After my somewhat damning review of last month's issue, I hoped that this month's would be better ... and I am pleased to say that in some ways it was, and in other ways it wasn't.
The articles included in this issue are:
Well it was better than number 436 ... but in my opinion it isn't as good a magazine as it used to be. So what did I enjoy?
Well Conrad Kinch was back on track, and although I've never wargamed the Hungarian Revolution of 1848, his Send three and fourpence column made me wonder if I have been missing something. I enjoyed reading The Great Game: Waterloo Replayed (a project that I wish I could have been involved in, had it been possible), and Arthur Harman's Alternate Waterloos, coming as it did so soon after I had read Peter G Tsouras' book NAPOLEON VICTORIOUS: AN ALTERNATE HISTORY OF THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO, was serendipitous. I also enjoyed Chris Swan's Fire in the Fens, especially as I know parts of the Fenland quite well.
What didn't I like?
Why were they two more 'interviews' in this issue? They felt like they were bordering on exercises in 'product placement', although at least Creating the Forgotten War was about a real war and not a fantasy/SciFi one. (And in answer to the question in the title of James Winspear's piece entitled Wargame-Mancer, this game designer does not dream of electric D10s!) Yet again there were two different 'how to ...' articles ... and do I really want to know how to paint figures to 'the tabletop standard' ... whatever that means?
One thing that I did notice in a sidebar in the Darker Horizons section was that Fantasy Facts is being dropped for the time being. It was accompanied by a statement, part of which did give some cause for concern, namely:
The articles included in this issue are:
- Welcome (i.e. the editorial) by John Treadaway
- Forward observer
- Send three and fourpence: A Spot of Hapsburg Policing: A Solo Scenario for Rebels & Patriots set in Hungary circa 1848 with text and illustrations by Conrad Kinch
- The Great Game: Waterloo Replayed: The biggest 28mm recreation of the battle ever attempted! with text by Noel Williams and photographs by Noel and Carrol Williams
- Alternate Waterloos: At Waterloo Napoleon Did Surrender ... by Arthur Harman, with photographs by John Treadaway
- The Battle of Karnal: Persian Mughals: February 1739 by Jon Sutherland, with photographs by Diane Sutherland
- Show Report: Sex It Up: A quick visit to the Joy of Six show with text and photographs by Alex Webster
- Darker Horizons
- Fantasy Facts
- Creating the Forgotten War: Getting the lowdown on Bold Action: Korea an interview conducted by James Winspear
- Recce
- Wargame-Mancer: Do game writers dream of electric D10s? Plug in as we talk to designer Joseph McGuire about cyberpunk skirminshing in Reality's Edge an interview conducted by James Winspear
- Quick and Dirty: Brush through your lead pile with the art of the tabletop standard with text and photographs by James Winspear
- How To … build a shell crater: Incoming! Grab some cover and get ready for some heavy calibre scenery with text and photographs by James Winspear
- Fire in the Fens: Hereward the Wake and the Anglo-Saxon Revolt by Chris Swan, with photographs by John Treadaway
- Stone Me: The continuing tales of a wargames widow with text and photographs by Diane Sutherland
- Club Directory
Well it was better than number 436 ... but in my opinion it isn't as good a magazine as it used to be. So what did I enjoy?
Well Conrad Kinch was back on track, and although I've never wargamed the Hungarian Revolution of 1848, his Send three and fourpence column made me wonder if I have been missing something. I enjoyed reading The Great Game: Waterloo Replayed (a project that I wish I could have been involved in, had it been possible), and Arthur Harman's Alternate Waterloos, coming as it did so soon after I had read Peter G Tsouras' book NAPOLEON VICTORIOUS: AN ALTERNATE HISTORY OF THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO, was serendipitous. I also enjoyed Chris Swan's Fire in the Fens, especially as I know parts of the Fenland quite well.
What didn't I like?
Why were they two more 'interviews' in this issue? They felt like they were bordering on exercises in 'product placement', although at least Creating the Forgotten War was about a real war and not a fantasy/SciFi one. (And in answer to the question in the title of James Winspear's piece entitled Wargame-Mancer, this game designer does not dream of electric D10s!) Yet again there were two different 'how to ...' articles ... and do I really want to know how to paint figures to 'the tabletop standard' ... whatever that means?
One thing that I did notice in a sidebar in the Darker Horizons section was that Fantasy Facts is being dropped for the time being. It was accompanied by a statement, part of which did give some cause for concern, namely:
'It's not the end of Non-Historical reviews in Miniature Wargames, of course; certainly not! But we are going to put into practice something I have espoused for many years: that there is essentially no difference between wargames set in Historical and Non-Historical 'periods'. On that basis, from this point forward, the plan is to amalgamate and combine reviews into a different format within the magazine'Over the past few months I have felt that I have seen more and more 'Non-Historical' content creeping into this magazine, and I am worried that this statement is the precursor of changes that will drive me to cancel my subscription. I may well enjoy using imagi-nations in my wargames, but they are always firmly based on historical examples. I am not, and never have been, a Fantasy or SciFi gamer, and I do see differences 'between wargames set in Historical and Non-Historical 'periods''.
I like having interviews in magazines. It gives a sense of community and indicates a direction in which the hobby is heading. Moreover, it provides a glimpse in the design process of games currently being published.
ReplyDeleteI do think this is different from what magazines used to be 10 or 20 years ago. Historical info that you used to find only in academic libraries is now readily available on the internet for everyone, so you need to provide other types of content that people cannot easily get online. Interviews are definitely a step in that direction, as is the type of article focusing on special events, such as the Waterloo game.
IMO, well-designed scenarios still have a place in magazines, as long as their fairly open w.r.t. period, and explain why and how a scenario works, and not merely provide a list of troops on an otherwise uninteresting table layout.
But indeed magazines have changed over the years. SF/F is here to stay (personally I like some F and some SF, not all), and one also has to be realistic w.r.t. content vs where the money is.
In the end, I read magazines for inspiration (and based on your comments I suspect you do as well), not necessarily immediate usability. If someone wants the latter (I want articles for period X, scale Y and rules Z), then a magazine is not the right answer for such needs.
Phil Dutré,
DeleteI really, really want to enjoy reading MINIATURE WARGAMES when it arrives each month, but I feel that it is going in a direction that doesn't fit with my particular ideas about wargaming. I do subscribe to WSS, but only the PDF version, and buy the occasional copy of WI, but when I chose to subscribe to a printed magazine, this was by far and away the best of the three at the time.
Using interviews seems to me to be a lazy form of wargaming journalism. At least the Korean War one in this issue had some useful background information, but the other just felt like it was more about the product than the actual game design.
My feeling is that one 'how to ...' article is enough for any single issue of a magazine, and that even a cursory search of the numerous blogs and websites that are available on the Internet will fill any 'how to ...' holes in the knowledge that new wargamers may or may not have. (By the way, I include articles about painting methods in this category as well.)
Well written scenarios can often spark off ideas that are applicable to other historical periods, and I'm always on the look out for them, mainly for inspiration ... which you have rightly identified as a major reason why I buy wargaming magazines,
I do enjoy some fantasy (particularly Tolkein and Terry Pratchett) and science fiction ... but as literature or film, not as a type of wargaming.
I note that the magazine recently advertised for a new member to join the editorial team, and it will be interesting to see what impact that might have on future issues.
All the best,
Bob
I have a book on the Hungarian 1848 Rising, so the article might be of interest to me, but frankly nothing else is from your list. I do miss WS&S landing on my door in the sense of reading a magazine, but the content is no longer of interest to me. When I didn't renew my subscription, they sent me a free pdf copy of the latest issue, which only confirmed my decision to cancel. I find Blogs and various forums (fora?) are now my 'magazine' as it were and will spend my suscription on books that interest me.
ReplyDeleteSteve J.,
DeleteI can remember buying every wargame magazine I could get my hands on, but those days are long gone. My main inspiration and ideas come from following a largish number of blogs, most of which I access via Feedly.
Funnily enough, I was looking through some old issues of MINIATURE WARFARE yesterday, and spent a very pleasant hour doings so.
All the best,
Bob
For what it';s worth, early issues of MW, WI, Practical Wargamer, as well as Battlegames continue to provide inspiration and items of (forgotten) interest when I revisit them every few months.
ReplyDeleteBest Regards,
Stokes
Heinz-Ulrich von Boffke,
DeleteVery true. I keep files of cuttings from wargame magazines, and looking through them, most are from earlier rather than more recent issues.
All the best,
Bob
It was the overweening popularity of non historical gaming in the US in the early 80s that gave birth to HMGS and the Historicon/Cold Wars/Fall In conventions! The Courier magazine started the process when a cardboard counter was awarded "Best New Miniatures figure Line" award by GAMA (The Game Manufacturers Assoc.) So this is Deja-Vu!
ReplyDeleteDick Bryant,
DeleteI never knew any of that!
The largest wargame shows in the UK do seem to have acquired an almost 50:50 split between historical and non-historical games and manufacturers. It's one reason why I tend to go to smaller shows, where there seems to be a more historical bias.
All the best,
Bob
What! You didn't agree with awarding GDW's System 7 as Best New Miniatures Line?
DeleteJonathan Freitag,
DeleteI take it that your 'indignation' is aimed at Dick's comment, and not my own. I'm sure that as far as cardboard counters went, it was probably the best on sale anywhere. ;^)
All the best,
Bob
Hi Bob, yes, I was responding to Dick's comment. I liked the countersets a lot when I gamed with them 40 years ago but miniatures, they were not.
