This is the thread to do all of your discussing/lobbying for your choice on the Modern New Release vote. You only get one vote, and it can't be changed. If you feel strongly about one, get active here, and convince others that it would be a great thing to get! Please keep friendly.
To vote go to this thread:
http://www.ghqmodels.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5874
Thank you for your support,
GHQ
Discussion thread for "Vote for a Modern Release"
Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1
-
GHQ
- Site Admin
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:50 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Discussion thread for "Vote for a Modern Release"
Last edited by GHQ on Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
7.62
- E5
- Posts: 1883
- Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:52 am
OK FOLKS IT IS UP TO US NOW!
The poll seems to be slipping down the list ie when you vote it may not stay on the top posting.
So log in (must log in to vote), find the poll "vote for a modern new release" and do your bit.
Best of luck to all.
Mick.
EDIT. forget that it has been made a sticky at the top.
Cheers Mick.
The poll seems to be slipping down the list ie when you vote it may not stay on the top posting.
So log in (must log in to vote), find the poll "vote for a modern new release" and do your bit.
Best of luck to all.
Mick.
EDIT. forget that it has been made a sticky at the top.
Cheers Mick.
Last edited by 7.62 on Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Donald M. Scheef
- E5
- Posts: 1629
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:24 am
- Location: Waukegan, Illinois USA
-
Hoth_902
- E5
- Posts: 1538
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:08 am
- Location: Pacific Northwest
- Contact:
I am torn between stowage and the Uparmoured Challenger 2. I know these were not popular choices, but its up to the Group now.
I hope everyone, that is a member, votes and makes this a success. Even if my choice does not win, I like being apart of the process and love this aspect of a small company. It shows a great appreciation for the customer. Lets return the favor with a huge group participation. Thanks GHQ for this opportunity.
I hope everyone, that is a member, votes and makes this a success. Even if my choice does not win, I like being apart of the process and love this aspect of a small company. It shows a great appreciation for the customer. Lets return the favor with a huge group participation. Thanks GHQ for this opportunity.
-
AllenRockwell
- E5
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:47 am
- Location: Palm Springs, CA USA
- Contact:
I'm glad to see the M60A2 on the list,,, I have 5 of them that I bought in the 1980s and I'd like a few more.
I'm very surprised to not see civilian vehicles on the list.
I'm very surprised to not see civilian vehicles on the list.
Allen Rockwell
Owner, GameCraft Miniatures
GHQ Fanatic since 1978
My Micro Armor Blog www.allensmicroarmor.com
Owner, GameCraft Miniatures
GHQ Fanatic since 1978
My Micro Armor Blog www.allensmicroarmor.com
-
pmskaar
- E5
- Posts: 2173
- Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:45 am
New Modern Model Vote
Based on what is available I vote for Soviet Cold War Heavy Weapons Pack. This will be a nice addition to the Cold War range.
For Team Yankee and other Cold War era games I would love to see more Cold War infantry done by GHQ. These would be East Germans, West Germans, British, Americans in steel pots with M-16s for 1960s to early 80s with ground mounted TOW launchers, maybe even French.
Pete
For Team Yankee and other Cold War era games I would love to see more Cold War infantry done by GHQ. These would be East Germans, West Germans, British, Americans in steel pots with M-16s for 1960s to early 80s with ground mounted TOW launchers, maybe even French.
Pete
-
CBoy3
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:33 am
When I first saw the list of the choices I was surprised by how heavy it was on cold war, and Sweden. Then I went back and read through the original discussion thread, and it looks like they really did hit the things that were talked about the most. I'm surprised that there weren't any ultra modern things up, but there weren't any really mentioned. I'm happy to see that they are doing this exactly as they said that they would. It's fun to feel like I actually have a say in a model that is coming out.
I haven't voted yet, but the M60A2, West German LARS and the Russian weapons are all calling me. The M60 because they made one before I got into this, and I didn't get a chance to get it, and the other 2 because I see so many people playing Team Yankee in 6mm, and getting more out there makes a lot of sense. How long does the voting stay open? I need to make a decision before it ends!
I haven't voted yet, but the M60A2, West German LARS and the Russian weapons are all calling me. The M60 because they made one before I got into this, and I didn't get a chance to get it, and the other 2 because I see so many people playing Team Yankee in 6mm, and getting more out there makes a lot of sense. How long does the voting stay open? I need to make a decision before it ends!
