Warfare HQ and Armchair General to join forces with new forum!

[Doctor Sinister]

Originally posted by gobeavs
Wooohooo! Does that mean we can proceed to Phase 2? Or have you already done that?

BTW: I think these types of posts are what miffs the folks over at WFHQ. It seems like WFHQ is more of a forum, and we are more of a community. I am not a member of WFHQ, so I don't have first hand knowledge of this, I'm just basing it off of what some people have said in the merger thread about us. Correct me if I am wrong.

Oh! So now it's all MY fault?

That's it! I'm going to kill you!!!

Thump...thump...smash...crack...snap...

Only kidding Don, everyone.

ats Gobeavs on head in friendly manner:

:armed:

Dr. S.

 

[Marines]

Originally posted by Don Maddox
Interesting comments gentlemen. As some of you are already aware, I'm also one of the website editors here at Armchair General. I'm very active on the Warfare HQ forums as I run that site as a full time job, but I'm less active on these forums (there are only so many hours in a day).

You guys have already hit on some of the important and more interesting aspects of this proposed merger, thus I will leave it to you all to continue that debate. You're bringing out some good points and I would encourage you to continue to provide us with constructive feedback. It does help us.

Now, allow me to speak to some of the wargame-specific questions that have been raised here. To do that, I feel it would be appropriate for me to give you a tiny bit of background on WHQ and it's members.

Warfare HQ is currently about four years old and was founded by me. The staff consists of hand picked volunteers who have experience in their respective wargame. The Warfare HQ staff are not simply "mods" for the forum, far more importantly, they function as "Section Leaders" for our main website. They run entire portions of the website, set up and run major wargaming events, post news articles, AAR's, reviews, previews, and administer W.A.R.S. (the official WHQ ladder system for wargamers). In addition to this they frequently act as liaisons between our organization and developers/publishers. In short, they have more in common with the senior Armchair General staff than they do with the forum moderators here. Not better or worse, but they do have a somewhat different perspective in general.

The Warfare HQ membership has been carefully cultivated over the years, specifically for the purpose of mentoring and developing serious wargamers. There are many sites that cater to titles like Operation Flashpoint, Call of Duty, and Command & Conquer style games--but we aren't one of them.

All of our wargame forums are directly linked to sections on the main Warfare HQ webpage. We only support a very select group of hand picked games, but our aim is to be a premiere destination for these titles. The point is, our wargame sections consist of much more than a simple forum where people can talk about a particular title. We do not support a wargame unless it meets fairly specific criteria, has several dedicated volunteer staff members, a full section on the main webpage, W.A.R.S. support, etc. Our members are not your average wargamers, even among websites with a similar theme. A large percentage of our members have extensive experience in the military and a significant number of us (myself included) have actual combat experience or served as instructors. It's fair to say our members tend to be "hardcore" wargamers, better known as grognards. There are other wargame organizations out there who are more relaxed than we are and tend to stick to lighter wargame fare, but that's simply not our cup of tea. Warfare HQ is primarily oriented toward those wargamers with a serious interest in military history and tactics.

Okay, enough on that.

How would this merger work? In short, I am the chief architect of the Warfare HQ forums, although I am keenly interested in constructive feedback from both the staff and the general membership. If I didn't listen to suggestions and ideas, WHQ never would have become as popular as it is. I layout the structure and organization, I am the graphic artist, and I have the final word on the overall direction of the organization at WHQ. Brian, Eric and I have known each other for quite a while and have a very close working relationship. We're pretty much on the same sheet of music when it comes to wargaming, in fact, Brian and Eric met at Warfare HQ and things have simply progressed from there.

Now some of this may smack of elitism to some, and it might be fair to say that is true to a small degree. As I said, the Warfare HQ crowd are not your average wargamers as many have or are commanding military units from around the world. In contrast to ACG, we also have a very high percentage of Australians, Canadians, and Europeans among our ranks (about 50% to be exact). This does tend to add a very different character to our daily discussions. Warfare HQ was not created for the purpose of trying to be all things to all people, rather it was tailored for a specific design. It is fair to say the members there would react very negatively if they perceived I was attempting to "water down" our primary mission.

The announcement of the forum merge was authored by both Brian and myself. In hindsight, we may have miscalculated as to how much enthusiasm there would be for such a merger as we are currently discussing. We could have possibly gone about it in a different manner, but it's really a moot point now. The main question is: will Warfare HQ and Armchair General compliment each other, or will there be competing interests. That's a very difficult question and the answer appears to be somewhat more elusive than we originally thought. While we are sorting through all of this, we are asking the members on both site to please refrain from adopting a "us vs. them" attitude. That will not be constructive no matter which way things go.

As to the forum structure itself, we do indeed have a draft design (that took about three months to brainstorm), but it is not set in stone. In short, everything would be located within a single VBulletin, but major areas of interest would be divided by category. Due to the very large number of sub-forums that currently make up both ACG and WFQ, there would indeed be some heavy duty consolidation that would occur. We had the same problem at Warfare HQ, and I have done much over the last several months to restructure our forums and consolidate things with an eye toward the eventual merge. People don't like change, and as I have been running forums for about 6 years now, I'm well aware that not everyone would be pleased with the new structure. However, there simply is no way to change things while keeping them the same!

You feedback is useful to us and is helping us to determine the best direction to proceed.

Thanks Don for clearing up alot of the issues I had with this merger.

 

[gobeavs]

Originally posted by Doctor Sinister
Oh! So now it's all MY fault?

That's it! I'm going to kill you!!!

Thump...thump...smash...crack...snap...

Only kidding Don, everyone.

ats Gobeavs on head in friendly manner:

:armed:

Dr. S.

I have absolutely no problem with posts like that, I do them myself. I actually like them. :thumb:

You really need to get the evil genius demo...it is fantastic.

 

[JDS8072]

Originally posted by Patrocles
aye aye! carry on!

that will mean a whole buncha new folks! Cool!

Wonder if WarfareHQ has any women

 

[Iron Mike USMC]

Originally posted by Jeremy Scott
Wonder if WarfareHQ has any women

Heh heh...heh heh...heh heh..he said women.

 

[BarcelonaBlom]

They seem more scared of us then we are of them. I could really care less what happens (unless its bad but I'm quite optimistic). I think that this will work out for the good of both sides and once the members meet and forge relationships I think we might have something very good here. There's my 2 rupees!


A TOAST TO ACG AND WFHQ!!!:toast:

 

[Brevet]

I used to spend quite a bit of time on the WHQ forums when I was playing a lot of TOAW (my first game was against SiberianHeat). I haven't posted there in awhile but I don't think there will be any major issues with the merger. It'll be like seeing old friends; even Cheetah

 

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Jeremy Scott
Wonder if WarfareHQ has any women

I am sad to report they have just about as many women as we do. Over time they have had a couple (same as us), but to the detriment of men on both boards, women have shied away from us.

Come to think of it, that is an indicator of just how similar both memberships truly are. We both repulse women utterly and completely!

:laugh:

If only women took the time to get to know us and our hobbies!

:toast:

 

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Brevet
I used to spend quite a bit of time on the WHQ forums when I was playing a lot of TOAW (my first game was against SiberianHeat). I haven't posted there in awhile but I don't think there will be any major issues with the merger. It'll be like seeing old friends; even Cheetah

Welcome! Been playing TOAW lately? I never seem to have time anymore.

 

[Temujin]

As a WHQite i can say that in regards to CoD or any other games of that type most of us play or have played them. There are other wargames that members play that are not supported by WHQ. So its not, as a previous comment suggested, that it is above anyone there. The type of games supported there are mostly technically difficult ones (although im just a Steel Panthers player) and the forums serve the purpose of supporting players who are newbies and more advanced players/scenario and game designers.

So up till now it would detract from the forum to have a heap of less dedicated gamers who are looking for an adrenaline rush and don't fit into the modern and historical military buff catagory. How the merge mixes these types of games is going to be interesting to see, but considering this is a site for war/military enthusiasts i doubt the problem of having less than serious contributors/players will arise.

I look forward to it because i'm sure both forums games sections will be enhanced by the influx of new and likeminded warmongerers.

Just on another note, the 'O' club we have in test mode over there has nothing to do with elitism. Its just an avenue where those that are a bit more aquainted with each other can discuss certain things, rather than having any tom dick or harry coming along to view it. Plus, as maembers are eligable to go there after a certain amount of posts (we don't post as much as a lot of you guys) discussions can be orientated around the forum itself, as a means of input from those who most use it. Thats just my opinion of it so far, and others share that, but theres definately no sort of elitism attached.

Just thought i'd try and clear those points of concern up for ya's, i dont see much difference in character in the two forums, some use WHQ just as a resource/support site others have a sense of community there. Theres probably going to be some friction regarding 'disagreements' in some of the unrelated to war sections like the FFZ, but in my experience it stays in that Zone and nobody takes it too personal, not that i would ever argue passionately about something

 

[Larkin]

I meant the other wargaming, the type with models and such.

 

[RichardS]

The one thing I really found off putting was the comment at WHQ that the ACGers would have to have their post counts reset to zero. Better idea...reset everbody to zero or not reset at all. I worked hard for my rank here and proud of it. I'll not give it up easily.

 

[CyberRanger]

Originally posted by RichardS
The one thing I really found off putting was the comment at WHQ that the ACGers would have to have their post counts reset to zero. Better idea...reset everbody to zero or not reset at all. I worked hard for my rank here and proud of it. I'll not give it up easily.

That will not happen. When the merger is done, your post count will still be intact. In fact, if you have an acoount on both sites, you're post count will be the summed.

 

[trauth116]

To paraphrase Dr Ruth Post Count doesn't matter -> it's what you say.

(I've been to boards where a dedicated group is into that) - and the guys with the highest totals normally post nothing but crap. (Just to get a post count -to me, behavior like that is idiotic - and is no indication whatsoever of the value of a community member).

 

[tigersqn]

Originally posted by WestPointer
In fact, if you have an acoount on both sites, you're post count will be the summed.

Wooohoooo :banana:

 

[Double Deuce]

Originally posted by RichardS
The one thing I really found off putting was the comment at WHQ that the ACGers would have to have their post counts reset to zero. Better idea...reset everbody to zero or not reset at all. I worked hard for my rank here and proud of it. I'll not give it up easily.

I think it was meant to be more of a suggestion than a request. There had been mention of periodically deleting older threads in the FFZ Forums to minimize bandwith and website space usage. This would obviously result in lost posts for those posting in that area and so it was mentioned in another post about doing away with tracking post counts altogether.

In any case, I encourage all ACG members to vist the WFHQ site and post there, not only to express your concerns about the merger but also to respond to any concerns we WFHQ members may post there. We will encourage our members to do likewise and vist the ACG Forums. Both sides can speculate on what priorities the other group prefers but unless we can communicate across forum lines, we are both just sitting on our own sides of the fence and preaching to the choir.

 

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by trauth116
To paraphrase Dr Ruth Post Count doesn't matter -> it's what you say.

(I've been to boards where a dedicated group is into that) - and the guys with the highest totals normally post nothing but crap. (Just to get a post count -to me, behavior like that is idiotic - and is no indication whatsoever of the value of a community member).

I don't think that necessary applies in this case. Some of our highest posters on ACG are also well versed in mil history subjects, and although some of our more colourful characters such as Doctor Sinister enjoy some slightly off topic posts now and again (note the "u" in color, as Doc. S. is a Brit!)...it doesn't mean they are simply posting to accumulate post counts. No one at either site just posts "hi" over and over to raise their post counts. That is not what anyone of us is about.

However, just because a guy has a high post count does not mean his contributions are not valued. That is a dangerous generalization.

Besides, after 25 posts every member is free to choose whatever title they prefer...so any claims of useless posting to achieve a certain rank is bunk. After 25, you are free to make yourself Commander Surpremo of the Universe (possibly the highest rank out there?).

:laugh:

All good comments though...and I'm listening to every one of them.

 

[Lance Williams]

Originally posted by Tigersqn
Wooohoooo :banana:

Spoken like a man with a foot in both camps........

 

[dannybou]

Originally posted by Double Deuce
I think it was meant to be more of a suggestion than a request. There had been mention of periodically deleting older threads in the FFZ Forums to minimize bandwith and website space usage. This would obviously result in lost posts for those posting in that area and so it was mentioned in another post about doing away with tracking post counts altogether.

In any case, I encourage all ACG members to vist the WFHQ site and post there, not only to express your concerns about the merger but also to respond to any concerns we WFHQ members may post there. We will encourage our members to do likewise and vist the ACG Forums. Both sides can speculate on what priorities the other group prefers but unless we can communicate across forum lines, we are both just basically preaching to the choir.

Some of us are posting over at WHQ. But from what I'm reading over at WHQ, it doesn't seem that there is too much enthusiasm and some are againts it altogether. So in view of this it is difficult to keep a very optimistic and anxious to the merger kind of a mood. I'm sure Brian and Don weren't expecting this, I know for one I wasn't. I've been aware of this merger now for a few months and kept it to myself and wa very excited about it. There seems to be "old boys club" attitudes for a lack of a better expression maybe? Or am I getting it wrong?

Oh and welcome to our forums Double Deuce.

 

[Double Deuce]

Originally posted by BarcelonaBlom
They seem more scared of us then we are of them.

Please take into account that the majority of those at WFHQ are hard-core wargamers and with that comes a certain mentality. We tend to have a lot of experience with boardgames and when we get a large number of people around we get very nervous. The next thing you know, these newer people start moving in closer to have a look and end up bumping the table, knocking over pieces, ruining our perfect little orderly world

We prefer the gaming aspect of warfare as opposed to discussing and speculating on it. We do however rely on those with the historical knowledge who discuss warfare for creating new campaigns and scenarios. I think in that respect the merger is a good thing. Who knows, we may even make wargamers out of some of you :thumb: