The thinking man's wishlist

[8ball]

INFANTRY MAKEOVER

Binpicker and I have talked about this a lot, and I agree with some of the other guys here, like MK-1 and jb.

Here's what I think (I can hear the moaning already). Infantry has long been the orphan child of GHQ. It seems to me they never considered infantry to be an integral component of wargaming. The release of the Individual Infantry was a huge inprovement but it's still a half measure. It needs to be beefed up as a subset of the GHQ line.

I'd like to see infantry marketed and packaged in a more historically representative format. Instead of 60 figures, how about a platoon? The basic selection of figures would be a variation of poses compiling a 10-12 man rifle squad. In other words, each Individual Infantry set would have a minimum of 10-12 poses, and a few additional command poses for a total of perhaps 40-45 figures. The kit would be typical to the unit offered. For example, a 1944 American rifle squad would have 12 figures, including 10 w/ M-1 Garands, one with a BAR, and one with a Thompson (perhaps).

Also, poses should relate to each other. It's no good to have 10-standing riflemen, and a prone BAR man. In this example all should be firing, kneeling, or running. Or, have a mix that includes several prone, several kneeling, several running, etc. so that our stands look like a realistic grouping of soldiers.

We also need all the heavy weapons, bazookas, 30 cal MGs, Lt Mortars, Hvy Mortars and so on, for all the infantry types.

As others have mentioned here, some of the existing lines need punching up. The German infantry needs to be tops on the list, as does the Russian Infantry, and the American Infantry. These seem to have the most shortcommings and probably represent the most popular battles that we game.

Which brings me to the types thingie. We need American Paratroopers, and Marines. And please, please, please, don't suggest I just paint the American infantry different colors. If I was that detail challenged I'd be buying Adler, or worse, using rice grains. Please don't force me to buy Adler. They have such big heads.

Peachy: Billy,,,why is the ball so big?
Billy: Size of ball depend on size of man's head...big head, big ball, little head, little ball. This Bashki man, big damn head.

Please GHQ don't force me to buy Adler.

[Thunder]

Moan...............

jk, I think it would be great if this happened. However it may not be as easy for GHQ as it sounds. It looks like they have master and production molds made and in production designed for the sets we already have available for purchase. It would be a challenge for GHQ to stop using the current production molds which are still good and paid for, model new figures and use existing ones where they can, create new masters, and create new production molds, and start casting these as a new item that would directly compete with something they already are selling. So, I'd guess this won't happen, but could happen on new designs like US paras for example should they make these. In the end, I would like to see 8ball's suggestion go into action, but am not holding my breath.

[Pitfall]

Why not recast the infantry? GW has done it several times and people buy the plastic minis for three to four times what a pack of 50 micro scale infantry cost.

I, for one, would buy a new sets of infantry if the quality was as good and represented more options for 1:1 basing.

[IRON FIST]

I agree more infantry. Redo some of the early packs, Germans, U.S. Russians with 81mm mortars, bazookas and Russians with rifles and anti-tank rifles. Branch out more into the Axis Eastern front allies, Romanian, Hungarian, Slovak infanrty packs with heavy weapons.

[jb]

Moan...............

jk, I think it would be great if this happened. However it may not be as easy for GHQ as it sounds. It looks like they have master and production molds made and in production designed for the sets we already have available for purchase. It would be a challenge for GHQ to stop using the current production molds which are still good and paid for, model new figures and use existing ones where they can, create new masters, and create new production molds, and start casting these as a new item that would directly compete with something they already are selling. So, I'd guess this won't happen, but could happen on new designs like US paras for example should they make these. In the end, I would like to see 8ball's suggestion go into action, but am not holding my breath.

You're right,it won't be easy. But this is the first place they come to,to realise what it takes to make the customer happy. So far the consensus on this thread is about the packaging of the infantry. As a matter of fact I think it also would satisfy some concerns about the FoW thread.
As for competing with itself, GHQ has the best infantry out there,and we really don't have a much of a choice on getting high quality elsewhere. So yes they would be doing that...for a little while.
As for it not happening I wish GHQ would say something about it either way. That would be nice...then I could breath,because this has got me holding my breath!

