must be repaired.

"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul

Stormlion1

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15295
  • Apparently Im a rare survivor of the 1st!
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #28 on: 05 June 2013, 16:57:18 »
I have to admit, my prefernce in mechs is from 3025 to maybe, pushing it 3075. There just mostly classic designs and the DA designs initially left me cold. There growing on me, but mostly they still aren't stuff I want to play with. I also only have a single Mackie, painted up in SLDF colors, then dulled down heavily to make it look old. Like a tank that sits in front of a VA outpost or something. I still haven't used it. It is funny, when the first archiving was announced a few years back I was so sure it was to be archived I bought one right away. And it is still in the store and must be selling more than six a year to stay there. Maybe I will order a second one soon and paint it up as well. Maybe in a rusting hulk scheme or something you would expect in a periphery outpost.
I don't set an example for others. I make examples of them.

cold1

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4881
  • Goon
Re: More of the old, less of the new
« Reply #29 on: 06 June 2013, 08:33:33 »
Hate to burst your bubble but with a massive new TRO roll out my guess we'll see a lot more new minis before we see more old ones re-done.

People are going to want to put the shiny new toys on their game tables


To the patient go the spoils

 

Register