"Battlefront acquires Wargames Illustrated and Gale Force 9" Topic

"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."

It just so happens that the current material on the BF site relates to Eastern Front subjects, presumably because of the recent publication of the "Hammer & Sickle" supplement. If you go looking for it, I'm sure there is much on both that subject and many aspects of WW2 in the libraries. My local library has IIRC at least a couple of bookcases FULL of books on all aspects of WW2, including the Eastern Front.

"Of course, a serious wargamer would, in pursuit of his hobby, devote years of his life to learning those languages"

Research is a part of the hobby. How much time and effort you spend on it is up to you. Some people do a lot more solid research than others. Where would the average Napoloenic player be without the huge body of work produced by George Nafziger?

"just so he can spend yet more time in libraries in the capitals of the world."

Obviously, you've never heard of the inter library lending service.

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

If that's what you want to do, then fine. Just don't complain when somebody says: "ah, but at that battle the 3rd PZGrenadiers were definitely wearing their WINTER uniforms"!!

"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."

I'm afraid that's not saying much …

"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….."

It's got nothing to do with any innate prejudice. It's all to do with the perceived ethos of a company who appear to be attempting to copy the GW business model as closely as possible. Whether such an approach proves to be ultimately successful for them remains to be seen.

I am not pre-judging. I have merely stated that based on previous performance of similar companies (WI and GW), the likelihood is that WI will go the same way as White Dwarf. Until someone produces concrete evidence to the contrary that must remain a valid supposition.

Actually there's an awful lot of material on the website about the Normandy campaign as well….

There is a lot of stuff in libraries concerning, for example the Finns. But for primary resouces you have to go (usually) to national military museums.

I assume that the inter-library lending service doens't extend to Finland. I do know it takes my library weeks to get hold of books. I also know that the nearest library with the kind of coverage you describe is in England.

I also know that I've yet to find a better guide to painting Finnish vehicles than the one on the web-site.

Not, obviously, the accessibility to the hobby is important to you. A 'serious wargamer' would have taken time to visit Parola or gone to ishallneverknowtheloveofawoman dot.com for the appropriate obscure text.

If someone wants to critique that my troops uniforms are wrong for the period – fine. So long as they don't mind me laughing in their faces.

Not all of us have sufficient resources to own Late War Germans in winter and summer uniforms. Apologies for demeaning your hobby in such a frivolous manner.

As a matter of interest, what is wrong with the GW business model?

It's made the hobby larger,and made the people running it a pile of cash.

Given both are also true of Battlefront, I'd say that the issue of whether it'll work for them has been settled.

"As a matter of interest, what is wrong with the GW business model?

It's made the hobby larger,and made the people running it a pile of cash."

From a purely business perspective, you are right that GW have made their version of the hobby larger and earned themselves lots of dosh. Although 2008 figures show that GW made an operating profit of £3.1m and a LOSS per share of 2.4p
link

But is it good for the wargaming hobby as a whole? There are an awful lot of people who would say not.

"Given both are also true of Battlefront, I'd say that the issue of whether it'll work for them has been settled."

QED. I rest my case!
Look out for the next issue of Battlefront Illustrated in newsagents throughout the world soon …

"If someone wants to critique that my troops uniforms are wrong for the period – fine. So long as they don't mind me laughing in their faces."

I'm sure they won't mind at all … until they produce the evidence to support their case.

Of course, it is up to each wargamer to decide what level of accuracy and historicity they are content with. For me it depends on the period. In some periods, I am a stickler for historical accuracy. In others it doesn't bother me so much. Each to their own.

I give up trying to get Mike to say something unqualifiedly nice about Battlefront/FOW.

Mike, if we all stipulate that the FOW rules are not an accurate depiction of WW2 combat, that the historical information they provide for free on their website is not as detailed or in depth as that you could find in an entire book on any specific subject, and that there are people who play FOW who are young and aren't particularly interested in WW2 history would that suffice to keep you from chiming in with negative comments anytime Battlefront or FOW are mentioned?

I personally don't like GW rules, but I'd love to know how the existence of a toy soldier company that is a household name is detrimental to the hobby.

And I repeat, Battlefront have clearly stated that the magazine won't be turned into a house magazine.

If I laugh in someones' face, it won't because I doubt the accuracy of their research, believe me.

It seems evident that Mike here is opposed to anyone new ever coming into the hobby.

(Perhaps he'd allow someone who has written a thesis on a suitably obscure part of military history, though. Perhaps.)

Relax, Mike ;-) It's just a game/pastime with toy soldiers/whatever.

What was this thread about?

The news is interesting. Lets just wait and see what happens shall we?

"Mike, if we all stipulate that [snip] would that suffice to keep you from chiming in with negative comments anytime Battlefront or FOW are mentioned?"

It might well do, but I cannot say if it will have the same effect on all the other people who have expressed their doubts about BF taking over WI on this thread.

"It seems evident that Mike here is opposed to anyone new ever coming into the hobby."

Of course not! The implication of your comment though is that FoW is the ONLY way that new people get into the hobby. I beg to differ.

But what I DON'T want to see is new people coming into the hobby with gross misunderstandings of the history. Bring them in in their droves, but let's those of us who have some historical knowledge dissuade them of the fantasies they may have picked up along the way. The way they teach history in schools these days, is it any wonder some of our young people don't even know who won WW2?

"Relax, Mike ;-) It's just a game/pastime with toy soldiers/whatever."

I'm perfectly relaxed, thank you, and have been all through this discussion. It seems though that some others have got a bit hot under the collar defending BF and WI against all nay-sayers. My only comment is look at their track record and then tell me what you think will happen to WI under BF ownership. As some others have said, it can hardly get worse than it is now …

People coming into the hobby will have all kinds of views about history.

But say what you like about the FoW website, but the history is pretty rock-solid – and a good deal more comprehensive than many coffee-table histories of WW2.

As I said before, they don't ignore the millions of people who fought for the 'minor Axis' allies for start.

And not all WW2 rules give us Brits equal billing either.

"But say what you like about the FoW website, but the history is pretty rock-solid – and a good deal more comprehensive than many coffee-table histories of WW2."

I never said the history articles on the site were not sound. I did say that I considered them a bit shallow and somewhat superfluous given the amount of history books available in the average library and high street bookshop.

"As I said before, they don't ignore the millions of people who fought for the 'minor Axis' allies for start."

I'm sure they don't. Again, I never said anything negative about the BREADTH of content.

"And not all WW2 rules give us Brits equal billing either."

I'm not sure which rules you are referring to here, suffice to say that none of the rules I am familiar with fall into that category. Quite the reverse – at least one I played quite a bit a while ago is positively pro-Brits!

BangorStu – Is that Battlefront \ Fire and Fury you are referring to?

Sorry to be picky, but I hear this a lot and it's simply not true. When the original rules were released the Brits were ommitted, but with the understanding they would be added with the first suppliment. This was simply a matter of space and card capacity, and has since been rectified.

At the moment there are at least 154 data cards for British kit and 73 for the US, so I think they made up for it.

PilGrim – I'll 'fess up, yes it was Battlefront I was thinking about.

Good to know they've made up for it, but still…..

Play FoW on a big table, not a piddly 4x6, and you get a very different game. I wouldn't play it on anything less than 10x6 now.

Nice to have your field batteries actually behind the lines. On a 4x6 table they are coming under direct tank fire in a few turns.

"Why don't you guys go back to your mimeographed rules from the 1980's and leave the rest of us in peace, free from your obnoxious condescension."

So, although the thread asked for opinions, any opinions that don't match yours aren't welcome. Is that it?

"First, I don't believe that Battlefront has ever billed FOW as a "realistic WW2 Wargming System." "

From the website: "by using the sort of tactics and cunning that a real-life commander would" etc. In fact the evidence shows that BF has always advertised FOW as an historical simulation of company combat in WW2.

"….. would that suffice to keep you from chiming in with negative comments anytime Battlefront or FOW are mentioned"

So people on TMP can't write what they feel about wargaming because their opinion differs from others? And if you do, rather than receiving the opposing argument, receive a personal attack. Interesting world view – it's called totalitarianism. What's the point of a discussion group if people can't express their own views? The FOW forums would be a better place to go if you don't want for and against views.

Time will tell….
Lets all wait for 18 months and then see how much advertising space for other 15mm WWII manufacturers apart from BF is available in WI.
Is that a different sort of totalitarianism?
…oh no, sorry, its called "a good business model"

Look guys all of this is fun but the guy who owns Battlefront, as I understand it, is a wealthy shipping tycoon or timber tycoon who has enough money to probably buy up all the wargaming companies in existent. And, he likes wargaming. So if he wants a wargaming publication, he gets a wargame publication. I think it great that someone with those kinds of resources wishes to put some of those resources into wargaming.

I don't play WWII (too complicated). I do like WI. I like the photos (they're inspiring). I like the product announcements. It is one of the few ways I get to keep up on what is being produced. I like the ads. They also help me keep up on developments. So for me, the articles are a plus. I don't bitch and moan because there is an article there I don't like. For those complaining about any supposed Foundry connection – give it a rest. You're supposed to be an adult. Act like it.

If WI folds it won't be the end of the world. If it improves – great. If it becomes a house organ, I'll move on. The one thing I won't do is bitch moan.

Rich

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

I think a partnering of Battlefront and GW would be a marriage made in heaven for both companies. It would give BF an instant high street presence and GW would be able to break out into new markets should it's own line up reach saturation point.

Mass market commercial terrain also looks like an area that both companies might like to explore.

With the presence of the internet and the apparent trend in declining circulation of magazines, it is quite cheering to see that both MW and WI have been able to get new owners to invest, particularly so during uncertain financial times. Both new owners must be confident that their vision of how each mag should evolve, will suceed.

MW had a really nice 'pull out' rules supplement a couple of issues ago, I have not seen anything that good before done in that way, so fresh ideas may revitalise both mags, it would be really nice to see circulations actually being reported as rising.

Rich Knapton

''If WI folds it won't be the end of the world. If it improves – great. If it becomes a house organ, I'll move on. The one thing I won't do is bitch moan.''

……and leave the rest of us to do the constructive critisism.

:-)

I really can't see how this move can be construed as a negative. If people don't like the changes to WI, then they'll vote with their wallets. If it does become a FOW house magazine, so what? YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY IT! There are alternative magazines out there.

Given that WI has become an illustrated catalogue for a few manufacturers over the past few years I've found it to be the least interesting of all the wargames magazines for a while now. (Even MW has some decent articles!) That said both WI & MW have shown some improvement in recent months IMHO.

Contrary to what some people have said, BF/FOW has always recognised that there is a larger hobby out there. Even on the website you'll find plenty of knowledgable people some of whom (Shock, horror) don't even use the rules. There is plenty of content on the site that is relevant to any WWII gamer IMHO. If you can't be bothered looking, that's your loss, not mine.

So what if the history on the site is just a summary? There's a lot of information there that I'd have to really dig around to find out & I have a reasonably extensive library at home, including many of the standard works on WWII.

In my experience the information that I haven't got is not available through the local library system, or the university libraries or other easily accessible sources. I work 60 hours a week & am often on call all week, I have 4 small children & other interests beyond wargaming. I probably spend 10 hours a week researching various aspects of military history/wargaming that interest me. Apparently because I don't have even more time to go digging out the information that makes me some sort of dilettante in the eyes of some of you! It's a hobby!!

Bangorstu – spot on!

I AM REALLY, REALLY TICKED OFF!!!

180 posts, and no-one has offered to make popcorn yet.

Allen

Oh, what a lapse in manners!
Buttered or plain?

180 posts, and no-one has offered to make popcorn yet

That could be their first giveaway on the cover :-)

"I have a reasonably extensive library at home, including many of the standard works on WWII. "

That was exactly my point.

…the guy who owns Battlefront, as I understand it, is a wealthy shipping tycoon or timber tycoon who has enough money to…

actually its Fishing – just FTR.

I wish we had a rich fishing uncle

Contrary to what some people have said, BF/FOW has always recognised that there is a larger hobby out there. Even on the website you'll find plenty of knowledgable people some of whom (Shock, horror) don't even use the rules. There is plenty of content on the site that is relevant to any WWII gamer IMHO. If you can't be bothered looking, that's your loss, not mine.

Their website is a fantastic resource, Ok the history is shallow, but no more so than most Osprey books and a sight cheaper.

Some of the forums are also well worth visiting. The Gallery can be truly inspirational, the modelling and terrain forums contain much that is useful and there's a lot of excellent stuff on the Armies & Unit Histories forum – some of it even derived from research on primary sources.

Just in case I lose my membership of the Negative Nellies Club I feel forced to point out that most of the other forums are full of inane fanboy drivel and that the treatment of people who criticise the company and/or it's products can be quite disgraceful at times.

actually its Fishing – just FTR."

that explains all the oil on the resin….

BF still put rocks at the base of their bocage hedgerows though, I've never gotten over that.

"Some of the forums are also well worth visiting. The Gallery can be truly inspirational, the modelling and terrain forums contain much that is useful and there's a lot of excellent stuff on the Armies & Unit Histories forum – some of it even derived from research on primary sources."

And even more in their defence…..

While the history stuff can be a tad superficial in its depth of understanding the operation, it is normally sufficient to make the game work.

With the amount of revisionist history blurted out in the last 20 years which attacks the conclusions made by the actual participents which on scrutiny shows up as mojor misinterpretation of the evidence used to establish the original thesis, What BF do could actually be commended.

If you want a book which has the aims, desires and stratagies employed and apportioned blame put fairly on the wrong shoulders, read Max Hastings latest Burma offering…

World war 2 is like a great detective story with the one question being "what really happened?"

BF still put rocks at the base of their bocage hedgerows though, I've never gotten over that.

They've read somewhere that the banks at the sides of the fields are made up of the rocks that were removed from the field – which is true`to an extent.

The fact that the rocks are covered in earth and vegetation (and have been for centries) seems to have passed them by.

Some research using primary sources, a visit to Normandy or even looking at some pictures of the bocage, might have been useful.

And if you mention the fact that this is wrong on their forums you will be attacked by the fanboys.

OK, I've scrolled past most of the last page, but as someone that wrote one of the articles which was an expansion of the history in the Stalin's Onslaught book, you will not find much more information in English on the 78th Infanterie & Sturm-Division than was published. They did trim some of it to make it fit however.
If you have a few hundred dollars, a translator of military German and a little luck, you'll be able to find out some more, but I couldn't find a copy of the original unit history myself. Primary sources are very hard to find outside the Russian archives, and it's a somewhat obscure unit for secondary sources.
All that research (2 years worth) was started by my revitalised interest in WW2 and the increased breadth of that interest (Eastern Front rather than just Australian Battles for example) that FOW brought. I know that many of my friends who play FOW have also done research, and most of them had little interest in WW2 before FOW.
Not everyone that plays FOW has even a decent collection of Ospreys, let alone "many of the standard works on WWII".

As to the controversy about exactly how successful FOW is, I think much of it comes down to exactly where you are.

In the UK the consensus appears to be a minimal impact, but given that you already get to see a copy of virtually every rule system for an era at your club, and demos at every con, that's not surprising. You're spoiled for choice, and there are enough people playing each game to know you'll be able to get a game regardless of system.

Head to the US or Australia, where distance is more of an issue, and supply of rules becomes a serious issue, FOW has appears to have been far more successful. We don't get to pop up the road to the con and see the latest version, or chat to the designer at the club. In this environment, playing the popular system means you can travel and still have a fair chance of picking up a game.
If I wanted a game of Crossfire down under, I'd have to attend one of the 2 cons here in Sydney, hope that the dozen Crossfire players were putting on a demo, then try to arrange a game.
FOW I just stick my head into the forums and find an opponent, or visit the 3 or 4 stores that stock BF minis, several of which have regular FOW games afternoons in store.

That doesn't include the rest of the world either, and FOW appears to be doing pretty well there too. They've just released French, Italian, German and Spanish versions of the rules. Just how many other WW2 rule sets can make that claim?

I'll stay out of the usual argument about how & why the FOW rules are flawed though, as I've said my peace about that often enough.

Regarding bocage – never seen any, and I've not seen the BF models either.

But I'll make the following observation.

Here in North Wales there is a similar hedgerow type called clawdd, which is basically a hedge built on top of an earth bank faced with stones from the field.

The hedges tend to be smaller, given the climate, but over the centuries they too have a habit of forming big earth banks where you can't see the stones/rocks.

But occasionally, trees fall over, throwing them out. Or heavy rains wash away some exposed mud, that kind of thing.

So I'll point out to the city folks here that even centuries old earth banks require maintenace. So a few rocks aren't out of place – though more than one or two would be.

"If I wanted a game of Crossfire down under, I'd have to attend one of the 2 cons here in Sydney, hope that the dozen Crossfire players were putting on a demo, then try to arrange a game."

How odd.

From this I assume you already have the rules (although the following would apply to any set of rules, not just Crossfire). Presumably therefore you also have the figures. So all you need to do is either find a willing opponent or play solo. It doesn't matter if he doesn't know the rules or is even new to wargaming – introduce him to the game and get on with it. Hook him with a game or two (heck, let him win the first time if you have to!) and you've got yourself a new wargamer.

There is a good description of bocage in this publication link

In 1944 this would have sent shivers down your spine picture

Presumably therefore you also have the figures. So all you need to do is either find a willing opponent or play solo. It doesn't matter if he doesn't know the rules or is even new to wargaming – introduce him to the game and get on with it.

Neither of those options are an alternative to playing a game against a real breathing opponent who knows what he's doing. I've run plenty of games where I've had to teach my opponent how to play, and in none of those games could I "get on with it" – I'm lucky if we get a turn finished by the time we've gone through all the rules involved. Worthwhile, yes, but not often fun.

"Neither of those options are an alternative to playing a game against a real breathing opponent who knows what he's doing. I've run plenty of games where I've had to teach my opponent how to play, and in none of those games could I "get on with it" – I'm lucky if we get a turn finished by the time we've gone through all the rules involved. Worthwhile, yes, but not often fun."

How sad. Sounds like your rules are way too complicated if your newbie opponent struggles so much. Try fudging the rules or simplfying them for the first few games until he gets the hang of it. After all we all had to start somewhere. It's no good bewailing the greying of the hobby unless you are willing to train up new players.

I admit solo wargaming is an art all of its own, but I have always enjoyed solo gaming and for me it certainly is fun. If it wasn't, I wouldn't still be doing it after 30+ years.

Better a solo game or a game against a newbie opponent than no game at all, surely?

That's one of the myths of WWII, that the bocage is only found in Normandy.

It's not – it's just that the only heavy fighting that took place during WWII in that sort of country was in Normandy. Bocage can also be found in Brittany and down in the Vendee where it was a feature of the fighting in the French Revolutionary Wars.

Areas that are very similar can be found in parts of England as well.

Or in my former backyard in Ireland, where the hedgerows are known as "ditches".

Great link EagleSixFive, fancy posting it to a new thread where it can get some more attention? I grew up around Dorset and Somerset, where we get very similar terrain.

"Neither of those options are an alternative to playing a game against a real breathing opponent who knows what he's doing. I've run plenty of games where I've had to teach my opponent how to play, and in none of those games could I "get on with it" – I'm lucky if we get a turn finished by the time we've gone through all the rules involved. Worthwhile, yes, but not often fun."

I didn't say this, but I wholeheartedly agree. You don't get better at a game unless you're playing against your peers.

"How sad. Sounds like your rules are way too complicated if your newbie opponent struggles so much. Try fudging the rules or simplfying them for the first few games until he gets the hang of it. After all we all had to start somewhere. It's no good bewailing the greying of the hobby unless you are willing to train up new players.

I admit solo wargaming is an art all of its own, but I have always enjoyed solo gaming and for me it certainly is fun. If it wasn't, I wouldn't still be doing it after 30+ years.

Better a solo game or a game against a newbie opponent than no game at all, surely?"

All well & good but first you have to meet that someone willing to play, know the rules yourself, and have the place to game at.

Getting all those together isn't always that easy.
Compare that to walking into the store, picking up the introductory box BF have just released, learning the rules then returning to the store the following week and getting a game against one of half a dozen opponents in the store as well.

And as for solo wargaming, yes it's better than nothing, but just like other things in life, it's far better to do it with someone else. For me it would be a last resort, not something I'd like to do as the main part of the hobby.

"Getting all those together isn't always that easy."

Really?

"All well & good but first you have to meet that someone willing to play,"

Friends? Down the pub?

"know the rules yourself,"

What's the point if you don't know the rules yourself? You can't be that much of a newbie? As you say in your counter example, you still have to leaarn the rules if you don't know them already.

"and have the place to game at."

Your place or mine? I was under the impression that houses in the US and Aus were huge compared to ours in the UK. Plenty of room then to set up a game!

"Compare that to walking into the store, picking up the introductory box BF have just released, learning the rules then returning to the store the following week and getting a game against one of half a dozen opponents in the store as well."

What store? We have very few (if any) B&M stores left in the UK. And even the ones we have are not big enough to find table space for even one game (business rents are just too high).

This is where the completely different gaming scene in the UK raises its head (again).

The local pub down here isn't a place I'd be talking about gaming to some random person, as it would likely have that person leave, or I'd end up in a fight. Don't know about your local, but we tend to just drink in ours, watch sport, play pool or the pokies. Not exactly the haunt of geeks and gamers…

You can read the rules all you like, but without playing them against someone else, you can misunderstand what might otherwise appear easy to understand rules. American English vs British English for one.

Not everyone here lives in 4 bedroom bungalows. Flats are fairly common, as is shared accomodation at the lower end of the rental market (you know, where the students who might be interested in gaming live). "Wanted Down Under" is usually looking at the top end of the market, not what most people actually live in.

Then you have a need of terrain, a suitable board, loads of models (which aren't as easy to get down under, aside from BF), etc.

