"GW Tables at Historicon??" Topic

Oh, dear me. The Aussies and Limies are listening in…

For some reason I don't think this thread would be complete without this YouTube link

And that McKinstry is the biggest splitter of all.

I have to concur with McKinstry's comments. Personally, I just want the best facilities possible, while including the most people. If that's in Lancaster or Baltimore, so be it. Baltimore is an easier commute for me.

Steve
cavalcadewargames.com
nycjadie.wordpress.com

"Baltimore is an easier commute for me."

And that should be the deciding factor. Everything else is secondary. Now we can end this thread. Everything is good with the world!

A good case of picking out the choice bits and leaving the rest on the table. Fox News might have a position for you.

Hah! Touche!

"I don't give a rat's ass about enlarging the hobby, recruiting or Heaven forfend, historic education. I want three good Cons a year and I'll support anyone that gives me that and vote accordingly."

Of course, we have to then fight over the definition of what "good" is!

Oh, and I've mentioned an alternate location before:
The Dulles Expo Center dullesexpo.com
I don't know why Baltimore is better than this…

Of course, we have to then fight over the definition of what "good" is!

So true and therein lies the rub. Things are so much easier if people aren't involved. I suspect if HMGS-E had two members total, they'd still be split on the choice of site.

For what it's worth, right up until it was announced as BCC bound, I thought the Gaylord in Maryland was the front runner.

Dulles, but that would mean I would have to enter the state of Virginia. Not quite sure I'm up for that! :)

Joey

But he used CAPITAL LETTERS. That makes his statement beyond dispute.

Wow – this whole time I thought his keyboard was broken! I was going to ask for his address so I can send him another one.

Dulles, but that would mean I would have to enter the state of Virginia. Not quite sure I'm up for that! :)

You live in PG County, MD for Petesake! I'm surprised you are fearful of ANYTHING!

Oh, and it's the COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, mister!

P.S. Use of CAPS was simply for the free keyboard! :P

The Dulles site was long ago discarded as not being big enough – as in, bigger than the Host, or perhaps even as big.

Why should facts like that get in the way of a good rant, eh? 8)=

In my experience as a manufacturer and importer and a veteran of many years as an exhibitor at HMGSE conventions, I can say that over the last 5 years there has been a dramatic shift in the "acceptability" of non-historical gaming by a majority of HMGSE con attendees. Whereas 5 years ago, most historical gamers would not go near anything but a historical game, the majority will play in one and some even buy non-historical games. Non-historical I am defining as everything that isn't strictly historically based.

I could care less that GW has gaming tables if they don't take away from any historical gaming. If it draws a few hundred more people to the convention, great. If you don't like GW and attend the convention then just stay away from their area. Heck there are some gamers that totally avoid the other tournaments going on for the same reasons. In a nutshell who cares?

I am also glad that Bob Giglio and his staff are running the convention. If anyone can make the convention a success, it is Bob and his staff. It will take more than the first year at the relocated site to be judged a success or not. As Bob Coggins said, the first year of a move is typically followed by lower attendance. I think Bob and the HMGSE BOD know this all too well and will be doing everything possible to make it as successful as possible.

The decision has already been made to move. At this juncture does it really matter? What are the alternatives – watch from the sidelines and then complain if it fails?

As an HMGSE member, I for one will be supporting the Historicon convention.

In a vacuum I would say that Baltimore is a good spot. In that same vacuum I might rather go to Baltimore and havemore restaurants in walking distance, etc. And while I do not believe with the panic attack that the Host is about to explode from our attendance, we are bumping up against capacity.

I just don't like the idea, way to common in all areas of society, that if the current situation is not perfectly satisfactory than ANY change, no matter how poorly considered is worth a try.

Knowing how cantankerous we all are as a group you would think that anyone planning a move and not wanting to kick a hornet's nest would have taken great pains to make sure that the plan was widely disseminated. Sensing sessions and years aof vague talk about a move don't meet that target, imo.

Now there is a lot of bad feeling and many people saying they will not go. I always said I would probably go and I probably will. But if half the guys I enjoy gaming with don't go thenthe convention is a lot less fun for me and maybe I don't go back.

I also think that it would have been wise to really get all the ancillary issues worked out before committing to the convention space. Regardless of where you come down on the idea of the need for a new venue, I doubt a serious case can be made that another year in Lancaster was a major problem. If the details could not be worked out then why not push the move to 2011 and get the details nailed down? That's not a reactionary, anti-move at all costs attitude. We are talking about a fourfold increase in venue costs, incremental increases in hotel costs for attendees, massive increases (from free) for parking, and probably moderate increases for food. Logistics, ingress, egress, and similar items also posed a lot of questions, many of which remain to be answered. I still have to wonder if a GM running two games is going to have to pay to get back into a parking lot four or five times as he shuttles back and forth to the unloading area.

Also, the "if you build it they will come" notion that simply moving to a new venue would dramatically increase attendance never made sense to me and no real evidence to support the assertion was ever put forth.

Now, having saddled the con with a much higher cost structure another controversial thing is undertaken to try and beef up attendance to support the new reality. I personally have no trouble with SF and F gaming and do some myself. However a massive GW involvement will likely incrementally change the character of the convention in some ways. If the event ends up having 6,000 or 7,000 attendees then the core historical group is now half the people there. Would this bother some people? Would it change the event? There are definitely positives. Clearly, SF and F gaming is a major feeder for new historical gamers, though I would wager the percentage of those gamers who enter historicals is very small from a percentage point of view.

Is Historicon improved if attendance goes up hundreds of people, substantially all of whom are there to compete in self-contained GW tournaments? Would current attendees feel this result was worth sustaining higher costs for registration, lodging, and parking? How about if we lose 500 on the other side as Historical gamers unable or unwilling to bear higher costs drop out? Is it right to trade 500 longstanding attendees to gain 1,000 new ones that are not within the main scope of the organization?

I sympathize with anyone trying to find an alternate location. Real convention centers are expensive, as we can see with BCC. The Host is an enormous facility for someplace that is basically an inexpensive dump.

I just wish that the move were better thought out before a commitment was made. I think the cost structure is going to be a problem and the logistics even worse. That said, in many ways I think it will be nice to be in Baltimore. The ability to walk to many restaurants will be a plus. Certainly the concern about crime, etc., is vastly overblown and not an issue, imo.

One has to wonder, with the move of Fall In to the host and the expansion of Cold Wars to four days, if we are not effectively going back to 2 mainstream historical cons (like pre-fall in) with Historicon morphing into more of a general gaming con or mini-origins?

Again, while I am not sure I like that I could see some advantages. One, as a feeder into historicals as mentioned before. Two, it may bring more dollars into the dealer universe which can only make that healthier.

We will see what happens I guess.

I don't know how they are going to do it, and I not a fan of non-historical, non-military games, but honestly, they could have 200 GW games off in some side rooms at the BCC and I doubt we'd even know it unless we went looking for them.

The move was in large part made because the convention was out of programming space at the Host. Yes, you can heap on a bunch of other reasons and hopes too, but they lost FoW returning due to lack of space, and they couldn't do any more at the Host if they wanted to in terms of games, painting seminars, lectures, guest artists, etc, etc.

I dunno if the BCC is the answer, but I understand what the problem was, and I understand the organization's frustration in that it couldn't do anything else at the Host, even though they wanted to.

What are the alternatives – watch from the sidelines and then complain if it fails?

But it's also a two way street.
If the move fails the pro-Baltimore folks will be quick to say it failed because "we" failed to support it.

Which is a total crock of .

If it fails it will because of the decisions that the BOD made. If it succeeds it will be the same thing.

What's next, blame the economy?

Well guess what? Conventions fail for two reasons. The decisions made were not good enough to attract a large enough audience to succeed or the weather goes crap.

That's the bottom line. And yes, I have put on four successful conventions in the past.

Agreed Ed on many of your points.

However, absent of information of when contracts were signed, whether a contract at the Host was up, etc etc, one has no information to come to a logical conclusion of what they would have done in the same situation.

Personally, from a fiscal point of view, based on how the economy has been during the last 15 months, unless their hands were tied due to issues such as above, I personally would not have chosen this timeframe to move.

That said, as I mentioned before I will support the convention. I want the club to survive the move. Our wargaming community with a damaged HMGSE will not be a good one. I will do what I can to prevent that from happening.

Personally, from a fiscal point of view, based on how the economy has been during the last 15 months, unless their hands were tied due to issues such as above, I personally would not have chosen this timeframe to move.

Totally agree on that one as well.

I wonder if they have anyone that's been in the hotel business helping them negotiate.
You never negotiate for the next year, you always negotiate two years in advance.
This way if they hem and haw you have enough time to start looking.

It is an odd choice of economic times in which to commit to a massive increase in costs.

Guys,

When HMGS started the historical miniatures hobby was weak and had an almost non-existent profile. Thus, the early cons were held in modest venues where there was little room for fantasy/scifi so we restricted these games and prioritized the dealers.

Today historical miniatures is much stronger and though we are not equal to Games Workshop, enterprising companies have developed business models which include poaching gamers from GW, see FoW.

A few years back I attended a Columbus Origins held in a large convention center. So large they were able to place all of the historical and fantasy/scifi miniatures in a room that is so large that the fantasy sci/fi disappeared from notice. The board and card and roleplaying games were segregated in a seperate room and I never had to look at them. The dealers' room did of course cater to all parts of the gaming hobby, including computer wargaming (Matrix).

Well the BCC is at least that large and the 100 or so GW tables will get lost in its vastness and with a little planning historical gamers will never have to gaze on the Great Satin.

To the contrary the GW gamers will be exposed to historical produce and may even buy from some of our cross-over dealers.

As for hard times, curiously historical miniatures is an inexpensive hobby and being on the low end, sorta like Walmart, the well being of the hobby is not subject to being affected.

Good Gaming.

Bob Coggins

"To the contrary the GW gamers will be exposed to historical produce…"

I'm not sure any will really be inclined to switch over from elves and orcs to the Broccoli-Kohlrabi War of 1758.

I could be wrong.

Allen

"It is an odd choice of economic times in which to commit to a massive increase in costs."

Actually, it's better to negotiate leases during bad economic times because you're much more likely to get a better deal and have more say in the choice of weekends. That being said, I was surprised to see how high the numbers were for the cost increases. While I think investing in a bigger space and diversifying from the "Lancaster" convention model is a good one, multiplying costs 3 to 4 times is something I probably would not have done. But, I also don't know all the numbers that were under consideration.

The Dulles site was long ago discarded as not being big enough – as in, bigger than the Host, or perhaps even as big.

historygamer,

From each of their sites:

The Lancaster Host has "more than 80,000 square feet of premium meeting space that can be configured to accommodate gatherings of virtually any size or scope." link

The Dulles Expo Center is a "…200,000 square foot facility [that] offers over 2,400 FREE parking spaces and a 15,000 square foot conference center on-site." link

It has over twice the advertised space as the Host, so size wasn't the reason. Availability, ammenities, or cost may have been legitimate concerns, but they definitely have the room.

"Well the BCC is at least that large and the 100 or so GW tables will get lost in its vastness and with a little planning historical gamers will never have to gaze on the Great Satin."

I thought witches were made of wood, not cloth. But I suppose THAT would float, too… 8)=

Dulles was turned down because it is not as fancy or glamorous as the BCC. This is about competing with Origins and Gen Con now…

Competing not directly, but looking to raise Historicon and HMGS' "stock" to a similar level…

"Hey mister, whatcha' doing?"

"We're recreating the Battle of Gettysburg in miniature and fighting it out to see if the results change."

"Why?"

"Because we're idiots."

"Can I play too?"

"No. We're old and we hate kids."

"Ok. Can I watch?"

"Come to think of it, old Bobby Lee over there hates kids far more than I do. He's a retired teacher. Roll these dice and let's see if we can't give him a coronary."

Maybe there will be an impressionable ten year old kid at next year's Historicon who will wander up to some of you old buzzards and perhaps learn something like I did 25 years ago.

Games Workshop has done a fantastic job of creating a cult around "The Games Workshop Hobby" but there is always a chance that a tiny few of those players will wander over and get enthralled by the historicals and maybe learn something useful.

Then again, they'll probably just be dressing as Orks and screaming "Waagh!" and asking the historical gamers how old they are and whether they'll be dying soon. They'll also be laughing at your armies because they spent more money on a single resin Space Marine Ultra-Crushalot Tank from "Forgeworld" than you paid for your entire army of Gauls.

Wow, another controversy. Who da thunk it? Guys, we missed our chance to kill this pig, by putting people on the BOD with delusions of growth grandeur, fame, fortune, whatever.
If you want a say other than voting with your feet and squirreling away the pocketbook, you've got to stand and ask questions, BEFORE, a potential heretic gets on the board. Having said that, when NOVAG was founded in 1985 it was a mixed club of fantasy and historical and we lived with it for a long time until most of the fantasy role play guys went off for greener pastures. I say keep the focus historical, mandate a percentage of historical stock from the dealers and hold the line there. Still this would take a group of members who really give a darn not sitting before a computer screen to show up, make a motion and get the motion passed by the BOD. If a by laws knowledgeable person could get such a motion together, I would be in attendance at a membership meeting and support it and other
measures to keep us a primarily historical group with the fantasy stuff on the side where it belongs but knowing such games are still enjoyed by many historical players. I've heard it said a million times, relax it's only a game. The real thing is far beyond our scope. Someone has to step up and I nominate Long Island Gamer because of his stand at Hisoricon, but I for sure don't have the time right now and if you've noticed I've pretty much have dropped the anti-move threads, because it is OVER, time to move on. The impeach Pete etc group will never happen unless a group gets together and passes a motion or two at an official HMGS meeting sometime, somewhere. Otherwise the diatribes are fun, I admit, but really useless as time goes on. I think there's room for all toy figures afficienados in our hobby but primarily historical miniatures. Newer members who weren't around, HMGS was founded for some very good reasons; there was a time when historicals were pretty much ignored in favor of fantasy role play and we should not forget it although there is a whole lot more to choose from and more people involved now than then. And there was no Internet. Only snail mail.

Valator, I am lucky I didn't have coffee in my mouth reading that or my laptop would have been history.

In any case, what I have seen over the past 10 years is a big change in the attitude of historical gamemasters. It is rare to have an issue with a grumpy GM these days and most are welcoming and encourage new players. Yet there still are a few GMs that are perpetually grumpy and discourage newbies – especially young ones.

Just like to say, didn't mean to toot my own horn about being missed. I'm really a pretty humble person if you know who I really am without giving away my real name for reasons of my own personal security. So if you did notice I wasn't around, I humbly thank you. Did any of you know I was doghawsed? Is it only James Mattes whom you care is missing? I suspect foul play, but nobody bothered to check and see if old vonLoudon was still breathing, did they?
Just what I thought from you bunch of crotchety old wargamers. Good day to you too.

You were gone? Who are you again? Oh, you won't say. 8)=

Ugh, will people please stop trying to say that this was some dark closet secret and that no studies were run.

There were scheduled and advertised meetings on this subject for years. Most of those were (shock and gasp) not well attended but they were all advertised. In them they presented endless slide shows and studies. With all sorts of statistics that could have been debated at that time.

As for GW, big whoop! They play games with toy soldiers just like us, let em play. How come no one has said word one about the BattleTech guys running all day demo games and sucking up entire rooms at the Host. That has been going on for quite sometime. "Ummm geee, well no one told me about that!" Or perhaps Battletech is a historical game now.

Thank you Brigade Games for bringing some social responsibilities into this debate. I also will support this move whether I agree with it or not because the elected officials made a decision and I prefer to see my club move forward so that I can continue to play with my Toy Soldiers and see my friends.

The TOP TEN Reasons why you aren't allowed to complain about the move to the BCC, GW involvement, non-historical games, and etc.:

1) You missed all of those Saturday 8 am meetings.

2) You didn't vote in the last election (HMGS-East, not U.S.).

3) You haven't run an HMGS-East convention.

4) You don't live in Maryland.

5) You didn't join HMGS in 1985.

6) They know what they are doing – better than you do.

7) It's just a hobby (unless it's their problem, then it's the end of the world).

8) You just don't know enough yet – once you have a drink of this nice purple liquid… er, I mean "listen better", you'll endorse the idea wholeheartedly.

9) You just haven't run the numbers properly, that's all.

10) Because if you keep it up, they'll find your body in the water out by Dundalk with your pants pockets full of GW lead (what they make anymore).

Huh? Where am I? What's going on here?

I wrote the GW gamers would be "exposed" I did not say there would be a stampede. Long ago I learned gamers attend conventions (game days?) to play the games they have always played not to get involved with new stuff. The vast majority of Warhammer gamers will ignore us as we ignore them but some will slip their leashes and meander through the dealers' rooms and be "exposed" to something different. And that is a good thing.

Regarding Dulles – A few years back I had the opportunity to visit the Dulles Convention Center as ConOps and along with Egvedt who was also on the board then.

The D.C.C. is a converted "box store." It certainly is not fancy with tons of pillars throughout but the major problem was the interior layout which was entirely inappropriate for Historicon. The hotel was brand new then but it only had 226 rooms. Historicon is a 1200 room convention. This meant most gamers would have to stay in small hotels/motels and drive to the facility. I won't even begin to mention how dearly the Boston Management company held the facility but suffice it was more expensive than the BCC and that was almost a decade ago. The then management company was getting kicked out by the Owner who may or may not have taken over the management of the facility.

In short the management of the facility was in transition, the interior was poorly laid out for a miniatures convention, most of the motel rooms were a half mile to a mile away and the price was excessive. Other than that it is the perfect facility.

Good gaming.

Bob Coggins

I work across the road from the Dulles Convention Center and I'll echo what others have said. It's a great place for a craft fair or computer fair (bought two of my desktops there over the years) but it seems completely unsuited to our purposes.

Just for the record:
* I'm looking forward to Baltimore
* I like the Host (and it's non-Euclidean architecture)
* I like Gettysburg (it's less than an hour from my house)
* My first HMGS-E con was Timonium 2003. I went for GW but came back the following year in Gettysburg and have only missed one HMGS-E con since. I haven't played Warhammer for years but it's likely I would never have discovered HMGS and historicals without it.
* I have a great deal of respect for the Board and the many others who give their time and effort to running our conventions. My skin is nowhere near thick enough to take the kind of abuse they do and not run screaming.
* In all honesty, I'll most likely follow the conventions wherever they go.

Chris

"How come no one has said word one about the BattleTech guys running all day demo games and sucking up entire rooms at the Host. That has been going on for quite sometime. "Ummm geee, well no one told me about that!" Or perhaps Battletech is a historical game now."

Great point.

@firstvarty1979- LOL at your 10 reasons people shouldn't complain list.

Despite objections, cautions, and questions…things will either ork out for 2010 or they won't.

I'll get my coat…

12:10 Friday Cold Wars 2010 – Kinderhook Room, Lancaster Host.
"OK you guys with the Classic Battletech…..Out!….this is an historical convention."
"But we're in the program, set-up and ready to play."
"I don't care this is an historical convention."
"But this is where we've played Classic Battletech for the past three years at this convention."
"Oh….well then…..that makes this a game historically correct in the past at this convention hotel then, Right?"
"Right!"
"OK then."
Seven hours later in the Marietta Room, Lancaster Host
"Hey you guys over there playing Snowball's Chance. What's that snowploy model doing on the table and who's Old Man Crabbe? This is an historical convention."
"But we were here last year playing the same game in this very room."
"Right, OK then."

Very nice list, fv but I was pointing out what members would actually have to do to make some changes. If I'm factually wrong, set me right. If I'm rhetorically wrong that's different. See my list on the thread about despite torches and pitchforks. If you want to change policy, you have to do it within the organization and its by laws. If you just want to bitch so be it. Which do you want? I've done and heard enough bitching for now until the next major thing goes wrong. In the meantime I'm planning and trying to acquire more armies of little soldiers which is what really makes the hobby work for me.

So just to be clear so I am not pigeonholed into the wrong clique on these threads, I am anti-Baltimore move, bad decision, bad timing, throw the bums out clique. I don't care who complains, whines, moans, throws mud, tries to deny somebody elses right to complain, or whatever their opinion is. I am also now complaining less and looking forward to some wargaming in November, February, and March at various cons. I will also be if at possible in Baltimore for H-Con. Come or don't come, your choice. Continue to work against and complain, your choice. Actually make a policy move. Your choice. I don't hate or dislike anybody that has bothered to put forth an opinion on these forums. My choice, courtesy of Webmaster Bill A. I am not trying to convince you to do anything you don't want to do or don't agree with. I'm going to participate in this organization as I see fit within the bounds of propriety and gentlemanly demeanor. Again my choice. So have fun, stay safe, keep debating if you want, let me make my decisions and I'll "let" you make yours, my fellow wargamers.

Wow! We are up to page six and have resolved what so far?

Seems that a number of historical gamers may not attend the Baltimore show. Their loss is sad since it is historical gamers that Historicon was started for and not the Fantasy/SciFi-GW crowd.

The HMGS-East board and many of the gamers who plan to attend are not worried about this since the loss of historical gamers will be offset by the GW/SciFi/Fantasy crowd.

I wonder if they will sell day passes to let historical gamers visit the vendor room. I would expect so sicne that is the trend among many multi-genre conventions.

picture

Now that was really funny. Great link.

