Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Drafting a note to Ares re recent worrying trends, collaboration appreciated

  1. #1
    Comptroller of the Navy Board
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    4,298
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default Drafting a note to Ares re recent worrying trends, collaboration appreciated

    So, as noted I'm working on a note to Rob on the recent pattern of worrying QC issues, and I thought it might carry more weight if it had the strength of Community Consensus behind it.

    Rob, there've been some issues I've been noticing forming a disturbing pattern over the past year's releases--I didn't want to throw the Problem Flag without having some ideas to take corrective action, but after months of thought it seems that it might be best to just call it as I see it, let the chips fall where they will and then see if between all of us we can come up with a viable plan where I've just been spinning my wheels on my own. If this means my usefulness is at an end so be it, but I owe it to both you and the game community to present the issues I've observed firsthand and heard repeatedly mentioned to try to figure out why this pattern keeps happening and how we can stop it... and how we can make right for the miniatures already out in the wild, since entire production runs are too big for recall.

    • Sopwith Triplane wing spacing - not to beat a dead horse, but this seems to be where the pattern of otherwise-excellent models with head-scratching "Wait-WHUT?!" major mistakes started.
    • Beaufighter Mk. VI tailgroup on Mk. I/II aircraft - a simple one, but still a headscratcher. We know you can tool detail-variations on a sculpt, so why not both Mk I/II flat and Mk VI dihedral tailplanes to suit the models? All it would have taken was different mounting tabs, less work than even the 1- and 2-seat variations on the Sopwith 1-1/2 Strutter.
    • Bf109K incorrect wings and tailgroup - glaringly obvious. We know you can do better, we've SEEN it on the market, how did this one happen? While I bought yours for collection completeness, my miniatures will probably never leave their boxes and instead see their bases and cards used with third-party models for play.
    • SGN108 and SGN201 gunport-layout major issues - Head scratcher. Neither model's gunport arrangement is correct for anything ever built, which is a personal burr under my saddle since *I* sent you links to the original draughts and even some mid-life rebuilds. As with the Bf109K, as soon as I find more accurate hulls in the same scale the "official" miniatures will be permanently replaced and retired to storage in their original boxes.
    • SGN109 and SGN110 backward spritsails - Your CAD modeler "billowed" the spritsail the wrong direction.
    • SGN110 gun projection - Design level, guns only project from their ports at extreme ends.
    • wrong-scale SGN111 Meregildos and SGN112 Gautier 74s - SGN111 and 112 both measure out as 1/1200, more closely matching the size of the Langton 1/1200 Meregildos on SGN101 than SGN108/201 which it should be at least the same size as for the "short" version of the Meregildos design. Not to mention the apparent cutting-corners by shrinking the mini to re-use SGN104 masts rather than doing it right... Similarly SGN112, which appears to also be downscaled to 1/1200 to maintain proportion relative to SGN111, is closer to the size of pewter 1/1200 offerings rather than somewhere between the sizes of SGN102 and SGN104 as it should be.

    In light of this pattern, I must suggest that when the Wave 4 3d models are ready to go to pre-production, it might be prudent to have David, Jose Manuel and myself review and sign-off on the model designs and suggest any final revisions as required BEFORE the CAD models are transferred to the toolmaker to start cutting metal, and to send us photos including rulers for scale reference of the pre-production samples for review before committing to production for release. This also seems to be a systemic pattern by your modelmakers, so an in-house Root Cause Analysis would seem to be in order trying to figure out why they're consistently glitching at least one model almost every recent release.

    Here's what I've come up with for a few ideas we might discuss as possible options on making things right:
    • Sopwith Triplane wing spacing - this ship has sailed, the damage is done. However, should you start running out of Entente fighter sculpts a re-tool might work to fill a slot, just have to retire the old tooling and re-use the new when re-running its wave.
    • Beaufighter Mk. VI tailgroup on Mk. I/II aircraft - it's very simple to fix, pop the tailplanes off, file down the mounting tabs and reglue. But the point still stands that that's a DIY correction we shouldn't HAVE to do.
    • Bf109K incorrect wings and tailgroup - not readily fixable. Less die-hards will probably never know, but I would suggest flagging the Bf109K to get the same treatment I propose for the Tripe, a "Mulligan" do-over resculpt when you run out of Axis fighter sculpts. In the interim, I would suggest either directly or via Licensing Partner if Keith is game for it and can find a 3d-modeler collaborator offering a produced-on-demand Correction Kit through Shapeways with replacement wingtips and tailgroup.
    • SGN108 and SGN201 gunport-layout major issues - another BIG challenge fixing. Most of the casual players probably won't care but for the seriously historically-minded it matters in a big way. My suggestion here involves two new lines--first, as part of the Accessory Line offering Spare Mast Sets, which would be a welcome addition for fumble-fingered klutzes like me too. Second part, like Bf109K, offer a series of Produce-On-Order Correction Hulls via Shapeways--the hardcore types won't mind doing their own assembly and painting, and as a bonus with no tooling cost this would allow more variations to better capture the major visible differences between the three-decker designs.
    • SGN109 and SGN110 backward spritsails - for the already released, owner-performed surgery for the customers where it matters. For future reprints, the spritsail/jib piece needs to be retooled.
    • SGN110 no-gun gunports - can be fixed by customer but a nuisance to do so. Inner-hull insert with guns should probably be retooled to extend most guns.
    • wrong-scale SGN111 Meregildos, aka "MINI-gildos", and SGN112 - see SGN108 and SGN201.

