April 2010 New Releases

[Turk]

This discussion had me thinking about 'gameable' battles in Iraq where irregulars stood and fought rather than took pot shots and hid in the populace. The best example I can think of took place in Diyala a few years ago. This would make an outstanding wargame, because of the many types of forces involved. During this 2 month long campaign, the 'good guys' deliberately cleared the heavily vegetated Diyala River northeast of Baghdad. The majority of AQI forces from both Baghdad and Mosul were seeking shelter in the wooded areas after being forced out of those cities by the surge and they became isolated by US and IA forces. The river was flanked by open desert to the east and west, Shia militia-controlled areas to the south and US-controlled Baquba to the north. Overall, the enemy covered an area of about 15 km north to south and about 300-800 meters on either side of the river east and west. The actually firepower that could be brought to bear on the palm groves was limited due to the Iraqi governments concern about destroying the (apparently) valuable trees. The actual clearing operations could be broken in to about 6 phases centered on villages in the palm groves. About 400 AQI, armed with small arms, RPGs, various mortars, HMGs, and some skilled snipers, had spent years placing IEDs and building bunkers in the area. Friendly forces involved a Stryker RSTA squadron, a Stryker Infantry battalion (squadron), a Paladin Battery, 2 IA BDEs each with 3-4 battalions of Iraqi Army troops in HMMWVs (and their advisers in MRAPs), an IA BMP-1 BN, a company of T-55s and T-72's (about one platoon of each), a BDE of 3 Iraqi National Police battalions (in HMMWVs and 'technicals'), a Bradely Task Force, lots of route clearance assets, and of course plenty of air support (ranging from Apaches to B-1B's). The operation was commanded by an Iraqi Division commander with close coordination with US commanders. The enemy was forced to stand and fight in many areas and the number of civilians in the area was extremely small. A single engagement over the course of this operation could include 1-2 BMP1 companies, a Stryker company (+), US route clearance forces, 1-2 IA Infantry BNs (each with an adviser element in MRAPs to control fires), a National Police BN and US air and artillery support. It wouldn't be as complex as an urban fight where the enemy can transition from combatant to non-combatant in a matter of seconds. It would probably be a lot for fun playing it at home than it was in real life.

[Theodore]

And if GHQ ever actually makes the 2 percent of the figures missing from their catalog to fight actions in Iraq, then we will all have to buy Strykers, Paladins, 3-4 battalions of Iraqi Army troops in HMMWVs, MRAPs, BMP-1s, T-55s, T-72's, HMMWVs and 'technicals', Bradleys, route clearance assets, and plenty of air support to fight them.

We'll see if our patience works or if we will just be the last people to choose between fighting the same cold war scenarios we moved beyond in the 80s or put our microarmor up on e-bay to those who do.

It is unfortunate that we have to chose between fighting Fulda Gap or Fuldagapistan if we want to remain in the hobby.

[Timothy OConnor]

We'll see if our patience works or if we will just be the last people to choose between fighting the same cold war scenarios we moved beyond in the 80s or put our microarmor up on e-bay to those who do.

I haven't gone quite that far (yet). But I did put my 6mm Afraqistan moderns project on the shelf. Simply didn't make sense with so few irregulars to choose from.

Instead of spending my hobby dollars with GHQ they went to companies that make 25/30mm near future and sci-fi troops. IT's actually easier to do COIN games using Sci-Fi figures than with GHQ figures!

The people happiest with GHQ's Fulda-Gap Inertia Problem? Competitors making moderns in other scales!

What's so ironic is that GHQ had the only complete line of Stryker vehicles for some time but no real-world enemies for them (I believe some are in Afghanistan but they've seen a lot of combat in Iraq).

Meanwhile competitors in larger scales are rolling out more Strykers AND decent opponents.

But hey, at lest we have those fantasy WWII German vehicles!

[Belisarius]

As a huge follower of history (which is why Micro Armor appeals to me in the first place, vs. Warhammer 40K or more popular tabletop games), I feel like correcting the false notion that nearly all (or even most) conflicts in the past 30 years have been fought in the Middle East. Here is a list of medium-high intensity conflicts from 1980-present, organized by region. We'll begin with the Middle East (and I'll include stuff that began before 1980 but continued at least into the 80s). Also, I'm not going to include the Cold War proper, nor am I including the Korean War (which technically never ended).

