Lynx7725

You're misunderstanding, the $200 price tag was for a transformable one like the prototype. They're considering making a much cheaper one that can't transform. Personally, still sounds laughably bad in my book. Then again, if they got it to $150 range for the transformable version that'd be the same as a 1/48 and I'm a huge enough GCM fan where I'd probably buy at least one (especially if it was built comparably to the Yammy 1/48s). I serioulsy doubt how many others are big enough fans where they'd pony up for that though. 396030[/snapback] Regardless of whether it's transformable or not, USD 200 for a toy from a company who has a track record for QC issues is not exactly comforting. When I bought my only MPC Alpha, it was like playing reverse roulette -- you hope the ball doesn't drop on your box. At USD 200, it's a Russian Roulette with automatics. What I'm particularly afraid of is that in order to "justify" the price tag, the design would cram in weird electronics "just because". It's worse because a Alpha-scale Beta would actually have enough room for a small wafer board and a battery.. but that would really turn me off. Sigh. There are times I applaud innovation, but there are times when I prefer idiots who don't understand what their customer wants to keep their hands out of the design cycle.

Man, the F-22 ain't having a good week, is it?

Right, and that would be $200 less dollars HG would get from me.

That bad? If you feel that way about the F-22 (which by accounts is a fairly ok plane), I hate to think about the F-35. The V-22, it's a new-ish concept, so not surprising to have teething problems. What's surprising is that it's been having teething problems for what, over a decade now?

Y'know, this does explain the bishonen genre....

Ever been in the situation where you know a car wreck is going to happen but simply can't look away? I feel that way right now. Kelvin's S' letter of explanation So, he's saying that he didn't really have much of a choice in the decision, and it's probably true. With cash flow problems, your choices when something bad happens is generally poor. The question is whether he wants to call it quits and let PB close while he can still withdraw gracefully.

Now now, don't be too fast off the bat. The amount claimed can be possible if the stuff stolen/ embezzled led to production loss or overprinting, which depending on how creative your accounting is, can add up to quite a nice lump. I don't quite believe it either, but it is possible.. Pigs do fly, after all, in cargo planes. 1BRD: If that's what you give to people in such a small case, I hate to see what you do to more serious criminals.

Now now, don't be too fast off the bat. The amount claimed can be possible if the stuff stolen/ embezzled led to production loss or overprinting, which depending on how creative your accounting is, can add up to quite a nice lump. I don't quite believe it either, but it is possible.. Pigs do fly, after all, in cargo planes. 1BRD: If that's what you give to people in such a small case, I hate to see what you do to more serious criminals.

FWIW... some details of the "theft"

And PB has apparently a problem retaining these good writers. Some very negative experiences reported by some of the writers on RPG.net, and it's not your usual work grievances. I want to keep an open mind but.. I mean, if a company can't treat its most valuable assets right, what right does it have to survive? Even if we are talking about freelancers, which traditionally companies in most industries treat as most expendable? Especially when we are dealing with essentially a creative process here. Hard to find people who can spell accurately nowadays, much less write a coherent and interesting story. By nature, a lot of these people are pretty free-spirited and need to be handled carefully. Touchy egos sometimes.

Oh the background is there.. you're right to say a lot of the books have the OCC up front (IIRC), but there are certain gems that had a lot of interesting fluff. I personally liked the Phase World series a lot, because of the background mainly. PB stuff are generally well written (and not that bad in terms of typo.. I've seen a lot worse), it's just that in terms of layout and graphics it's about 2 generations behind. I can understand the graphics part because they do have to keep cost down (and good artist costs..), but the layout can be sub-optimal at times.

No, but D20's got the reach, and it's got Hasbro/ WotC's weight behind it, and at the end of the day, it's going to be a standard simply because of that. And the fact that there is no other game system with the same reach and marketing drive behind it. You gotta admit, it's one hellacious move on WotC's part and it paid off in spades. Coming back. PB's failure to adapt and improve its system to the point where it can compete with D20 is one massive blob of epoxy on its coffin. All's well and good prior to the OGL, but once the OGL gotten going, the team there should really have taken the threat seriously and evolved. They didn't, and IMO it's just.. "how long?". To be fair, most of the other companies also didn't do much as well, and the smaller publishers are honestly much better off riding on the de facto standard 'till they get a better idea of how they want to create their systems. The question I have to ask is the same: How long before the market consolidate into 2, maybe 3 RPG systems?

In other words, you are saying a Su-33 with wings up flies because it's a rocket, right?

I find that Rifts is a game where the GM has to be quite experienced in order to exploit the game well. It's a great game system for a "jump in at level 15 and shoot things up!" system where you can throw a PC in with a high-power mecha and lots of enemy to shoot at and everyone would be happy. That's maybe a one-off session, or a short campaign. But for a long campaign, the GM has to be very careful about power creep. Give the Samas pilot a super-Sammy? Well, you would be hard pressed not to use GM fiat to get it back, so you end up throwing bigger and bigger mobs at the party. The GM has to be very stingy with the gear he lets the party gets, and it's a lot of work. I like Rifts because of the multitude of fresh if underdeveloped and unbalanced ideas it has. Rifts is a good campaign setting for the imaginative and the adventurous GM, you can throw anything you like and still have an explanation for it ("It came from a Rift!"). Want to see Chi-town levelled by a battalion of MAC IIs? "They came from a Rift!" Want to see Free Quebec evaporated by Zentran battlecrusiers? "They came from a Rift!" Want to see Meltran Power Armour rip holes in Glitterboys? "They came from a Rift!" But once you unleased a whole battalion of Meltran troops backed up by battlecruisers, how do you get that genie back into the bottle? I think that's Rift's greatest failing: it's sold and pitched as a campaign setting with an easy game system to get into (and it is to an extent), but it's based on a system that doesn't self-balance (at least D20 has the CR idea for DMs to gauge whether it's a massive overkill or utter walkover). Rifts ain't a beginner RPG in terms of content -- Rifts GM has to be experienced to understand what power creep can do to a campaign (you can only blow Earth up that many times...). Yet it's packaged as though a cheap entry level RPG... odd marketing there. I think at the end of the day, what I'll miss about PB is two things -- the el cheapo books (in terms of price, the quality of the book bindings and such is actually quite good), and two, the ideas and story that goes into the various campaign settings, especially Rifts. EDIT: Well, IMO the D20 is a good system because it lets developers concentrate on producing a better world rather than on producing a better game system. It's not a perfect system, but that's not the primary concern of campaign setting developers; you can (in theory) adapt the campaign setting to any game system and it should still work. It's not a good system not because of its inherent flaws (which exists) but because of the marketing power that Hasbro and WotC has behind it. The glut of D20 materials is slowly influencing players to adopt D20 as the de facto standard -- maybe even sole standard of the genre. That's not good from many perspective, primarily IMO one of stagnation and growth.

Not according to the fans of the system, apparently. Truth to be told, it's not all too different from D20. Stats generation is virtually identical. Combat is just a short tweak from D20. Skills are the main difference and I think D20 is better, if only because it's open-ended. At the end of the day it's really just a system and a great GM can cheerfully ignore the system to get the game on. The system is just a way to adjucate the game to make sure the GM doesn't do a TPK that often... Personally I think the Palladium system just need to be tweaked a little here and there, and especially to ditch all the garbage that's crept in inadvertably over the years -- that's normal housekeeping. I'm not sure whether getting PB campaign settings onto D20 is a good idea. The main thing I see about a potential PB death is the loss of a system that can be rectified if KS is willing to loosen his (death) grip on it. While having standards is good, having only one standard is not a good idea, and having competing standards do keep the company honest and promotes innovation.. well, in any case other than our friends in PB. But then again, we've got GURPS, we've got OGL, we've got Silicore and various others.. I think we can survive seeing one go.

You read the same thread I read, I believe. And the poster has a point... if it mattered. Granted, the loss of an established name like PB will make retailers a bit hesitant, but I think a lot of people see the writing on the wall for PB a long time ago. One thing I learn in life is that in a small industry, people talk, and that scuttlebutt generally makes the rounds with the customers too. PB's poor schedule reputation doesn't help them in this regard. I'm not sure how retailers perceive PB, but I get the profound sense of "meh"; I get a sense that the customers/ retailers sort of expect a production consolidation -- it's just a matter of which company crumbles. WotC and WW was too big to be candidates, the smaller guys don't matter, so it boils down to SJG, PB and a few middle grounds.. and from what I'm hearing, PB had a good market share but is percieved as a weak link due to product quality and its management style. Not to mention that, as you said, the RPG line has been declining anyway.. A smart retailer would have reduced inventory anyway, I know my LGS did. I guess what I'm saying is that while PB had a good market share, they had made themselves irrelevant by their practices. The only reason why they are still there is simply because of inertia -- no other better company has emerged to challenge them. It was only a matter of time before some EVENT shot their legs out from under them. In a way, it's similar in tabletop gaming and for Macross. We know Games Workshop's and Harmony Gold's practices in the past weren't good practices for the industry, and they had increasingly made themselves redundant. It's just whether they can turn that around in their respective industries in time before some EVENT cut their legs out from under them. (Of course, the level of impact would be very different from PB. GW is a big leader in tabletop gaming; if something happens now the impact is a great ripple. HG is irrelevant, so their passing would hardly be mourned, especially by MW.)

Actually, it looks more like the F-15 got its backend kicked up all the way into the front... I'm more interested in the chicken walker design shown partially on the left.

Agreed... but that's why, in order to grow, small companies have to put aside the "I am my company" mentality and go with "I am in charge of a company" mindset -- and then start planning for disaster recovery such as loss of key personnel. It's not easy, of course, and it's expensive; corporate governance and enforcement is typically an internal cost and you sort of have to devote a few people to do it full time to do a good job. But a small company cannot progress beyond without something like that in place. Back to the topic. From description, PB is still of the "small business" mentality even though it has a long standing and international reach. It never really progressed out of that mindset even though its products are going out worldwide, and I think that's one major nail. Granted, had they went with a more corporate outlook their product might be different, but I think their reputation as a publisher would be better.

To be fair, KS ain't asking for donations, he's asking people to buy books and to buy a special piece of art. The value of art is, as always, in the eye of the beholder. EDIT: I don't think KS is that terrible a man.. you can't live to his age and still be a total b@stard all your life either. It's just that he alienated a lot of fans -- by being (probably overly) protective of his IP (C&D letters were apparently sent out) and being a bit high-handed at times -- and now that treatment is coming back at him. The main thing the... naysayers, for the lack of a better word, are saying is that even if the temproray cashflow issue is resolved, what changes would come from it? They see PB as a company that's quite ossified and refuses to change with the times -- and that its unlikely after this event that there would be changes for the better. As I asked -- What value does PB bring to me? And what value does PB brings to the industry? I can't honestly think that it's very much, but I only have a narrow view into the industry from where I am.

From the talk on RPG.net, which is biased by its very nature, KS is not likely to want to lose control of PB; he has resisted buyout offers before apparently. Which is understandable. He spent what, 2 decades building PB up? Thing is, if there had been signs of progress, I think a lot more people won't hesitate to chip in. But PB hasn't quite demonstrated real growth -- a lot of their stuff is just running around the same tree, maybe a new branch here and there. I think that's also what bugs the more business-minded people. The potential is there, but sadly only (in their and to an extent mine opinion) if KS isn't running the show anymore.

Only insiders can say for sure, and the speculation can be left at RPG.net... As a consumer, what I can say is that the last few years had seen PB releasing products which fails to interest me, and generally poor brand promotion. Heck, my LGS doesn't even bother to stock much of PB and generally doesn't bother to bring in new stuff unless on request. Not that many PB players in my area. Hindsight committee on PB's Nokia N-gage and film attempts leave me a bit cold really. Sounds to be very speculative attempts which diverted attention from day-to-day running, and coupled with rumours of their internal management style makes me shudder even more. Honesty prompts me to say that there's generally a decline in interest in RPGs. I heard even WotC is facing issues with its RPG line, and PB doesn't have the deep pockets that WotC have potential access to. "Small" issues such as theft in this environment can torpedo the business, yes, but IMO there are already serious holes in PB's hull already. Thing is, I don't really mind dropping $50 into the kitty.. had they came out with any interesting product of quality. As it is, I like PB for some of the whacky ideas they can pull out, but searching through the bundles of chaff for the wheat gets tiresome fast.

I hate to have to say this because it really makes me look like a heartless b@stard... but: Does Palladium put out quality product that I want to buy? If Palladium goes, what does that mean to the industry in objective terms? For (1), I hadn't purchased a Palladium product in years. I might get some old Robotech RPGs just to round out the set I had, but even that is so low on my list it's... below sea level. For (2), I can't see how it would hurt. The only thing I can think of is that it denies new players an entry-level, affordable RPG, which does hurt the industry as a whole. Given the above, I can't really justify to myself to purchase the item from Palladium. The jury is still out though.

