GHQ miniatures played with FoW rules

Von Omar · Post by **Von Omar** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:40 am

I think I'm being taken too much to heart with my "bashing" sentament. I'm just getting a negative feeling about FoW from this thread. Such a negative feeling from people that dont play it for the most part. I'm not a FoW fanboy by any stretch. I much prefer more sophistication. I simply dont see the down side to GHQ tailoring slightly to a FoW product.

jb · Post by jb » Sat Jul 15, 2006 5:49 am

Von Omar wrote:... I simply dont see the down side to GHQ tailoring slightly to a FoW product.

...agreed. There would be no downside to it. I would say everyone here has already agreed that FoW users have a lot more options if used with Micro Armour...
I would still like to know what GHQ is up to about this thread

voltigeur · Post by **voltigeur** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:10 am

I have played FOW once or twice didn't find it all that appealing. My Roomate plays it regualrly and I checked the organisations for historical accuracy.

If GHQ did packs that allowed a customer to build man for man infantry companies. Then they would have products FOW compatable with out having to use the name.

Their research is pretty accurate.

Pitfall · Post by **Pitfall** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 8:04 am

jb wrote: I would still like to know what GHQ is up to about this thread

Easy, they're doing market research.

The biggest thing that FoW has on GHQ products is marketing, namely packaging and distribution. The rules aren't going to sway many people one way or the other, as those that like simple systems will play simple systems and those that like more intricate systems will play those.

I think the reason folks play FoW rules with GHQ minis is because they want to play larger scenarios with more units using 1:1 rules. What GHQ needs to do is release a 1:1 rules set that isn't overly detailed (or at least had a "fast play" version of the rules set).

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 8:30 am

="Pitfall What GHQ needs to do is release a 1:1 rules set that isn't overly detailed (or at least had a "fast play" version of the rules set).

What good is that? What they ought to do is do a side by side for the minis. FOW such and such platoon costs this much, GhQ costs this much. Compete in mini department not the rules department.

And any greater than 10mm is just playing with dollies.

Pitfall · Post by **Pitfall** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:12 am

Mobius wrote:
="Pitfall What GHQ needs to do is release a 1:1 rules set that isn't overly detailed (or at least had a "fast play" version of the rules set).
What good is that?

A 1:1 rules set will help sell the minis by upselling. I don't think people by FoW minis for the great detail, they buy them because of the corresponding rules set. The same holds true for GW products.

I agree that GHQ needs to up their marketing in terms of packaging, etc., but GHQ might do better by giving people a reson to use the minis they buy.

Mickel · Post by **Mickel** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:55 am

I'm not sure I can agree with the last statement. I didn't need any other reason than that they're "the best damn wargaming products - since 1967" around to buy them.

I must admit that it is probably a little different for me being down here. I would be surprised if there were any retailers selling GHQ here, and everyone that I know simply gets it through the website because it's a fast delivery and no dramas to deal with (except for what to get this month...

).

The point I'm trying to get at (I think), is that figures are figures, and can be applied to any rule set available (basing limits excluded). This doesn't apply to fantasy quite so much, but that's a slightly different case. I've got access to four or five different WWII rules, GHQ's and FoW included. There is nothing stopping me using my 1:285th stuff with any of them.

Thunder · Post by **Thunder** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:42 pm

I've bought GW figures in the past because I thought they were cool, but really do not like any of their rules other than Blood Bowl. The 40K figs were neat, not the rules. Having played the game after buying the figures, I lost enthusiasm rapidly. Perhapse I am the anomoly here.

Mickel · Post by **Mickel** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:40 pm

The 40K figs were neat, not the rules.

The original rules (1988/9?) were good fun. Then thing's got silly.

I've thought about my earlier comment about rules and figure scale and stuff. Scale is very much a personal choice. There wouldn't be a single person on this forum who doesn't like 6 or 10mm (just for ACW Bill

) figures. But they're not to everyones' liking, for variety of incomprehensible reasons

There's no accounting for taste.

All of the 15mm FoW players that have come over to check out the real manoeuvre games at conventions have commented on the vast spaces available to move around in, but there are also jibes about how we get on with losing vehicles (whch has been known to happen to well camouflaged vehicles and infantry on Terrain Maker (TM)). One of the common queries is how do we paint it all - and there is generally a lot of it. I just stand there and think, 'well, mine is passable but you should see the really good ones...'.

I think that in the end people think it's too hard. We haven't got a critical mass to suck people in (not here anyway, and the competition rules are considered on 'The Dark Side' which doesn't help).

The way to tap into the FoW thing would be go to cons with this stuff, play FoW - big games if you can handle them. Leave out the minor add-ons - special characters and the like are irrelevant when you have a battalion or more. Have more than one player on each side. Get people interested in the scale - highlight the benefits such as relative cost, storage, huge range available, that things look right on the table - that a town is more than four buildings. Then the rules don't matter so much.

ok... enough of the ramblings of a Kiwi

Thunder · Post by **Thunder** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 4:27 am

I'm hoping cons and demos at stores are the key like in your last point. We usually get a full game at the cons, but I'm not sure what percentage of this turns into repeat players and buyers of the products. Anyway, its fun to play with the new players at the cons.

As for the 40K rules, yep, it was in the 90s when there were so many books you really didn't know where to look for the rules. Then out of the blue, or actually frequently, I get whamooooooed by a rule I didn't know existed and that sucked.

Pitfall · Post by **Pitfall** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 4:42 am

Again, I'm going to have to go against the grain of puplic opinion.

A lot of people say that the rules system doesn't matter, and that GHQ should be able to stand on it's models alone. I still think that a 1:1 rules set by GHQ will get more people interested in the GHQ products. If the rules system didn't matter to people, then there would be no thread on this topic! Sure, marketing and redesign of the models is important, but if modeling was the only thing, then people would be playing with GHQ models using GHQ rules.

The idea at the heart of this thread is that people are using FoW rules while using GHQ minis. Not that that is a bad thing, but it does point to the underlying fact that people want to do large scenarios with a 1:1 rules system.

1ComOpsCtr · Post by **1ComOpsCtr** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:45 am

The basic problem with large 1-1 scale games has to do with the time it takes to resolve fire, which in some of the games I've played when we used Tractics, Fast Rules, etc., etc., took an hour or longer per turn. Detailed 1-1 rules also tend to get bogged down by the "rules lawyers" who argue about every angle, "flank shots that aren't", and hull down positions that are or aren't really hull down, etc., etc.., which makes those types of games unpleasent, unless you have a really good judge or a player who can take charge of the "process of playing" a big game.

That is why Flames of War is popular ...because it evens the playing field a little for the average player and makes the game all about tactics and die rolling... if you put the biggest hammer in the right place and roll good dice you will win almost every time.

Playing a game to conslusion in 2 hours 'give or take' also makes a rules set attractive.

Many of the participants in this forum don't strike me as FoW types. Any group of individuals who argue(might be a little strong

) about the correct colors for each front and time of year doesn't strike me as a group who is going to play a simple set of rules for a complex period of gaming... but thats just my opinion

I must tell you that the system we do simulations with the military is very simple, though it looks complicated at first blush, but in reality our system is all about time management.

Time is the one thing you can't replace in combat. Once you lose it, its gone forever. There's no going back, no "way back" machine where you can slip into the CP and whisper the solution is some Major's ear... so time management is one of the most important things you can do in modern combat.

Our system also takes the core skills of each commander and turns them into quantifiable tools to determine how the commanders interact within each combat period, but our simulation(game) is real time, so they can go on for hours, even days sometimes if that is what it takes to get a decision for the Staff or a particular unit's CO.

Different kind of game... probably not for everyone, but really fun for me since I am the one who makes it work each time.

Will
ComOpsCtr

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:03 am

="Pitfall" The idea at the heart of this thread is that people are using FoW rules while using GHQ minis. Not that that is a bad thing, but it does point to the underlying fact that people want to do large scenarios with a 1:1 rules system.

I think the underlying point of this thread is people will play FOW with 1/285 scale minis if other people do too.
FOW is fast. I don't think that translates to anything more, least of all tactics.
There are more 1:1 rules than you've had hot suppers.
If GHQ were to release their own 1:1 rules similar to FOW it would just join the crowd. People would have to like it more than their current game and change. And change both from their rules and their 15mm minis. Surely there would be more people that would be inclined to just change their minis and stay with FOW as their rule system.

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:06 am

="1ComOpsCtr"
Many of the participants in this forum don't strike me as FoW types. Any group of individuals who argue(might be a little strong ) about the correct colors for each front and time of year doesn't strike me as a group who is going to play a simple set of rules for a complex period of gaming... but thats just my opinion
ComOpsCtr

Well, the cream rises to the top.

1ComOpsCtr · Post by **1ComOpsCtr** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:35 am

There is perhaps another substance of a similar color that floats... Could you be confusing the two...

Purists (dedicated individuals) always have difficulties with new things and new people entering their domain... could all the negative comments really be an unwillingness to recognize an approaching change that could benefit the "hobby as a whole" and take some of the "eliteness" away from those that think 1/285th scale is reserved for those, in the hobby, that look at WW2 more historically (as in more correctly)

...in their eyes.

Is there a little "I don't want to share my toys" coming out here.

What GHQ decides to do with their marketing plan really doesn't have anything to do with this forum(other than the courtesy of informing us what they are thinking) because GHQ must adjust to the market, like any other company, or wither. Why not take advantage of an existing market to make another market for your products if possible.

In my opinion, and its just an opinion, GHQ would be making a mistake not to take advantage of a ready made market for their castings. A slight change in packaging would be all that would be necessary to make the transition.

I want to take the opportunity to thank GHQ for offering their rules at a discount so that anyone on the forum can become more familiar with them if they have not already...

Thanks Greg!

Will
ComOpsCtr