Middle East
1975-1990 Lebanese Civil War
1978-present Afghan Civil War
1979-1989 Soviet War in Afghanistan
1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War
1982 1982 Lebanon War
1987-1991 First Intifada
1990-1991 Gulf War
1992-1997 Civil War in Tajikistan
1993 1993 Lebanon War
1994 Civil War in Yemen
1994-1997 Iraqi Kurdish Civil War
1996 1996 Lebanon War
2000-2005 Second Intifada
2001-present War in Afghanistan
2003-present War in Iraq
2004-present War in Northwest Pakistan (aka Pakistan-Taliban War)
2004 Operation Rainbow
2004-2010 Sa'dah Insurgency (actually a civil war in Yemen)
2006 2006 Israel-Gaza War
2006 2006 Lebanon War
2006-present Palestinian Civil War (aka Fatah-Hamas War)
2008-2009 Gaza War

And now, Europe.
1968-1998 The Troubles
1988-1994 Nagorno-Karabakh War
1989 Romanian Revolution
1991 Ten-Day War
1991-1992 1991 South Ossetia War
1991-1995 Croatian War of Independence
1991-1995 Georgian Civil War
1992 War in Transnistria
1992-1995 Bosnian War
1994-1996 First Chechen War
1997 Lottery Uprising
1998 War in Abkhazia
1998-1999 Kosovo War (most likely where the Irregular Infantry are depcited)
1999 Russian Invasion of Dagestan
1999-2009 Second Chechen War
2007-present Civil War in Ingushetia
2008 2008 South Ossetia War

Wow... not TOO smaller than the Middle East.

North and South America
1960-1996 Guatemalan Civil War
1976-1983 The Dirty War
1980-1992 Salvadoran Civil War
1980-2000 Peruvian Civil War
1981 Paquisha War
1982 Falklands War
1983 Invasion of Grenada
1989-1990 Invasion of Panama
1995 Cenepa War
2004 2004 Haitian Rebellion
2006-present Mexican Drug War

Wow! A smaller list than Europe? At least there hasn't been a huge demand for Colombian drug cartel figures. >_<

Asia
1968-1989 Communist Insurgency War in Malaysia
1975-1989 Cambodian-Vietnamese War
1976-2005 Aceh Rebellion
1983-2009 Sri Lanka Civil War
1984-present Siachen War
1987-1988 Thai-Laotian Border War
1996-2006 Nepalese Civil War
1999 Kargil War
2004-present South Thailand Insurgency (only included cause it currently equals
the death toll in Iraq)
2006 Operation Astute

Wow. Also not very long. So then, the Middle East is still #1. Who's going to dethrone it? Why, of course, who else but the continent everybody forgets and nobody seems to care about?

Africa
1961-1991 Eritrean War of Independence
1966-1989 South African Border War
1966-1988 Namibian War of Independence
1973-1991 Western Sahara War
1974-1991 Ethiopian Civil War
1975-2002 Angolan Civil War
1977-1992 Mozambican Civil War
1978-1987 Chadian-Libyan War (aka The Toyota War cause of all the technicals)
1979-1982 First Chadian Civil War
1980-1981 Second Eritrean Civil War
1981-1986 Ugandan Bush War
1982 1982 Ethiopia-Somalia Border War
1983-2005 Second Sudanese Civil War
1985 Agacher Strip War
1987-2009 Lord's Resistance Army War
1989-1991 Mauritania-Senegal Border War
1989-1996 First Liberian Civil War
1990-1993 Rwandan Civil War
1990-1995 Tuareg Rebellion
1990-2006 Casamance War
1991-1994 Djiboutian Civil War
1991-2002 Sierra Leone Civil War
1991-2002 Algerian Civil War

I could technically stop here as the list is now longer than the Middle East, but I continue...

1991-present Somalian Civil War (arrrr!! Here there be pirates, if you play Micronauts)
1993-2005 Burundi Civil War
1996-1997 First Congo War
1997-1999 Republic of Congo Civil War
1998-2002 Second Chadian Civil War
1998-2000 Eritrea-Ethiopia War
1998-2003 Second Congo War
1998-1999 Guinea-Bissau Civil War
1999-2003 Second Liberian Civil War
1999-2007 Ituri War
2002-2007 Ivorian Civil War
2003-2009 Darfur War
2004-2007 Central African Republic Bush War
2004-2009 Kivu War
2005-present Third Chadian Civil War
2006-present War in Somalia
2008 2008 Invasion of Anjouan
2008 Djiboutian-Eritrean Border War

[Belisarius]

Sorry for breaking this into 2 parts but I had issues submitting it all as one large post.