I was reading through Wikipedia's coverage on the Guadalcanal and Solomon naval battles, and there's an interesting pattern. I've only read up to about '43, so there's some parts that I hadn't cover yet, but... In the Guadalcanal and Solomon naval engagements, aside from the very first (Battle of Savo Island), the focus of IJN has always been to support its ground troops (which was committed in a very piecemeal fashion). The IJN never entered any of the latter battles with the intent to destroy the opposing fleet; it's usually (a ) a bombardment fleet, (b ) a reinforcement fleet or (c ) an escort fleet that got intercepted by a USN Task Force or blundered into each other. Aside from Yamamoto and his primary deputy, Nagumo, there were very few offensive IJN fleet action designed solely to draw out the enemy fleet and to destroy it conclusively. Yamamoto tried it in two or three places: Pearl Harbour, Indian Ocean (after Pearl Harbour, where Nagumo took most of the fleet carriers to try to destroy the British fleet presence there) and Midway. (Aside: In a way, I see Yamamoto and Nagumo as excellent foils for each other; Yamamoto is the aggressive strategist, and Nagumo is the conversative tactician. Both balanced each other off -- Yamamoto went for the big prize, high risk/ high return, and Nagumo kept his forces intact enough to actually catch the prizes and bring it home at a reasonable cost.) Guadalcanal and the Solomons though, has nothing really concerted there -- it's a bunch of accidental run-ins or interception by the USN (which typically knew of the presence of the enemy fleet through signal interception and was expressedly there to engage and deny/ destroy the enemy). IJN didn't really try to bring the USN into combat in an environment where they are ideally suited for -- tight quarters which favours torpedo combat at night. Reading through the engagements, one can gain a sense of frustration. The IJN units were being expended for no visible results. In many sense, the IJN was sucked into a war of attrition that is not in its favour and didn't realised it. Guadalcanal and the Solomons were the stake in IJN's heart. Not only that, when IJN won engagements, IJN admirals tended to be very conservative and casualty-conscious (probably because they knew they were losing in a war of attrition) and didn't push hard enough. There were several battles where the IJN won tactically, but pulled back and lost the strategic advantage the victory gave them. These allowed the USN to recover and come in again. In sharp contrast, the USN weren't very good tactically -- the early Pacific engagements were universally USN losses -- but very aggressively strategically. USN admirals were pretty aware of the big picture and were willing to gamble, such as sending in the Washington and South Dakota after the Kirishima one night after the Kirishima and another IJN BB beat the living tar out of a USN fleet. If you want to say a decisive naval engagement in the Pacific.. really only Pearl Harbour was decisive; Midway evened the odds, but the Solomons series killed the IJN in the sort of attritional warfare that they should have controlled and won. Japan was fighting a two-front war, but the first front was in China. It's involvement in China was quite extensive (almost the entire coastline!) and the war was pretty low intensity -- not much battle, plenty of unrest, a troop sink really. In the Pacific, it wasn't so much a matter of two-fronts, more of overextension. To fend off MacArthur's Australian threat, the Japanese need to hold New Guinea; to hold New Guinea, you need to hold the SE Pacific islands to prevent a buildup of enemy forces on your flank. And to hold the SE Pacific islands, you need to hold the Central Pacific to secure your supply lines. When you get down to it, the minute Japan decided to invade the Philippines, they basically had no choice but to go all the way into Indonesia; without securing Indonesia, you cannot secure the Philippines -- too much landmass that allowed a buildup of land forces to come across, and the Philippines is notorious for being hard to prevent a landing. Basically, the conquest of SE Asia and the Pacific is a mistake; no nation, not even today, can attempt it without getting overextended. The nature of the geographical layout forces you to keep extending all the way till the northern tip of Australia, and that exposes way too much flank for anyone.

Only if he's using an 18.1" gun to do the splashing....

Jug, as far as I can recall, wasn't exactly a good dogfighter. Could dive like a brick out of the way and can go like a bat-outta-hell, but not dogfight; that's fine 'cos that's the way they fought in Europe, high-alt and high speed. I personally don't like it precisely because it handled like a brick. Jug vs. Lightning, I think both are good planes. I'll personally go with the Lightning though; For one, it has two engines.... Again, in sims, I've flown the Tigercat. It was a dated sim though, so hard to say.. but it's a nice two-engine. Quite good to fly. Can't quite recall how good it is against Hellcat and Corsairs, but one thing is for sure -- I have a healthy respect for late-war Corsairs' torque. As for the P-51 vs. Bf-109, the Bf-109 suffered from a major performance differentiate IMO. A good pilot can still pull it off, but I'll stack the odds with the P-51. A P-51 is more maneuverable than the Zero? Err, the Zero did have a reputation for a reason. The P-51 is probably faster -- most American fighters are -- but at low speed, low alt, flaps out, the Zero outturns pretty much everything. A well-flown Zero would be very difficult to go against, especially in the Pacific with the 'Stang's sensitivity and vulnerability. And the Zero packs 20mms. Not a lot of rounds, but it does have them...