Concur on the Grant/Lee. That is a hole badly in need of filling.
I am a modeler, not a gamer, and I have the Warlord models of the Matilda, Cromwell, and Churchill. I found them less than satisfactory, for a number of reasons. Built them all before I knew Rubicon existed. I do see your point though. Plastic models are expensive to produce, and there must be better than good prospects on a return on investment.
I have gone over exclusively to Rubicon because of the options they provide, and their attention to detail, without requiring the builder to be a magician with the assembly of twenty parts to make a steel ball. The instructions are clear, leaving no question as to what parts go where. Compare that to the Warlord Matilda turret, where I spent more time researching exactly where all those bits and pieces go, than I did assembling the entire model . In short Rubicon makes a better product, for the same or lesser price. I can purchase a Hanomag 251 for instance, mail order, and pay less for it, including postage than I would if I go to my local hobby shop and purchase the Warlord 251 over the counter.
The only disappointment I have ever had with a Rubicon kit was the chunky hunk of plastic they give you for the headlamps/brush guards for the Crusader. Even then they give you the headlamps as a separate piece with the instructions on how to construct the brush guards from wire stock.
So to me Rubicon is the gold standard in 1/56 scale, a scale that perfectly fits my space for storage limitations. That's why I asked them to consider three of this latest quartet of mine. I can understand market forces though and will respect their decision. Now how about the A9, a tank that is both important historically and double ugly.?
