> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:08:13PM -0500, Tom B wrote:
A quick question to all those of you interested in seeing some more walker
minis (particularly bipedal ones)....
If we're talking about medium-sized combat walkers (in the 3-5 metre
"real" height range, ie: 30-50mm in 15mm scale, with a single pilot
in the torso "cockpit"), how would you like to see the legs cast? In fixed
poses for ease of assembly of the minis (each leg a single
piece casting), or as multi-part castings (each leg broken down into
"thigh", "calf" and "foot" parts) to allow much greater poseability,
but at the cost of a much more fiddly-to-assemble kit...?
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
Poseable would be nice, but otherwise maybe a few leg variants? For casting
purposes poseable is probably easier as people will always just that variant
you didn't make.
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
This is a "third way" that, on reflection, I may well take:
master-cast the legs as separate parts, then assemble them into a
variety of different single-piece castings in the production moulds
to supply as (random?) pose variants - so you get a walking set, or a
running set, or a crouching set etc......
Jon (GZG)
> Frits
[quoted original message omitted]
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
> Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com> wrote:
> This is a "third way" that, on reflection, I may well take:
My personal preference is for poseable. I like having precisely the right
miniature for the look I want, and the customizability is well worth a few
minutes with a file and some glue.
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
I'm curious if there's a decided preference for legs being humanoid or
'chicken'. From all the research I'm seeing, 'chicken' seem to be the most
agile and quick. The humanoid robots I'm seeing require slow, balance
movements to walk, and running seems out of the question. It seems our own
constant 'falling forward' is difficult to mechanize.
Feel free, all, to contradict with real world stuff. ;->=
By the way, I've always hated the idea of bipedal vehicles, but I'm starting
to thaw...
The_Beast
I would go with single piece, but possibly made so that they can easily be
cut for folks that want to re-pose them.
Michael Brown mwsaber6@msn
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Ground Zero Games" <jon@gzg.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 4:54 AM
To: <gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: [GZG] QUESTION Re: Walkers in 15mm
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:08:13PM -0500, Tom B wrote:
I'm
> not claiming this is the best possible system, just that it's one that
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lJon
,
Maybe you could make them available with pre-cast legs in different pose
ranges such as: Kneeling, Prone, normal height stationary, normal height
moving.
Having tried to assemble over the years a few of the more fidly casts (B5
Carrier, I'm looking at you!), that can be a real annoyance to most folks.
There are those that like to build models from the raw materials, and
obviously they like maximum adaptability, but realistically if we could get
the poses above, that would probably cover most. Or sell the leg kits
separately and let people order a few of each and build their own combos.
In Reply to Other Folks:
Re: HG 25mm - The newer HG are about 20mm scale I think. The older
25-28mm
ones are OOP and can be hard to find (I think I might have 25-30, but I
got
a huge set off E-bay in box).
My Own Opinion:
I'd still love to see the 'tank turret on legs' (BF1942). That's what is
missing from most big walkers - they have guns and legs, but they miss
the 'turret' part and they often have a canopy that makes them look comically
vulnerable (vs a nice, fairly sloped turret that could be peeked over building
tops or hills hull down or turret down). Most of the time I legged tanks
(ignoring that ridiculous Clone Trooper thing), they are assault guns with the
gun fixed in a hull that requires leg movement to align (Shades of
the S-Tank!) rather than having a heft turret on top. BT got it right
with the idea of a torso and head you could counter rotate, but none of them
could hold the weapons a real tank turret could and most of the time, the figs
were all made with head, torso and legs pointing in the same direction so the
idea was lost in the manufacturing.
