Age of Annihilation - Backer Trend and Discussion

[rudyvalentine]

They included some extra promos in the base offering, but the product is the same as what went to retail. Same with the first two expansions included with the Mythic Tier. I’m not saying the boxes were identical, I’m saying the haslab base offering was the retail version without extras.

The difference here is they went with an entirely exclusive set that would only be produced in limited quantity one time because it would never be offered at retail in the same form.

I don’t believe this was AH’s wish, but I think this campaign was structured to expose Hasbro to as little risk as possible. They don’t have to front any of the costs because they weren’t going to send anything to retail until they had the vanguard edition printed and fulfilled and then they could decide what to do next.

[Hogg]

Originally Posted by rudyvalentine

They included some extra promos in the base offering, but the product is the same as what went to retail. Same with the first two expansions included with the Mythic Tier. I’m not saying the boxes were identical, I’m saying the haslab base offering was the retail version without extras.

The content is more or less the same, but they definitely changed and improved things after the Haslab run, before the retail set was printed.

You can set them side by side and point out the differences, but some of the main ones were:
- Added UPC to boxes for main set and expansions
- Changed box size for main set, took out false bottom and made it smaller (might have been done at some point in the middle of the retail run)
- Changed the blow molded trays that hold the minis to fit them better
- Printed both sides of the cardboard tiles in the expansions instead of leaving the backs white
- Improved QC for the minis

I was going to warn people that the retail HeroScape release might be better quality than what people would get in the Haslab run, but its a moot point now anyway.

[CapAp]

Originally Posted by Dad_Scaper

As the campaign enters its final hours, I just want to thank everyone here for engaging in such a positive way, during a time that has been so stressful for us as a community.

I know there's been a lot of ink spilled, here and in other places, about "negativity" about the Haslab, but I haven't seen much at all. I really haven't, even though I know the opportunity has been there. I've seen people enduring stress in their different ways, but I'm not one to judge that. Just don't be nasty to each other, and - thankfully - I haven't seen nastiness.

As a guy who actually worked on the inside of the campaign, I've always felt supported by this community, despite the troubles. And I appreciate it.

As someone who was vocal about why they chose not to back, I *really* appreciate this comment and sentiment. Even though it didn't match my desires, I sincerely appreciate your (and others') effort on this project and it saddens me that it wasn't successful. I hope that somewhere along the line you're given the opportunity to provide that input again.

[Heirloom]

For posterity, the AoA: Vanguard campaign finished with 4353 “backers” ($1,088,206.47; so, basically $1.1 million).

[EricTheGreat1999]

Well, that is the end of it all. I am not going to repeat what has been said in the past, although in short summary I haven't been a supporter of this project. I do nevertheless hope that Heroscape is able to bounce back in a more refined and better marketed project at a later date.

It remains to be seen, as to how Avalon Hill decides to approach Heroscape in their long term planning. I suspect that it might not be a positive outlook.

[GamerDad74]

As another veteran 'Scaper who initially was super excited to back AoA, but in the end never did, I will say that this community comported itself extremely well with solid discussion on both sides of the issue. I certainly shared my observations on why I thought it was not the product I was looking for (and I think many others shared that sentiment), but I do want to give Hasbro and AH credit for at least trying. I know the AoA Team worked hard and were probably hamstrung tremendously. That's regrettable, but probably inevitable.

Here are two things I hope going forward:

1) I hope that the War Council will share as openly as they can with us what was going on behind the scenes, what they're happy with, and what they're disappointed in (and not just on the backer side). Transparency builds trust and good will moving forward, should there be a second try (here's hoping)

2) And to go along with the hope of a second try, I truly hope they will take into account the considerable amount of feedback they received and implement it in obvious, demonstrable ways, if there is a next time.

In the meantime, Hereoscapers has been my go to for well over a decade now, especially C3V and AotP. I hope to see this community grow even stronger and look forward to new units, new discussion, and all things 'Scape.

See you all around.

[rudyvalentine]

There will be a lot of commentary on what happened with this campaign, but the most concise statement I’ve heard that sums it all up for me is “they didn’t deliver the product the customer wanted, they delivered the product they wanted the customer to buy.” - thegimpygamer

Link Here

I don’t agree with everything said in this video and a lot of it is just speculation, but that line hit the nail for me. Not because I didn’t like what was being offered but how they reverse engineered it to deliver a product based on a price point and number of units sold rather than researching what fans wanted and what would sell.

It really does feel backwards to say ok we need to raise two million dollars so how many sets at how much money do we need to get there?

When they could have made more educated offerings that consumers would actually want multiples of and would likely raise more than the target by being more accessible (commons, terrain packs, a la carte factions) to both new and existing players.

Not the only reason it didn’t work, but a pretty significant issue IMO. It’s easy to arm chair quarterback I know. Who really knows what limitations were placed on them, but I hope the money raised shows them there’s something viable here if they can figure out how to offer it.

[GamerDad74]

Originally Posted by rudyvalentine

There will be a lot of commentary on what happened with this campaign, but the most concise statement I’ve heard that sums it all up for me is “they didn’t deliver the product the customer wanted, they delivered the product they wanted the customer to buy.” - thegimpygamer Link Here

I don’t agree with everything said in this video and a lot of it is just speculation, but that line hit the nail for me. Not because I didn’t like what was being offered but how they reverse engineered it to deliver a product based on a price point and number of units sold rather than researching what fans wanted and what would sell.

It really does feel backwards to say ok we need to raise two million dollars so how many sets at how much money do we need to get there?

When they could have made more educated offerings that consumers would actually want multiples of and would likely raise more than the target by being more accessible (commons, terrain packs, a la carte factions) to both new and existing players.

Not the only reason it didn’t work, but a pretty significant issue IMO. It’s easy to arm chair quarterback I know. Who really knows what limitations were placed on them, but I hope the money raised shows them there’s something viable here if they can figure out how to offer it.

This really is the point for me, and I said it a few different times--no intro level for new players, no on ramp, no tiers, no add ons, no commons, no historical, no Classic 'Scape to speak of.

They made what they wanted to sell rather than what the community really wanted and was asking for, and the community responded accordingly.

[Knox]

What they made unit wise I do think was what people wanted (except for historical and they had good reasons for avoiding that). But yeah, people needed/wanted a ramp on tier. And I think they needed to release it with no cap to what you could pledge - maybe after backing Vanguard you could start backing common squads and extra terrain packs (like lava, tundra, etc.). There are people who'd have backed $5-10k worth if given the opportunity

[Master Roshi]

Originally Posted by Knox

What they made unit wise I do think was what people wanted (except for historical and they had good reasons for avoiding that). But yeah, people needed/wanted a ramp on tier. And I think they needed to release it with no cap to what you could pledge - maybe after backing Vanguard you could start backing common squads and extra terrain packs (like lava, tundra, etc.). There are people who'd have backed $5-10k worth if given the opportunity

This is how I feel; by providing a smaller tier a new player could test the waters without committing $250 to something they don't know, and by providing addons an existing player could spend $1000 to buy a bunch of stuff that works in larger quantities such as terrain and commons, rather than stopping at $500 because they don't want a third set of uniques.

[Nukatha]

Originally Posted by rudyvalentine

T “they didn’t deliver the product the customer wanted, they delivered the product they wanted the customer to buy.” - thegimpygamer

I greatly appreciate that quote. It is applicable across entertainment nowadays.

[brak88]

Originally Posted by Nukatha

I greatly appreciate that quote. It is applicable across entertainment nowadays.

Applicable to many things these days unfortunately.