GHQ Miniatures Review

TheGM · Post by **TheGM** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:59 am

Hey All,

First post, but I've been lurking for a bit.

Several of us who work in the publishing industry have gotten together to make a miniatures review webzine: Wargames @ Nordalia.com.

Our first set of articles and the site went live this evening, including a single-product review of the GHQ Sampler packs.

Drop on in and let us know what you think.

Don.

Hugewally · Post by **Hugewally** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:40 am

I'll probably catch a bunch of flak for this, but here goes... (intended to be constructive criticism)

The British came as a desert force. All the soldiers wore pith helmets, the tank was a Crusader, the gun was a 17- or 25-pounder (itâ€™s difficult to say at 1:300, but we surmised that it was a 17-pounder),

We also admit to a small amount of annoyance while trying to identify the pieces in the packs. But the Web is your friend, and we were able to identify them all to our satisfaction with just a half hour of research.

Its not a 17pdr, its the 7.2" howitzer (found that by looking at the pics on the GHQ website).

And personally, I don't think the "The Good and the Bad" this bit needs to be in the review at all...

The only real negative, and itâ€™s hard to call this a nit because we knew going in that these were pretty darn small, was their tiny size--when painting 1:300 (6mm) figures, some features will just be darn difficult to cover without plastering paint all over the place. No worries though: If something is so small that you cannot adequately paint it, the feature is probably too small to be seen from three feet away on a gaming table (though you will note that in our magnified pictures, minute details show up just fine â€¦)

Not to be a flag waver for the GHQ products (though they are the best on the market), but are you reviewing the GHQ models or making an editorial about the 1/285th/6mm scale?

Also the quote above is a bit contrary to this

and yet the models are not as difficult to paint as you would expect for something this tiny

.

HMSDiomede · Post by **HMSDiomede** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:06 am

Since we're picking nits here, I'd like to add a couple of observations about the GHQ miniatures reviewed: The US "105mm howitzer" is actually a 155mm, and the British APC is a Ram (not Sherman) Kangeroo. And BTW, the "pith helmets" on the British are the Mk.1 steel helmet, common to most theatres in which the British infantry served.

My remarks are intended to be constructive, not idle criticism. I'll be dropping by periodically to see how the site develops.

David

jb · Post by jb » Wed Aug 02, 2006 5:47 am

...If you can't tell a 17lber from a 7.2 gun, what are you doing writing articles about such subjects?

At least have a staff member help out...
Years ago I got into Micro armour because you could correctly identify them,especially at a distance. This was even with the early stuff...

"Pilot to crew,pilot to crew. Get your your flak s**t on boys here it comes!"

TheGM · Post by **TheGM** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:37 pm

I'll probably catch a bunch of flak for this, but here goes... (intended to be constructive criticism)

Not from me, that's for certain... Anything to make it better.

Its not a 17pdr, its the 7.2" howitzer (found that by looking at the pics on the GHQ website).

Heh. We never even looked at the GHQ website - we went online to other resources looking for IDs. I think it stresses the fact that they should ID them in the package though. To be honest, I think we were comfortable with that ID and did not look it up - guess that's a lesson learned.

And personally, I don't think the "The Good and the Bad" this bit needs to be in the review at all...
::Snipped by TGM::
Not to be a flag waver for the GHQ products (though they are the best on the market), but are you reviewing the GHQ models or making an editorial about the 1/285th/6mm scale?

Yes. The site is aimed at a cross-section of modelers and gamers, not just 6mm modelers. We felt it was important to let the 28mm or even 15mm guy know that it is not as easy as they're used to - obvious, perhaps, but we felt it warranted. The guy who owns a ton of 6mm can blow off the statement, but the guy who's buying his first batch needs to know, in our opinion.

Also the quote above is a bit contrary to this
and yet the models are not as difficult to paint as you would expect for something this tiny
.

No, not contradictory - 6mm is difficult, 6mm GHQ was easier than we expected at that scale.

Thanks for the feedback, this is the first real constructive criticism we have received thus far, and we certainly know we're not perfect. But each one can get better.

Don.

TheGM · Post by **TheGM** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:45 pm

Since we're picking nits here, I'd like to add a couple of observations about the GHQ miniatures reviewed: The US "105mm howitzer" is actually a 155mm, and the British APC is a Ram (not Sherman) Kangeroo. And BTW, the "pith helmets" on the British are the Mk.1 steel helmet, common to most theatres in which the British infantry served.

My remarks are intended to be constructive, not idle criticism. I'll be dropping by periodically to see how the site develops.

David

Hey David,

As to the 155, bet you're glad I didn't serve with you

.

Overall, the "ID on the fly" operation was a failure, and we'll have to be much more careful about that in the future.

Thanks,
Don.

TheGM · Post by **TheGM** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:52 pm

...If you can't tell a 17lber from a 7.2 gun, what are you doing writing articles about such subjects? At least have a staff member help out...
Years ago I got into Micro armour because you could correctly identify them,especially at a distance. This was even with the early stuff...

"Pilot to crew,pilot to crew. Get your your flak s**t on boys here it comes!"

Simply put, we're all rather experienced, but we're neither perfect nor all-knowing. Given a random miniature, vehicles and support weapons I play with regularly I will identify every time. Others will be hit and miss. I imagine that's true of everyone. I don't, generally speaking, play British, and in fact this is my only 7.2 in any scale (assuming that ID is correct - I haven't verified it personally).

As to having a staff member help out, we likely will in the future. A better solution is for GHQ to ID what's in the package when it ships... Not everyone will bother to call a staff member.

Don.

Post by **GHQ** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:53 am

Thanks for adding the review of our sample packs to your inaugural issue of your magazine. It looks like you have put together a nice website. The sample packs were designed to give a sampling of miniatures from a particular country. We intentionally have not listed the contents of the packs because they are not necessarily always the same. We do this mainly for two reasons- first, when we pack things, we do them in runs of one hundred or more. We didn't want to have a packing run held up because we needed to cast more of a particular vehicle. After all, these are designed for people who just want to get an initial sampling of our models and see the quality of the designs and castings. Second, it leaves it open for us to completely overhaul the sample packs at some point, and not have anyone contact us to say that the pack that they just purcahsed from a store, ebay, etc. is mispacked. Since the packs came out about a year ago, we have already had a couple situations where we made substitutions when doing a packing run of sample packs.

The sample packs have been very popular since we released them. Obviously many of the sample pack purcahsers are people who have never seen our models before, and want to see what they are like before buying some. They are also fairly popular with our long time customers who want a small smattering of a particular country, or want a few infantry and some spares to have on hand.