Just because the London & the UK doesn't have gaming stores, doesn't mean the rest of the world doesn't. IIRC, there are more gaming stores in Singapore than in London (Games Workshop excluded).
Here in Sydney we have 4 independent gaming stores, one with 2 separate shops. Of those, all are big enough for at least 2 tables, and all of them run FOW games at one time or another. One has room for 6 or more tables out the back and runs FOW games every second friday night.

As for the dearth of gaming stores, I suspect that the fact that you can go to a con every month and buy straight from the manufacturer rather than a B&M store would be a big issue, along with the high business rents you mentioned.

The UK scene (from what you've said and I've read elsewhere) is not in any way indicative of the rest of the world. Nowhere else has as many Cons, in as small an area, with as many manufacturers that appear selling direct.
Nor do we have a big history interest to feed off due to being able to go on school outings or holidays to the D-Day beaches or Arnhem.

I really hadn't realised how impoversihed the wargaming scene in Australia is. You have my deepest sympathy!

Austrailia, the US and, to a lesser extend, non-capitols of europe all suffer from the lack of supply we in the UK enjoy as standard fare. It explains why postage, distance and "best ww2 game I've played" have different meanings outside the UK. I suspect that as much as 2/3rds of BF world wide sales are in the UK and it has the lowest percentage of useage of national sales in FOW games. I buy more of their stuff than the average fow gamer, but do not have a need to buy whole swathes of their products like the books, rules, smoke!, artillary templates, short telegraph poles, etc.

I appreciate I am spoilt for choice.

There may also be an issue with market saturation. Even with a 60 million population, you can only have so many people who want to actually wargame. 51% of the population are women, then there are the under 10's and the over 80's,people who go Kayaking at weekends…etc etc. So for Fow to grow in the UK and reach a wider audiance, it needs to break the Herd protection limit within wargamers and convert people from other games, drag them in from other periods & the fantasy genre.

While some may see this as painful, I do not necessarily see this as detrimental nor actually that difficult. WW2 gamers are probably the most likely to multu ruleset in terms of period closely followed by napoleonics The influence of DBA, DBM , and other game systems have moved in, influenced game design and thinking moved on from it. The same cycle will happen for Fow. This magazine buy out may (should!) create a second surge of FOW interest and may influence BF to move FOW into a version 3 or maybe "advanced flames of war" because they are playing to a pickier audiance.

IMHO, There are only 3 things that need to be addressed that would send it's acceptance level into the stratosphere….but the big "BUT" is….unlike outside the UK, do people have the NEED to play one game.

I agree this move is just carbon copy of Games Workshop with white dwarf.

I wouldn't call it impoverished, just different. We after all can support LGS.
However due to the distances involved, a game needs to hit a critical mass of support to become popular. And that support is usually from the stores. It's why a one stop shop approach works so well outside of the UK.
Players can't go to a Con every month to pick up their figures, rules, terrain, accessories, etc; they need to be able to get everything from that store.
So BF produce rules with a small dose of history, package figures with everything they need, in just the right sided packs, all from the one distributor with the one catalogue so it's easy for the store.

As for a need for a 3rd ed FOW?
I really don't think so right now. To change it enough to get greater acceptance in the UK market, it wouldn't be FOW any more.

It would also be more ammunition for the crowd that already think BF is exactly the same as GW. It would also annoy those (such as myself) that came from GW due to the churn cycle with new rules, figures and books.

Yes BF release a ton of books now with their campaign style, however you don't need to buy every one to keep up with the system, and usually any new rules that are somewhat core to the game (like bocage, open bunkers to name 2) are released as PDF files from the website.

Right now I suspect they would lose 2 players for every one they gained in the UK if they released a 3rd ed or FOW Advanced.

"I suspect that the fact that you can go to a con every month"

A show every month? I consider myself lucky if I get to more than TWO in a year! There may be a lot of shows in the UK in a smaller geographical area than other parts of the world, but our population density and exorbitant public transport costs militate against getting to more than a few shows in a year. Personally, I tend to save up and do all my spending at Salute – one day in a whole year!!

do you think this would be bad taste if i told you i am holding a flames of war bootcamp in manchester,march 22nd at emlyn hall,emlyn street,walkden,manchester.Entrance for the bootcamp is £3.00 GBP each and if you havent a army we can supply one for you but please tell me when booking via e-mail paulreid28@hotmail.com. so come see if FoW is Evil or not by coming to bootcamp.

sorry ,i could not ressist it.