[Zeppelin]

I would join with others in voicing support for improved infantry packs. Along that line, I would recommend a couple other offerings that would definitely open up wargaming different periods as well.

Thanks to GHQ, most of the vehicles are available for wargaming some of the wars after WW2. However, infantry lack. Recommendations:

1- Korean War. Needed: US infantry with flak jackets (WW2 US can be used for the earlier part of the war); Chinese infantry; North Korean Infantry. (South korean troops can be represented with WW2 US troops). Oh, it wouldn't hurt to have British Infantry in battle jerkins, either.

2- Middle East Wars- Egyptian/Syrian infantry of 1956-73; Israeli Infantry for same period.

3- Pakistan/Indian Conflicts.

I feel that adding to these lines would then be sufficient to game just about any modern conflict thanks to what GHQ has done over the last couple of years.

Now if I could just convince GHQ to add to the exisitng modern aircraft and micronaut lines...

Best regards,
Zeppelin

[ltcconard]

I would be happy to see infantry that is closer to the vehicle scale. The Artillery crews are OK, but the Vietnam Infatnry is HUGE, and one can't use it in conjunction with the artillery -- or with their other infantry. So much for the promise of a "constant scale."

It is difficult to find designers to do high detail, and correct scale, look at the members of this forum that complain about the rifles the infantry are armed with. Ankles are even more of a problem.

I wish they would have gone further with their grouped figures -- not the guys standing at attention, but the heavy weapons packs. The US BAR teams are good, nearly in scale (good enough for me!) and quite well done. i wish they would have dome a Soviet team as good as those.

No, I'm not giving up on GHQ, but, from time to time I get frustrated.

[8ball]

So far the consensus on this thread is about the packaging of the infantry. As a matter of fact I think it also would satisfy some concerns about the FoW thread.

Good point jb. It's a great place forGHQ to start.

Also, doing a full court press to promote infantry might actually expand the hobby. There are a lot of 10-15mm guys out there that like infantry oriented action. GHQ infantry is of higher quality. Give those guys comparable variety and many will make the jump.

[av8rmongo]

Just to inject some naval flavor to this... It would be awesome if GHQ could address holes in their modern 1/2400 line by looking at the historic engagement that happened nearly 25 years ago. The conflict over the Fakland Islands was the first truly modern naval war that put to the test all the theories of Mahan, Corbett and le Juene Ecole. Unlimited / Limited warfare, Fleets in Being they're all in there. It would be great to see a line of aircraft; skyhawks, mirages, daggers etc. to represent the Argies. And of course the ships are woefully under represented.

The fact that GHQ doesn't have them on their list for next year indicates that either they missed the silver anniversary connection or they don't think gamers care about wars they actually witnessed. To my mind GHQ missed the boat once already when Clash of Arms released their update to South Atlantic War at about the 20 year anniversary point. GHQ could have made a killing if they had timed the appropriate product releases to coincide with that scenario book.

Paul

[Thomaso827]

I'll add my $0.02 worth - need M-50 Ontos and the early model Cobras to fill out the Vietnam era field, and while I really like the Vietnam era troops, I was a bit surprised not to see any M-79s in the mix. I will probably modify the shotgun armed figures to use as grenadiers. Otherwise, I like. NVA need a light mortar in their weapons mix like there is in the US mix. I agree with the earlier posts on LMGs as standing in an "assault" pose rather than all prone. Also, when I made up an NVA company at 1=1, I ran out of leaders before running out of squads, using up all the knealing leaders from 2 regular packs and the heavy weapons pack, but have little use for the number of snipers included in the heavy weapons pack. That would be a good place to make some changes.

Thanks for the opportunity to add to the list.

