Proposals for entirely (mostly) new GHQ line(s)

[lekw]

This is a great discussion. I guess mostly fantasy but still nice to dream. I am going to concentrate on ranges not done in 6mm that I think GHQ would do a great job with:

First like suggested a Russo-Japanese War range would be great. However, I don’t mean ships. Infantry. Nobody makes a full range in 6mm or 10mm or 15mm for that matter. GHQ could do infantry, cavalry and artillery. Maybe expand with some new Asian terrain. This is a fascinating conflict kind of colonial WWI. Very interesting characters and tactical situations. The large armies lend themselves to 6mm.

Second like suggested WWI. However, I would like it in 6mm. Navwar and Irregular make some forces but these are okay at best. Looking at the new WWII and modern GHQ infantry I am sure GHQ can do a much better job. A few additions to tanks and artillery and this would be a great range.

Well just my wish list. I guess its just a dream, but wow I can almost see those massed Japanese marching into entrenched Russian machineguns. Or the vast maneuvers of the Russian front in WWI 6mm.

[LAX_Kev]

My two cents worth on proposed new model lines:
* I liked the suggestions for expanded Modern/Cold War Royal Navy models. Perhaps that could be tied with some US and USSR Cold War micronauts - stuff like FRAM DDs, Kotlins, USS Long Beach, and others beyond the current modern ship collection. Plenty to pick from (certainly more than 10 candidates). Might generate some good sales with the ship crowd (like me).
* At the other end of the century, I liked the suggestion of US warships in their WW1 configuration. Again, more than 10 candidates here: of course the battleships, but there were a few armored cruisers, scout cruisers, and lots of 4-stack DDs. Some sales potential here as well.
* Finally, my pet suggestion for GHQ's newest line: the complete collection of US Navy Battleships. Start with TEXAS and MAINE, and run up thru the Washington Treaty cancellations. We already have the WW2 configurations of the ships that fought in that war - now let's get the cage mast fleet in their "as-built" form. Throw in the LEXINGTON class battlecruisers for good measure too! This line is sure to be a Best Seller!
Kevin

[Laevakutt]

I must agree with LAX Kev. I think that a fleet of "as built" Americans would be very nice. There are actually the Washington Treaty "cancellations" available from Viking Forge. I have both versions of the SOUTH DAKOTAs and the LEXINGTONs from them. They are of higher quality than some of the other Viking Forge offerings. Viking Forge also does a line of "as built" Americans, I do not own any of those though, and cannot vouch for them. They do a TENNESSEE armoured cruiser, but it is of relatively lower quality than one would expect from the rest of their line and GHQ of course. I think that LAX Kev is correct in his evaluation that armoured cruisers should be joined in the line. The PENNSYLVANIAs and even the ST LOUISes would be fantastic.

The Cold War ships would be great too. Again, Viking Forge carries some of these, but there are still huge gaps in the immediate post-War Era. I think that SVERDLOV, CHAPAYEV and EENDRACHT cruisers would add a lot to Second World War fleets to bring on a bit of the immediate post-War tension scnearios to the gaming table. At the moment these ships are only availabl,e in 1/3000. VANGUARD or even angle decked ** CENSORED ** would be very complimentary as well.

I also think that Pre-dreadnought would be fantastic. I have most of the Pre-dreadnought world from NAVWAR. They are 80% the size of GHQ though and therefore of limited value to be mixed with other units from 1/2400 companies. Viking Forge does make enough of the Pre-dreadnought line to satisfy most of the historical scenarios; ie: Russo-Japanese and Spanish-American, however other scenarios are not possible. I do notice that there is a lot of demand for and Anglo-French "could-have-been" war for the Pre-dreadnought Era. Of course this line is carried in 1/3000 by NAVWAR and WTJ, but no one has dabbled in1/2400. I read that WTJ was thinking of it but in the end realistic marketing prevailed and there is only 1/3000 offered.

One thing that I think would really sell would be the Never-weres. I do not mean the typical ones (GHQ already carries anyway). I mean KAGA as a battlecruiser, the Dutch 1047, O-P-Q Class battlecruisers, Second World War LION Class, KRONSHTADT or any of Stalin's other ideas. I think that there would be a strong market for products that allow some imagination in their employment in well-thought hypothetical scenarios.

If the idea is to nurture the hobby, then I think bringing the Never-weres to the fore would add a lot of potential customers. With the right rule set all of those hypothetical discussions that are hashed and re-hashed can be put on the game table and enacted with miniatures.

