WHEN INDEED, DOES ONE ARMY EQUAL FIVE?
In this day and age of high figure cost and limitations on a person's time, the temptation to substitute is great. However, I feel obligated to take issue with Mr. Hollinger's views. To start, we as Historical Wargamers must ask ourselves: What makes us different from the masses of Fantasy Garners? The answer is obvious, History of course! Careful study and research will show that the differences in Barbarian/Irregular forces is almost as great as those found in regular armies. After all Mr. Hollinger, you wouldn't use Norman Knights to represent Sassanid Clibanarius, would you? The differences between Vikings and Cauls are many and varied. Indeed, each has national characteristics making them unique, and so it should be on a wargames table. What I suggest to Mr. Hollinger, is that Barbarians should be a mixed lot. Hinchliffe, Lamming, Garrison, Ral Partha, to name but a few. All have excellent ranges of Vikings and Gauls. Enough poses can be found in these lines without throwing in "Hell Anything".
Oviously my solution requires more work on the part of the wargamer. Maybe even breaking down and painting during the summer. But again, isn't that what its all about. Without the research, study, and painting time, we would indeed be nothing more than Fantasy Carriers. All they require is an eye for the bizarre and an overactive imagination. So Mr. Hollinger, keep painting and maybe even consider becoming a purist. -BRUCE ROEDER, Milwaukee, WI
This article was written in Canada where I live. Up here in "The Great White North" the availability of figures is difficult at best and when they are they're damned expensive. Some places charge $2.00 for a single 25mm cavalry figure. Given these facts it's extremely practical to get as much out of your gaming dollar as possible especially in these economic hard times. Of course I'm not advocating use of goblins for Gauls only common sense and I believe in the common sense our the readers. The article was aimed at the vast majority of hobbyists trying to save a buck in a pricy hobby and not the purist elite. - PETE HOLLINGER
ACCURATE FIGURES: ECONOMICALLY UNFEASABLE?
When I first read Robert Coggins' letter which appeared in The Courier Vol III, No. 3, I had mixed emotions. On one hand, I felt Mr. Coggins had a justifiable complaint. With the cost of wargame figures continually increasing, and the wealth of information available to figure manufacturers, perhaps we should insist on completely accurate figures. I am sure that it would take no longer to create a correctly detailed figure than it would to create one with several discrepancies. The only difference would be the time and effort it would take the figure manufacturers to research the particular figure involved.
This, however, could conceivably be the fly in the soup. Figure manufacturers in recent years have gradually phased out many historical lines to make way for the faster moving and more profitable fantasy figures. With the increasing emergence of the fantasy lines, the need for research has diminished. How much time does it take to research a completely authentic goblin? And why take the time to research the intricacies of 1808 Russian uniforms when you can make an acceptable goblin and sell ten of them for every one completely authentic Russian musketeer?
Mr. Coggins became involved in wargaming in 1961. How many accurate figures were on the market then? Why, there were many times when we had to convert, happily I might add, available figures in order to have the particular figure we wanted. The longer I thought about the content of Mr. Coggins' letter, the more it seemed that his complaints were nit-picky. Most of his discrepancies could be readily amended with little effort.
However, I appreciate Mr. Coggins' letter. His views on this subject could very well be the feelings expressed by the majority of wargamers. I for one, though, appreciate the efforts of Minifigs in striving to replace their "unpretentious blocks" with "Ferraris," especially in the face of the fantasy explosion. If Mr. Coggins requires a Ferrari though, he should be prepared to foot the bill for purchasing one.
A business must make a profit in order to remain in being. A business must also supply what the buying public demands. At the moment, the majority of the public is demanding orcs, elves and the like. in order to make a profit, figure manufacturers must make what is selling. I fell grateful that Minifigs is not only still manufacturing historical lines, but is making an effort to upgrade those lines. With this in mind, I will not complain if my figure is 10% inaccurate' but appreciate the fact that it is 90% correct. -BILL OSBOURNE; Florence AL.
