As customers are we more demanding ?

[Cubster]

I completely understand a collector wanting their models to be just right, with the correct buttons, the correct knife on the belt, the correct number of bootlace holes etc.. Anal retention is just part and parcel of being a nerd and I fully endorse and share the concept.

What I don't have a lot of time for is the mealy-mouthed picking holes in someone else's models, for no better reason than pettyness. Now pointing out something which you think the other person might not be aware of, something they may find useful is great, that's just being helpful. But you do have to tread carefully and choose your words (as well as getting your facts right).

[shadegate]

It's probably the level of 'pickyness' that's nudged manufacturers in the more accurate direction. Plus, as was stated earlier, we now have so many ways to discuss our viewpoints. This forum is only one of many out there and they all span the globe.

As far as delivery goes does anyone remember the old days (I'm speaking from a UK perspective) where everything on 'mail order' carried the clause "Allow 28 days for delivery"? Most things also seemed to take that long to arrive too. Nowadays we are so used to a lot of things arriving almost instantly anything longer than a few days seems an age.

So to answer the original question

Yes we have become more demanding but this appetite, in my opinion, has been more than matched by the majority of the current suppliers.

[Colonel White]

@ Cubby -Yes your right . Its a very fine dividing line . Sometimes its better just keeping quiet about things to avoid confrontation as that what usually happens . At end of the day its their model and they can do what they like with it as far as I am concerned .If they ask for advice then of course that is another matter.

For example someone in our club wants to use a KV2 and is convinced that they were used at Kursk. None of my sources will support that . But at end of the day its his money. I prefer the more modern SU152 which is a similar sized gun and can keep up with my T34s .You can run faster than a KV2!

@ Shadegate- I take it you havn't ordered from Maestrom recently

[Froggy the Great]

This is why I play speculative or alternate fiction. Sure, my Romans might have the wrong armor for the source period, but they also didn't have clockwork pilia or steam-augmented scorpions.

[Colonel White]

Well I think as one aims to get the flavour then all is well. As soon as you place a specific badge onto a tank then you are asking for a rivet counter to jump out at you thats why its important that manufacturers do get everything as near spot on . This puts pressure on the manufactuer to ensure that the research material is from a good source. All of this will of course cost and is probably refelected in the prices we pay today.

[mrtn]

My first thought was the same thing that Piers mentioned; the further back in time you get, the less fussy people seem to be. Napoleonics and WWII seems to be hit worst by the "it has to be right"-disease*.

Personally the historical era I'm into now is the 17th century, and as long as it has a pike it's ok in my book.

*No offence meant, of course you're all entitled to be as demanding about details as you want.

[grant]

I think you're right mrtn (even though you are still missing vowels!)

Naps: "that's not French blue"
WW2: "your [tank] is missing [x] rivets"

No other period seems to be as picky. And yet, they too suffer from historical gaps, and everything is on a best efforts basis. And there's always an exception to the careful research!

[Parus Ater]

Thing is, as a re-enactor I'm very picky but in models I know you can't get all the detail on there and something will be "simplified". What I can't stand on models is things being wrong. So rivets missing fine, M43 shovels on 1st Rangers or anyone else in the MTO BAD.*


*Yes, you Battlefront!

[Undave]

My first thought was the same thing that Piers mentioned; the further back in time you get, the less fussy people seem to be. Napoleonics and WWII seems to be hit worst by the "it has to be right"-disease*.

Personally the historical era I'm into now is the 17th century, and as long as it has a pike it's ok in my book.

*No offence meant, of course you're all entitled to be as demanding about details as you want.

The further back you go the less physical and documentary evidence there tends to be. For WW2 a lot of it's right there in pictures, copious records and even living memory. Napoleonics you have artwork and lots of contemporary records and accounts as well as quite a few original artefacts. ECW you've got quite a bit of arms and armour but most uniforms and flags have long since vanished into the mists of time. Jump back to the dark ages and there isn't an awful lot to go on other than contemporary artwork like the Bayeux Tapestry, corroded bits of junk dug out of a field and a load of second and third hand accounts written by monks who may not have had any real idea what they were talking about. With people who had no written records like the Picts it's anyone's guess really.

The more evidence there is the more accurate you need to be when re-producing it and the more likely you are to be picked up on it if you get it wrong. It was most inconsiderate of our ancestors not to catalogue everything about military dress and tactics in minute detail purely for the benefit of us wargamers centuries into the future.

Bunch of useless gits

[grant]

I agree!
Let's not forget the Viking sagas, written about two hundred years after the event, and by Christians monks mostly as "see what you lot did when you were pagans". There couldn't possibly have been as many blue cloaks as there are in the literature!