Re: [OFFICIAL] Where we're going from here...[LONG RAMBLE!!]

It's been another hectic week. I'm only now getting a chance to respond.
First, I think this is absolutely great that Jon takes the time out to
not
only read our messages, but also think about what we said and actually
respond. I can't think of any other game where the players have such a
close
relationship with the designer. Thanks for the message, Jon. I know I
greatly appreciated it, and I'm not the only one.

At 07:00 PM 8/23/97 +0100, Jon wrote:

>1) GZG is still a VERY, VERY small operation; even though I now have an
>assistant (Dave) helping out with a lot of the actual miniatures
>production, most of the running of GZG is still a one-man operation
(me).

I think that's something we all tend to forget.

>Sure, we could rent a bigger workshop, take on a dozen staff and a
>secretary [18 and blonde, please, typing skills irrelevant but must
make
>good tea and have really great legs... :)] and really go for it... and
>probably end up down the tubes in 18 months with the bank, taxman and
>creditors after us like so many, many other games companies that have
gone
>this route.

There's nothing worse for a small business than to expand far too
rapidly.
Under capitalization has killed more small businesses than anything
else;
over expansion is probably next in line.

>3) The feedback and ideas from this list are invaluable to us, and we
>really do consider the opinions expressed in it. The members of the FT
list
>are probabaly among the keenest users of our games (FT in particular of
>course) out there. However, please don't forget that the total list
>membership actually represents only about 2% of the gamers worldwide
who
>have bought FTII since it was released!

That's quite true. But, don't forget that the list members make up the
"heavy half." That is, we may only be 2% of the gamers, but we make up
for
more than 2% of the sales, I'd wager. We're also the ones most devoted
to
the game. Sure, you could probably sell almost anything to us with "Full
Thrust" written on it (although--I'm happy to see--you have no intention
of
doing that). However, if it won't fly with us, you'll have a hard time
getting anyone else to buy it.

>So, we tread a bit of a tightrope here - we'll never manage to give
>everyone what they want all the time, so we're just going to have to go
>with the best compromise we can!

That's about as good a definition of "small business" as you're likely
to find.

>Two important things: the FB WILL use a new, revised ship design
system,
>and it WILL contain quite a bit of supplementary rules material
designed as
>a "stepping stone" between FTII and the coming FTIII.

I don't know if this was mentioned before (it might have been) but I
hadn't
realized this. One of the biggest problems with switching from one new
game
version to another is that you end up leaving people behind. One of the
reasons you leave people behind is that people don't often want to
re-buy
something they already have. By using the fleet book as a stepping
stone,
there's a good chance that by the time FT3 comes out most players will
be up
to snuff with the majority of the new system. I like this idea. Also, if
people absolutely HATE the new design system (not likely, but you never
know) you'll hear about it before you've committed the money needed to
produce the FT3 book.

This should ease my one main concern with a new version of FT: that FT
players dissolve into two camps, the FT2 camp and the FT3 camp.

>I know that one or
>two people have commented in the past that they would not want to buy
the
>FB because they didn't use the GZG background, and therefore would not
be
>happy with "having" to buy it just to get the rules updates. Well, the
best
>thing I can say here is that the FB should not be looked on as just a
>listing of "official" ship designs and stats - look at it as a
compendium
>of all sorts of ship designs that you can lift out and drop into any
>background you want, just by changing the names!

That's exactly what a number of us said at GenCon. Even if you don't use
the
official miniatures it would be nice to get ship design ideas.

>The new and amended rules that we intend to include in the Fleet Book
will
>cover most of the modifications that we plan to make for FTIII, and we
hope
>that these and the large number of pregenerated ship designs will make
it a
>worthwhile purchase for most FT players.

I'm sure it will.

>Well, yes and no. You'll probably have most of the rules variations,
true,
>but we hope to put a LOT more into FTIII by the time we get it to
print,
>including a campaign system, some scenarios, more background (don't
worry,
>not TOO much)
>and of course lots of new art and pretty bits. 

That would be fantastic. Besides, since the dog got a good bite out of
my FT
rulebook, I'm looking forward to a replacement...

>Oh, and maybe even a counter
>sheet for little stuff like vector markers, missiles, debris etc....

That would be nice.

>FTIII really MUST come if we are to keep the game progressing and
>improving. We have reprinted the FTII rules three times now, for a
total of
>over 10,000 copies over six years, and can't really justify another
simple
>unaltered reprint.

Wow, 10,000 copies? Most board wargames are doing well if they sell
5,000
these days.

>Oh, and between everything else, we're
>also considering a FANTASY version of the FMA system (provisional
title:
>BLOOD AND THUNDER) which will be playable at any level from man-to-man
>skirmish right up to mass-battle and with any scales from 6mm to 25mm;
it
>will have a simple sub-Tolkein generic fantasy setting, (unlike most
>Fantasy miniatures rules, it will be 90% rules to 10% background rather
>than the other way round...) - you know the sort of thing:
>"Elves are pointy-eared tree-huggers; Dwarves are short, hairy and
>beerswilling; they don't like each other..". What more background do
you
>NEED...?  :)

Some of us attempted this last year (as you probably remember). I have
the
notes from our month long session. The problem we ran into was that we
had
about two or three different ways to go with the game. We realized that
we
needed one person with one vision to direct the project. I've been
semi-tinkering with it for a little while, but it's been on the back
burner
as I work on my own samurai skirmish game. When you're ready to work on
this, let me know and I'll forward the mail on to you. There are some
very
interesting points brought up.

In another message I sent last night, I mentioned that _Fantasy Rules!_
has
a pretty good stranglehold on the "alternative to Warhammer" side of the
hobby. It's also building quite a following. This might be your
strongest
opponent in this realm. I just read your comments, though, and hadn't
realized you were intending to create a game that handled skirmish to
full
battles. That's rarely been attempted and I don't know of any game that
actually succeeded. I think that would be the edge that got people
forgetting about FR! and that other company's game.

Allan Goodall:	agoodall@sympatico.ca 
"You'll want to hear about my new obsession.
 I'm riding high upon a deep depression. 
 I'm only happy when it rains."    - Garbage