Jump to content

Mommar

Members
  • Posts

    13828
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mommar

  1. This might be one case where "problem free" is a subjective term, due to people's expectations.

    My ankles aren't loose, but I had to tighten them after attempting to pose the feet. Compared to every other ankle joint Yamato has put on valk in the past ten years or so, the range of forward to back rotation of the ankle is extremely limited. People expecting to be able to point the toe up or down are going to be disappointed, and may see this as a problem.

    The problem isn't that the feet are bad, but that the design is so different from everything they've produced in the past. People are used to ankles that move up and down a lot, with just enough side-to-side rotation to allow a spread-legged stance. These new ball-jointed ones are entirely the opposite, offering tons of side to side flexibility, but almost no range of motion front to back.

    The bottom line is, the restricted range of motion that people are seeing isn't a mistake, it was designed that way on purpose. Whether people see that as a problem is going to depend on how important flexible feet are to them.

    Frankly though, I do have to say.. it's a ball joint. It's round. Why isn't the range of motion around it symmetrical? Unless all the sideways motion coming from the joint farther up inside the ankle. In any case though, I do personally think the ankle needs a redesign. That side-to-side joint up inside the leg could potentially be rotated 90 degrees so it gives the feet some up/down rotation. I mean, they're supposed to be thrust vectoring nozzles after all, and the VF-19 is the first Yamato valk I think I've ever seen where it wasn't possible to vector the feet up or down in fighter mode. That's partly due to the ankle cuff restricting them, but pulling the feet out should at least let you move them slightly.

    On the other hand, that particular design should be perfect for the VF-17, considering it's feet are mounted sideways in fighter mode. It still won't help posability in battroid though.

    It is good to hear they're looking at the ankles some, and strengthening that thigh piece. Either way though, I love this design so much, no amount of ankle weirdness is going to dampen my enthusiasm for the S/F/P. I can't wait to get those. The only question remaining is how many I'll actually buy. ^_^

    Could you post some pics showing just how far the ankles tilt up and down versus the other Valks?

  2. Heard from Yamato that for the VF-19S, the tab inside the gerwalk mode hip joint that a few people managed to break will be strengthened.

    Also, steps will be taken to make the ankle ball joint more resistant to loosening. Although I have to say that I haven't encountered this problem on both my Fire Valks. In fact they have both been completely problem-free.

    Graham

    it's still good to know they're taking it so seriously even if the problem isn't wide-spread. That will make me more confident in my three purchases (S/F/P.)

  3. Hmm... magnets would work pretty well in this situation, on the legs. The canons would attach at the wing roots.

    The only parts I would really be worried about are how short the leg missle holsters are in battroid mode. You can clearly see in the lineart that the holsters are longer than the lower part of the leg while in fighter mode.

    The canons on the back boosters shouldn't be too tough, if Yamato were to design them to extend similar to the knees of the VF-0S to accomate GERWALK mode, it just might work.

    I want to see what one of these looks like in Gerwalk. I'm not sure it's ever been shown. I can't find a place in the Animation where there was a Super VF-17 in Gerwalk at all and certainly none of the line art online has it.

  4. Maybe not 'come with', but there's a very good chance we will see it :)

    That's a good reason to buy the S variant as well. Yamato should officially discuss the chances of fast pack additions. People one the fence or who have flat out decided they dislike the S variant color/head may rethink if they can get a true S variant with the packs. I know I'm now going to get both based on what you've said.

    The reason that Yamato are not doing FAST packs for the VF-19S/F, is not because of the leg missile bays.

    The reason I have been told is twofold:

    1) Getting the shoulder mechanism to work for the FAST Packs is seen as being quite difficult.

    2) Due to the way the wing looks tighly to the leg, you would only be able to get half a FAST pack on the leg anyway.

    Graham

    I could see the shoulders being a slight pain. More than anything they look pretty dumb in Battroid configuration. The leg fast packs, after looking at the line art, are impossible to implement save for having an additional clip-on part for Gerwalk/Battroid mode. You can clearly see in fighter mode that the wings attach right about the middle of the "bell bottoms" and the fast pack only covers the front (bottom) half of the calf. Suddenly in battroid it's covering the entire calf but you can still see on the back of the fast pack where it's drawn to have a flat edge like where the wings would fit over it. The only possible way to do that would be an extra part that snaps on/off. I still think it would be cool to have one though because it looks pretty awesome in fighter mode.

  5. Oh really? Sweet. The kai doesnt interest me in the slightest so I never really looked. They should re-release the yf-19 w/o the "gullet"

    We've had a very long discussion on that topic. We all agree however the build of the later VF-19 models is such that Yamato would have to pretty much completely create new molds for a YF-19 variant so it's not as easy/cheap as just making a new YF-19.

  6. You know, I'm actually pretty confused about the feet on this thing.. are they even supposed to move forward to back? I mean.. I can probably get a good 60-70 degree arc of rotation side to side.. but I can't point the toe or heel at all. They just don't move. I get maybe 5-10 degrees of rotation there, and it just seems like the pieces aren't designed to rotate front to back at all.