-
panzergator
- E5
- Posts: 3466
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 3:44 am
My discussion:
The BV 206 is used in interesting places by interesting units, particularly the British Royal Marines, US Marines, too, but it doesn't strike me as a combat vehicle, which doesn't necessarily disqualify it, but it makes it less interesting to me (I do buy trucks, recovery vehicles, and combat support vehicles). I don't see a company of them in the attack or defense, or in my motor pool. I'm sure someone will disagree, but it's a "NO" from me.
Soviet crew-served weapons mentioned in the nominations would be useful for Soviet in-depth defense, an unlikely scenario in Europe during the Cold War. But some folks might look at the Middle East. Soviet-supported countries also used their doctrine and, given an Israeli onslaught, might set up a Soviet in-depth defense, using those crew-served weapons. In the attack, which is what the Soviets were going to be doing in Germany, doesn't slow down enough for the crew-served stuff to be dismounted and employed. Perhaps in mopping up a by-passed area? Or, perhaps, you have a NATO unit that would like to try its luck against it. Good luck! Another "NO," though, for me.
The Stridsvagen 103 is made by Brand-X already, It is a plain model and perhaps on the small side scale-wise, but what is the demand? Yep, it's a neat vehicle, definitely a defensive one, can't fire on the move, meant for ambushes in the mountain fastness of its native land. Marginal at best in the attack. Even late-model M60A1 had add-on stabilization. M60A2s had factory stabilization, although it could not be used with the missile, and with a 1500 meter range on the gun round, well, that's close combat. M60A3s had stabilization and the Tank Thermal Sight, the latter, according to some, being better than the one on the early M1.
This one is a "NO" for me, as well.
I had a reason for suggesting the M48A1 with add-on fuel drums in the back - an interesting model and a challenge to employ. The tank's range (it was a gasser, not diesel) was only 70 miles without the drum, and not much more with'em. It kind of segued out of GHQ's '47 Series, being introduced soon after the M47, which, after all, was a makeshift model, placing turret from another test bed model on a slightly improved M46 chassis. Since it was not selected for voting, it obviously gets a "NO."
The up-armored Challenger II interests me, but I haven't seen anything beyond the current offering by GHQ in the press, so I'm a "NO" on that one, too.
Some of the same things may be said about the M60A2 as the STVGN 103 - best on defense, good for combat in cities and forests (kinda). Limited, only 5 years in service. It's made by Brand X. According to my knowledge, as well as some research, there were only 3 battalions of M60A2s in Germany, two in 3rd AD and one in 7th Corps, I think a 37th Regiment battalion. There may have been a 4th somewhere, but I can't find anything definitive. I currently have three battalions of M60A2s, two of them thanks to the kindness of gentlemen on this forum, who have winkled them out of crevices in stores or on their own back lots, and one of Brand X. I know they had them in Stateside active units, but I'm not sure how many battalions (I used to know, but I'm old and I can't remember) There were just a little over 500 made. I doubt very much they put them in the stocks for REFORGER units, let alone Reserve or National Guard (if anybody knows different, please tell me). There are other priorities in the Gator State right now, but sentimentally (I had an A2 platoon), I'm voting "YES" for the M60A2.
The BV 206 is used in interesting places by interesting units, particularly the British Royal Marines, US Marines, too, but it doesn't strike me as a combat vehicle, which doesn't necessarily disqualify it, but it makes it less interesting to me (I do buy trucks, recovery vehicles, and combat support vehicles). I don't see a company of them in the attack or defense, or in my motor pool. I'm sure someone will disagree, but it's a "NO" from me.
Soviet crew-served weapons mentioned in the nominations would be useful for Soviet in-depth defense, an unlikely scenario in Europe during the Cold War. But some folks might look at the Middle East. Soviet-supported countries also used their doctrine and, given an Israeli onslaught, might set up a Soviet in-depth defense, using those crew-served weapons. In the attack, which is what the Soviets were going to be doing in Germany, doesn't slow down enough for the crew-served stuff to be dismounted and employed. Perhaps in mopping up a by-passed area? Or, perhaps, you have a NATO unit that would like to try its luck against it. Good luck! Another "NO," though, for me.
The Stridsvagen 103 is made by Brand-X already, It is a plain model and perhaps on the small side scale-wise, but what is the demand? Yep, it's a neat vehicle, definitely a defensive one, can't fire on the move, meant for ambushes in the mountain fastness of its native land. Marginal at best in the attack. Even late-model M60A1 had add-on stabilization. M60A2s had factory stabilization, although it could not be used with the missile, and with a 1500 meter range on the gun round, well, that's close combat. M60A3s had stabilization and the Tank Thermal Sight, the latter, according to some, being better than the one on the early M1.
