Re: Discussion topic - rewriting (future) history....?

*If* any rewriting is done, I think it should be to include fluff on 
megacorporations (tied to new lines - corporate security/mercenary 
figures, corporate space fleets) with.any new fluff relating to the 
nations/blocs being a decent way down the timeline, to prevent 
real-world events overtaking what has been written (one possible 
exception - the US financial collapse in 2049 is likely to happen 
much sooner than that when PRC calls in all the US debt they hold - 
possibly a much stronger rationale for the ongoing enmity between NAC
and ESU).

That being said, I think most of Jon's customers aren't interested in 
the backstory, but love the miniatures and the FT rules (SG and DS 
don't seem to be played very much). On the 15mm minis, I know that a 
lot of SF skirmish gamers are using them outside of canon - eg New 
Israelis and UNSC Light Infantry as HALO Spartans, NAC as 
Aliens-esque space marines - I'm guessing that is at least part of 
the reason for those ranges having received the most attention.

AS for miniatures gaming dying off, I'd tend to disagree for the 
reasons outlined by another poster. A lot of people who used to game 
in the past have been returning to the fold (myself included), in 
particular to SF skirmish and WWII gaming. There are also a lot of 
people coming into "real" wargaming having been caught up in the web 
of the Evil Empire of Nottingham, UK. Many are coming in to the 
Ancients and Renaissance periods from computer gaming as a result of 
the Fields of Glory rules.

I think what is less evident is people joining established 
clubs/groups for gaming, instead forming their own groups with 
friends locally or playing in local stores (again, something that can 
be pinned on the EEoN,UK).

15mm and 6mm wargaming of all periods is also becoming more popular, 
evidenced by the number of new producers/suppliers of figures, 
terrain and rules.

What is behind the phenomenon of gamers returning after many years 
away? Many reasons, but here are some:
1) kids grown up and left home, parent has space and time to fill 
(and money to spend)
2) cheaper than many other adult hobbies
3) a sudden spark reignites their interest (true in my case)
4) they have an interest in military history (or SF) and come across 
a book or website about wargames (partly true in my case - it was 
looking around on the web for something that led me to the 
Tuffleyverse and reignited a long-dormant interest in gaming)

(I guess the last part of this post has diverted somewhat from the 
original topic ;)  )

Tamsin

At 20:22 20/10/2011, you wrote:
>textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative
>
>1. I'm attached to the current timeline because it had some interesting
>factions, twists, and strangely life came close to it in several
>particulars.
>
>2. I liked the tone and flavour of the write ups in dirtside and
stargrunt.
>Still do.
>
>3. A 'reboot' makes perfect sense from a business point of view. You
could
>phase out otherwise unfavoured miniatures lines, create new miniatures
for
>new powers, etc. This could be a good business motivator, so I
understand it
>from that perspective. Even if, Jon, this wasn't the inspiration, you
may
>want to consider that side of things.
>
>4. The least likely things in the old continuity are the most heavily
>entrenched in miniatures. The NAC was tremendously unlikely (I mean,
God
>Save Her Majesty The Queen of Canada, but Britain rescues North
America?
>Don't know if that works... and then taking over all of South America?
Not
>likely). The ESU probably at least as unlikely. But they are both
popular
>blocks of minis.
>
>If I had to think what I would do it would be:
>
>1. Try to preserve the long term power blocks (ESU, FSE, NSL, NAC, etc)
but
>perhaps envision an alternate path from here to there... maybe the NAC
is a
>super-sized 'coalition of the willing' with the US having to take a
more
>moderate part due to an economic collapse.... maybe the ESU is the
result of
>strongman governments in Beijing and Russia cooperating to offset the
power
>of the NAC.... the NSL and FSE are the long term result of the demise
of the
>Eurozone due to economic collapse.....
>
>2. Leave room for everyone's pet mini-states. No sense kicking about
the
>fans. That just means there has to be room for small splinter states.
>
>3. Fix the demographics a bit - pure math says the NAC should beat the
heck
>out of the ESU and take its lunch money (based on modern day population
and
>GDP).
>
>4. Allow a few more powers. Big blocks might be more like NATO or some
other
>defense conglomeration more than super-countries. This would leave room
for
>a lot more independent countries and small navies and ground forces
(aka
>minis to sell).
>
>PS - I've never played FT for mechanics, I've only ever played it
because of
>the background. As a ruleset, it is okay (no complaints really other
than
>the value in most games of the FoD), but as a ruleset married to an
>interesting somewhat different background that has some flavour of 2300
AD
>(colonialism pushed forward a few hundred years), it was a good tool
for
>telling stories. And those stories are tied to the background.
>
>Tom B