So anyways, the total figures are:

Asia - 10
The Americas - 11
Europe - 17
Middle East - 22
Africa - 41

On a percentage basis, this works out as follows:

Asia - 9.9%
The Americas - 10.9%
Europe - 16.8%
Middle East - 21.8%
Africa - 40.6%

So there. Only 21.8% of wars fought in the last 30 years have been in the Middle East. It's nowhere near anything significant. It's just barely one out of every five wars. Interesting that the Brushfire Warriors aren't insanely popular. There're a lot of modern wargaming scenarios for them. Granted if I did add low-level insurgencies, the list of Middle Eastern Wars would almost double, but Africa's list almost triples (and by low-level insurgencies, I mean small ambushes over the course of several months, years, or decades that claim only a few hundred lives... or elections riots).

Anyways, to sum it all up here, yes GHQ had us thinking one thing when they released something else--even I thought "Irregular Infantry" was going to be more militaristic-outfitted Jihadists. BUT the AK-47 is ridiculously popular, as is pretty much all Soviet-era gear, so Warsaw pact Infantry painted in different shades, mixed with a couple Mujahideen Infantry, Brushfire Warriors, and some Irregular Infantry--maybe even one or two IDF soldiers and an American or two--would definitely create an insurgent force of pretty much any nation, especially the Middle East. All that is missing would be the occasional hat-less civilian with an AK-47 dancing in the streets with a bright-orange life vest (which would of course be a tactical vest painted orange). I do think GHQ should make plain-clothed gun-toting militants (ie, civilians with guns). And when it comes down to price, you might spend $9-$18 more on the infantry packs that are a smaller percentage of my aforementioned mixed infantry (like IDF or US Infantry), but then you have some people to fight the insurgents.

If we're going to ** CENSORED ** about infantry, where the hell is Modern German Infantry when you have a whole section of Modern German equipment?

[Timothy OConnor]

BUT the AK-47 is ridiculously popular, as is pretty much all Soviet-era gear, so Warsaw pact Infantry painted in different shades, mixed with a couple Mujahideen Infantry, Brushfire Warriors, and some Irregular Infantry--maybe even one or two IDF soldiers and an American or two--would definitely create an insurgent force of pretty much any nation, especially the Middle East.

These guys don't look like any of the above...not even CLOSE! You can't be serious.

[Belisarius]

Ah, those guys... As I recall, those guys don't fare very well at all against modern armies. Sure, I guess killing a few American or British soldiers in an all-out assault (compared to the hundreds or thousands they often lose in the process) is a victory for them of sorts. It seems like it wouldn't be a fun campaign to play out though, because it almost always ends with the same side getting brutally raped...

Now, the guys that actually put up a comparable resistance (which leads to a better game in my opinion) would be these guys...

http://theklaxon.com/wp-content/uploads ... -rebel.jpg

http://www.christianworldwideweb.com/la ... ny1995.jpg

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_hrLcZqtw3s8/RJpMI ... 177-ic.jpg

The Chechens.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/200 ... on.600.jpg

Hezbollah. Note those actually are civilians wearing the plain clothes.

http://photos.upi.com/topics-Hamas-Mili ... 15/H_1.jpg

Hamas.

And of course these guys...

http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/05/21/ ... 245109.jpg

The Mujahideen.


All those Al-Qaeda, Syrian, and Lebanese insurgents we fought in major battles, like Fallujah, stood and fought all right... inside buildings. So unless someone starts making buildings with pop-off roofs and fully detailed interiors, the t-shirt, jeans, and shemagh wearing fighters won't be of much use. I suppose that in a wargame, maybe someone could designate that fire is coming from somewhere inside the Middle Eastern Shoppe, after which an infantry squad is removed from the gameboard to denote "fighting inside a structure." And then that same squad comes running out after realizing the insurgent is too-well held up, after which a 105mm round or guided missile will fall on it and solve the problem. Man, it would suck to play as those guys...

So has anybody really purchased an entire Stryker Brigade just to march it down a street and take some pop-shots from a few guys inside of buildings? I would've thought all that desert-themed modern equipment would have been used in real battles like when we fought the Iraqi Republican Guard, who look like this...