This one is a "NO" for me, as well.
I had a reason for suggesting the M48A1 with add-on fuel drums in the back - an interesting model and a challenge to employ. The tank's range (it was a gasser, not diesel) was only 70 miles without the drum, and not much more with'em. It kind of segued out of GHQ's '47 Series, being introduced soon after the M47, which, after all, was a makeshift model, placing turret from another test bed model on a slightly improved M46 chassis. Since it was not selected for voting, it obviously gets a "NO."
The up-armored Challenger II interests me, but I haven't seen anything beyond the current offering by GHQ in the press, so I'm a "NO" on that one, too.
Some of the same things may be said about the M60A2 as the STVGN 103 - best on defense, good for combat in cities and forests (kinda). Limited, only 5 years in service. It's made by Brand X. According to my knowledge, as well as some research, there were only 3 battalions of M60A2s in Germany, two in 3rd AD and one in 7th Corps, I think a 37th Regiment battalion. There may have been a 4th somewhere, but I can't find anything definitive. I currently have three battalions of M60A2s, two of them thanks to the kindness of gentlemen on this forum, who have winkled them out of crevices in stores or on their own back lots, and one of Brand X. I know they had them in Stateside active units, but I'm not sure how many battalions (I used to know, but I'm old and I can't remember) There were just a little over 500 made. I doubt very much they put them in the stocks for REFORGER units, let alone Reserve or National Guard (if anybody knows different, please tell me). There are other priorities in the Gator State right now, but sentimentally (I had an A2 platoon), I'm voting "YES" for the M60A2.
All blessings flow from a good mission statement.
Pogo was right. So was Ike.
"A Gentleman is a man who is only rude intentionally." (Churchill)
Give credit. Take responsibility.
Pogo was right. So was Ike.
"A Gentleman is a man who is only rude intentionally." (Churchill)
Give credit. Take responsibility.
-
Hoth_902
- E5
- Posts: 1538
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:08 am
- Location: Pacific Northwest
- Contact:
Panzergator,
As for the up armored Challenger 2, Not to be confused with the ultra modern one that is produced by GHQ already, there is actually lots of pictures of it in service. This model was used in the second gulf war and for some time after. Don't ask me the years of service, because I have never looked that deep. As for finding pictures, just do a search in google for Challenger 2 or Challenger 2 gulf war. The later one will get you both the up armored challenger 1 and up armored challenger 2.
S-Tank, Always thought that was a neat tank.
To All,
Wouldn't it be awesome if GHQ played us and put all of the selections in for next year. Aaah.. a commander could dream.
As for the up armored Challenger 2, Not to be confused with the ultra modern one that is produced by GHQ already, there is actually lots of pictures of it in service. This model was used in the second gulf war and for some time after. Don't ask me the years of service, because I have never looked that deep. As for finding pictures, just do a search in google for Challenger 2 or Challenger 2 gulf war. The later one will get you both the up armored challenger 1 and up armored challenger 2.
S-Tank, Always thought that was a neat tank.
To All,
Wouldn't it be awesome if GHQ played us and put all of the selections in for next year. Aaah.. a commander could dream.
-
BattlerBritain
- E5
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:00 pm
- Location: Somerset, UK
-
Ben
- E5
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:42 am
- Location: Lehrte, Germany
-
Hoth_902
- E5
- Posts: 1538
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:08 am
- Location: Pacific Northwest
- Contact:
Ben,
When I suggested the Up armored Challenger II, I had this in mind.
Its basically the TES without the RPG grates over the drive sproket and no extra armor on the turret. Below are images to show the differences.
Challenger II
Up Armored Challeger II - My suggestion
Challenger II TES
I know when it comes to modern, there is a lot out there that we need as a community. I can also concede that this version is splitting hairs...However, we all have our favorites and this is one of mine. Besides.. GHQs release list is long, every year, so I am sure there will be lots of other tanks.
When I suggested the Up armored Challenger II, I had this in mind.
Its basically the TES without the RPG grates over the drive sproket and no extra armor on the turret. Below are images to show the differences.
Challenger II
Up Armored Challeger II - My suggestion
Challenger II TES
I know when it comes to modern, there is a lot out there that we need as a community. I can also concede that this version is splitting hairs...However, we all have our favorites and this is one of mine. Besides.. GHQs release list is long, every year, so I am sure there will be lots of other tanks.