The BF1942 design does use thick legs. I think there is a logic there -
if you have to support a tank turret, a thick leg gives you a bit more ground
pressure dispersion, allows you to handle the stresses of kneeling, and if you
are bipedal especially, gives you some resistance to damage (more critical as
a bipedal unit). To my mind, a unit like that should stand about 50mm at the
cupola. These legged tanks look like they can manage a 'fast walk' or 'hussle'
rather than an outright run (at no point does the whole vehicle leave the
ground!), but they aren't sprinters. Star Wars chicken walkers may look
faster, but they can be taken out by ARBOREAL TREE BEARS. Where I come from,
we call that a DESIGN FLAW, even in a recce unit. (And
all leg units should come with an auto-actuated cable and vine cutter
that
deploys like a blade or chainsaw from the front surface of the leg -
doesn't need to be visible on model).
The armaments packages could vary for the tank turret part from main tank gun
(one big honking mid to long barrel for an HVC or HEL to a shorter one of your
'plasma gun' barrels for DFFC), AT (GMS systems along with a 30mm
chain-gun style RFAC for soft skins), Arty (howitzer or MRLS), AA (GMS
and rotary cannon) and lastly AP (multiple rotary cannons and perhaps a couple
of barrels that could be for vehicular flamers). I know Jon usually casts up
multiple turrets if and when he does a tank-ish vehicle.
Another Under Represented Class:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ferrisdp/NSF/Exoskeleton_fm_Aliens.jpg
http://www.6patlar.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/alien.jpg
This would make for a sort of iconic 'generic figure' of a starship
crewperson in a load-lifter. An alternative variant would be the same
thing with all open panels sealed in by glass, so you could work in a vacuum.
Lastly, if you want to see the most futuristic single person transportation
I've seen that would make for a crazy miniature to put on for civilians or
maybe some police in a game:
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/wearable-motorb.html
I think you could easily get away with either whole legs in various poses,
though you might want to make the hip/leg assemblies a single piece for
ease of assembly. That way you get two legs that definitely fit together and
sit at the right angles.
"A quick question to all those of you interested in seeing some more walker
minis (particularly bipedal ones)....
If we're talking about medium-sized combat walkers (in the 3-5 metre
"real" height range, ie: 30-50mm in 15mm scale, with a single pilot
in the torso "cockpit"), how would you like to see the legs cast? In fixed
poses for ease of assembly of the minis (each leg a single
piece casting), or as multi-part castings (each leg broken down into
"thigh", "calf" and "foot" parts) to allow much greater poseability,
but at the cost of a much more fiddly-to-assemble kit...?"
> TomB wrote:
> Star Wars chicken walkers may look faster, but they can be taken out by
> ARBOREAL TREE BEARS. Where I come from, we call that a DESIGN FLAW,
Um, well... today's MBTs can also be taken out of the fight by dropping big
trees on them from ambush (particularly the kind of elaborate ambushes
featured in RotJ). OK, they won't *explode* quite as nicely as the chicken
walkers do, but you can disarm them, blind them and immobilize them... and
they're not even recce units :-P
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
> Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> aren't sprinters. Star Wars chicken walkers may look faster, but they
The little-known Lucasian corollary to Godwin's Law is that when someone
compares their opponent to anything involving Ewoks, the argument ends and the
person making the comparison has lost.
FM 17-15, Chapter 3 Section III
'Prior to insertion into heavy rain forests, platoon leaders will inspect all
large trees for heavy logs suspended by vines...'
The_Beast
Oerjan Ariander wrote on 02/17/2009 01:57:06 PM:
> TomB wrote:
> >in a recce unit.
and
> they're not even recce units :-P
G'day,
> This is a "third way" that, on reflection, I may well take:
This I like very much.... even I'm weakening on the "spend money on figs" vs
"renovate bits of HOUSE front" (HOUSE emphasised as last time wise cracking
Jon pretended Derek thought I needed the renovating!)....
G'day,
> I'm curious if there's a decided preference for legs being humanoid or
I don't care so long as they look cool;)
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lA
> funny man from across the pond wrote:
Um, well... today's MBTs can also be taken out of the fight by dropping big
trees on them from ambush (particularly the kind of elaborate ambushes
featured in RotJ). OK, they won't *explode* quite as nicely as the chicken
walkers do, but you can disarm them, blind them and immobilize them... and
they're not even recce units :-P
----
I'm not saying you can't immobilize a tank with a good pit trap or with logs.
Mind you, we've both seen tracklayers pull out of some pretty extreme
scenarios that looked like it should bog them. Break vision blocks and
electronics, possibly. I guess a big enough logfall might damage the weaponry.
But the whole 'trip it with a rope held by about 6 fat fuzzy bears" etc. is a
bit dodgy. If we assume Imperial Troops are decent (might not apply to
AT-AT crews, just Stormtroopers - who else can be so precise?), at the
first sign of trouble, they'd lock their hatches (if something is knocking on
the roof, you ask your stormtroopers to shoot it until it stops) and they'd be
aware of the possibility of tree falls and rockfalls and suck and govern
themselves accordingly. 6 fat fuzzy bears isn't going to stop one.
And if it looks like you're going to get a rockfall, instead of tipping over
and blowing up (must have been made by the Republic Pinto Engineering Company
of Banasdan), they might just dig the feet in. Then they wouldn't be trying to
walk on logs.
At worst, they get knocked over anyway, at best, their legs hold and they
might be stationary, but at least they are upright and can shoot.
And I have doubts about these bears as arboreal climbers. Most of them were
too rotund to get up on a log without a Princess to help.
And don't get me started about the uselessness of Stormtrooper Armour. Won't
stop a rock, won't stop a blaster, won't stop a lightsaber, limits your
visibility, limits your movement.... arrrghhh....
Wee wakka, ee chupa! Yub-Nub! YUB-NUB!!!!!
"Translation: Those Stormtroopers are killing us! Run! Runnnnnnnn!!!!!"
The only thing good about Ewoks:
http://www.theforce.net/SWTC/holocaust.html
G'day,
> 6 fat fuzzy bears isn't going to stop one.
You've never been into a kindergarten have you Tom?....;)
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lIf
you went with a "realistic" walker design with a MBT style turret you could
design them so that the existing vehicle turrets fitted them. This would
obviously cut down developement effort and improve flexibility  Having seen
videos of tanks firing their main gun the recoil is pretty significant. A
bipedal walker could struggle to cope with the recoil of a main gun. So you
could end up with a seried of walkers that use bipedal for scout or missile
equipped models and multileged types for MBTs. APCs could be either type.
> If you went with a "realistic" walker design with a MBT style turret
That's kind of what I was thinking.... bipedal walkers would probably tend
towards being armed with mutiple smaller weapons for antipersonnel fire, with
some missile systems for the bigger targets, at least until you get up to
putting energy weapons or other
low-recoil stuff on them - firing a big tank gun from one is most
likely to knock it onto its big tin arse..... ;-)
At least I could imagine our OcTank bracing all eight legs while firing the
big cannon.
Jon (GZG)
> _______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lAno
ther voice from across the pond: (other pond, upside down)
---
G'day,
> 6 fat fuzzy bears isn't going to stop one.
You've never been into a kindergarten have you Tom?....;) Beth
---
My Mom, in one of her incarnations, taught kindegarten. She never seemed to
have a problem. If a 100 pound lady could manage 24 unruly kindergarten
children, I'm sure a 20 ton walker could manage six fat tree-bear
sausage-oids.
And for the record, that Jon has some cheek to suggest Derek would be having
you renovated. He's lucky you don't get to Merry Old very often....
Many of us are grateful, and need to be, for Beth's generous, though
occasionally wicked, sense of humor.
The_Beast
PS > 'I don't care so long as they look cool;)' Beth, are you suggesting
something dear Jon produces lacks cool
factor? ;->=
> Tom B wrote on 02/18/2009 02:59:59 AM:
***snippage***
> And for the record, that Jon has some cheek to suggest Derek would
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
Remember, by the time of RotJ they'd been cloning these guys for ~20 years.