DISAGREE WITH GILL
I have just finished reading GIVE AND TAKE by Sam Gill (VOL III, no. 5). I find myself in total agreement with the two main points which he makes about the giving and taking of wargame orders. A. "The C-in-C plans the action, arranges his army for it, gives operational orders to his immediate subordinates and commits the reserve." B. A wargamer who "ignores the clear instructions" of his commander "is guilty of a breach of military code which would almost certainly result in rapid relief from command."
I agree that a more enjoyable and realistic wargame can be fought when methods are found to limit the C-in-C's ability to look over the shoulder of his subordinates as they carry out his orders. At the same time, those very subordinates must be allowed to disobey their orders based upon their own appraisal of the situation.
However, I strenuously disagree with Gill's method of dividing the wargaming population into two groups: those who agree to accept his ideas, and those unfortunates who do not.
Those "perspective" wargamers (led apparently by the HATSOFF group) who have "Seen the light" and have embraced Gills precepts fall, of course, into the first favored group. These "better wargamers" have "developed a tradition of maturity" and are "more mature and better researched" than the members of the slovenly second group.
According to Gill, the wargamers who do not do things his way are an "ignorant" "pack of dogs" who "boast of what passes for generalship", but really play "military checkers", "Stratego", or "king on the mountain" and generally "conduct contests on a lower plane of juvenile purport", while "engaging in cheap heroics and selfish neglect". These "immature", "unthinking" wargamers have "no conception of what generals do" and "mis-understand the functions of command". "Wargame principles are beyond their comprehension."
While I agree that Gill is on the right track in urging acceptance of gaming mechanics along the lines that he lays down, I feel that there must be a more humble and less obnoxious way of getting his point across than by abusing those who will not accept his ideas. His previous article When You're Whipped" was laced with similar sanctimonious bombast.
There are others of this ilk who will brook no denial or argument with their pronouncements on wargame rules or concepts. While HATSOFF may be a fine club, I feel that this type of rule and article writer should form their own club.
I think that the order of leering Elitist Repulsive Know-it-alls should herewith be formed and that Sam Gill should be named head JERK. - TERRY GRINER, Spokane, WA
ADVERTISERS MISSING A BET
I am an avid wargamer who has been in the hobby for about 12 years. I am also a marketing researcher for one of the largest property/casualty insurers in the United States. I have put up with a lot of things I do not like in the hobby but there is one thing that is driving me nuts. The manufacturers and distributors in this industry display a remarkable ignorance concerning the basic marketing principles! Most manufacturers seem to think that the pinnacle of the marketing art is to publish a list of their latest releases. Without a doubt, this approach is sadly lacking in imagination and appeal.
Manufacturers seem to forget that the heart of this hobby is its visual appeal. If you have a product which is visually appealing-show it! On the other hand, if you have no faith in the appeal of your product-get out of the business. Sure, this kind of advertising is more expensive but remember, marketing is not a business expense. It is not like buying lead. It is an investment. If done properly, good marketing will increase your market share and the financial condition of your company.
There are many of us who cannot attend major conventions. Nor do we have retail outlets which can invest in extensive inventories. We depend on advertisements in the hobby press to keep us up-to-date on new products. A list gives us no idea of the visual quality of the products being offered. (Those drawings accompanying some ads are a complete waste of ink and space.) Show us your products! 1, for one, will not waste my hard earned money on figures I have never seen.
Also, I am amazed at the total disregard the industry has for special marketing opportunities. The figure manufacturer has two jobs to do with the marketing of his product. First, he must sell the time period of the figures he manufactures; second he must sell the figures themselves. With its theme program, THE COURIER is already doing the manufacturer's first job-selling the time period. But, are the manufacturers taking advantage of this? No way! A case in point is last year's theme: The Seven Years War. Not one manufacturer took advantage of this theme to push his Seven Years War line. One manufacturer even took this time to drop this line. They say ignorance is bliss, well, there must be a lot of happy people at that company. The point is, here is a major wargaming publication highlighting a period of wargaming in order to increase public interest and not one manufacturer followed through to try to capitalize on that increased interest. Such ignorance boggles the mind!
There are, however, some successes. Let me give you an example of what I think is one of the best ads currently running in the hobby press. Turn to page 23 of the November-December 1981 issue of THE COURIER. This is the GHQ ad. Those of you who are familiar with this manufacturer know that its strongest selling point is the exquisite detail of its figures. So, what dominates their ad -- a closcup of one of their beautifully detailed tanks. They lead with their strength.
Next, look at the text: "After a hectic three years with Napoleon, a couple of hours in the desert can be very refreshing." There are several things to notice. One, GHQ has taken the time to analyze the market of the publication in which they plan to advertise. THE COURIER is directed primarily at the pre-modern period audience and the ad addresses this audience. Two, notice the subtle indirect approach they take to interest this audience in their time period (an approach Liddel Hart would have been proud of). They do not attack your choice of time period but rather use it as a leverage to interest you in their time period. They do this by asking the question "How about a change of pace?" (Never mind that perhaps you have been refighting Napoleon's Egyptian campaign and if you saw anymore desert you would puke!) Finally, look at the positive approach thay take to both periods. 'Speed and power' are used to describe armoured warfare and 'color and pageantry' describe Napoleonic warfare. You do not build interest in your time period by knocking someone else's.
GHQ knows how to market their product. They sell their period and their product. They are also conspicuous by their excellence-surrounded as they are by mediocrity and lack of imagination.
As already mentioned, THE COURIER's theme program, already sells the time period for the manufacturers/ Picture this scene: a wargamer, exhausted from 16 hours of fighting a 60,000 point battle against the Swiss-Assyrian confederacy (and from arguing through the latest interpretations of WRG's 128th edition of its ancient rules), says to himself, "There must be more to wargaming than just this".
He sits down and picks up THE COURIER's introductory issue to the Seven Years War. As he reads Ken Bunger's excellent article, he says to himself, "Say this sounds like fun". Now comes the fantasy part-At the end of the article, he turns the page and there is a Minifig ad displaying a beautifully detailed battalion of British grenadiers advancing, through light brush, on the enemy. Elsewhere, there is an ad from Hinchliffe picturing a small group of Austrians defending behind a stone wall against advancing Prussians. There are further ads from Garrison, Mike's Models, Frie Corp (who, by the way, do show off their figures in British publications with justifiable pride) all building on the interest sparked by Bunger's article.
We are talking about more than just 'figure review' photos. Set your figures in mini- dioramas that compliment and show off your figures. Appeal to the imagination of your market. We all fantasize about our armies: increasing them, building new ones. Build and feed that fantasy. It is what sells figures. In other words, learn to market your products. There is much more that could be done to more effectively market these products but this would be a good start. -R. KNAPTON, Renton WA.
COMPLIMENTS
I wanted to congratulate you on Issue III/5, an altogether excellent effort in all respects. I especially wish to compliment Mr. Haythornwaite's "Concerning Cannon Balls." It's about time someone put paid to those asinine "bounce-sticks" made famous by (among others) CLS. I'm sure the author is going to be severely attacked for his views, but available evidence indicates he is absolutely correct. The intrested reader is referred to Hughes's Firepower, pp.32-33, which indicates the ball, after initially striking the ground, did not subsequently bounce higher than five feet, thus remaining lethal throughout the remainder of its "flight."
I also want to compliment George Jeffrey for an interesting and thought-provoking article on morale.
However, I take serious exception to his opinion that morale is unaffected by whether the unit is formed. "To be formed," he says, "is a physical not a mental state", related to whether or not the men "are standing in some preordained spot."
Hogwash--the point is not where the men are standing, but that they are sufficiently under command and control to be in a recognizable formation in the first place. George would have us believe that dispersed or disorganized troops are equivalent in morale to troops in good order!
Space does not permit recitation of the mountain of available evidence on this point, so I'll confine myself to Marshall's Men Against Fire, wherein he discusses at length the importance of "cohesion", which he says "enables a group of individuals to make the most of their united strength and stand steady. Unit comes to full cooperation between each man and his neighbor. There is no battle strength within the company or regiment except as it derives from this basic element within the smallest component. - George apparently disagrees-perhaps he can explain how a unit which is not formed would enjoy much in the way of cohesion? -CHRIS JOHNSON.
Back to Table of Contents -- Courier Vol. IV #1
To Courier List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1982 by The Courier Publishing Company.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com