Lynx7725

I think it's clear that the CMS Legioss set is a controversial subject. Some people like it and some don't. We're all entitled to our opinions and discretion to spend our own money. So keep it clean, ok? It's not worth getting into a flam-ish argument over.

Hmm. Seems like they went with a folding knee joint instead of a telescoping leg. And a fixed kneecap. That's where Toynami MPC has an advantage -- the collapsing leg and movable kneecap improves the fighter mode tremendously. I got this feeling that the legs are actually swiveled out from the body in Fighter mode. I think I understand CMS' design philosophy. They went for a great looking Soldier mode, but compromised heavily on Fighter mode. You got to admit, aside from the small chest intakes and the over-long tail fins, Soldier mode is very good looking. Unfortunately, when coupled with the Tlead, the original design actually is most impressive when the Legioss is in Fighter mode. But the leg design actually hurts the combination because of the knee and the non-retracting feet -- the over-long leg meant the leg has to be displaced sideways, creating the poor look. In Toynami's case, it was a decent design hampered by poor material and quality control. In CMS' case, I think it will be a case of an over-compromised design due to an obsession with the Legioss' Soldier mode. I'm a bit on the fence now. I like the Battroid mode but the Zeta's head is a bit disappointing. And the poor look in Combined Fighter mode is very disappointing. I need to think about this much more.

http://www.hlj.com/product/CMS65187 Here we go again.

Hurmp. Not much time for a review of the Big Blue before the Big Red then.

Don't overlook the fact that the Sue Graham MPC is not line-art correct, as Toynami did not change all the necessary parts; IIRC, the chest is the most prominent of these. Back to the Legioss/ Tlead. When's Big Blue coming out again? I'm considering plonking cash down for Big Red, but would like to see a review first.

Type Zero has always been the poor orphan -- it's a great design, but under-utilized and hence very few "cool" scenes and accessories. It is after all a police labor, and so will lack the big guns/ "military grunt" look that makes the Helldiver so cool. BGC ladies and/ or hardsuits would be interesting, but I think the licensing might be an issue. Still, doesn't stop the hoping -- as is the hope for Revoltech Destroids and Zentradi/ Mentran mecha.

Hmm. I was about to post about how the kneecaps look to be mis-transformed, but the last back shot of the Zeta is intersting. Looks to be the thighs do not telescope in and out the way I remember the Toynami versions do (but my memory might be off). It looks like the thighs are designed to fold backwards into the lower legs, but given the size of the hole and length of the thigh, I don't think there's enough room for the thigh to fully swing into the lower legs. So yeah, the lower legs might stick that far out.. Another question is that we can see the lower legs to be essentially hollow. As a mostly plastic toy, it has to be a bit top heavy -- unless the upper torso is mostly hollow as well. That does bring up questions of durability.

Woah, that's quite a major incident. Looks like the left wing is really tattered. Yes, it could have been a lot worse -- quite surprised there's no fire.

Huh. Chun Li's got Thunder Thighs now. Not a big SF fan, so going to pass on these. But I think it's a good sign that the line is still strong.

Mine just got shipped with my Revoltech Movie Patlabours.

Yup. Like that.

Hmm, I was going through the usual pics when I realised we've never seen the Legioss/Tlead combination in GERWALK (or whatever it's called) mode. Is it even possible?

Bureaucratic inertia? I mean, every other variant has a Tlead, so let's have one for the Zeta too!

It's a Gelgoog JG version, a late OYW version. But this is not the actual line-art -- it's some other artist's take on it. Good looking though.

Hmm, never knew there was a board game out for Macross: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/16167 Actually, apparently there were quite a few: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/metasearch.ph...cross&B1=Go Anybody ever owned one of these? What are they like?

First off, thanks for the photos.. I think it shows the quality of product well, but the design may have some deficiencies. Second, they just effectively lost a sale here. I want to get only the red Legioss, but if it's an exclusive, I'm not going to pay yet another premium on top of the already high price. Sorry, no go here.

Actually, once ONE new Revoltech Item comes out, there usually is a few more.. Fraulein Asuka, for one: http://www.hlj.com/product/KYD01192 Fraulein Tohsaka from Fate Stay Night, for another. No, not getting her. http://www.hlj.com/product/KYD01189 Then, surprise surprise, Aqua Griffon. The main thing is the spare revolver in this case, but unlikely I'll get this. http://www.hlj.com/product/KYD01177 And of course the Black Ox above.

Nah, the cargo bay is where we keep the 30mm ammo and the MOAB/ MOP payload..

And ammo, lots of ammo!

