OK, I cast my vote for the West German LARS. I'm still torn between that, the M60A2 and the Russian weapons, but I saw that the LARS wasn't getting a lot of attention. This is a great piece for everyone who is playing Team Yankee, and makes 6mm that much more viable as a scale for TY. TY isn't exactly my cup of tea, but I think that the more people use 6mm for it, the better off all of us are. There are a couple thousand people in Facebook groups who are using it for TY, and the more people that we can lure to 6mm, the larger the customer base will be, the more products that will come out in 6mm...
In addition, based on the choices that were put out there, it looks like Cold War gaming in general is becoming more popular. It seemed like no one cared a lot for it for quite awhile. Maybe the 30+ year buffer has made a difference?
Discussion thread for "Vote for a Modern Release"
Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1
-
RedDragon
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 4:08 pm
- Location: CA
I didn't expect another lobbying thread along with the voting, but I guess the last one was to lobby for inclusion on the short list, and this is to lobby for the deciding votes.
While I love the broad appeal and nearly universal usefulness of the stowage accessories, I still have to stick to my guns, Soviet Hvy Weapons 2 that is.
It's just too glaring a hole for the frankly monolithic side in the Cold War. Let's face it, NATO/OTAN could have dozens of different infantry packs and still have gaps, but one side in almost any conflict is going to be using Soviet kit, so let's at least keep those boys well-armed!
While I love the broad appeal and nearly universal usefulness of the stowage accessories, I still have to stick to my guns, Soviet Hvy Weapons 2 that is.
It's just too glaring a hole for the frankly monolithic side in the Cold War. Let's face it, NATO/OTAN could have dozens of different infantry packs and still have gaps, but one side in almost any conflict is going to be using Soviet kit, so let's at least keep those boys well-armed!
-
Noble713
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 3:10 am
- Location: Okinawa
Sounds like your interests are somewhat similar to my own: I don't game massive hordes of armored vehicles. I focus on infantry-centric combined arms with 1:1 representation. My suggestion didn't make the cut, so I voted for Soviet Heavy Weapons. It's at least a widely-used and applicable bit of kit, useful for decades of conflicts and armies across multiple continents.CG2 wrote: I fully support the vote principle (and I hope that GHQ do it every year) but I have long realised that because I want Ultra-Modern, non-American, non-armoured skirmish stuff that things I want doesn't come up very often in this sort of poll. For example, the logic of prioritising minor variations to a Challenger II when there's no British AA vehicles or current infantry support weapons escapes me
I would rate the M60A2 as a distant 2nd option....
-
StVF101
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 1:02 am
- Location: Kaiserslautern
I voted the M60A2, as I have loved the look of it since I first saw a picture and it's nickname "Starship" so I would love to have a GHQ produced M60A2.
Personally I'd love to see the top three be made into next years release as I do love the external stowage idea, especially if it's draped over a brand new M60A2 model.
And the overall use of the Soviet Heavy Weapons models spanning from the Cold War gone hot Team Yankee Europe to the Sinai Peninsula in 1973. 
That being said, vote M60A2 because it's a Starship. And Panzergator's posts about M60A2s are awesome.
Personally I'd love to see the top three be made into next years release as I do love the external stowage idea, especially if it's draped over a brand new M60A2 model.
And the overall use of the Soviet Heavy Weapons models spanning from the Cold War gone hot Team Yankee Europe to the Sinai Peninsula in 1973. That being said, vote M60A2 because it's a Starship. And Panzergator's posts about M60A2s are awesome.
-
panzergator
- E5
- Posts: 3466
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 3:44 am
Update on the M60A2 units in Germany... my buddy didn't remember. He wasn't in an A2 unit in Baumholder, which was 2nd BDE, 8ID. (I was BDE S4 there five years later and the A2s were gone by then). I saw a rumor of one in 1BDE, 8ID, but cannot confirm it.
I read a quote from Gen. Donn Starry, who was V Corps commander during M60A2 deployment that specified the deployment of 4 A2 battalions, one in 1BDE, 3AD, one in 3BDE, 3AD, one in a brigade in 1AD (1-37AR), and one in 3ID. I also read that 3ID broke up their allocation between battalions, which would have meant 2 M60A1 battalions sending a company each to the A2 battalion and the A2 battalion sending a company to each of those battalions.
I have significant reservations about that, because the maintenance support of those A2 companies would have been an absolute nightmare. The prescribed load list (replacement parts carried in stock based on a demand history) alone would have strained the battalion maintenance task because the demand history of the A2 company would have been insufficient to keep a decent supply of parts. The unit I was in (1-32AR) had a suite of specially trained maintenance personnel from the battalion maintenance officer on down. Even all platoon leaders were supposed to be 1st lieutenants (they weren't, but they were supposed to be). I was a !LT at the time, but had not attended the add-on A2 course) Tank gunnery would have been horrendous. It isn't a matter of just divvying up the A2 maintenance personnel. There are special tools involved, as well. The complications just boggle the mind. It would be interesting to hear from someone who served in one of those units. The only way to effectively do this would be to task organize on receipt of an operations order, perhaps known in advance.
Meanwhile, I have to go with 4 battalions in Germany, (54 tanks each).
I read a quote from Gen. Donn Starry, who was V Corps commander during M60A2 deployment that specified the deployment of 4 A2 battalions, one in 1BDE, 3AD, one in 3BDE, 3AD, one in a brigade in 1AD (1-37AR), and one in 3ID. I also read that 3ID broke up their allocation between battalions, which would have meant 2 M60A1 battalions sending a company each to the A2 battalion and the A2 battalion sending a company to each of those battalions.
I have significant reservations about that, because the maintenance support of those A2 companies would have been an absolute nightmare. The prescribed load list (replacement parts carried in stock based on a demand history) alone would have strained the battalion maintenance task because the demand history of the A2 company would have been insufficient to keep a decent supply of parts. The unit I was in (1-32AR) had a suite of specially trained maintenance personnel from the battalion maintenance officer on down. Even all platoon leaders were supposed to be 1st lieutenants (they weren't, but they were supposed to be). I was a !LT at the time, but had not attended the add-on A2 course) Tank gunnery would have been horrendous. It isn't a matter of just divvying up the A2 maintenance personnel. There are special tools involved, as well. The complications just boggle the mind. It would be interesting to hear from someone who served in one of those units. The only way to effectively do this would be to task organize on receipt of an operations order, perhaps known in advance.
Meanwhile, I have to go with 4 battalions in Germany, (54 tanks each).
All blessings flow from a good mission statement.
Pogo was right. So was Ike.
"A Gentleman is a man who is only rude intentionally." (Churchill)
Give credit. Take responsibility.
Pogo was right. So was Ike.
"A Gentleman is a man who is only rude intentionally." (Churchill)
Give credit. Take responsibility.
-
pvt64
- E5
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Ballston Lake, NY
New Modern
I would like to see an SU-17/22.
Last edited by pvt64 on Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Waddell
- E5
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:16 pm
- Location: San Mateo, CA
I was just looking through the list and saw that I had not cast a vote yet. I've been thinking on this quite a bit and have my vote now.
What is needed is Mujahideen Cavalry figures. They could be used in Afghanistan, the Sudan, Mali (although they'd need camels instead of horses!), and a number of other locations. For all our technical advances we still have armed men riding into combat on horses in a number of different places.
What is needed is Mujahideen Cavalry figures. They could be used in Afghanistan, the Sudan, Mali (although they'd need camels instead of horses!), and a number of other locations. For all our technical advances we still have armed men riding into combat on horses in a number of different places.
When in trouble or in doubt,
Run in circles, scream and shout!
Run in circles, scream and shout!
-
GHQ
- Site Admin
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:50 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Yes, the winner was:BurtWolf wrote:Hey GHQ any update on this? Thanks!
Cold War Soviet Heavy Weapons- Sagger ATGM, SPG 9, SA-7/14 SAMS, RPD/RPK machine guns
We will definitely put that into our next New Release schedule. At this point the schedule is not finished, and we aren't sure exactly where it will fit in, but we will make every effrot to put it near the front. The M60A2 was a close second, and there is probably a good chance that will make it too, but we can't guarantee that.
Thanks to all who participated in the discussion, and the poll. We have heard from some people who didn't participate, and wanted to know if their votes could still count. Unfortunately we have said that we are going to stay with the parameters that we laid out when this was initially discussed.
Thank you for your support,
GHQ
-
Hoth_902
- E5
- Posts: 1538
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:08 am
- Location: Pacific Northwest
- Contact:
-
Hoth_902
- E5
- Posts: 1538
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:08 am
- Location: Pacific Northwest
- Contact: