"Battlefront acquires Wargames Illustrated and Gale Force 9" Topic

"Whatever BF do to WI it can only make me more likely to buy it as at present my purchase likelyhood is roughly zero."

That's interesting. Whatever BF do to WI it can only make me LESS likely to buy it as at present my purchase likelihood is exactly zero.

You don't do that by bringing in teenagers who think that FoW is a "realistic" WW2 wargame system. (What do you mean, Shermans DIDN'T Charge into battle wheel sprocket to wheel sprocket???)

I disagree. I used to read the BF forums, and there were lots of people who came to the hobby ignorant about history but wanting to play a game with Tiger tanks. Many of those were greatly educated by playing the game, and learning the history behind the game. Sure, some didn't care, some were power gamers, but I'd say that most seemed to develop a love of the history too, and developed a deeper interest.

"Think yourself lucky you've actually GOT a FLGS, we have nothing here (unless you count Orc's Nest in central London)."

Sorry – I just find it hard to believe that ALL of the FLGS are gone in London with one exception…

On the purchase of WI:

I expect a change from a magazine of that favours retouched photos of 28mm abominations of human anatomy to retouched photos of 15mm abominations of human anatomy.

It'll be interesting to see the actual results. I'll be watching my local bookstore and browsing, and probably still buying from time to time.
--
Tim

Duncan has worked on WI and on Miniature Wargames prior to their schism for over 25 years,I remember the first issues like yesterday and have an eternal debt for the inspiration they provided. If he's cashing in, then good luck to him, well done! I hope he got a big old payout.
I havn't bought more than 5 copies of WI for at least the last 10 years- why? because for a large portion of that time its been a Foundry journal and I don't much care for their product, and also, articles on Paraguyan light infantry, fantasy Victorian explorers, and "how to make my figures look wierd" painting masterclasses by Kevin Dalimore don't float my boat either.
Battlefront? well, yes, they will try and sell their product and good luck to them too.
Apparently they have "a good business model" so that makes everything ok.
I might buy a copy out of curiousity, then who knows?
The point is, I made up my mind a very long time ago that as a wargames consumer I would buy stuff…which isn't the same as being sold stuff.

"Sorry – I just find it hard to believe that ALL of the FLGS are gone in London with one exception…"

OK, someone prove me wrong …

When someone does Mike, let me know….but we might be in for a long wait.

MatoWar wrote:

>As long as they still publish my article I dont mind :)

Yeah, and you might even get paid… unlike me ;-)

Mike Snorbens wrote:

>"Sorry – I just find it hard to believe that ALL of the FLGS are gone in London with one exception…"

Oh ferfuxsakes… this again??

TMP link

w.

Mike Snorbens wrote:
>"Sorry – I just find it hard to believe that ALL of the FLGS are gone in London with one exception…"

Er … no I didn't. What I did say was:
OK, someone prove me wrong …

"Oh ferfuxsakes… this again??"

TMP link

Yup. Like I said, only Orc's Nest comes remotely near qualifying as a FLGS, and even that is a poor attempt compared to the shop I once had (oh, 30+ years ago) in my home town.

normsmith
''Scanning through the posts I get the impression that most of the negative posts are coming from people who……''

Well I am actually hoping for a positive outcome: there are things wrong with WI and one can only hope Battlefront will do better.

''I always suspect that the biggest criticism for commercially succesful complanies comes mainly from the 'want something for nothing' tight wads who would be happy to have a sponge on a matchstick for a tree if it was free !''

That's insulting, normsmith. To most of us, this is our hobby, it's not a shopping trip. I join in to play games, and I buy when I have to and make stuff myself when I can: that's not the actions of a 'tight wad': making and preparing games or figures yourself is what the hobby IS. Doh!

And to accuse people of being 'tight wads' for not wanting to exist as commercial prey; for enjoying the creative side of their hobby rather than delegating creativity to a stranger who charges for it, especially now when people are short of money all over the industrialised world….well, please consider how that might sound arrogant to some.

Regards

Bangorstu wrote:

How many historical gamers are local to you? How many of them are under 30?

Enough so that I can get a game whenever I want and why should I care?

None of them playiing Flames of War.

Mike – well I started wargaming as a teenager, so yes I tend to think bringing youngsters into the hobby is a good thing.

Otherwise, in 30 years time, there will be no hobby.

And to be fair to FoW, whether you like the rules or not, they make their game very easy to pick up and play. Getting people into the hobby has to be a good thing.

Once I've got the little blighters playing FoW, I can educate them (if they want to be educated). But first we have to get them playing.

As I said, I've had a bunch playing early war Brits using QRF and Peter Pig miniatures trying valiantly to defend Calais. FoW is, like all rules, what you make of it.

Hopefully I'll get them playing FoG soon…

But to get to the point at hand, if Battlefront can keep the high production values and give WI some content worth reading, it's a win-win.

I expect a change from a magazine of that favours retouched photos of 28mm abominations of human anatomy to retouched photos of 15mm abominations of human anatomy.

Oh Tim, you still aren't peddling that old 1/76th Plastic Figures vs. any scale Metal Figs rant are you!!!

I too am intrigued by what the future will bring and don't think it will necessarily be bad… We will have to wait and see…

And the end of the day FOW ("Farce of War" as it's known here) is basically WH40K with WW2 models – and it is marketted on a GW model – but there is no disputing that it has got more younger (WH playing) guys back into historicals (at least here in NZ) as well as other historical guys who normally never played WW2. Personally it's never excited me and I am far happier playing Crossfire (or similar, where the focus is on real life challenges & tactics rather than gamey mechanics), but Battlefront have certainly done a fantastic job of succeeding to date…

And Slitherine & Osprey have also now followed the GW model with FOG – so the house magazine may end up being the way of the future… Like it or not…

FWIW My magazine vote is Battlegames (1st) and WS&S and D&P (2nd equal) (see wargaming.info ) – I am not renewing my Miniature Wargames sub and will be shortly signing up to WS&S or D&P instead – My WI sub is due to run for a while, so we will see what comes next 6-9 months, but might end up dropping that too, to get a sub to the third of my 'top 3' publications above…

john M, leave tim alone, His deformed sherman picture is such a cool photochop…..

farce of War……the local scottish name is fudge of wargame, because fudge's dimensions can change depending on the ambient temprature and the way you look at it.

I really hope the variety in subject matter improves for WT.
Then i might buy it.

I always thought teens with ADD were the basic recruitment pool for wargaming – it's where Mycenius & I came from….although IIRC he was stil a teen at 25…..;)

I stopped buying WI when they ran full page ads for an alternative medicine huckster selling magic magnets or something like that.

I imagine that given a few years the magazine will morph into an in house monthly catalogue like White Dwarf. Good luck to them I say. I don't buy that mag either.

Oh Tim, you still aren't peddling that old 1/76th Plastic Figures vs. any scale Metal Figs rant are you!!!

I'll have you know a number of AB SU-76 crew made a debut here last June and were on display at a late war CF game I ran this past week at a very, very small (5 tables including an anime RPG) local con. My 28mm friends (running a GW wild west game) were duly impressed! But everyone else was impressed, at the (mostly) plastic and metal figures alike.

There was one young fellow from the Battletech table looking at my stuff and remarking that he had a FOW panzer grenadier unit together. He does good work on his 'mechs. I tried to be encouraging to him, though I probably won't play with him – he games at the local shop which features warhammer and BT and I really prefer just playing with my friends at my house. It was exhausting moving a car load of terrain and models for me and until I get a transplant, probably won't do it again. But the point is, FOW is bringing interest into our WWII genre and I've always liked it for that, even though I've never played.
--
Tim

I stopped buying WI when they ran full page ads for an alternative medicine huckster selling magic magnets or something like that.

That idiot really ed me off. I was shocked a piece of garbage article like that got through, but in all fairness, I think it took the publisher by surprise too, based on the discussion here on TMP shortly after the appearance of the issue.

No, I'm anxious to see what BF does with the magazine. If it becomes mostly WWII, even with the awful BF figures, I'm sure there will be great articles on painting and stuff that is applicable to those of us who are still military modelers.
--
Tim

In the release doesn't it say that they want to
're-launch the magazine soon with an increased page count, a wider range of articles covering every game, scale and era of the historical hobby'?
Why do so many people assume an evil corporate motive to mislead us and end up featuring exclusively WWII (FoW) articles?
Add to this that Battlefront have become global distributors for Warlord Games, and that these guys are quite buddy buddy with the Perrys and the owners of Great War miniatures, amongst others, and are we not looking at the potential vehicle for a wide range of interesting wargaming articles?
Call me naive but I believe that the guys from Battlefront might care about wargaming as a hobby and not just be corporate raiders.

This will be okay for the hobby in general. That doesn't mean each and every one of us have to jump and cheer for it either.

WI really has stunk for quite awhile, but I don't like 40K WW2 that much either. I gave FOW a chance. I promoted it as I hoped to get young folks into our hobby. I played it for a spell and collected plenty of their books and minis. It did bring in new and younger folks, but they didn't seem to go farther than the FOW table. They don't want to leave the 40K comfort zone. Oh well, at least BF makes nice models and such, right….??? But then came the endless releases of must have books, followed by must have new editions, followed by more must have new books. Too much money…sorry. Also, FOW tournaments tend to be too all engrossing. They want your whole day. Games, judging of your armies and "histories," pub quizzes and more. No need for you to play any of the other games at Origins or Historicon, right??? No thanks.

WI will almost certainly become BF's house organ. I suspect this will be timed to coincide with their new gaming period. I strongly suspect that will be Napoleonics. Think of the endless numbers of books on obscure nations, principalities and duchies….think of all the minis that will be required to field the armies in those books….Napoleonics gaming needs a facelift, but man….no more 40K games….please!!!!

On the sunny side, we'll now have the Subscriber's Free Deal with 3 15mm Tiger Tanks sculpted by Mark Copplestone…bound to be a wonderful marketing scheme, followed by Mark's rendition of 3 Stugs, then 3 Shermans, etc, etc…cool!

I wonder if Battlefront will start to open their own stores?

Natholeon, I too have been wondering at the number of people here who have obviously not read the fine print of the news release: "… a wider range of articles covering every game, scale and era of the historical hobby".

I mentioned Airfix magazine a while back. I still think it was a good model (pun not intended!) of a house magazine that managed to balance pushing its own products while still having a lot of varied and readable content.

As for FoW and BF, I'm not a WW2 gamer, but browsing through their products at our FLGS (especially their lavish books) is still one of my pleasures of this hobby. BF haven't forgotten what wargaming is all about: fun!

Browsing the FoW website is another of my enjoyable pastimes, because even for a non-FoW player, there is so much that is interesting or useful there. If they can do the same to WI, well, good on them … and even more so if they are indeed planning on articles on lots of other scales, games and eras.

Ever look at the Tamiya magazine? That's really an example of how this kind of thing can be done right. I agree that WI has blown goats for the last while. The change can only be for the better.

w.

Sudwind – aren't all tournaments engrossing? I only play ancients at competitions (and now have a trophy! For coming last at Burton… :))

I mean two games of aorund 3-3.5 hours each is only ever going to leave the evening. Or do your competitions expect you to play in the evening as well?

Sorry, just interested. We return you to your usual programming.

"Why do so many people assume an evil corporate motive to mislead us and end up featuring exclusively WWII (FoW) articles?"

Because it's one thing to say:
're-launch the magazine soon with an increased page count, a wider range of articles covering every game, scale and era of the historical hobby'

- and something completely different to actually do it.

We all saw what happened with GW and White Dwarf. We also saw what happened with WI and Foundry. Why should WI and BF be any different?

Call me naive, but I believe that the guys from Battlefront only care about their own version of "the hobby". Whether they are "corporate raiders" remains to be seen.

I'm unable to access Battlefront page right now so I can not read their announcements on this (firewall problems and that). Have they told anything about the current subscribers?.

Magic Magnets man is my friend. He is a really decent bloke who has a weird blind-spot when it comes to that particular insanity.He actually thinks they work. I try to forget about it when we are playing a game.

I had forgotten all about the fury it caused when the ad ran.

Pat

I always thought teens with ADD were the basic recruitment pool for wargaming – it's where Mycenius & I came from….although IIRC he was still a teen at 25…..;)

I still am now!!! I luuuvvvv my toys… Big & small & otherwise… Well except not too small – no wargaming figs under 1/76th (20mm) please!

I'll have you know a number of AB SU-76 crew made a debut here last June and were on display at a late war CF game I ran this past week…

Ha! That’s the second time you've admitted to having metal figs Timmy! Timmmmyyyy! Timmmmmmyyyyyy! (sorry, couldn’t help myself with the South Park impersonation)

I don't recall the Magnet thing – what issue was that in…? I must confess my current sub to WI I only renewed because it was having regular photo spreads of stuff by a couple of guys who I really admire their terrain and stuff (e.g. Paul Darnell of "Touching History" series – e.g. the Sudan Demo Game a couple of years ago) plus like seeing lots of photos of Perry Miniatures & Foundry stuff and such like – so I just got it for eye candy colour photos and had no expectation of substance to the text – but then that's been WI since the 90's really…

In the release doesn't it say that they want to 're-launch the magazine soon with an increased page count, a wider range of articles covering every game, scale and era of the historical hobby'?

Hi Natholeon – correct – I wasn't suggesting they would do it overnight (or at all) but I think a lot of people probably just think/expect (including me) that there will be a natural 'drift' (unintentionally) towards increased content of their own product – unless they keep a truly independent editorial team… And I have no doubt that the BF guys do have a certain commitment to Wargaming as a hobby, etc, but the business has gone from being a sideline tax-write-off hobby interest to I believe a fully self-sustainable operation – so investing money in WI one expects will need to show some return on that investment…

P.S. Timmmmmyyyyy – I PM'd you!

Tim Marshal on 'The day I suddenly I realised I liked 15mm figures, and that I had been wasting my time with 1/72' would have made a great article for WI.

Looking at the most recent WI, there was about ten minutes worth of reading in it. Sadly, last time I looked at a WD it was about the same, so i would lose out either way.

Pat

"'The day I suddenly I realised I liked 15mm figures, and that I had been wasting my time with 1/72' would have made a great article for WI."

Er … that single sentence would probably have been the entire article. (The rest of the double spread would have been taken up with a big headline: "Tim Marshal on:" and lots of eye candy pics!) :-)

Mike Snorbens says:

You don't do that by bringing in teenagers who think that FoW is a "realistic" WW2 wargame system. (What do you mean, Shermans DIDN'T Charge into battle wheel sprocket to wheel sprocket???)

First, I don't believe that Battlefront has ever billed FOW as a "realistic WW2 Wargming System." The quotes I've seen from the authors are that it is a game based in WW2 history, not a "faithful recreation of WW2 combat." It provides a "feel", not a true to life simulation.

It's only the know-it-alls who find fault with this.

Second, the whole sprocket to sprocket tank thing is a canard. The rules don't require this, don't encourage this tactically, and by the way, they aren't any different in that respect then all those "realistic" rules. It's the player, not the rules.

Finally, why won't you "serious" wargamers ever give Battlefront any credit for all of the historical information they do provide and make accessible? Have you ever perused any of the many, many articles on their website providing details of campaigns, equipment, organizations, etc.?

And it's not just all the "popular" stuff. They have organizations for Free French, Polish Divisions in Normandy, etc. and also make models for Hungarians, Finns, and make models for special equipment like the 21st Panzer Divisions modified French equipment used in Normandy.

I guess none of that matters though because the game doesn't satisfy your vision of what a "realistic" wargame is.

Whatever…..

Bede – well said.

It often appears that to be 'realistic' a rules set has to ignore most of the nations which actually took part in the conflict….

"Second, the whole sprocket to sprocket tank thing is a canard. The rules don't require this, don't encourage this tactically, and by the way, they aren't any different in that respect then all those "realistic" rules. It's the player, not the rules."

So how come it happens so frequently in FoW games and not in other WW2 games?

Careful, Bede, keep talking sense and you'll get "The Twins" all riled up! 8)=

""Second, the whole sprocket to sprocket tank thing is a canard. The rules don't require this, don't encourage this tactically, and by the way, they aren't any different in that respect then all those "realistic" rules. It's the player, not the rules."

So how come it happens so frequently in FoW games and not in other WW2 games?"

I've seen it constantly at HMGS cons in far more Battlefront WW II, Disposable Heroes. and Battleground WW II games, among others. Even in some Arc of Fire and Face of Battle games. As he said, it's mostly the tread-head players and NOT the system that is to blame.

"Finally, why won't you "serious" wargamers ever give Battlefront any credit for all of the historical information they do provide and make accessible? Have you ever perused any of the many, many articles on their website providing details of campaigns, equipment, organizations, etc.?"

Didn't know it was there.

However, I've just been having a look and find the eclectic mix of history articles interspersed with reviews of supplements and new BF models difficult to navigate. Be that as it may, I did take a look at a couple of the history articles. They were about the Eastern Front and for example, one was describing the battle of Vitebsk in which three Russian Fronts attacked three Panzer armies. Now if FoW was an operational level game this woould make some sense, but in FoW the typical player command is a company or two and so the large engagements involving multiple armies are somewhat irrelevant. This is stuff I can get from history books in the library – and in far more depth and detail. (Funny that, since the advent of t'Internet people seem to have forgotten libraries exist). It would have been much more useful to provide well researched scenarios that could actuially be played using FoW.

I've not had time to peruse the site in more detail and frankly I'm put off by the difficulty of finding relevant articles. I've no doubt that the quality of the history articles is good, but the downside is that a typical article being only the equivalent of 3 or 4 pages of A4 (including maps, diagrams and photos) is not going to do much more than scratch the surface of the subject.

"I've seen it constantly at HMGS cons in far more Battlefront WW II, Disposable Heroes. and Battleground WW II games, among others. Even in some Arc of Fire and Face of Battle games. As he said, it's mostly the tread-head players and NOT the system that is to blame."

How strange. I certainly haven't seen anything so silly in any WW2 period games at UK shows. If it had happened the game and the group putting it on would no doubt have been held up to ridicule.

Back when I was still playing micro-armour games back in the 1980's and early 1990's it was common to see tank platoons (or even companies sometimes) lined up hub-to-hub or close to it. Might not be smart tactics, but the gamers were doing their best to maximize firepower like the FOW gamers do now.

I saw this behavior regularly playing Tank Charts, Firefly and Challenger. Tank Charts admittedly treated infantry and artillery as afterthoughts as I recall, and in general it seemed that people played micro-scale games to run around as many tanks as they could. The combination of limited deployment areas and rules where sudden range-band changes increase your ability to hit & inflict damage will encourage gamers to bunch up more than they should… especially if artillery/air power is absent or having a limited effect in the game.

In my opinion it's the same as an Napoleonics game where people have too many troops on the board and end up deploying in a solid line from one edge to the other and just advancing across the board to blow the snot out of each other. It's not historical (usually), but you have limited options for maneuvering, and let's face it, many folks show up to roll dice and blow things up.

FOW has it's issues, but it's hardly alone on that front IMO.

How strange. I certainly haven't seen anything so silly in any WW2 period games at UK shows. If it had happened the game and the group putting it on would no doubt have been held up to ridicule.

