Kings of War Kickstarter

[ThePandaDirector]

Another blooming Kickstarter =]

So yeah, here's the link: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...8/kings-of-war

Never been a big fan of Mantic Games, partly because they took the opportunity to make a great, original game and just made their version of Warhammer. Though I suppose it serves its purpose to many.

But if I see another flipping Video CoPilot preset then I'm going to kill Andrew Kramer, man's the bane of my life =P

[Mister Monkey]

It seems a few weeks ago I did not even know what kickstarter was .... now everybody seems to be using them ....

[ThePandaDirector]

I only found out about crowd sourcing at uni because it links to indie film funding. IndieGoGo tends to be better because even if you don't meet your goal you still get the money (minus a little cut from what I recall).

It's become a recent craze sure enough, ever since some projects made millions and people realised that they could fund their projects through fan support and, what for many is basically, an alternative form of preordering. However, it is isn't sustainable and while the old ways are dying, we'll need to discover new ways to support the people who produce our entertainment.

[Pierowmaniac]

Never been a big fan of Mantic Games, partly because they took the opportunity to make a great, original game and just made their version of Warhammer.

Its still a better version of Warhammer ;)

[Dustcrusher]

I don't even know if I want to play KoW (at least not at its original scale) but I am so tempted to buy into this one...

[Dustcrusher]

Never been a big fan of Mantic Games, partly because they took the opportunity to make a great, original game and just made their version of Warhammer. Though I suppose it serves its purpose to many.

My impression of Warhammer after flipping through the books a bit and watching people play it- it's full of annoying rules that add complications without adding much depth. KoW keeps it simple.

Hell, the old Grenadier (and thus now free) Fantasy Warriors is kludgy and overly complicated but the additional stuff actually adds interesting tactical options. It would need a major overhaul in this day and age, though.

Way I see it, there are plenty of fantasy mass combat systems out there, Warhammer and Kings of War are only two options.

I only found out about crowd sourcing at uni because it links to indie film funding. IndieGoGo tends to be better because even if you don't meet your goal you still get the money (minus a little cut from what I recall).

For things like movies and albums, I think it's better, as part funding can still go towards launching the project. For hard product Kickstarter makes more sense- why should I lose my money if they don't have enough to make the product I wanted?

However, it is isn't sustainable and while the old ways are dying, we'll need to discover new ways to support the people who produce our entertainment.

How is it not sustainable? Project is pitched directly to the masses, masses vote with their wallets, only the unfunded projects lose (and it's not as if they can't try again later on). I'll admit I'm a little starry-eyed at the crowdsource concept so I'd like to hear your criticism of it.

The one thing I can think of is that it could lead to even fewer truly daring works of art or media being made, as the mainstream fodder would likely guarantee the most buy-ins.

-------------------

In any event, I caved. Went in on it with a friend which mitigates the cost a bit. I figured it was a very rare opportunity for me to get sizable Undead (me) and Orc (my friend) armies for a very reasonable price, plus lots of extra goodies.

The Kickstarter's over 100K right now. The milestones have come so quickly that they are scrambling to add stuff to the incentives.

[ThePandaDirector]

My last post was lost in a computer crash, so here I go again...

My impression of Warhammer after flipping through the books a bit and watching people play it- it's full of annoying rules that add complications without adding much depth. KoW keeps it simple.

Hell, the old Grenadier (and thus now free) Fantasy Warriors is kludgy and overly complicated but the additional stuff actually adds interesting tactical options. It would need a major overhaul in this day and age, though.

Way I see it, there are plenty of fantasy mass combat systems out there, Warhammer and Kings of War are only two options.

My past with GW certainly lends bias, but I will stand up for them as far as creating interesting designs go (creative integrity is another thing). With Kings of War, Mantic have basically said "this is how we would do Warhammer if we had had our way" and while it is a brilliant business plan (simpler, cheaper alternative to one of the biggest games in the industry), I have a personal loathing for repetition and Mantic go beyond the usual patterns of high fantasy to copy so much of Warhammer instead of being original. Perhaps it's more of an issue with the industry, or a fact of the demographics who play these games, but it rubs me the wrong way nevertheless.

For things like movies and albums, I think it's better, as part funding can still go towards launching the project. For hard product Kickstarter makes more sense- why should I lose my money if they don't have enough to make the product I wanted?

Kickstarter isn't even great for "kickstarting", but rather boosting a well founded business plan. It works on credability, hence why computer game companies are able to make games that they wouldn't otherwise have the money to do, but there are very few indie (i.e. risky) campaigns that succeed in going from zero to hero. It's all business, this isn't asking friends and family for money, and people need to make informed purchases. I personally find analogue games more rewarding, because unlike almost every other campaign which is basically a glorified pre-order system, people like Studio McVey can actually give you substantial rewards and use excess revenue to visibly improve the product. But there's little risk, because a credible source is likely to meet its starting goal and none of these companies are working from scratch; Sedition Wars is already done, the campaign is just an alternative way to market the product.

How is it not sustainable? Project is pitched directly to the masses, masses vote with their wallets, only the unfunded projects lose (and it's not as if they can't try again later on). I'll admit I'm a little starry-eyed at the crowdsource concept so I'd like to hear your criticism of it.

The one thing I can think of is that it could lead to even fewer truly daring works of art or media being made, as the mainstream fodder would likely guarantee the most buy-ins

Kickstarter saturates the market by throwing everyone into a big pot. It links to the Long Tail (more of less; for every Lady Gaga there's a horde of indie artists selling a dozen albums a year) and the idea that I can't be expected to support every campaign I like within the designated time (I'm not going to support Studio McVey or Mantic because I don't have the money now). So while some campaigns like Zombicide are really successful, the majority won't be and the format forces me to make choices whereas a more open system would allow me to support a company whenever I am able. It's also going to end up being more and more occupied by big business and the reason people think it is a fad is because every campaign is forced to sell itself as an "event", which has merits but is the least sustainable form of collective marketing (if everyone's special...). But like I said, for the most part Kickstarter just acts as a glorified pre-order system.

A better format would link my "investment" not only to perks, but a more sustainable community connection that isn't limited to certain periods and levels of hype (allow people to provide "more of less" of themselves). Best way to combat piracy (beyond addressing customer loyalty issues) is to allow people who pirate and like your product to pay you without having to buy a redundant product (i.e. a DVD of a film I'd only watch once); the same applies to crowdfunding, the real product is "the journey" and you are providing investers with an intuitive way to connect to the things they love.

My friends are launching a crowdfunding campaign for a feature film next week; £10k is roughly how much they need. I'm not sure if they'll make it, but it really depends what their competition is that month and if people haven't spent their earnings already.

But it's a subject I'll be researching more among other things as, for my sins, markting is an area I'm looking to get work in now.

[Dustcrusher]

My bias towards GW has gotten far more critical. They are no longer the same company that (along with Ral Partha) got me into this hobby. I miss RP and vintage GW, but then again I think sometimes that one can't go home again. I keep the old memories (and a twinge of disappointment that I can't find my RP Ratlings as they'd be perfect for 15mm). The flipside is that my hobby dollars can go elsewhere- to Wyrd, Mantic, Spartan, Studio 38, Reaper, etc.

Kings of War as "Warhammer [Mantic's] way" is more or less accurate. I hate admitting that though, because that, to me, leads to a slippery slope that all fantasy combat systems are skirmish, WFB wanna-bes or Hordes of the Things ripoffs. In this case that comparison is reasonable, but there are fanboys that probably think Wargods of Aegyptus is WFB with Egyptian-themed beastfolk (and yeti and Spartans). Alessio Cavatore worked on WFB and Warmaster- I don't see anything wrong with him reusing what he's contributed as long as it isn't a carbon copy, much like Rick Priestley is using Warmaster-style mechanics in Hail Caesar.

-------

As far as Kickstarter goes, I'm not sure I understand why Kickstarter boosting a well-founded business plan a bad thing? If someone doesn't have a well-founded business plan, and their idea isn't all that great either, I sure as heck don't want to back them. I might be willing to back a great idea from someone without a plan, but it'd have to be amazing.

Your comments on the time-sensitive nature and the "alternate pre-order" scheme of Kickstarter are right on. I think Kickstarter is going to be used as a gauging tool for demand- less risk if an idea fails to catch on in a crowdsource campaign than in actually putting the product out there and losing the money invested. The gaming companies are being very clever about this and rewarding people for preordering. I've estimated that my backing of Mantic is going to net me almost three times what I'm paying in in overall product, and that's assuming they meet no more goals. Sedition Wars is going to be all purty now because Kickstarter customers said "yes, we do want all the upgrades and we're willing to pay for them." The only difference is that the companies know exactly what they can afford to do, rather than having to guess.

Look around and you'll see some less-known people doing well and some better known people struggling (John Clowdus' new game isn't fully funded yet, and the attempt to relaunch Vor crashed and burned hard, yet a video game about canvassing is well on its way). I also would like to see how much the "staff pick" designation helps on average, because I imagine it leads to a significant boost in backing.

The only way I see this being a problem is what you said about smaller projects being crowded out by big companies. Mantic isn't nearly as big as a lot of people make them out to be, but what if GW decided to start a small side business and get into it? That prospect bothers me and I hope it doesn't end up that way.

A micro-investor setup would be really cool, actually. Non-profit sites like that already exist. Unfortunately I am not sure how a company could make money off a for-profit version- that's for someone with more investment savvy than I to capitalize on (pun totally intended). Perhaps a membership club that lasts a certain amount of time from the day you back the company or a guaranteed benefit if a small sum is created (like, say, 10% for anything under 10 grand).

[ThePandaDirector]

My bias towards GW has gotten far more critical. They are no longer the same company that (along with Ral Partha) got me into this hobby. I miss RP and vintage GW, but then again I think sometimes that one can't go home again. I keep the old memories (and a twinge of disappointment that I can't find my RP Ratlings as they'd be perfect for 15mm). The flipside is that my hobby dollars can go elsewhere- to Wyrd, Mantic, Spartan, Studio 38, Reaper, etc.

I think GW's miniatures and online marketing (Flickr, digital codexes, etc) has gotten better, but I think that the roots of the company have rotten over time* and when it comes to staff members it's a straight coin toss between honest salesman and corporate asskiss (and I saw a friend of my mine transist between the two). As nice as GW's retail presence is (none of my friends can explain why those shops still exist), I hate how they force other gamer's into isolation in an industry that needs to be united to beat instant gratification.

GW are and always will be vital to the industry, but I have come to the preemptive conclusion that they should no longer be the face of the industry. When I was looking at some PW models (AntiZombie's fine work, see here) a strange conversation occured when someone spotted them:

Friend: Hey that's Warhammer
Me: Uh, no it's not
Friend: Yes it is
Me: No, it's Puppet Wars, it's a boardgame, it's completly-
Friend: It's Warhammer...

It's important to point out that he attached an apathetic-negative tone to the word "Warhammer", like most people I know do. It's not because their disenchanted fanboys, but because they once played it when they were kids and now look back it as "hey look, those toy soldiers I stopped playing with after I grew up". There's other negative connotations and sematics that have been established and reinforced by GW - that miniatures are expensive, that you need lots of them, that only certain people play it (i.e. no women), etc. I think if they had company up on top then something could really be done about the public image of the hobby/industry. My personal belief is that Wyrd are the company destined for that role (and I will be the Merlin to their Arthur) =]

*"You know what the difference is between me and you? I bleed red, you bleed green. What you been building for us? You know, I look at you these days, you know what I see? I see a man without a country; not hard enough for this right here and maybe, just maybe, not smart enough for them out there."

Kings of War as "Warhammer [Mantic's] way" is more or less accurate. I hate admitting that though, because that, to me, leads to a slippery slope that all fantasy combat systems are skirmish, WFB wanna-bes or Hordes of the Things ripoffs. In this case that comparison is reasonable, but there are fanboys that probably think Wargods of Aegyptus is WFB with Egyptian-themed beastfolk (and yeti and Spartans). Alessio Cavatore worked on WFB and Warmaster- I don't see anything wrong with him reusing what he's contributed as long as it isn't a carbon copy, much like Rick Priestley is using Warmaster-style mechanics in Hail Caesar.

I'm a fan of Alessio Cavatore, and I suppose it's ok for him to throw Goblin Fanatics into KoW, but I'm more interested to see how they develop it and create their own identity. But then I'm about as excited for high fantasy these days as I am for comic film adaptations ;)

As far as Kickstarter goes, I'm not sure I understand why Kickstarter boosting a well-founded business plan a bad thing? If someone doesn't have a well-founded business plan, and their idea isn't all that great either, I sure as heck don't want to back them. I might be willing to back a great idea from someone without a plan, but it'd have to be amazing.

I wasn't stating it as a bad thing, rather pointing out that it doesn't "kickstart" a company from scratch. That ties into the whole aspect that it isn't really designed how many people see it, it's not quite as democratic as people think. I also find that I don't back projects that don't have great perks, because why else am I spending my money in advance? But if I was to try and crowdfund a film (and one day I'll likely do just that), I would take a leaf out of Peter Jackson's book, and rather than just saying "this is the idea, you can get a signed copy of the script if you pay up", I would sell the journey and be transparent. Honesty is a commodity in itself.

Your comments on the time-sensitive nature and the "alternate pre-order" scheme of Kickstarter are right on. I think Kickstarter is going to be used as a gauging tool for demand- less risk if an idea fails to catch on in a crowdsource campaign than in actually putting the product out there and losing the money invested. The gaming companies are being very clever about this and rewarding people for preordering. I've estimated that my backing of Mantic is going to net me almost three times what I'm paying in in overall product, and that's assuming they meet no more goals. Sedition Wars is going to be all purty now because Kickstarter customers said "yes, we do want all the upgrades and we're willing to pay for them." The only difference is that the companies know exactly what they can afford to do, rather than having to guess.

Agreed. CMON have basically said just that too, it's a great way to release a product and build up support for it. The main issue is what happens when it ends? Where do these backers go? What do they do with their next paycheck? It would be worth companies having perks that directly or indirectly empower their fans to basically become "Henchmen" as soon as they get their grubby mits on all the extra stuff, that way carrying on the virus.

Look around and you'll see some less-known people doing well and some better known people struggling (John Clowdus' new game isn't fully funded yet, and the attempt to relaunch Vor crashed and burned hard, yet a video game about canvassing is well on its way). I also would like to see how much the "staff pick" designation helps on average, because I imagine it leads to a significant boost in backing.

It's easy to get lost in the current sure enough. I suppose that exists everywhere, but one of the contributing factors to the "fad" aspect of Kickstarter is that it turns businesses and projects into passing movements that ultimately loose momentum, reinforcing that aspect in social conciousness (just look at the rise and fall of Kony 2012).

The only way I see this being a problem is what you said about smaller projects being crowded out by big companies. Mantic isn't nearly as big as a lot of people make them out to be, but what if GW decided to start a small side business and get into it? That prospect bothers me and I hope it doesn't end up that way.

Though I see little chance of GW getting involved unless it sees the opportunity to reach another market, it is an issue. The idea behind Kickstarter is it levels the playing field by giving the small guy a chance to rise on the back of their fans, but if the big guy gets involved then what's to stop it becoming the same old system?

A micro-investor setup would be really cool, actually. Non-profit sites like that already exist. Unfortunately I am not sure how a company could make money off a for-profit version- that's for someone with more investment savvy than I to capitalize on (pun totally intended). Perhaps a membership club that lasts a certain amount of time from the day you back the company or a guaranteed benefit if a small sum is created (like, say, 10% for anything under 10 grand).

It works better for digital products, especially music and apps. Problem with membership stuff is it's a barrier to entry (unless you make it easy to sign in through another account). I suppose Beasts of War's Backstage is quite good, considering the limitations of what they do. However, the idea I am interested in is loyalty based patronage; where you give more of less to the customer (so Wyrd giving more fluff, more artwork, more reports, articles, videos, etc), for free and delivered directly to the customer's "doorstep", before giving them the ability to give more of less of themselves in return. Even though it works better in theory with digital entertainment, the fact that analogue games can rely on a physical product that doesn't get pirated, they can provide more digital content (including social and community based tools) for cheaper (democratisation of technology my friends) and get a consistent and accumulative return from their growing fanbase (never underestimate customer loyalty).

But yeah, that gives you a glimpse at what I will be studying for the next 18-36 months =D