[Mickel]

Well... after some consideration... a re-worked M-48. The new M-60 model looks fantastic, and I'm sure the same could be done for the M-48. There are lots of places they have been - Pakistan ('65 & '71), Vietnam, NATO, the Middle East. I'd be inclined to make one pack with 105s and another with 90mm, only because you're not likely to mix them within a force.

This beat out the M-75, M-59 and AMX-VCI, but only because they all have the same reason for wanting them and I couldn't choose!

Can't say I'm disagreeing with anything that is said about the squadies. The nice thing is that it's not actually remoulding - it's adding more (additional weapons and poses) and repackaging. One platoon per pack is the ideal way to go. If you use a platoon per base that's not going to prove a problem either, since they tend to be less fussy about what's on each base.

[ShortRound70]

I'll throw my hat into the infantry rework ring as well. Both Modern and WW2. I'm still fleshing out the infantry for my MEU (Modern). Platoon style packs,as mentioned by several above would be great to work with. So would "Command Packs" and "Weapons Platoon Packs". There are just too many of some figures and not enough of others in all the sets I've purchased. That doesn't mean I'll stop using GHQ, just venting. We also need artillery crews for all eras/guns. WW2 US Paras & Marines have been overlooked for too long. ETO USA infantry do not look like PTO US Marines. Also, as posted earlier, revised infantry packs could appeal to the FoW community. Thanks for letting me vent.
S/F
SR70

[Ben]

While there are several items that I would prefer to see (with good cases for each), the one that is most justifiable is the CV90.

Reasons:
1) CV90, in its multiple variants, is already in service or on order with 6 western countries (Sweden, Switzerland, Netherlands, Norway, Finland and Denmark), with more than 1,100 being built.
2) As an MICV, CV90s will always appear on the battleboard, unlike artillery, most Corps assets, or fast moving aircraft.
3) Many of CV90's users have earmarked their vehicles for expeditionary use, which means that we'll actually see them in hotspots like Africa.
4) The business case for making a 1/285 scale CV90 makes sense:

• a) There is virtually no competition for a CV90 model. Only Heroics-Ros makes one and it is a particularly poor model.
  b) Customers do not buy 1 or 2 packs of MICVs (like AAA, SAMs, artiller, etc); they buy companies and battalions of vehicles.
  c) Just like Stryker, each of the variants ends up being a relatively simple mod to the base chassis - more sales with less initial design effort.

Steve

Have to second this, the CV-90 would be a very good addition for the modern line.

...and the Challenger ARRV, Warrior MRRV/MCRV, Foden IMMLC and M-3 Amphibious Ferry/Bridge as well .

Cheers Ben

[8ball]

The Infantry issue was actually brought up over on the Miniatures Page this Morning by a newbie. RCT sent them over here, to this discussion.

Though it's only one person, it's good to see an opinion from someone outside of our inner circle.

[modwar64]

1:1 scale platoon packs is a great idea. I too feel your pain on having too many of one type of figure and not enough of another. While you can swap extra figures with other gamers it usually ends up with everybody being short of the same types of figures.

A lesson can be learned from how Navwar aka Heroics & Ros does their infantry. Each spare has the appoximent number of figures with the necessary weapons to fill out a squad/section. This goes for support weapons and command sections also. The quality of Navwar miniatures is by no means equal to GHQ but their figure mix packaging is better.

Also, South Africans would be a great addition to the GHQ line. Ratel APC's with 20mm and 90mm turrets along with the Oliphant MBT would provide the necessary vehicles to field the most common SA units. Since the turrets are what makes one Ratel APC different form another GHQ could produce one Ratel APC pack containing five hulls and a mix of 20mm and 90mm turrets similar to what is already done with the AML 60/90.

Finally, since there seems to be a trend toward historical modern, such as Vietnam and the Arab/Israeli wars it would be great to see additional aircraft such as the Mig17, Mig19, Mig21 and Mirage III.

Just more food for thought.

Thank you,

Tony