    This pattern, combined with an overall decline in quality since Sails Wave 2 which may be traceable to the standard practices of Chinese manufacturing where they relax their standards each batch (an Anchorage member with his own experience in the same sector observed a reduction of meeting-spec by about 1% every order with his business) figuring once they have you hooked you won't go to the expense of changing vendors, is of no small concern to the serious customer-base. It sucks having to be hardline and break bad news about this, but part of my role is to be an advocate for the community--and the natives have noticed this pattern along with growing inconsistency in detail and scale-fidelity and are growing restless. We CAN do better, we SHOULD if we're serious about earning their money, and we MUST if we want to avoid negative word of mouth slowly poisoning the brand. This pattern, if not checked, will eventually lead to a product of completely unacceptable quality; the question without corrective action is not if the time will come when you must pay the piper but *when,* though there will probably be steady desertions as individual customers hit their tolerance limits as you approach that breaking point.
    I welcome any suggestions you guys might have on this--and it'll be crossposted at the Drome for the Wings-only guys later.. Markup as you see fit, the main point is trying to point out the elephant in the room and get them to try to figure out what's causing this string of problems and how to stop it before the next wave enters Pre-Production. :)

    Edit, latest revisions will be in red text.
    Last edited by Diamondback; 02-04-2017 at 20:16.
    --Diamondback
    PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
    Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.

  2. #2
    Admiral of the Fleet.
    Baron
    England

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Notts
    Log Entries
    22,273
    Blog Entries
    22
    Name
    Rob

    Default

    Thank you for your efforts on our behalf yet again DB.
    I give my fullest support to your post.
    Rob.
    The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.

  3. #3
    Stats Committee
    Captain
    Sweden

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Linköping
    Log Entries
    3,943
    Blog Entries
    6
    Name
    Jonas

    Default

    The SGN109 and SGN110 backward spritsails isn't an installation issue. You have to cut off the spritsails individually and glue the other lower corner to the bowsprit. I also changed the angle of the lowest part of the sail by cutting into it a little too. Not absolutely necessary but helps with the look.

    Installing it the other way would put the base of the bowsprit away from the ship and the sails into the foremast OR it would put the sails below the bowsprit. Both of those changes would make them billowing the right way, but make everything else a mess.

  4. #4
    Stats Committee
    Captain
    Sweden

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Linköping
    Log Entries
    3,943
    Blog Entries
    6
    Name
    Jonas

    Default

    I'm also not sure Shapeways have good enough 3D printers. Everything I've seen has been striped and with too bad precision for the hulls. There are 3D printers that can handle the precision we'd like made for jewelers, but I've never seen them used for hobby purposes. I'm guessing it's a price issue.

    The guns on the British 50 gun ships only show in the very first and last gun ports. It's no big deal but we've gotten used to the great quality of the first wave and miss that. It's a pity since I think the stern galleries are a great improvement.

  5. #5
    Comptroller of the Navy Board
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    4,298
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    Thanks, guys. I'll wait a few hours, then see if I can do a whole batch of edits all at once.

    Jonas, if it helps to know I'm thinking not one-piece "block" hulls but basically printing flexible "flat" side-plates, top and bottom pieces like how the official models go together, and was hoping that would get around "stepping" in Sails.

    Too strong to say that overall quality has been generally declining since Wave 1?
    --Diamondback
    PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
    Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.

  6. #6
    2nd Lieutenant
    United States

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    TX
    Log Entries
    806
    Blog Entries
    1
    Name
    Hugh

    Default

    Id say that wave 2 was better than wave 1, atleast in materials and packing choices. The new ships look great, they just arent what they are supposed to be.

  7. #7
    Admiral of the White
    Admiral
    United States

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Log Entries
    4,568
    Name
    Jim

    Default

    DB, I'm completely supportive of your note to Ares. While I'm disappointed in these latest QC issues I'm still behind Ares for what they do.