Just my two cents about MMOGs.. I got into MMOGs a few years back, went with Lineage II (and that's a ballbuster for you), and CoH, and EVE. Then I got into the "free" MMOGs, which are browser-based and often ran as a side projects by non-corporate owners. In general, I think the commercial concept taken by most software house is not quite to my liking. Aside from the usual "people are asshats online" problem -- which is none of the developers' problem -- my gut feel is that the MMO genre is still waiting for a killer app. My current view of the traditional approach to MMOG design is as follows: Make it look pretty to attract players. Give the online economy some ridiculous name and claim people can deal with other real-life people (as if it's a good thing!) Give some nebulous and often inconsequential rewards to attract and retain players. Pander consistently to high level players in the game update releases. Features in new releases are often mostly for more developed game characters rather than newly joined characters. I don't think this approach works very well, because it simply encourages players to stay online to grind their characters up. Since most companies charge on a monthly basis, it actually doesn't make any sense to get players to do this (since you cannot charge them for it) and the whole online presence of gamers are probably over-stated. And the grind is probably the most stupid design decision ever made. Yes, it does cause players to stick around to develop their in-game characters, but it also tends to alienate players over time. This just creates a churning of players, with new players replacing dissatisfied players. As long as you can sustain a positive churn you are ok, but the market is notoriously fickle, so it's not IMO a good long-term strategy. At the end of the day, people want to play games to have fun. Grinding is not fun. Having people interact online may not be fun because people are more likely to be asshats online. Having empty achievements is not fun after a while. The whole point of the game is to make players larger than life, not having a second digital life where they have to work at being merely adequate. Which is why I think the MMOG genre is still looking for a killer app, or at least to rethink its approach and rapport with their customers. I don't play WoW, but apparently they got something right but overdid on the grind portion, or structured their game in such a way that once players hit the cap, there's little incentive to continue gaming/ paying. I played EVE, and they almost got it right -- it's innovative in many ways and the grind isn't too terrible, but it didn't get everything right because it's still a lot of work at high levels and content is somewhat lacking (for me) at low. CoH got it mostly right, but unfortunately the genre is not interesting to me. I think what the MMOG need to do is to develop their online economy AI and their non-combat AI substantially. At the end of the day, combat/ conflict in MMOG is a means to an end -- you should fight because you have to, not because you want to. The risks and cost inherent to open conflict should be crippling, but for most games now, fighting is the whole point. If open conflict isn't the way to go, then the other areas -- the so-called "soft war" option -- need to be improved so that players got another option to achieve their own goals. Content is king in MMOG, and direct combat doesn't fill that niche; there's only so much combat stuff you can engineer into the game, so it's always limiting. Too many MMOG concentrates on hyping their P2P combat that they don't realise MMOG is not the same as an online FPS. There is a critical need for the developers to rethink the design philosophy behind the game.

I said that, actually. It can be done, I agree, but there are better platforms to do close-in work. An F-14 with XLAAs is better utilized from far away -- its air-to-air weapon choices are optimized that way and it's really good at it. I've seen a very good F-14 pilot in close and I can appreciate that the plane can do it, but from an ACM POV, I think the F-22 and Su-47 are much better close-in than a 'Cat. EDIT: One thing though, if you use an XLAA-plane (F-14 and Typhoons only, IIRC), I think you cannot reasonably expect that many individual kills. XLAA is awfully inaccurate in the boost stage, up to 10~15K, and it's not that hard to dodge it if you see it coming, unlike the QAAM. It's also not often one-shot fatal. I see and use F-14s with XLAA more as a long-range missile support, good to soften up a dogfighting F-22/ Su-47 and even claiming the odd kill. If I see an F-14 with XLAA in an online match, that's either someone who knows the plane well enough to be confident with it, or someone who is more intent on winning by objective, or someone who's a fan of the plane.

Most online players are used to seeing XMA6s from my experience. They don't expect missiles coming from 30K+ out, which helped me get a few online kills.

I was feeling a bit whimsical today, so I played around with Heavy Command Cruiser. It could be hit by RCLs, but guess what? You can hit it with FAE too. It's tricky, but it's a big target. I've managed to disable all weapons and engines before the Strigon team even made it off the deck, and the splash of the FAE knocked out a lot of stuff on the surrounding cruisers too. Actually, the surrounding cruisers are smaller targets, so harder to hit with an FAE. But can be done and a single hit tends to wipe a lot of things off the deck. I think I fouled a few Strigons that way too -- think Strigon 5 was a bit too close behind me when the FAE hit one of the cruisers, and he had to break off. (Incidentally, I did see an F-14 which made a pass at me get taken out by my FAE -- he was too low, and the blast AOE nailed him. So in online play, don't be too surprised when A-10s show up bombing with FAE, they can hurt you... but it's rare.) EDIT: Just a note -- total time taken, less than 8 minutes 30 seconds, Grade B because I ignored the tankers. I'm not sure how quick this is though.

Yeah, and while he's fixated on that one plane you told him to go after, another 3 or 4 would be making passes at you. He can take out targets, but you often has to tell him to go after something.

What I find annoying about the Allied Support is that it's often telling the friendly AI to do their job. I mean, I have to get Allied Defense because Shamrock apparently really, really sucks at protecting your six, and I have to get Allied Attack because the friendly AI can't seem to hit the broadside of the barn with anything short of a rocket salvo. The enemy AI seems to be a lot more accurate (ground AI at least), and in the air they tend to work a lot harder to stay together...