All Activity

Johnny "Earthworm" Storm

Yeah, that might have been me explaining the knees, but my point here was something a little different. If you look at the original battroid art, the YF-19 and VF-19 absolutely share the same proportions. They're fundamentally the same skeleton with different body panels. If they were cars, they'd be the same chassis with different body kits. From the toy manufacturing side, what I'm talking about is the internal skeleton that the valks transform on, independently of what any exterior panel is molded to look like. Whatever the exterior looks like, you can probably draw a very similar stick figure between every one of the major transformation joints, and the mechanisms involved will be mostly identical, with the same measurements between them. The big differences come from the way Bandai and Yamato/Arcadia approached their own designs. The Yamato and Arcadia YF-19 and VF-19 both compromised the length of the legs to make the battroids stockier, so they both have to extend the legs for fighter mode, leaving those knee gaps. But the fundamental proportions of the designs, the "skeletons," are the same between them. On the Bandai side, they made the conscious decision to model their YF-19 (and the VF-19 Advance) on the updated animation style without any mass shifting. The legs are proportionally longer and skinnier, so they were able to avoid the knee gap. Some people didn't like the changes, but it helped Bandai pull of a very slick fighter mode. While we don't have the DX Fire Valk yet, we can make some general assumptions, and it's very likely that it will share the same "skeleton" proportions with the DX YF-19. Once you figure out a working set of those measurements and mechanisms, it helps a ton to be able to re-use them, which is why they're doing the same for the VF-17 now, rather than re-designing it to match the original animation. It's just a lot less work. Far as the animation goes though... eh. On the off chance that we did get a modern animated version of the VF-17, I feel like it would be cutting way too many corners to just tweak the model like Bandai has done here. It's practically unrecognizable as the same valk. For the VF-19 and YF-19 though? The YF-19 was drawn in the M7 style, almost literally. Macross Plus and Macross 7 came out concurrently in 1994. The animation styles of the two were a little different, but the line art was all drawn around the same time, and is very similar. Also, something to keep in mind with the animation... Bandai can write whatever lore it wants about how the VF-171 is supposed to use the same components as the VF-17. Truth is though, trying to reconcile those designs between the two shows is just flat out impossible. The sizes of the valks in M7 were insane, and no amount of lore manipulation can make that make a lick of sense. Like, just for comparison. The 171 looks like its wings/waterline are about 6 feet off the ground. The VF-17 was animated to look absolutely gargantuan by comparison. M7's art scaling was not at all grounded in realistic sizes for any of the fighters.

Just picked up my two and quickly unboxed one. Looks great.

Yack Deculture.

Would it be better just to go onto Bandai's or Kawamori's X post/social media and just have everyone comment about the too thin/too skinny proportions? Maybe with enough public outcry directly would get them to reconsider?

Don't close down before making a 1/60 YF-19 reissue... 😭 I need a 1/60 YF-19.

The moment I heard of this, I assumed it would be basically a reuse of the 171, and sure enough... I'm not a big fan of the 17, much prefer the 171, but even so I gagged a bit at the pics.

If it's gonna be based on the 171 here is a comparison with the Yamato. Photo's courtesy of @bat1911. Bandai should've made the Delta tan version too.

DHL charge for the 19P from AE was 5200 yen which feels steep but relieved it wants the crazy amounts some have been quoted.

Can quite sense Mr. K's frustration, and I do hope Arcadia can come out of the current problems & continue pioneering valks for fans. Bandai is getting really lazy.

I gotta agree that billing it as a 171 in fantasy or what-if M7 colors would be more palatable. I guess if I am getting this, I would pretend it to be so and lump it together with the Anniversary schemes in the shelf. Haha this is gold! I'm actually a bit meh on Yamato's 17 Battroid mode, perhaps too slim or scrawny in some areas, but I recognize they have done quite an effort to balance all modes in light of the heavy anime magic going on. At minimum, they acknowledge a key aspect of the 17 being a bulky boy. That said, I have your 17 pics saved to my phone for longest time, and I love how the angle plus black background of your shots effectively masks the shortcomings of Yamato's sculpt and giving it a full brute appearance.

I'm not sure I'm actually going to get my Tread's from Amazon.

i hereby christen thee...the picasso valk!

Unfortunately my crystal ball is out of order. I keep asking it for next week's winning lottery numbers but it keeps connecting me to group chats with Christopher Lee and a giant flaming eyeball. 🤔 Anyway, I would personally say "probably not". But I'm definitely not representative of the sort of person who would be seriously entertaining the question in the first place. I had found the series entertaining but not particularly compelling for much of its run, so the prospect of more adventures of Din Djarin and the highly marketable mascot is not as appealing to me as it is to others. If you get really excited about the prospect of more of The Mandalorian, then the answer is probably yes. If not, then probably not. IMO it doesn't quite feel like a project with very broad appeal. But then, TV series epilogue movies seldom do.

Bozune, you are a hot mess and I love you. 😂 I few more seam lines to deal with then I’m going back into it with some surfacer 500 for texture and brush painting this goofball with lacquers. 👍

Leave it to Bandai to be 0 for 3 on getting a decent looking mode. It's totally a 171 with an oversized head. Looks terrible.

I don't get the level of hate for the fins. I don't like that they are such thin speakers and are off color from the body, but the fins themselves look like they could be decent vertical stabilizers. If destructive modding and painting is on the table, I think filing down and filling the speakers with putty to make them proper stabilizer fins would look better and more unique from the kai.

100% ahahaha, that drawing... This site is the best

I missed a line in the quote I was responding to, but half of what I said was responding to "Minor alterations to the 19 to make a fire valk." Fundamentally in lore, they are the same, but in terms of toy production, other than following most of the same contortions to transform, they are almost unrelated. The 19s really don't even share the same battroid proportions either. Wasn't it you, or maybe it was someone else, that told me on the other thread that the 19kai has that nasty gap in the leg because it has to retract for battroid and extend for fighter, where the YF doesn't have such proportion issues? Their legs are of completely different design, so bandai couldn't even recycle those parts even if they wanted to. Meanwhile it's in lore that 171 stuffs a larger engine in the same old 17 leg. So like I said, Bandai has their lore excuse to prove that it's a matter of artistic depiction. But I've alreardy said they shouldn't have done that and should have followed the original fat proportions as depicted. I don't disagree that it looks wrong from every depiction ever, so I'm not sure what part of the topic I'm missing. To put it differently, if 171 was drawn in M7 style, it would be just as chonky as 17. But if YF-19 was drawn in M7 style, it would still have different legs, shoulders, nose cone, canopy, lower chest turrets, shield, head, etc from the VF-19kai. One gives them justification to cheat the toy design while the other doesn't. Not that they should have cheated at all

They better don't go out of bussines before they reissue a VT-1. I can bet it is a big hole in many collections now days.

But is it fine enough to take the entire family to the theater pay full price for tickets and popcorn on the opening weekend when you can just wait for it on Disney Plus?

I’d list things as Andor being young adult, the cartoons and Skeleton Crew as for younger kids and the rest is basic kids stuff. But adults can enjoy kids stuff as well, no need to feel shamed. Although the main audience is the aged fandom for the most part

I’m pretty sure he meant for the og trilogy and maybe the prequels at the time of his statement

Eh, whether Star Wars as a whole is "for kids" is kind of an academic question at this point... since even if it WAS for kids when it was new those kids are in their fifties and sixties now and still haven't let it go. 🙃 This new movie is pretty undeniably aiming for the young kids, though. Which is fine.

https://twiiter.com/Mrk_arcadia/status/1971095763485897058 web-translated: