Generally well spoken, Mr. Zac. I think this sums up at least one major issue in the whole “Rackham Debacle.” It is truly a sad day (that happens almost every day somewhere in the world) when a company abandon’s its semi-altruistic and artistic vision in order to “turn a profit.” It is most unfortunate that the world runs on money instead of something everyone can actually potentially possess (vision, talent, hope, heart, etc.). I think that is the true kick in the face that many gamers and hobbyists feel they were dealt by Rackham. So much time, money, and effort went into the collecting, painting, and playing of the earlier versions of Confrontation. But many seem to overlook or forget that Rackham also spent a lot of time, money, and effort on those earlier products. The times have changed, the market constantly changes, and Rackham made a decision.

If I recall correctly, members of the Rackham team expressed various levels of concern with the new direction. But the choice was made. Here we are. I admit that I was very upset with Rackham when they first announced the concept of making Confrontation a PPP minis game. I actually completely quit the game and the company (sold almost everything I had). Even with the various problems in the rules and game-play the minis were a bastion of hope in a (at the time) dark world of sub-par products (from a plethora of companies). But now that I own multiple 100+ miniature armies for GW games along with a lot of other minis that will never see paint, I’ve come to accept the fact that PPP stuff is convenient and basically sufficient when the time comes to just play a game.

Rackham had a very positive impact on the entire industry as far as miniatures are concerned. Every person in this hobby, no matter the game or the company, has benefitted from Rackham’s influence. Heck, some companies even picked up sculptors from Rackham. So it was not all in vain.

I’ve overrun my time, I know, but the last thing I wish to type is a question to hopefully inspire some introspection in everyone that feels abandoned by Rackham: Why does it hurt so much when a company like Rackham decides to change directions? The same emotions are not so violently inflamed when a company like Microsoft decides that the Xbox is outdated and the time to create something new has arrived. Yeah, the Xbox 360 is almost completely backwards-compatible with original Xbox games, but the fact is you are going to have to spend more money and abandon the old ways in order to keep up. Most of Rackham’s previous minis are still compatible with the new game. So why is it such a different and disturbing situation?

And in closing, thank you very much, Mr. Zac, for pointing out the fact that Rackham did start out as a niche company in an already niche market. They started out making extremely high-quality minis for people who were not satisfied with the current offerings. Now others have taken up the challenge (some have surpassed even the mighty Rackham) and more will come and go over the years. It is a volatile market… in a volatile world. Change is scary but it is necessary.

Thank you for the chance to speak out, TGN.

Hmmmm - While I appreciate the sentiments I thought this was obvious. I guess not due to the number of folks still expressing concern over R’s direction.

As someone who has liquidated about 1/2 of my collection at 30 cents on the dollar I understand folks frustrations about the financial side. I also believe that the money was spent and that most got a reasonable amount of return out of their investment if they look at balance between entertainment costs and the amount of entertainment time returned on that investment.

However, as I move into CAoR (as I enjoy AT43) with my metal collection (b/c I have about 10,000 CAoR pts of an army) I am still dismayed. Not at the product or the game play but at the fact that the materials that support their game still are not up to snuff.

Mostly I refer to the card packs released to allow those of us w/ metals to play in the new system w/out making additional purchases. The cards statistics don’t match the new preview in CHO last week. I was stunned. I didn’t expect every profile to be in the preview but to not match the profiles that crossed over was a bit much.

So, try as I can to embrace the “new” Rackham regarding gameplay and figures they still seem to be the “old” Rackham in the fact that they still do things way too haphazardly for me too feel extremely comfortable investing in a lot more of their product.

Due to the AoR issue I held back on some AT43 purchases. Not out of spite but out of concern for the game and companies direction regarding “quality control” of their printed releases

I will admit my ignorance — why can’t the metal figs be used for the new system?

@schogun - many of the metal minis dont have compatable stat cards and even some armies are rumored to be unsupported

Here is one possible good side to this community backlash - perhaps one of the sculptors will look at the fan reaction and decide to take after Matt Wilson and round up the people to start his own company. Its kinda obvious to me that there is a market for minis like old Rackham made, the question is does anyone have rules for them that would work?

I imagine some of this backlash is very similar to what happened when GW shifted from 2nd ed 40k to 3rd - you are making a drastic extreme change that many people dont think is very wise. Add in that many people get attached to the figures they have poured so much time into working on and they will defend them rabidly. And simply compare a metal fig with the same plastic and its easy to see why people feel like Rackham is kicking them in the teeth - its not that the plastic is horrible its just that the metal was so much better.

They might be able to mitigate the backlash a small amount by agreeing to provide army support for some of the factions that, as I understand, wont be supported - like Mid-Nor. Perhaps they could steal a page from GW Warhammer and add them as allied armies, not enough to stand on their own but still supported. It wouldnt be much but it would be a little bit of a concession to long term fans.

Hopefully some good will come of this - like a new company or R will work harder on the rules since thier minis are no long pewter art pieces…

also, about the new company comment…
It would be kinda cool if a part of rackham split up and became an independant company (kind of like the specialist games.) this one mostly supporting the crazy world of Cadwallon and its game, including a modification/mix of hybrid, dogs of war and cadwallon.. resulting in a solid rpg game and a *gangs of cadwallon* characterbased skirmish game, maybe even more crazy subgames. this sub company taking with them rackhams crazier ideas and races that dont survive the ragnarok transfer (cadwallon, midnor, goblins with only minor groups based on the other armies, especially the clanbox types.)
wont happen probably :)

I was disappointed that a source of excellent miniatures vanished, but never angry. That was because I didn’t have personal investment in the rules. But I do understand why others would be angered, by shared experience.

I used to be a Squat player. I started 40k with Rogue Trader, picked my army, and rolled with it straight through 2nd edition. I waited patiently for my promised codex and continued to buy and paint minis. Then came 3rd edition, and the final nail in the Squat coffin. The communication was horrible, the excuses pathetic, and in the end I was left with a lower quality game made for the mass market and a collection of figures no longer viable in the current game. My money and time was wasted. Yes, I had fun when I could with them, but so had all of the Space Marine players who still get to use their minis.

So yes, I feel the pain of those left by the wayside by Rackham. It is a little foolish to be hurt, but it is real none the less. We have a hobby that we love. It as a niche market, but I think we almost like it that way. We have something special. And we hold onto what we can. Those hours spent painting, writing army lists, and laughing with friends mean something to us. We put a certain amount of trust in the hands of a company that we buy into. If they go to the trouble of making an army of minis and rules for them, websites, forums, updates, and revisions, then we trust that our investment will be a symbiotic relationship. We give them our time, our money, and, as strange as it sounds, a part of our self. Because it is our hobby. It is what we choose to do to express ourself in our free time. The time that is ours alone. It is how we spend our Christmas money and what we ask for on our Birthdays.

So there is a personal attachment, as childish as it seems on the surface. There are hundreds of rules-sets and millions of miniatures. We take that precious time and money and choose a few of those rules-sets, and make the very personal choice of the army we want to focus on. We spend our money, invest our time, and grow attached to our choices. We set aside the time we can in our schedules to meet with friends and play those games. So losing one means the loss of not only the money spent, but our hobby time, and sometimes even that time we spend with friends.

Image the world-wide outrage that would occur if football (soccer), took a year off to re-organize. During that time they can barely keep their facts straight about the future of the sport. When they return, they have rewritten the entire rulebook and disbanded entire teams. There would likely be riots with real people and property being hurt. This has all been the wargamer’s version of a riot, and I must say that things could have been much worse. We tend to like to keep our war on paper.

Now maybe we would have lost the company and game entirely if things hadn’t changed. Maybe only a handful of people played Mid-nor. Just as only a small number probably played Squats. But to us, those armies were our personal investment, and a reflection of ourselves in some small way. The game as it used to be was our investment, our thrill, our communion with friends. Losing that is going to be hard. Losing that without compassion from the company we trusted is even harder.

It would have been much easier for me to take that loss with GW if they had just been forthcoming and understanding. If they had said honestly that they need to make the rules more accessible to stay in business. Squats dont sell well enough to bother producing anymore, but we understand that some players still want to use them. So here is a tournament legal pdf codex. We wont make anymore minis for Squats, but anyone who likes may produce them and they will be legal as well.

I think the fans of old Confrontation would probably have been happier if their investment was respected as well. Rackham might have been better at communicating the real reasons for their changes and understanding of the impact on its old players. They might have encouraged players to continue playing Confrontation 3 or 3.5 for skirmish games if not write a new compatible skirmish system. They might have continued to cast the old minis for those who want them, or allow other companies to do so. They might be upfront right now about the future of armies like Mid-nor. If those armies arent going to make it to CaoR, they can let us know now and take steps to keep the players with official pdfs instead of full-fledged army books, or some other option.

Confrontation has changed, and there is no turning back. Some will never find that it fulfills them the way it used to. The reasons they loved it may be forever lost. That is going to hurt and there is no avoiding it. Because it is not just bits of metal. It was their time, their passion, their community, and their self-expression. That doesnt make those players pathetic or weird. All people make attachments just like that every day. Now, it isnt life-threatening pain and it wont last forever. We all know that. We will move on in our own time. And the sooner the better for everyone involved. But that time cant be forced on anyone, and trying to do so will only cause a backlash.

I think the real problem is being hidden by the emotions involved. The real problem is that constant bickering on this forum isnt helpful or productive. There will always be those upset with Rackham over this, and those who arent. Those who are upset will always feel the need to say something about it and those who arent will always feel the need to counter. Because this is the internet, and we are human. People who get hurt want to make it known and hope someone hears, or that they at least can feel a little better by ranting. People who dont feel the same way get sick of others ranting. But the fact is, this forum is for news of the gaming world and its thoughtful discussion. This idea is not promoted by rants and counter-rants. We shouldnt be asking for those upst with Rackham to suddenly gt over it, or for those bothered by the dissidents to suddenly be more understanding or worse, join their pain.

I think the best thing to do is say something like this:

We understand that many of you are bothered by the new direction of Rackham. While your pain is viable, further displays of it on this forum are not productive, nor are they in the spirit of TTGN’s purpose. Neither, it must be said, are its counterpoints. There are many other places online to further these discussions. For now we must ask that discussions of Rackham products be limited to the company as it stands now, in its current context. If you are incapable of doing so, we respectfully request that you ignore Rackham topics. Otherwise, may we suggest that you approach Confrontation as a new product on the market and comment on its merits and flaws as it relates to the gaming world currently.

I apologize for the length. if anyone got through that I commend you for your patience alone.

I’m one that sat on the sideline for years waiting for Con to become what I wanted to play. I tried it during C2, and hated it, and gave it a very good effort. Tried it again in C3 and it was still unplayable to me. I also had mixed feelings over the models. I never felt Rackham models were practical enough in a gaming sense. I had thought they were too detailed, sometimes detail added just so they could say they were detailed as some just didn’t fit. I always told my buddy they were just too pretty to game with. So I waited and figured I’d never get back into it.

I played AT43 when it came out as finally they had great looking models and the game system actually seemed pretty good. At my LGS I had to stress to my buddies that this was definatley NOT like C3 otherwise they would never have picked up AT43.

When CaoR was released and it was said to be using the basis that AT43 used and I saw the initial models and they were actually practical in a game sense, I was elated and have been ever since. I understand Rackham had to do what they did to survive, not just make money. Cx was killing them, and they had to evolve to the market. I’m sure there will be a time when we will see a prepainted starter set from GW in the near/far future. The gaming world is making a big shift in that direction. So, I happily play now and I put up with the moans and groans from the old guard. Its a small price to play to play a great Rackham game now.

Sorry Zac but I don’t think that you addressed both sides of the conflict. As a former regular on Rackham English forum I’m used to gagging. It’s very frustrating and now I feel exactly the same here.

I understand why people are upset but really there is no “sides” or “conflict”.

Rackham has decided to go the PPP route.

That is it. End of story. If you don’t like it either walk away OR continue to use your metal (and the still readily available metal) to play 3 or 3.5. Those are the choices. To me “walking away” from game that I enjoy seems silly - just keep playing it if you enjoy it - I have played tons of “out of print” games over the years and will continue to do so.

Zac, you may just have to axe any discussion over “old vs new” Rackham models entirely. People are free to talk about the new PPPs as it is relevant to the news topics but much like how most Games Workshop discussion forums have banned “price talk” - talk of old Rackham may have to just be off limits to TGN to keep things civil. Either that or just let people fight it out and know that in the end its just folks blowing off steam and that it won’t matter in the long run.

I find it unrealistic and overly restrictive to consider C:AoR products as brand new properties unrelated to the earlier games and models

You might but don’t forget that there are many people new to the game and setting who don’t share your perspective.

Is the negative tone that greets Rackham-related posts really any worse than the treatment that GW gets around here?

I don’t care if people are negative about the company or the figures.

I just want the commentary to be civil and respectful.

Be as critical as you want, but don’t let your disappointment with the companies new direction colour your comments.

If anything, the hypersensitivity of the current fans seems to have outlived any grudges held by the old guard

This is what I am talking about. This is the sort of comment I want to avoid.

You don’t need to comment on the state of mind of other people in the same way that they don’t need to comment on yours.

So lets all agree to not do it,

Zac, excellent editorial.
I was part of old-confrontaion generation and some post well describe the past.
Great community, large number of players. In Italy last year with 3.5 was fantastic with more then 250 players. Local tournament with more then 40 players. Really cool.
Now the situation it is very different.
A lot of players sold their armies and move their investments to others games.
Personally I decide to wait C:AoR and I started to play AT-43. A real good game. Not a lot of players but we are growing, a little bit expensive but very tactical game with a fantastic background.
The future it is related with Rackham relationship.
They decide to break any relation with players of CDRI and this is, from my point of view, a wrong move.
I hope this could be different in the next future.
Yesterday I bought Wolfen Card Pack for C:AoR ….

But I wholeheartedly disagree with people who believe that speaking up to Rackham accomplishes nothing.

If what you want is the old game and old figures back then I can’t see it doing anything.

If what you want is them to licence the old game and the rights to do metal sculpts to someone who will then move forward with the old game then you may have better luck.

My point was just that Rackham made a significant change in their business model and I don’t see that complaints from fans will move them from that.

But I would also say that KillMeForPrizes’ calling others “silly” is in the same vein.

I don’t think that he did. He is referring, I assume, to my comment about people leaving unsupported games and not playing them any more.

He isn’t directing that comment at any person… other than me perhaps. So I think it is clearly a different type of comment.

I may be wrong in this regard but calling one group of people hypersensitive is different than thinking that doing a particular action is silly.

I may be wrong though

I think it is also fair to say: Be as supportive as you want, but dont let your pleasure with the company’s new direction colour your comments

Very true.

Zac - I appreciate that I might have chosen a bad example with the “silly” remark. I guess that I was assuming that a lot of people had chosen to leave the game entirely and might feel that they were all being called silly. I could be wrong as well (and most likely am ^_^).

Boy, this whole internet thing really is a mess isnt it? People are able to offend each other easily enough in person, with visual and tonal clues. Taking those away, mixed with the freedom of anonymity, really makes a volatile situation. I have great respect for the job you do containing it and wouldnt want to be in your shoes for a minute ^_^.

Thanks for the work and the graceful way you handle criticism (even in an editorial, where you should be able to say whatever you want!!).

I actually registered just to comment. I personally love TGN for the news and views that’s on it. Kudos to Zac for running/managing this site. The reason I chose to comment was to bring a different perspective. My first Rackham game was/is AT-43. Personally I love it. It’s simple yet interesting. It’s different from 40k (no demons!). I can play with new units as soon as I open their boxes. Well…so what, you say?

Well, something strange happened. I (recently) got into Confrontation. 3.0. Got the C3 rulebook and DoW. (For the record, I have ordered CAoR and I’m waiting for it to arrive). At our LGS, C3 seems to have come back to life. The reason? The C3 old guard decided to run a Dogs of War campaign there. I recently got some metal Wolfen and Cynwalls and really looking forward to playing soon. The other strange thing is, I’m not the only new C3 player there. So is C3 really dead? Only as dead as you want it to be.

So what will I do when the DoW campaign ends? Well, the old guard with the support of the LGS have decided to keep playing C3. And so will I. The big plus for me is that, I can use my metals in CAoR too. I also know that Rackham has said they will come up with a better skirmish ruleset and also re-release an updated Hybrid. I’m really looking forward to that.

If you think I’m making stuff up, have a look at our small forum thread. Look at the dates of the posts. The C3 old guard there are friendly and helpful. And no, they aren’t selling or trading any of their old stuff. We newbies have to get our own but I’m not complaining. I’m to busy building my free company.

Sounds like a success on all levels Longbow :-)

As you’re new to the game and seem open to the idea of prepainted mass combat system, it sounds like you qualify for group #1.

Zac, you must be a masochist. :-)

I personally have no interest in this issue from side or the other. The only thing I will say is, if this is taking up more of your time and making it more difficult to run this NEWS site, then take whatever steps you feel necessary.

Longbow, good to hear its happening elsewhere as well :-) We had about nine months at our club in Nottingham (UK) where only two of us out of five or six players were playing. In the last month or so the others have all come back and play all the time again. We even have a couple of new recruits, and two of us attended a local tournament at a LGS near Milton Keynes which was attended by about fifteen or sixteen players. In the next few months we are planning on hosting our own tournament.

If you enjoy the game just play it - thats the prevailing atmosphere here :-)

Rich

Well written Zac…
I have a somewhat odd “view” of Rackham… I bought the metal models, mostly in France on trips over there, as models - with no intent on playing the game. I never had enough model to put anyone force together. Now I find that over the years I was incorrect - I have about 3000pts of the “new” Lion list.
With a few trades, and a few eBay purchases I have been able to fill out a pretty substantial Lion Banner.
I look forward to trying out the :new: game with the “old” figures.

No, I don’t like the pre-painted figs, I bought the MODELS not the game… now I find I want to play the game…

I was always interested in many of the Confrontation miniatures. After reading the rules I thought it would be a goods game. The fact that the statstics for the miniatures are only on the cards was such a turn off for me that I never bought any of thier figures until recently. What changed my mind was finding a set of rules that I enjoy and that were written to use any miniatures (Song of Blades and Heroes). I think this is the best solution- to use the best miniatures and the best rules. If those miniatures and rules were made for each other or made by the same company
doesn’t matter. I hope many of the players of older versions of confrontation are able to continue playing with the miniatures and rules they like best, whichever those are.

Interesting and well mannered discussion so far…

I am not a C3 player, and after I have considered the game, the new one is not for me either (mostly a financial consideration since I am broke).

There are some other facets that has not been explicitly discussed:

Cultural Difference- This “keep your customer informed of your plans” is very much a Anglo-Saxon business trait, that Brits and Americans take for granted is not necessarily shared in other cultures. In general business in France are less “customer friendly” judging by US standard (and this is not something I made up, check out last week’s NYT Travel section here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/weekinreview/23sciolino.html?ref=travel).
I think Rackham TRIED to be good and keep the customers informed, but this isn’t in their DNA and came across (at least to EN speaking audience) botched and billed as “uncaring”.

I was first sucked into buying Rackham minis because they were unlike anything else on the market at the time (right when they started C2, with the first set of rules in English). After playing the game a few times, I was hooked. C2 had a lot of depth to game-play, with multiple layers of strategy within each move/attack/defense, and the random activation made one have to react on the fly to a developing situation.

C3 took away a good part of what made the game interesting from a tactics point of view, as well as some of the unique qualities of the characters. It was still interesting, but not as colorful in game-play as C2.

C:AoR has watered down the rules to the point that my friends and I no longer care to play Confrontation. We might pick it up again someday, but we’ll be using one of the older rules sets. Unfortunately, we’ll have to devise C2/C3 stats and abilities amongst ourselves should any new figures be released that strike our fancy. We have no need of prepainted figs for Confrontation (or Rag’narok, which we like even more than Cf), but might pick some up to bolster our basic troop units. Rackham hasn’t completely lost us as customers, but new product purchases will be few to none compared to what they used to be (generally speaking, multiples of each new blister and box set for each of us).

Am I happy about Rackham’s current direction? Not particularly, but it’s not my call. It’s also not something I’m going to lose any sleep over, nor repeatedly bash the company for not doing what I want them to do.

Zac wants to defuse Rackham situation…. And I always wanted to clime the Everest, or at least I can always die trying.

I look at it as a study in how much people care about stuff.

With a wealth of forum data at your fingertips, you can actually do some awfully empirical stuff. Like compare user name to joined date, to post count, to date last posted. Or even more sophisticated analysis. Pretty exciting stuff! And, other minis companies can learn from this too. Heck, even Rackham can learn from it, although their PR arm won’t get a second crack at it.

You have to have a PRETTY AWESOME game to just spring it on people and hope for converts!! And the most exciting part of it is that the aftermath is STILL playing out! We’ve got all sorts of cool events to be pundits at, like upcoming GenCon, etc. Who will have the booth, will it be crowded, what will be on sale, for show, etc.? Awesome!