    Personally, it's not a huge issue, since I don't do a ton of battroid poses, and I love the fighter so much that it stays that way anyway (as will the blazers and P when I get them). But there just seems like there is something wrong with the way the feet on mine work.

    Can anyone confirm this is the way the feet are supposed to work, or did I just get bad ankles?

    I hope not. That would really eff up all of my Gerwalk poses too.

  7. 2011 Dec??? :blink:

    I just hope this comes with the Super Packs.

    vf-17s-superpack-battroid.gif

    Courtesy of Macross Mecha Manual (Mr. March)

    The other problem with that is Yamato already opted to skip on putting fast pack attachments on the VF-19 because of the leg-missile gimmick. The legs on this Valk will also have to open for the gun pod to be ejected and that likely means these fast packs will be in the way as well. I'll bet they opt to skip.

  8. All we need are these other two stuck next to 171 line-art and we can see just how easy it could be for Bandai to copy it (I honestly think the 171 is different enough that a it would be harder to do than just straight up copy.)

    Right out of the bat, I can see that the wings are far longer than they should be... though I guess this can't be helped due to the Anime Magic that was applied to the original line art. Other than that, lookin' good! (^o^)

    So what you're saying is the wings on the line-art are far shorter than is realistically possible.

  9. Er... Well... yeah, EXACTLY -- that's the point. That's how few people actually buy the destroid toys, and that's why Yamato decided that going through the trouble of manufacturing another shelf-warmer is not the most lucrative thing in the world. This kit is for the already hardcore people who want the Phalanx no matter what.

    You know I would argue Yamato tested the waters with the Destroids people wanted the least. Maybe not so much with the Tomahawk, because I'm a fan of that one (and you get the Battletech bleed-over people as well) but... the Defender? I don't know anybody who's a BIG Defender fan or just HAD to have one. I already mentioned the Tomahawk having a small fan base though still not really that big, I know LOTS of people who love the Phalanx and I've never met anyone Macross or Robotech related who didn't absolutely want to own a Monster. Maybe Yamato didn't focus closely enough on the favorites? Especially the Monster, that's in it's own category really.

  10. That's a great point!! Can't remember now if the P is shown in the lineart as being fastpack capable (guess it should be).

    Yamato has already taken the stance that the VF-19's with the missiles in the legs won't have fast packs because the two gimmicks interfere with each other so the Blazers are guaranteed to not have them as well. It's probably way beyond wishful thinking on my part they'll even attempt them for something like the P.

  11. Well I guess regarding this whole removable fins issue (I must add that I don't like them too), I'm stubbornly unreceptive to this idea :lol:

    It's part of the design to begin with, so If Yamato went with the removable option they should provide a piece to cover the holes. I feel like it's going the same route as: we don't like fins on the legs, make them removable, we don't like too many head lasers, make them removable and so on... It doesn't seem right.

    Well maybe cause I'm a cannon/lineart nazi :lol:

    More power to us if they're finnally removable but as I said it doesn't feel right.

    I was hoping having them removable would also mean there would potentially be a spot to attach fast packs instead.

  12. Why is this an issue? It's a part of the design. Deal with it.

    Because it's likely the only versions of the VF-19 with the longer wings (because some of us don't like the stubby F/S versions) we'll ever see were flown by Basara and both Valks are non-standard for one reason or another. Some of us find the colors on his McValk ghastly and unappealing but this other version is almost perfect except for the odd fins. If they were removable we'd have an excellent looking VF-19 with the longer wings and it's a far easier modification then attempting to repaint a bright red Valk.

  13. I think the smartest thing would be to include the gun pod. If you want a Basara Valk leave the gun pod off and the speakers on. If you want a generic military valk remove the speakers, add the gun. Want to be different? Leave one of the speaker fins on, put a cocktail umbrella in the hole for the other spot and arm the Valk with a hot dog.

  14. Fair enough. But remember it’s not another Basara special; Basara piloted a special customized version of the VF-19P outfitted with speaker units designed by a Zolan scientist named Lawrence to engage the space whales in orbit. So they're Zolan style speaker-fins, just like the VF-5000G Star Mirage Speaker Variant.

    http://www.macross2.net/m3/macross7/vf-5000g-speaker.htm

    http://www.macross2.net/m3/macross7/vf-19p.htm

    It's another goofy-ass slighty-but-not-quite-a-normal-looking-VF-19 piloted by Basara.

  15. All this whining over two little shoulder fins. Sheesh.

    There are those of us who love the basic mold of the fighter but weren't too keen on the clownish nature of Kai's paint scheme/design but would still like to buy one in support of Yamato. This design is almost exactly what we would want except for the wonky fins, another Basara special. But if they're removable that makes this pretty ideal for most of us who like the 19 design with the longer wings.

×
×
  • Create New...