    As Rob said thanks for your efforts on our behalf.
    "It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
    –English Proverb

  8. #8
    Landsman
    UK

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    NW Leics
    Log Entries
    20
    Name
    John

    Default

    Hi DB, your letter looks fine.
    The quality issues in regard to aircraft, which I am more aware of, well there is definitely a drop off in regard to fineness of gross sculpt and detail over the last couple of series releases, and a greater drop in overall finish.
    This could easily be due to profit maximisation in China, Ares are not getting whet they think they are paying for.
    My work involves checking and testing equipment increasingly sourced from chinese suppliers; the first shipments are to spec, the next 99%, then 98% and so it goes.
    Years ago, I worked for a small pottery manufacturer in the UK. One customer was a very large chain. If they found a single fault in one piece out of a shipment of 1000 pieces, we got the lot back and no money. Made our QC department, and all our potters and glazers VERY concientious.
    (1000 pieces could be more than a week's production)

  9. #9
    Captain of the Fleet
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    South Glos
    Log Entries
    2,220
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    I think you have summed up the general dissapointment and concerns DB, I could live with the wave 2 errors, mainly because I already doubled up on the first rates, but the errors, or so it seems , with the latest wave and especially as we have waited quite a while for then, need to be addressed. I am now concerned are the Spanish 74 also in error or just the first rates.
    So my support in your efforts to get these addressed and future sculpts consistant.

  10. #10
    Comptroller of the Navy Board
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    4,298
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    By the way, if anybody would either specifically LIKE to be quoted, or specifically prefer to NOT be quoted, please edit your post to say so--John, your comment sounds like precisely the kind of thing they need to hear about the business practices of their Eastern subcontractors.
    --Diamondback
    PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
    Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.

  11. #11
    Landsman
    UK

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    NW Leics
    Log Entries
    20
    Name
    John

    Default

    Glad to be of help.
    What they really need to do is start making sure QC is of increased importance with their suppliers, with sufficient penalty to make them sit up and take notice.
    When I worked in the pottery, the customer picked up the goods, but if they were returned as substandard, my employer had to pay the return frieght AND the original delivery costs. Overland in the UK is one thing, intercontinental by sea is going to sting.
    Not much use with existing contracts, but if their current supplier is proved to be in breach, new contract negotiations may be in order.
    They may also be subcontracting some of the work out without Ares knowledge, another common practice I believe; QC always suffers badly in such circumstances.

  12. #12
    Admiral of the White
    Admiral
    United States

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Log Entries
    4,568
    Name
    Jim

    Default

    It seems pretty clear that the further removed you are from the actual production facilities and without any permanent staff on hand to check quality the chance of errors or questionable practices increases significantly. I've seen this with Ares and a number of other Kickstarter projects over the last few years.

    With larger companies it's often nothing more than production delays, but now we seem to have both from Ares? Very unfortunate.
    "It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
    –English Proverb

  13. #13
    Comptroller of the Navy Board
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    4,298
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    A post I made over at the Drome:

    My other observation that I haven't figured out how and where to slip in is pointing out that one or two bugs every now and again will inevitably slip through, but that this pattern is way past "the occasional oops" and looking more like "systemic dysfunction at some level between model design and tool fabrication."

    I saw one estimate recently that said where the US and Asia compete head to head, it costs 20-30% or so more to "Make American." Would any of us pay 30% more for American-made minis? Alternatively, the Vietnamese are up-and-coming and looking to eat China's lunch... and I know that Hasbro and a few other big-leaguers have been moving part of their production south. Or, can anybody Over There tell us anything about former-ComBloc (apologies to our members over there) Europe for manufacturing, like Poland or Czech Republic or Slovakia?

    I feel like we should be trying not for a Dogpile of Grievances, but just looking for a consensus on what the Pattern of Failure is and how to fix it, stipulating that there's a spectrum between durable but sacrificing accuracy for same on one and and museum- or contest-grade fine-scale models on the other and gaming miniatures necessarily have to slot into that spectrum probably slightly more toward the "toy" end. Unfortunately, to reach understanding of the underlying pattern we have to look at the field of data in its entirety... and sometimes such discussion is a bit painful.

    I mean, does anybody really think I WANTED to delve into dirty laundry, especially since I'd like to work for Ares paid full-time if the opportunity arises? No, this is a "necessity of desperation" making a difficult and painful assessment of things trying to figure out how to tell people I've considered personal friends that their company is having systemic problems that threaten the image and reputation of their product line and their company itself.
    Last edited by Diamondback; 02-07-2017 at 17:17.
    --Diamondback
    PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
    Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.

  14. #14
    Ordinary Seaman
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    wa
    Log Entries
    30
    Name
    Michael

    Default

    Thanks for putting this together. I've been wondering about the scale of the ships in wave 3. The sizes of these ships when compared side by side just doesn't look right.

  15. #15
    Stats Committee
    Master & Commander
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Maryland
    Log Entries
    1,987
    Blog Entries
    13
    Name
    Dobbs

    Default

    Thanks for your efforts, DB. I have my fingers crossed for a perfect Wave 4, and maybe Wave 3.1?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •