Infantry Suggestion while shaking my head

[voltigeur]

Since I may not be able to resist some statements that might be construed as criticism I’ll start on a positive note.
First WOW! The truss bridges are great and I need to get them on my shopping list ASAP! I like the bombed out Mid East buildings as well. I urge everyone to check out the new items.
I really wish that the US infantry would be reworked to the quality of the Germans, Russians, Brits and Poles? The 3 things that show up on Infantry is the head gear, weapon and foot wear. Everything else can be fudged at this scale. (For example you can paint the Bush Warriors as Soviet Special Forces.) Unless someone get a magnifying glass you can’t tell the difference on the game table.
I am thrilled with the US Paratroopers! (Not only will I buy enough for a company but it would get me back into WW2 gaming. But the American line is so under developed! Why they are not being redeveloped like the obscure troops (Poles, Romanians etc.) is making me shake my head. Not having a 2 man bazooka team modeled for the Mech Infantry or the 30 cal machine gun. I just don’t understand. There is also opportunity for Marines with a different mix of weapons for bunker busting the Japanese. While regulation uniform at this scale differs little from the Army the un-bloused trousers would be a nice touch.
There are so many infantry lines where the figures will work for soooo many different armys. A pro western Bush Warrior opens the African wars of the 60’ and 70’s. They can double as SAS in Malaysia. Plus a plethora of banana republics.
I can’t help but shake my head at the 47 line. Who lobbied for this? Was it on the forum? I will admit I stop reading the wish lists after page 3 but I don’t remember this on the forum. Who got the inside track on this one?

Anyway off to place my order. Still a happy if bewildered customer.

[DrBig]

I can’t help but shake my head at the 47 line. Who lobbied for this? Was it on the forum? I will admit I stop reading the wish lists after page 3 but I don’t remember this on the forum. Who got the inside track on this one?

Anyway off to place my order. Still a happy if bewildered customer.

The only statement released is that it's happening this winter. We are all confused

[Ritter]

Cama you Canuck bugger - I knew it was you! (We Canadians can call each other whatever we like - no offence taken!)

But seriously, I agree with you...47...who...?...when...?...where...?...why...?

Troy

[Cav Dog]

The only thing I can think of is that somebody at GHQ has been reading some alternative history and decided that it would be a cool subject to get into. After all, I'm sure the folks there are gamers as well and if you can get your business to make the minis you want more affordable and practical through economies of scale...

I'm jealous.

Doesn't mean I'll start gaming what I see is essentially sci-fi though.

[DrBig]

only thing I can think of is that somebody at GHQ has been reading some alternative history and decided that it would be a cool subject to get into.

I hope not, that's the death sentence for any company.

Perhaps it's bait for PC gamers. They like to do the late WW2 onwards so they can have legions of King Tigers rolling towards Vladivostok

[Timothy OConnor]

Since I may not be able to resist some statements that might be construed as criticism I’ll start on a positive note.

I'm with you.

My biggest concern is the Weird War II project (aka Wermacht 1947).

GHQ's professional military and historical/current affairs-oriented customers can't simulate ongoing and very likely near-future conflicts. But GHQ has decided to committ resources to address the market opportunity for...fictional post-war German forces?

I suppose all miniatures companies go through these phases and hopefully GHQ will weather this one from a business perspective. Or maybe there really is a huge, untapped market demand for alternate history post-war Germans in 6mm. That's news to me and our local gamers, but who knows? Maybe the failure of alternate history games such as Crimson Skies, Tannhauser, etc., etc. were flukes.

Tim

[Panzerleader71]

"GHQ's professional military and historical/current affairs-oriented customers can't simulate ongoing and very likely near-future conflicts. But GHQ has decided to committ resources to address the market opportunity for...fictional post-war German forces? "

Not sure what is meant by this statement. Are you saying that theoretical modern scenarios are being denied on this site?

I think where the '47 line comes from is the interest in a very early WW3 scenarios. I think there was some interest a while back about having Pershings and Tigers going head-to-head with the Russian heavies of the time. I have to admit that I would find such a game very intriguing.

[Timothy OConnor]

"GHQ's professional military and historical/current affairs-oriented customers can't simulate ongoing and very likely near-future conflicts. But GHQ has decided to committ resources to address the market opportunity for...fictional post-war German forces? "

Not sure what is meant by this statement. Are you saying that theoretical modern scenarios are being denied on this site?

I wouldn't describe Iraq, Lebanon, Chenya, and North Africa as theoretical conflicts. Nor would the soldiers and civilians actually fighting there!

The "site" is not in question, the product offering is. That being the case, one can't game these (actual) conflicts since the products don't exist in 6mm (whether from GHQ or any other mfg at this time.)

I think where the '47 line comes from is the interest in a very early WW3 scenarios. I think there was some interest a while back about having Pershings and Tigers going head-to-head with the Russian heavies of the time. I have to admit that I would find such a game very intriguing.

I think someone else questioned the inspirational source of the sci-fi/alternate history 1947 line. As you note, one could game 1947 with the existing products (ie Pershings, Tigers, and Russian post-war tanks already in the catalog.)