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpi ... all5,0.jpg

Granted, some generic civilians (a few with guns--maybe even in the same pack) would be a welcome product in the NEAR future... emphasis on NEAR...

[Panzerleader71]

Oh, I see now! What you want is the proper figures to model a bunch of guys that barely know which end of the rifle the bullet comes out.

[Timothy OConnor]

Ah, those guys... As I recall, those guys don't fare very well at all against modern armies. Sure, I guess killing a few American or British soldiers in an all-out assault (compared to the hundreds or thousands they often lose in the process) is a victory for them of sorts.

Oh, I see now! What you want is the proper figures to model a bunch of guys that barely know which end of the rifle the bullet comes out.

The families of 4,397 American service men and women would probably disagree with you.

And my two little boys who will be in debt to communist China to finance the Iraq war would also disagree.

We managed to completely conquer Japan and Germany in just a few years. Either we're spectacularly incompetent or "those guys" know what they're doing.

[Theodore]

On a percentage basis, this works out as follows:

Asia - 9.9%
The Americas - 10.9%
Europe - 16.8%
Middle East - 21.8%
Africa - 40.6%

....
If we're going to ** CENSORED ** about infantry, where the hell is Modern German Infantry when you have a whole section of Modern German equipment?

GHQ is a wargaming company, not a peacekeeping gaming company, so the Germans are out. In addition their competitors make German infantry so the market has already been saturated.

As for percentages, how many people are gaming obscure African wars between a few squads with machettes? If you look at the PEL for an event like Historicon I bet you could not find ANYbody gaming it. But obviously in scales that want to stay relevant, they are producing figures for wars that are ongoing.

If nobody is buying those Strykers to fight insurgents, then why did GHQ make them? Also I have a hard time seeing any reason to buy them until GHQ makes a single figure for them to fight against. I have heard they are cool to drive, but I haven't seen anybody running NASSTRYKER racing events.

But lets look at the GHQ catalog for percentages, since figures drive sales. When a miniatures company produces figures, it also drives people to buy the figures to fight them. So what percentage of the GHQ miniatures line is involved in those subsaharan African wars? 2%? I mean a few trucks a single pack of T-55s, what else could you possible sell to people looking to game those battles?

So what percentage of GHQ figures and vehicles have been involved in fighting civilian clothed middle eastern insurgents? My best guess in 60-70% Most of the Israeli catalog, most of the US catalog, the Brits likewise, a hodgepodge of gear in Lebanon, in Iraqi and Yemeni hands much of the Soviet equipment has been used, the Saudis have used a wide range of gear to fight the jihadis along the Yemen border.

Ah, those guys... As I recall, those guys don't fare very well at all against modern armies

Which is why you need all those pretty buildings to fight in an urban environment where it is harder to use all that firepower. But I guess GHQ doesn't like giving their customers any more excuse (or motivation) to buy the buildings they spent so much money developing than they want to give us a reason to buy all of their vehicles that have been fielded to fight them.

GHQ royally screwed up when they developed their Iraq line by developing the buildings, civilians, and US forces to fight it without having anyone to fight against. My assumption is that then because they had not provided insurgents no one bought the stuff they had made so they thought it was a dead line. They then ceded the market to other scales who made the insurgents first and then added the bells and whistles.
Had GHQ created the insurgents first, and then added the rest of the stuff the entire history of microarmor's decline and GHQs bottom line would have been entirely different. We'll see if they wise up before it is too late to save the microarmor business or not.

[33YearsGHQ]

Dude (Theodore) you are pretty confident that you know a lot about GHQ and their business model. GHQ hasn't been around for 43 years without knowing what they are doing. Most people can figure out a way to use existing figures as insurgents and the vehicles are what most people want. GHQ continues to crank out World-class releases of a wide variety of subjects. While I have no interest in gaming 1947 scenarios, there must be some market for it. BTW - since you have skipped purchasing many items due to lack of insurgents, I have picked up the slack. GHQ has "suckered" me into purchasing 25,000+ vehicles; over 5,000 ships and 1,500 aircraft - not to mention hundreds of ACW and Napoleonics packs. All that being said, I hope that GHQ gives you what you want with their "Insurgents" that will be released later this summer.

[Panzerleader71]

"All that being said, I hope that GHQ gives you what you want with their "Insurgents" that will be released later this summer."