Imperial troops are clones of clones of clones of
clones. Given the usual errors in the cloning process, these guys are
breaking down pretty bad by the time of the last movies. That seems to be
confirmed by their poor performance throughout the last 3 movies.
Grant
________________________________
From: gzg-l-bounces@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
[mailto:gzg-l-bounces@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Tom B
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 5:51 PM
To: gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [GZG] QUESTION Re: Walkers in 15mm
> A funny man from across the pond wrote:
Um, well... today's MBTs can also be taken out of the fight by dropping big
trees on them from ambush (particularly the kind of elaborate ambushes
featured in RotJ). OK, they won't *explode* quite as nicely as the chicken
walkers do, but you can disarm them, blind them and immobilize them... and
they're not even recce units :-P
----
I'm not saying you can't immobilize a tank with a good pit trap or with logs.
Mind you, we've both seen tracklayers pull out of some pretty extreme
scenarios that looked like it should bog them. Break vision blocks and
electronics, possibly. I guess a big enough logfall might damage the weaponry.
But the whole 'trip it with a rope held by about 6 fat fuzzy bears" etc. is a
bit dodgy. If we assume Imperial Troops are decent (might not apply
to AT-AT crews, just Stormtroopers - who else can be so precise?), at
the first sign of trouble, they'd lock their hatches (if something is knocking
on the roof, you ask your stormtroopers to shoot it until it stops) and they'd
be aware of the possibility of tree falls and rockfalls and suck and govern
themselves accordingly. 6 fat fuzzy bears isn't going to stop one.
And if it looks like you're going to get a rockfall, instead of tipping over
and blowing up (must have been made by the Republic Pinto Engineering Company
of Banasdan), they might just dig the feet in. Then they wouldn't be trying to
walk on logs.
At worst, they get knocked over anyway, at best, their legs hold and they
might be stationary, but at least they are upright and can shoot.
And I have doubts about these bears as arboreal climbers. Most of them were
too rotund to get up on a log without a Princess to help.
And don't get me started about the uselessness of Stormtrooper Armour. Won't
stop a rock, won't stop a blaster, won't stop a lightsaber, limits your
visibility, limits your movement.... arrrghhh....
Wee wakka, ee chupa! Yub-Nub! YUB-NUB!!!!!
"Translation: Those Stormtroopers are killing us! Run! Runnnnnnnn!!!!!"
The only thing good about Ewoks:
http://www.theforce.net/SWTC/holocaust.html
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
> Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Ladue, Grant <ladue@buffalo.edu> wrote:
> Remember, by the time of RotJ they'd been cloning these guys for
And why they never take their helmets off.
Mk
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lAs
I have been reading the various responses to Jon's question it comes to mind
that what I want in ANY walker design is one that allows for versatility,
expansion and is still manageable as a model. Make the legs too complicated,
you have to fight to get the thing to stay up. Make them too simple and you
end up having a loss of flexibility.
I would tend to go with the option of leg sets in various poses. The modelers
can always mod these and later releases could expand these.
With these sets you'd have - walking, running, standing, and maybe
braced. This would allow for most any needed battlefield pose for a
semi-humanoid walker. If you get more humanoid, the desire for more
dynamic poses will come up.
I do not like the idea of multi-part legs as these are fiddly and hard
to get to pair of right. Similarly, seperate legs are also problematic as you
still have to glue them in the right way to get a biped to look
right ( a little more forgiveness in the multi-legged walkers), but they
are manageable.
As for the size of bipedal walkers. My primary preference is for the
smaller Class 1-2 sorts but I would never say that anything bigger would
be a bad thing. I have my favorites, but I'm all for the growth of the range
in every direction because I know just as I might have tastes that differ from
others, so are their bound to be tastes other than my own.
Really when it comes down to it, I have faith that Jon will produce a quality
product. I just hope that eventually he'll produce one of my "dream" products.
-Eli