I'm only questioning the allocation of design and production resources to a sci-fi/alternate history post-war conflict with a very limited scope for scenarios (unless GHQ intends to do a complete alternate history line stretching from 1947 to 2007!)

But maybe GHQ is allocating design and prodection resources that have nothing to do with their historicals and this new science fiction/alternate history line is a different entity. But even then I suppose one might question the allocation of $$$ to such an endeavour when gaping holes remain in GHQ's historical product line.

I guess I've always thought of GHQ as a historical miniatures company and maybe the shock of them moving into sci-fi alternate history has taken me off guard. After all, such alternate history books are indeed in the sci-fi section of the book store (I do enjoy sci-fi books).

When researching scenarios for use with GHQ miniatures I'm used to looking at military history books (eg the Russian General Staff's AARs on the Soviet-Afghan war), current affairs magazines and books, and web sites along those lines, not the book store section with "The Hobbit" and "The Dragon Riders of Pern"!


On the other hand, if there really is a significant market for 6mm, post war sci-fi/alternate history miniatures, and that marker is large enough to be profitable for GHQ, then I say do it to make GHQ stronger! But I would caution them with this thought: sales of DP9's WWII alternate history game, GearKrieg, were so weak they now only cast to order.

[Doug B]

I'm only questioning the allocation of design and production resources to a sci-fi/alternate history post-war conflict with a very limited scope for scenarios (unless GHQ intends to do a complete alternate history line stretching from 1947 to 2007!)

Hmmm.... I've gamed NATO vs WARPAC often enough, but that would fall under "alternate history" too I suppose.

In any event we have all got our own pet ideas of what is a vital gap in GHQ's line so I think their doing well to have 90% of us happy 90% of the time (Another Sherman but no Nationalist Chinese Infantry?!? C'mon, there were millions of them fighting the Japanese and then the PLA for over a decade.... but I digress ) Maybe the powers that be have had input other than through this forum? Local gaming groups in MN, letters/emails, who knows? Obviously enough to already expend time in planning and development to get to this point.

I suppose all miniatures companies go through these phases and hopefully GHQ will weather this one from a business perspective.

If GHQ can't make $$ off of this we'll know because the line won't develop after 2009. There are too many geeks like us to let them go belly-up over one mistake in judgement.

[voltigeur]

Hmmm.... I've gamed NATO vs WARPAC often enough, but that would fall under "alternate history" too I suppose.

True but it was assumed to be the next big war and the weapons used and modeled actually existed and had either been used in combat or were thourghly tested and operational.

(Another Sherman but no Nationalist Chinese Infantry?!? C'mon, there were millions of them fighting the Japanese and then the PLA for over a decade.... but I digress

Another example that has me shaking my head. There are 1941 Marican infantry, LRPS to add to the Vietnam line and the list goes on.

I to hope it is successful but still in shock.

[zaevor2000]

As a long time customer I hope that GHQ focuses on miniatures for conflicts that are/can happen now (and can be sold to large customers such as the army).

I can't see the US Army and other large customers investing money in miniatures for 1947 for purely fictitious battles involving fictitious forces...however, I can easily see them purchasing large amounts of miniatures that help them game such things as anti-terrorist activities, convoy protection in Afghanistand and Iraq, and insurgent warfare throughout the world.

This is a big, gaping gap that exists NOW. After this gap has been filled, then I think would be the time to allocate resources to purely fictional scenarios. Besides, the miniatures are already in place to game out 1947 scenarios since the forces that would be used are already part of the product line.

Resources are precious, I don't want to see a company I've bought over 2,000 minis from go out of business from pursuing a niche that is very limited in scope with limited market appeal in comparison with what could be produced.

It sounds as if many long-term customers share this viewpoint. They are not mentioning this just to make waves, it is because WE CARE very much about a company many of us have grown up with and supported for many years.

I'm not saying the 1947 forces don't have their place in the sun, just that other items in the product line would be much more profitable at this point in time and would produce a much higher ROI (return on investment) since as a company it has to be profitable to stay in business.

Frank

[DAK]

GHQ has been around a long time and I really don't think the 1947 line will make them go under. I'm certain plenty of thought has gone into the matter and there are enough people that have expressed an interest in it to make it worth their while. Like someone had mentioned earlier NATO vs the Warsaw pact never happened either, but it made great what if gaming. I think once it gets up and going there will be more interest in it than you think. Just my 2 cents.

[jb]

...Like someone had mentioned earlier NATO vs the Warsaw pact never happened either...

but it DID HAPPEN in the fact that the vehicles and weapons systems were more than mere draft table ideas, and the actual units WERE poised and in position...

[jb]

...Like someone had mentioned earlier NATO vs the Warsaw pact never happened either...

but it DID HAPPEN in the fact that the vehicles and weapons systems were more than mere draft table ideas, and the actual units WERE poised and in position...

[jb]

... Like someone had mentioned earlier NATO vs the Warsaw pact never happened either, but it made great what if gaming...

...Like someone had mentioned earlier NATO vs the Warsaw pact never happened either...

but it DID HAPPEN in the fact that the vehicles and weapons systems were more than mere draft table ideas, and the actual units WERE poised and in position...