I do want to stress to our GHQ hosts that I am very appreciative for the naval offerings that are available now. Bravo for the Dutch, Russians and Soviets.

[cbovill]

I'd like to see the never-were's too but right now there are still too many gaps existing involving ships that actually fought battles. We're missing significant cruisers for the Battle of Coronel in 1914 for the existing WWI line. There are many ships to build for the British, Germans, Italians in WWII and some for the IJN and even USN. Then, we come to the only modern naval conflict in the Falklands. It would be nice to have HMS Hermes, the RFA ships, the Argentine navy and then the aircraft that fought on both sides. This is but a sampling of what could expand the potential for gaming actual battles.

[terry]

We need V1 and V2 rockets and launchers

We need the material and items to create objectives, railroad stations, oil refineries, POW camps, airfields etc

[Bull`s eye]

Good idea...V1 and V2... and planes with landing gears and trains and buildings and....and...and...

[SeaHarrier2006]

Don't forget ships Bull's Eye Can never have enough ships and palnes to go on um.

[Bull`s eye]

ok ok, they are allowed to produce some ships too .

[dnichols]

I would like to see 10mm ACW Indian Territory soldiers. The ACW rules have a scenario for the battle of Honey Springs which took place in OK...but no soldiers for Stand Watie in GHQ line-up (hint hint guys).

That would be my preference.

Somebody earlier also suggested 10mm WWI. I have to agree, that would be a fun era to model and game.

[Bull`s eye]

So let me ask: where´s the fun to game WW I ? Perhaps 1914 and 1918 in the west, cause there was a " little bit movement ". But mainly it was a positional warfare in the west, days and days artillery barrage, the frontline nearly immovable. So why WW I?
I hope, GHQ will concentrate on adding missing models in the existing ranges, and not splitting their production and designing capacity too much. To my opinion they should force the production of airplanes ( and yes with landing gears too ), adding ground equipment and buildings like hangars or towers.
Next could be the trains. Modern warfare of 20 century without trains ? Unthinkable
Crossing rivers..but how ? What about the pioneer bridges ?
What about the " civilian " sourroundings for those, who built scenes ?

So there is a lot of work to do GHQ...

[Pitfall]

What's the fun of WWII? Days and weeks of troops travelling from one place to another? The hassle of moving supplies from city to city, while your supply trains are helpless under fire of enemy aircraft? BORNING! Two can be smarmy!

The fun of WWI wargaming would be the assaults and charges. Plus, fighter action and the advent of tank warfare would be interesting to many folks on the board. All wars have periods of boredom, we just choose to recreate the exciting parts.

[SeaHarrier2006]

All wars have boring bits, and excitiong bits. Take WW1 for instance, weeks and months of living in trenches, getting shelled, bombed and sniped at and gased, followed by 10 minutes walking/running towards machine guns, barbed wire and mines, while getting your regiment wiped out. Not really my cup of tea, but each to their own I guess.

Don't get me wrong, my eternal gratitued and admiration goes to those men and women who have faced the terror and horrors of war, right up to the current fighting in the name of freedom and Democracy.

If only our differencies could be solved using the models used for war gaming, instead on what happens at the moment. Oh well one can dream I suppose.

Happy painting to all,

Mark. (SeaHarrier2006)

[Hauptmann6]

So let me ask: where´s the fun to game WW I ? Perhaps 1914 and 1918 in the west, cause there was a " little bit movement ". But mainly it was a positional warfare in the west, days and days artillery barrage, the frontline nearly immovable. So why WW I?

Outside of the west, the war was moderately mobile. Small unit tactics were still used etc etc.

[Bull`s eye]

WW I. Ok. Movement. In the west mainly german offensive 1914 and then the 1918 actions. " Tank warfare " really mainly local, no real tank warefare, " MALES " and " FEMALES " trying to break trough german lines..., some german A7V ..
Mainly trench warfare, infantry assaults, very few changes in frontline-
Artillery, far away, barrage..indeed huge amunition dumps..
Fighter action ( there are already some good WW1 aircraft models )...
Plastine theatre...ok Daradanelles, ok...perhaps east front too...
But the main action, westfront, was very static. And i can`t see the sense of a WWI line.
My advice for GHQ: fill the gaps of long wanted and needed models in the existing range
But that´s everyones own taste. To my opinion it would be a mistake to create new lines instead of completing the existing ones.

And thank you SeaHarrier very much for Your comment