I listened to the whole thing. It was quite enjoyable to listen to Ken, who sounds like a really reasonable, passionate guy who loves what he does. This is good news!
He made a comment that they are harassed/criticized daily on their pages for being so tight lipped about their product, and I am definitely guilty of this. I apologize
As players, this is a day and age of reveals, and it's hard being patient when the "next big thing" doesnt tip its hand much! However, I get why they are doing this, and it is applaudable even if it is frustrating.
So...what did I take away from the podcast?
The game sounds like it is designed to be 3 to 5 companies of units, with 5 being the max before it starts to break down. I could not tell how many commanders are supposed to be on the field per side, but each commander controls 6 units that are attached to him...therefore we can assume that 1 commander per 6 units is reasonable.
At 53 minutes in, the discussion turns to rules; more specifically, at 59m when they actually start discussing details. Before that he discusses his love for the genre and scale, etc, and can be skipped unless you've got nothing better to do.
He referenced a few rulesets as "good" that made me realize, prior to his comment at 1:06, that I might be in trouble - Warmaster, Future War Commander...he said that he likes randomness, that (like Two Fat Lardies, he believes) not every model should move 6", etc. A little part of me died at that point.
Just last weekend I played a bit of Chain of Command, a Two Fat Lardies WWII game, which had some REALLY cool aspects to it (and shooting was a breeze), but all units moved with d6...a "Move and No Shoot" move for infantry was 2d6". My opponent had a commander who was in LOS to one of my advancing units, but the commander was only like 3 inches from the nearest building. He rolled his movement and got a 3 on 2d6...in short, he barely made it. Now, cinematically we can imagine that he was looking elsewhere, maybe directing his forces and not noticing the advancing threat, or maybe was struck by a sudden case of nerves and in his haste he tripped and fell, barely making it to cover...but this stuck in my craw like a bad chicken bone, and soured what otherwise could have been a good system for me.
The shooting mechanic actually sounds really cool. You roll 3 dice, which appear to be different types (d4, d6, d8, etc) based on the type of unit and firing control systems your unit has, maybe your weapon type, and what you're shooting at. You leave the result on the table and use the same dice to determine damage, which was a neat idea. I started to realize, however, that this could be even clunkier than Strike Legion or Gruntz, because not only are you rolling multiple dice per unit, but you cannot quickly determine "hit or miss" and pick them up and toss them again.
This is pure conjecture: is it conceivable that every unit in a group has different dice types? I imagine the author has limited this possibility, but it might exist. If my 5 tanks fire on your 5 tanks, I have to roll 5 separate times, resolving each shot before going to the next. I cannot batch roll, I cannot shoot all at once...and I am guessing that this is another "declare who you are firing at" system, so there isnt any quick damage resolution either (E:A, with it's "remove casualties from the front first" is so elegant!).
The "build your own" is always a fun concept. Some systems make it too math intensive, and Polyversal wants to reverse that trend. The system sounds "near future" so I'm wondering what kind of variety in weapons and systems the game really has.
Another concern I have is the hex cards the game uses. As I mentioned, each unit card is on a hex-shaped unit card, and the commander has 6 units "attached" to him by being placed around his own hex. It is unclear whether, if a unit is destroyed, its card can be removed and replaced by another unit on the board or not. My concern is, this sounds like a lot of real estate for a 3 Company game. If Epic has 10 to 12 units, then this game might have 2 full Hex-blossoms (my term, made up on the spot...) and depending on how big each individual card is, those blossoms could be 12 inches across or more? On a 6'x'4' table, where do those go? Imagine gaming down at your FLGS...not everyone has room off to the side for extras. It just gives me something to ponder, really.
Lastly, timing. If the Kickstarter happens this Q3 or Q4, there is no way we're seeing the rules before Summer 2015. So...with well more than a year before we can game this, find other things to entertain yourself. This one isnt any time soon.
Overall, I was excited to listen to the design aspects and visions of the author. I still want to see it and play it, but I have enough concerns that I will really have to think about my level of monetary commitment for the KS (yes, I absolutely will support it, even if its only at the rulebook-only level). I detest randomness in games, as well as klunkiness, which makes this sound like it might not be for me. Oh well...it could very well surprise me and be the Best Game Evar. Who knows...I've got quite some time to temper and adjust my expectations!