Amen. Or, we'll never hear the end of it.

[voltigeur]

The main reason you don’t see insurgents is that people do not want to game an insurgency. I’m currently reading the Army Handbook on Counter Insurgency Warfare. Many actions of an insurgent force are “no winâ€￾ situations tactically and real life insurgents know it. Operations are often taken to gain psychological influence on a disaffected population.

For example: They will hit weak patrols in various areas then run into the populace while other teams hit another patrol in another sector. All to give the impression they can hit any where any time, making the government look weak and ineffective.
In a stand up fight insurgents get slaughtered. So my question to the Ultra Modern gamer is who is up to be kicked around the table in a hideously unbalanced scenario so they can crow about how many psychology points they got with a fictional population? Plus a 3 to 5 man LRP, SEAL, SF team doesn’t last very long on a table if your opponent knows they are there.

It is my experience that war gamers like set piece battles with a clear winner and loser. That is why Napoleonic’s and the Civil War is still a leading period in the hobby. The Fulda / NATO vs. WARPAC are still popular because it was going to be a set piece battle!

GHQ has to determine what will sell. And set piece battles sell.
I to; want insurgents and a much larger infantry line. I remember decade after decade of not having good infantry in this line. I love gaming the cold war and want to build scenarios outside of Europe.

I would like to see you do a second version of the Bush Warriors with Western Weapons (Like the FN-FAL Rifle and Belgian light machine guns, Carl Gustav Light Anti tanks weapon. Then do the new regulars with Soviet weapons. You would with 2 packs close so many holes in the infantry line, I think a lot of progress with little effort.

Anyway my NSHO (Not so humble opinion)

[CG1]

And to think there are people out there who reject 1/285 scale as too small to see any details!

[Theodore]

And to think there are people out there who reject 1/285 scale as too small to see any details!

Anyways, to sum it all up here, yes GHQ had us thinking one thing when they released something else--even I thought "Irregular Infantry" was going to be more militaristic-outfitted Jihadists. BUT the AK-47 is ridiculously popular, as is pretty much all Soviet-era gear, so Warsaw pact Infantry painted in different shades, mixed with a couple Mujahideen Infantry, Brushfire Warriors, and some Irregular Infantry--maybe even one or two IDF soldiers and an American or two--would definitely create an insurgent force of pretty much any nation, especially the Middle East. All that is missing would be the occasional hat-less civilian with an AK-47 dancing in the streets

Details,who needs details, surely and Isreali soldier, US soldier, Afghan, Soviet, and Warsaw Pact soldier are indiscernable at this scale.

Some of us bored ot set piece battles when we saw they were so one sided after Desert Storm. Our enemies bored of them too which is why the fights with Saddam's Fedayeen were better battles than the fights with his Republican Guard in 2003.

A lot of the disinterest in infantry was driven by the lack of infantry in the old days. Bought one pack of the old parade ground infantry when Reagan was President and they still aren't painted yet. SO I switched to cardboard counters because they didn't look any worse. Eventually through attending cons and other stores I found CinCs infantry and switched to them, but their broken ankles led me to H&R and then Main Force. So it is not that people don't buy infantry, it was simply that for 40 years GHQs customers had no choice but to buy someone else's infantry. But with the end of conventional combined arms force on force warfare following Desert Storm, the infantry became more important. GHQ finally began making their individual infantry so I started to buy them but they still sit in their blisters waiting for someone to fight.

VOltiguer, people clearly want to game an insurgency the figures just don't exist to do so in 1/285. SO people are gaming it in other scales. Until the last years push of plastic figures, the only market that seemed to be growing was figures and vehicles for insugent fighting but in 15, 20. and 25 mm scale since the micromanufacturers abandoned the market for modern warfare. Well maybe not abandonded it, they invested tens of thousands of dollars to create vehicles to fight the insurgency and no one to fight. IF no one wants t fight Iraq scenarios, why does GHQ make all those vehicles that are only used to fight insurgents in Iraq?
It seems people's unwillingness to accept insurgent warfare as a key gaming market is purely based on their having no clue about the fighting that has occured in Iraq, Gaza, and Lebanon. The insurgents field small teams to do hit and run, then we field Brigades and go hunt them down in their safe areas where thousands of insurgents make a stand. THere have been several where the insurgents lost more than 1000 KIA, how many of those African battle havea hundred?