"Actually, it's better to negotiate leases during bad economic times because you're much more likely to get a better deal and have more say in the choice of weekends. That being said, I was surprised to see how high the numbers were for the cost increases. While I think investing in a bigger space and diversifying from the "Lancaster" convention model is a good one, multiplying costs 3 to 4 times is something I probably would not have done. But, I also don't know all the numbers that were under consideration."

NYC,

I understand what you are saying about getting better rates during a down period. Apart from the fact that it does not look like they got a very good deal, the problem is there is no lasting savings. If a retail chain signs a 15 years lease during a recession they enjoy that lower rent in the future. However in 2, 3, or 5 years they will still be negotiating new contracts and will pay market rates at that time.

All they managed to do was up their whole ante at a time when prudence would seem to have been wiser. And, in a time when it is reasonable to expect that some attendees will be harder pressed to attend at all they have created a defacto price increase, whether direct or indirect (through hotels, parking, etc.) which is akin to a store raising prices in a recession.

I don't argue with the general argument you make about growth. I agree with your assessment that a fourfold increase in cost is probably a bad idea. That is quite a jump in growth for a con that has not shown explosive growth.

Also, for all the praise that justifiably gets heaped on the volunteers who work the cons, has anyone considered how much more has been shoveled on their plate? In addition to the larger, more complex facility we have volunteers helping GMs unload and watching their stuff and manning storerooms – all in addition to what they had to do already. Is this fair or reasonable? One thing that should be considered is that at a certain size a con becomes problematic for volunteers and amateurs to manage. Is the next step professional management and planning, with the attendant costs? How big can we go with volunteers?

"One thing that should be considered is that at a certain size a con becomes problematic for volunteers and amateurs to manage. Is the next step professional management and planning, with the attendant costs? How big can we go with volunteers?"

So are we now changing the debate from it is too big for the Host, flea bag, bad location, etc., to "It should not grow because HMGS could not run it anymore"? I am just trying to keep my scorecard accurate.

"So are we now changing the debate from it is too big for the Host, flea bag, bad location, etc., to "It should not grow because HMGS could not run it anymore"? I am just trying to keep my scorecard accurate."

I think what's being said is that if the Con grows naturally then all should be pleased of the results. The problem seems to be with where the growth is coming from; GW.

Replace the GW influx with 400 more DBM'ers and I don't think we see six pages of arguements. Replace them with 400 more FoW guys and at worst you'd see snickering about the 'people who don't understand WW2' threads. The concern is that GW already runs half a dozen Games Days, do we want the premier historical convention to turn into Games Day Lite?

Who benefits? GW certainly does. But if the 'historical' wing of the party has to provide the con support; at an increasing cost in volunteerism, and dollars, can that cost be justified? The historical niche is a small one; if there is a mandate to grow historical awareness as part of the non-profit charter then certainly there should be a limitation as to the number of spots occupied by obviously non-historic games.

This shouldn't come down to 'my game is better than your game'. IMO we should worry about our own backyard first. GW doesnt need historics, HMGS shouldn't come to the point where the organization 'needs' mainline GW products to fill a building. Bring in WAB and there is no issue--it's just another historical ruleset--but instead its WFB/40K/LoTR. Should HMGS support the other niche games, sure. I doubt we'll ever see 400 weird wars/pirates/zombies/Flintloque players appear as a block. Supporting gaming in general is a good goal; but must be secondary to supporting hisorical gaming.

Anyone curious to see what the GW response to club tables of WAB at Baltimore Games Day would be? I'm not confident they would be as welcoming as we intend to be.

Anyhow, my two cents.

@Tilting – Bravo! Well said! I nominate you to be the spokesman for the "save Historicon" side of the argument! :)

I own and play GW stuff. I have been against the rising percentage of sci-fi/fantasy games at Historicon for years. I really don't want to "take it to the next level" either. If I wanted "the next level" and sci-fi/fantasy, then I'd go to a GW Gamesday or Gencon or Origins…

BTW, It appears GW is only holding one Gamesday in the US next year. It's going to be in the BCC and… Wait for it.. It's supposed to be in August. I'm still not completely convinced it won't be in July… :)

Well said Tilting! My fear is that Historicon and HMGS-E is losing their focus – in hopes of having a bigger convention.

Saturday, Nov. 7th 8:00am will find me at the member meeting. I'm curious to see how this plays out.