(KICKSTARTER) Warforged: First Contact

[tnjrp]

A new scifi/space-fantasy miniatures board game effort from Andy Chambers and (primarily, I assume) Tuomas Pirinen:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/275686604/warforged-first-contact-by-andy-chambers-and-tuoma

Resin minis with future gothic/knights in space aesthetic (for humans anyway), ca. 28mm scale. Boards build from dynamically allocated sections.

Not my cuppa but some folks might be interested in it I figure

[Melnibonean]

Some nice looking figures but why do the makers of sci-fi games insist on making figures with swords. There is a reason that our own soldiers haven't used swords for 100 years and that's because they have reliable long arms.

[Ultravanillasmurf]

Some of the mech concept art is nice (I like mechs even though I understand the concepts of ground pressure and target area).

Swords just look heroic, but unless you have a reason why guns do not work (or like Into The Badlands they are a "forgotten" technology)...

I would tempted by the cyborg war elephant because it is silly.

[tnjrp]

Cancelled: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/275686604/warforged-first-contact-by-andy-chambers-and-tuoma/posts/1867631

Will be back tho, of course... Or so they say. As always.

[Inso]

So... they funded and pulled it because it wasn't embraced as well as they hoped.

If that's the case... why didn't they set the funding goal higher?

Greed and pride...

[Major_Gilbear]

So... they funded and pulled it because it wasn't embraced as well as they hoped.

If that's the case... why didn't they set the funding goal higher?

Greed and pride...

Remember BtGoA KS? That's more likely why I suspect.

Read together with their statement and the most recent backer comments, I think this was a wise move.

[tnjrp]

Well. Lots of projects set their funding targets very low so that they can get to smashing stretch goals early on. Nothing -- or very little -- speaks to the wallets of the kickstarting public like tons of smashed stretch goals that bring in


It's of course embarrassing when the "real hidden secret goal" is then not met with or seems unattainable and you have to cancel a funded project. It becomes a pain when it leads to "pledge trolling" to hitch up the income in order to make the project runners to commit to coughing up goals.

[Elbows]

I admit I had some vague interest (if the minis were good - wasn't a fan of what I saw promoted though) but then I saw the silly little hexes...and realized it was a board game.  Rules by damned my interest dropped like a stone.  I had thought it was going to be a tabletop wargame.

[Torben]

I admit I had some vague interest (if the minis were good - wasn't a fan of what I saw promoted though) but then I saw the silly little hexes...and realized it was a board game.  Rules by damned my interest dropped like a stone.  I had thought it was going to be a tabletop wargame.

That and I never back reset Kickstarters means I'm not going to give this a second glance, no matter who's behind it.

[Inso]

I think it is cathartic when people start things believing that just because they are well known, their work is worth backing (no matter what it is) and then suddenly find out that they can't ride on the coat tails of their previous fame/success.

Beyond the Gates of Antares was the same (as previously mentioned).

A poor concept is still a poor concept, no matter how famous the instigator is.

It's kind of insulting to the punters.

[Elbows]

That's the biggest thing for me with Kickstarters and why I think they're great whether the company is established or not.  I don't even think they were just riding their own coat-tails, but rather maybe thought this would be grasped and people would be excited about it.  Obviously that's not.

Knowing the two names involved behind the game it's very likely they could have easily got a business loan from someone (with their game design credentials etc.) and put this out regardless...and it may well have flopped completely.  I hope they do a second take, maybe re-design or re-think some stuff - but I hope this is a financial flop/pitfall which was avoided because of the use of Kickstarter.  I think KS is not just a funding tool, but an excellent way to see how much genuine interest there is.  I'd imagine they also googled their own KS and checked all the forums they could, gathering feedback.

That's a good thing for them, even if the project never comes to fruition.

[Major_Gilbear]

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, or even just naive, but there is a section at the bottom of the front project page in every KS called "Risks and Challenges"; it strikes me that rather than filling this with the usual waffle about how you intend to deliver on time, a few short lines about using the KS to gauge public interest in the project might be both more appropriate and honest.

Using KS as tool to gauge interest in a project is completely fine and fair IMO, but sometimes you need to be more clear with your backers up-front so that people don't feel burned when a "funded" project is pulled by its creators before the deadline.

Afterall, the project creators are asking for trust of the pledgers in them and their project, so I don't think it's unreasonable to to expect the creators to show similar trust up-front in return as well.

[Elbows]

Oh, I agree...but when a project just squeaks by...I think pulling the carpet out is better than two years late with a bunch of broken promises and heart-ache for the pledgers. 

[tnjrp]

Oh, I agree...but when a project just squeaks by...

Indeed those are the ones that'll make me strongly consider jumping ship in the future. The problem is that since the super secret real funding goal is unknown, it may be hard to tell if a project with a seemingly reasonable funding multiplier of, say, 2, is on the black or not. But I suppose it's the nature of the territory.