You have now removed any lingering desire on my part I may have ever had to play at a con in the UK.
Do you have AARs in which you vote on whom to ridicule and scorn? Or is it just spontaneous?

If all you nay-sayers would devote half the energy you spend on bashing FoW to solving world hunger this would be a far nicer planet to live on.

Wow Mike S – you set high standards.

Me, I like browsing the FOW website every now and again, but then I like easy access history when it is not my main period, I find the painting and terrain articles inspiring, and the general "wow" factor is there in spades for me.

Reminds me of a big fantasy company I know……..

First off Mike complains that FoW isn't historical, now he's complaining that the FoW site is full of history….

I smell someone who wouldn't praise FoW if the designers paid him….

As it happens, I think there is a larger scale FoW board game which deals with a much higher level of combat.

But of course if you bothered to learn the first thing about a game before deriding it, you'd know that. and indeed looked at the web-site.

As for the wheel-to-wheel thing, well it works as well in FoW as other rules – i.e. it doesn't if your opponent has an ounce of sense and a little artillery.

But it happens as much because the ground scale and figure scale is skewed as anything else.

"Second, the whole sprocket to sprocket tank thing is a canard. The rules don't require this, don't encourage this tactically, and by the way, they aren't any different in that respect then all those "realistic" rules. It's the player, not the rules."

So how come it happens so frequently in FoW games and not in other WW2 games?

I don't agree that it doesn't happen so frequently in other games. None of the other WW2 games I own (Battlefront WW2, IABSM, Blitzkrieg Commander, Rapid Fire, Command Decision, Cross Fire) require you to keep your tanks spread out. Consequently, gamers will often keep them very close together to concentrate fire. That's the player's fault, not the games.

In FOW tanks can be spaced between 4" and 8" apart depending on the experience of the unit. If gamers choose to line them up more closely its because they've got too much stuff on a 6x4 table. HOw is that the rules' fault?

Mike, have you read FOW? Have you played it? It doesn't sound like you really know what you're talking about.

I've not had time to peruse the site in more detail and frankly I'm put off by the difficulty of finding relevant articles. I've no doubt that the quality of the history articles is good, but the downside is that a typical article being only the equivalent of 3 or 4 pages of A4 (including maps, diagrams and photos) is not going to do much more than scratch the surface of the subject.

Oh, so the articles aren't good enough? They're not comprehensive?

What other company provides anywhere near this amount of material for free?

Did you consider that the articles can serve as a starting point for more in depth research?

I won't even go into the siliness of your criticism that the availability of information on the internet is making people forget libraries. Whenever you are ready to come into the 21st century I'm cordially inviting you to do so.

"Oh, so the articles aren't good enough? They're not comprehensive?"

The articles are probably good enough for the average teenaged FoW gamer, but any serious wargamer would have rapidly surpassed this overview level in search of more comprehensive coverage.

Dragging this discussion back to the topic in hand, if this is indicative of the quality of articles to be expected in the new Battlefront Illustrated, I know a lot of people who won't be subscribing any more …

"What other company provides anywhere near this amount of material for free?"

Not aware of any, but why should they? They are game companies involved in the production of either miniatures or wargames rules. As afr as I am aware they are NOT in the business of providing free historical resources.

"Did you consider that the articles can serve as a starting point for more in depth research?"

True, but as I intimated above the serious wargamer (as opposed to the teenagers) will probably exhaust the content of the average article on the BF site in about 5 minutes.

"I won't even go into the siliness of your criticism that the availability of information on the internet is making people forget libraries. Whenever you are ready to come into the 21st century I'm cordially inviting you to do so."

Ready to come into the 21st century? What do you mean – libraries are now defunct because "everything you need is now freely available online"? If only that were true … it would make research so much easier. As it is, I often find resources online only to find when I try to access them that they are owned by some academic institution and that unless you have an account with them or a partner organisation you cannot access the material. So it's back to the libraries for me and (shock! horror!) paper books.

Bede – I think people like Mike consider that if you want to research the Slovak Fast Corps then you should bloody well go to Bratislava with a Slovak-English dictionary and look up the primary resources.

Excellent customer services, well produced rules and a regularly updated website with superb articles are evidence of total evil.

Of course in thirty years time he'll wonder why all the model companies have gone broke and he can't find anyone to play with….

Mike, unless you speak excellent Finnish, Rumanian and Hungarian, I think you'll find your research won't turn up much more than a lot of what is on the FoW web-site.

Of course, a serious wargamer would, in pursuit of his hobby, devote years of his life to learning those languages just so he can spend yet more time in libraries in the capitals of the world.

Us more frivolous wargamers do a little research and spend the rest of our time painting toy soldiers, playing games and having fun.

I'll say that if the content in WI is as high in quality as the stuff on the FoW web-page (given the constraints of that medium), it'll improve beyond all recognition.

It may not. It may go horribly wrong. But I'm not going to pre-judge because of an innate prejudice against a set of rules I apparently haven't played…..

"Bede – I think people like Mike consider that if you want to research the Slovak Fast Corps then you should bloody well go to Bratislava with a Slovak-English dictionary and look up the primary resources."

Going back to primary sources is always the preferred research method. We have found time and again how one historian has misinterpreted a source and then his view is picked up and copied by other historians until so many have done so that it becomes accepted as "history" because "they all agree don't they?".

"Excellent customer services, well produced rules and a regularly updated website"

I'm not disputing BF's excellent customer services. The rules are certainly well produced if you like the glossy style with lots of eye candy and I'm sure their web site is regularly updated.

"with superb articles are evidence of total evil."

I have already commented on the perceived quality of the articles on their site. Total evil? Did I say so?

"Of course in thirty years time he'll wonder why all the model companies have gone broke"

As far as I can see there are a large number of companies producing miniatures and rules for the wargaming hobby that show no signs of going broke. Indeed, why should they? More than that, it would appear from what I've seen that wargames companies are bucking the economic downturn. Maybe more wargamers are staying home and painting figures and playing games rather than spending their time and money on more expensive pursuits!!

"and he can't find anyone to play with…."

I mostly game solo. Lack of opponents should never be a problem to a true wargamer.

Hmm… alas for me, primary sources aren't an option for my example since my Slovak is a little rusty.

As is my German, Finnish, Rumanian, Russian, and indeed anything except English, French and a little Welsh.

So, apparently I can't be a serious WW2 wargamer by your definition. Nor can anyone too poor to travel, or who actually has a life and therefore no time to spend days in a library.

You certainly seem to think anything FoW touches turns to dross – as evidenced by the fact their rules ar epopular. given until today you hadn't visited their web-site or indeed you don't seem to have played FoW much I can only assume blatent prejudice.

In 30 years time, unless we encourage the teenagers you clearly despise to take up the hobby, the hobby will be dead. Because time marches on you might have noticed…

That you game solo really, really doesn't surprise me.

"The articles are probably good enough for the average teenaged FoW gamer, but any serious wargamer would have rapidly surpassed this overview level in search of more comprehensive coverage."

Anyone who's that much of a rivet-counter or pretentious enough to call themselves a 'serious wargamer' should skip the miniatures and move directly on to something like Advanced Squad Leader or one of the computer wargames out there. All of your worries about poor C3 or ground scale issues will be taken care of I'm sure.

I always find it entertaining when people start talking about being 'serious' wargamers or 'simulationists',etc. Not sure if it's intellectual snobbery or some form of insecurity that makes people talk this way. Perhaps it's a way to make themselves feel better about spending their time pushing model soldiers around on a tabletop. Not everyone wants the same thing out of the wargaming hobby, so to assume that people who don't share your views on how much research is 'proper' are either teenagers or small-minded people is pretty arrogant IMO.

No one said that the FOW website articles would satisfy a devoted student of WWII. Not everyone requires that level of study to gain some satisfaction from their hobby. I consider them a jumping-off point for further study if I find it interesting.