"Miniatures Wargames At 350" Topic

Miniature Wargames magazine published its 350th issue this month. What do TMPers think of the mag? Yes, I am biased (I've been MW's editor since 2008) but please be brutally honest. Well, honest anyway! I will address queries and criticism as best I can.

Better than it's been in the past.

DM

To be honest I have given up on all the news stand magazines and did so several years ago. I found that there was perhaps at most one article in any given magazine that I was interested in and that was often another article about something that I already had an article on on one of the 250+ magazines I already had.

I am not turned on by flashy pictures of 28mm figures and am not interested in obscure periods like pirates in West Africa or any of the other odd things that seem to crop up on a regular basis.

As someone who frequents numerous websites and forums I am normally fairly up to date with what is happening with the games and periods I am interested in.

At the moment I probably count as about the hardest sell there could be for a magazine publisher ;)

I've enjoyed the magazine for probably 25 years, and feel that
the current version is an improvement over previous
versions.

For me, the variety in the magazine is one of the
attractions. There are details in some of the articles
which translate well into periods in which I game or
have an interest in gaming.

Getting back to the standards of the first 70 or so…. (without the "interesting" commercial dealings of the then publisher)

Pick it up when I see it and has topics I am interested in. Not carried around here. Didn't Barnes and Noble carry it for a bit?

VR
James Mattes

Have been a subscriber/reader for many years now. I feel that the magazine has gone back to what it used to be and I really like that. I have just renewed my subscription through a US distributor this time as I found the on-line subscription process a real pain.

I've been a subscriber for a long time. And I don't intend to stop now. The change in format a few years ago works very well. But…

The pre-convention (Salute in particular) issues are a complete waste of space.
Using space to show the convention floor plan and dealer table locations might benefit a few (mostly Brit) folks who are actually going to attend the convention and can't be bothered to pick up a program at the door. But only IF the magazine actually arrives before the convention, which it rarely does.

However, I do like the after-convention issues that show who was there and what happened.

Okay… I used to subscribe for several year in the US. As it transitioned to more and more glossy color it seemed like the price went up and the substance went down. I found that if I was lucky I was interested in two articles, usually just one, and sometimes none. Mind you, I play a lot of periods and scales so they could have an article on a period I gamed but just didn't resonate with me. I decided to spend my money on things with a higher return and haven't bought a new issue for maybe 10 years. To show what a glutton for punishment my starved wallet was, I also subscribed to Wargames Illustrated.

I buy the occasional copy, but it is occasional I have to say. The articles are, in my opinion, mostly second rate stuff and often cover areas I don't even have a passing interest in ~ Dark Horizons for example. But, that's just me of course, I could be in a minority of one. The photos still remain poor on the whole, or perhaps its just the figures photographed, I do enjoy the superior look of WI in that respect. I bought two out of the last twelve issues I think.If I was being brutally honest I have n't thought much to any of the four magazines lately…

The first sixty MW were brilliant. I still look at them when I'm feeling jaded with things to get my mojo back.

The latest MW is better than that of MW of the 1990's, and 2000's but to be honest it doesn't seem to offer me much any more. I stopped buying it regularly about fifteen years ago, apart from maybe once or twice a year. I still look through every copy in WH Smith's but seldom buy now. Maybe its because I'm experienced at wargaming now, but I much prefer thought provoking stuff like Battlegames and the new WSS.

Hell, I even manage to buy WI at least four times a year when something is there of interest.

I re-subscribed with the revamp as I thought (and to an extent still think) it is a vast improvement on what went before. I agree that the first 60 odd issues were the 'Golden Years' and I too still go back to them.

However, recently I've been less than impressed. Steve Eardley's column has gone right downhill and his prejudices on aspects of the hobby (especially figure size) mar his column/reviews. And the writing style almost seems to have degenerated into a stream of consciousness rambling.

I've raised aspects of this with the Editor and been told he won't interfere with what his columnists write. To a certain extent I agree with that, as columnists should elicit feedback. But when the columnist is also reviewing products sent to the magazine he has a duty to do that fairly and the Editor a similar duty to see that happens. Failure to do so can result in suppliers not sending in review figures as they know they won't be looked at fairly.

I still rank Battlegames as my favourite mag and MW DID come second. The new WSS has firmly supplanted that place. I doubt I'll be renewing my sub next time round.

Andy

My views pretty much the same as Fat Wally. My first issue was no 9 purchased regularly for the next ten years or so when I decided could not continue buying 3 or 4 mags every month. MW lost out to WI. Always preferred the Duncan Macfarland style. Bought the occasional issue since but very few recently, think the last one was about a year ago specifically to get the Salute guide IIRC. The articles in my areas of interest were not of great quality and contained a number of basic errors, even the paper seemed poor quality. Browse almost every issue but have not seen anything since to make me buy again. It's a shame as it was part of my Wargaming upbringing. WI went through the duldrums a few years back but has come through, for me MW has been in the duldrums for over a decade. WI & WSS fulfill my needs more than adequately.

I like that it has a mix of subjects – both historical and sci fi. I do enjoy Dark Horizons, but wish it gave a little more deatil. I'd like to see another stand alone Darker Horizons, even though I thought the first one was only so so, just to give it another chance to thrill me.

I started reading MW around issue 100, and have been a subscriber for years, switching to the digital format recently due to lack of space on my shelf.

I was close to ending my subscription, but then the opinion columns changed my mind. To me, in this day and age of google and wikipedia, information articles giving a potted history and OOB are less relevant. I do enjoy having the latest figures and rules being brought together in a quick review with a few pictures.

Right now BG has the spread of articles I want: scenarios/tabletop teasers, well-illustrated terrain construction, reviews, musings, interviews with the movers and shakers in the industry.

If I can make a suggestion: Bring back Loki!

I'm of two minds (more perhaps). I much prefer it to WI, which I no longer bother with because it has become a glossy marketing arm of the company that owns it – I have no problem with that, but their style etc is not mine. I subscribe to BG and WSS (and did to D&P before the changes to the Italian postage rates made the shipping twice the cost of the subscription), and I have to say I prefer these. I don't *dislike* MW (though I have ZERO interest in SF stuff, and living in Oz the stuff on the UK show circuit is of decidedly limited utility/interest), but I find less and less to compel me to fork across the readies each month. Which probably isn't what you want to hear, and I'm not at all sure I have a 'how to' to offer in response to the obvious and reasonable question that follows from this (and other responses above), but you did ask, so there you go.

I'd always regarded MW as the poorer but more deserving cousin of WI. However, WI then not so much jumped the shark as pole vaulted over a great white and I dropped it quick. MW re launched itself and looked good.Then Battlegames came along and looked even better and then crashed and then resurrected itself and WSS revamped in a superb way and then the whole thing got out of hand and now I pick up what looks good in a particular month….it used to be uncomplicated once. For MW to get my attention it needs to tone down the sci fi and riot control articles and concentrate on historical wargaming. That's just me though.

A comment on Steve Eardley's columns/articles -

When he disparages something (a scale, perhaps) it does
cause me to think about whatever it is he's on about.
Of course, his actual commentary might be quite off-
putting, but some like milk and some lemon in their
tea.

His recent article on casting (a visit with Andy
Copestake at OG UK) I found to be quite interesting
(MW 348, for those interested) and informative.

Thanks very much to everyone who has contributed their views so far – keep 'em coming. It is very heartening to know that MW still means so much to a lot of people after all these years.

To address specific comments in roughly the order they were raised:

US distribution – this is handled by On Military Matters (www.onmilitarymatters.com) and they will be happy to supply both subs and single issues.

Too many articles people aren't interested in. This begs the obvious – what would you be interested in? Let me know and, if it is humanly possible, we will do it.

Poor photos – I have tried very hard to improve the photos since taking over and the feedback has been they have improved. In our readers survey this year 90% rated the photos as 'very good' or 'good'. But I'm certainly not complacent and will continue to drill down on it.

The columns. SF is not everyone's cup of tea but it is a growing part of the hobby and deserves covering. Darker Horizons has proved very popular and we are working hard on the launch of the spin off title.

Steve Eardley's column (The High Ground) is popular, too, but I appreciate not everyone likes his views or style. They don't even necessarily reflect my views either! However, I don't believe in micro-managing the contributors or second guessing what I think they should have said. If I went down that route, I may as well write all the articles myself. (Andy, we have corresponded privately on this and my offer to publish an alternative view to Steve's remains open). However, I would much rather publish an outspoken column that provokes controversy than a bland one that tries to please everyone and is immediately forgettable.

Loki – sorry, no plans to bring him back at the moment!

I will check back on Monday to address new comments. Everyone have a good weekend!

I kinda gave up on magazines a while ago. This is really down to being broke! For the cost of a handful of magazines you can buy a really good book with information on a topic you really want to know about. Also with so much info online nowadays there isn't the same drive to but them as there was when I was a 'youth' Back then it was the only way to see new products, locate shops etc etc.
Ialso lost interest a bit when much of it effectively became 28mm fantasy skirmish made up scenarios. As a 15mm wargamer who plays historical scenarios there isn;t the appeal about reading such stuff.

If I ever sort my finances out I would subscribe to all the magazines though as there is noting like thumbing through a magazine. I can't comment on the current quality though, but I wish you every success.

I don't like it when some magazines publish verbatum interviews with so called hobby experts…. usually companies with a product to sell. These are presented like a mini play script. You knoe the idea:

ED: So how did you get into the hobby ?
TT: Well, you know, it was like, when I was a small boy and ….

It is as if the reporter left the tape machine running and just got a secretary back at the office to transcribe it. It leaves a lot of unecessary asides in and is sloppy journalism. If you interview a "celeb" then do a proper write up.

I think MW has vastly improved on the whole, especially the eye candy (I know I'm being shallow) but I like to see nicely painted figures in the old days you'd pick up the mag and see chipped, badly painted stuff and think why did they bother. I also like sci-fi as much as the ancients stuff, so please don't lose dark horizons

Yes, to keeping the sci-fi pieces, but cut down on some of the extraneous chat…… it takes up several colunm inches some months before the reviews start.

I love the chat, actually. Like all those rambling side-stories in BG too.

Gave up on MW at issue 100. The revamp improved things and I now buy the occasional issue. Would like to see just historical articles. Photo's could be better. Plenty of good games at shows that could be photographed. (It's what WI do- they were at Penarth this year) Spoken to the editor at a couple of shows, he's a decent chap, so I hope MW is around for a few years yet. Gave up on WI after the change in ownership, new WSS very good. Battlegames is the only mag a buy each issue, although the latest issue was a little below par. Currently reading a batch of Battle mags circa 1978- Great stuff!!

Thanks for the continuing feedback, chaps.

Oudinot – taking photos of games at shows is definitely one string to our bow and recent issues have featured a number of show games. However, the conditions at some shows are not always conducive to good photography…

Parrskool – I actually agree with you and prefer the written up style of interview (as you'll see from my interviews) rather than the Q&A transcript – but not all writers can do that.

I can't speak for other magazines, but I can assure you MW does not have a big office full of secretaries poised to take down our correspondents' words of wisdom! If only…

Hi Andrew,

They don't even necessarily reflect my views either! However, I don't believe in micro-managing the contributors or second guessing what I think they should have said. If I went down that route, I may as well write all the articles myself. (Andy, we have corresponded privately on this and my offer to publish an alternative view to Steve's remains open). However, I would much rather publish an outspoken column that provokes controversy than a bland one that tries to please everyone and is immediately forgettable.

Meant to reply to this earlier and also meant to catch you at Partizan for a chat. I don't have a problem with Steve expressing his views (misguided and downright wrong though I believe some of them to be!). My objection is to his reviews of products that are sent in good faith by suppliers. He (and you) have a duty to ensure those reviews are fair and accurate and do the product justice. His review and comments of the 6mm figures in the issue concerned were far from that. He can waffle on about what he likes in his column and try and be controversial, but his reviews in general leave a lot to be desired…

I do think the magazine has improved immensely the last couple of years. I like the SF column (even though it's not a big part of my gaming) and I think losing that from MW to move to an separate mag is not a good move although a good SF/Fantasy mag on the shelves next to White Dwarf has to be a good thing!

I'll try and catch you at a show soon (though likely to be Derby now) and we can discuss things further :)

Cheers

Andy

Thanks again for your feedback, Andy – I look forward to seeing you in person at Derby or one of the other shows to discuss it more.

Just to clarify: the launch of the spin off Darker Horizons mag will not mean the end of SF coverage in MW, but it might be scaled back a bit (which I know many readers of the historical persuasion will welcome).