DeleteJonathan Freitag,
DeleteI thought so ...
I've never really played many board wargames, although I have owned a few. My favourite was Avalon Hill's AFRIKA CORPS, although my copy has been lost along the way.
All the best,
Bob
MW seems to have a small number of contributors. Perhaps that is why content is suffering? Four articles by one contributor and the regular ones by John, Diane and Konrad. It needs some new blood methinks.
ReplyDeleteKhusru,
DeleteI agree with your assessment off the situation. I think that James Winspear, who wrote four articles in this magazine, is a member of the editorial staff whereas the other regular contributors get paid for their contributions. I have submitted some PORTABLE WARGAME stuff to MW in the past, but it has never been published and I never even got an acknowledgement from the editor.
All the best,
Bob
I'm not sure I am very interested in 'the direction the hobby was headed' - unless that 'direction' were outward in all directions. Although I have piles of old magazines, I haven't bought - or even looked at - a new one in years. I do recall some inspirational (and aspirational) articles in Battle, Mil Mod, Practical Wargamer and a number of others.
ReplyDeleteI'm always interested in how others 'do' wargaming: ideas, scales, figures, set-ups - especially if they are out of the main stream. The more DIY-ish, the more engaging. But that's me.
Like you, Bob, I have no special interest in SF much less Fantasy, as a war game genre. If Wizard's Quest provided a neat idea for war game mechanics, that had nothing to do with Fantasy, but the idea behind the method. Having said that, there is one SF blog I follow with interest, as having a narrative thread running through it - The Governor General of Sector Six.
Campaigns are always good, ever since Hyboria.
Archduke Piccolo,
DeletePerhaps my growing lack of interest in certain aspects of the very broad church that is 'wargaming' is a function of my age. Starting with Britains, Herald, Timpo, and Hong Kong toy soldiers, and graduating to the first Airfix plastic figures and model vehicles probably meant that I was used to a 'make do and convert' approach. If we didn't have it, we either made it or did a simple conversion ... often with just a change of colour scheme!
As the hobby grew, and more figure manufacturers came onto the scene, that need seemed to diminish, and many younger wargamers seem to reject the approach I started out with.
Who can blame them? If they have a choice of literally hundreds of figures to chose from when creating ones armies, the idea of sitting down and using a hot screwdriver or soldering iron to reshape a figure so that it can represent a figure that you cannot buy, must seem downright odd. Why bother when X makes a suitable figure in 25 different poses?
Do we return to our wargaming 'roots' as we get older? I'm not sure, but I know of at least one wargamer who now only collect and use 54mm figures ... just like they did when they were young. In my case, I seem to be returning to using 20mm-scale figures and vehicles for my WWII project, with many of the latter being second-hand ROCO and diecast tanks and vehicles!
I've strayed a long way from discussing the state of the current wargaming magazine scene, but I suspect that one of the reasons why I no longer enjoy the new ones as much as I enjoyed (and still enjoy) the ones published years ago is age-related.
As to Hyboria ... well, that is one campaign that I wish that I had taken part in. Having read some of the stuff that was written by the participants at the time, it sounds like they had a lot of fun. It may have been fantasy, but it was fantasy that was rooted in the real world ... and I could have easily lived with that.
All the best,
Bob
Bob,
DeleteYour last remark ties in to the observation I've also made several times, is that wargaming over the years has evolved from a DIY hobby to a consumerist hobby.
It used to be you had to cast your own soldiers, write your own rules, do your own research ... Now all these things are available as commercial products, and this is reflected in the magazines.
Another effect of this commercialisation is that wargames have become self-referential. One is not playing WW2 as a period, one is playing Flames of War, or Bolt Action. Outside references become scarce, since these systems provide everything - history included - through system-dependent sourcebooks. Thus, the link with actual history is slowly disappearing, and historical wargaming is becoming more like F/SF in that respect.
Phil Dutré,
DeleteI think that you have hit the nail well and truly on the head! The hobby has become very commercialised and self-referential. (Your last point exactly sums up the situation I've come across, with players selling off perfectly serviceable collections because they don't fit the latest edition of 'THE rules'.)
Your last comment does concern me ... because in the 'new' world of 'fake' news, 'fake' history is bound to follow close behind. It was happening twenty years ago when I finally decided that I could no longer teach the 'history' laid down in the UK's National Curriculum. The topics taught were designed to 'rectify' the bias that some people felt existed in the history that was being taught. For example, there were some feminists who wanted the subject retitled HERstory so that it included Female Studies in order to remove what they perceived as an overwhelming male bias. Others wanted more prominence given to Afro-Carribean history to counter what was seen as being a 'whites only' view of history.
I know that Sam Goldwyn once said that if given the choice between telling the truth or telling the myth, he'd always tell the myth, but nowadays people are telling myths (or 'fake' news/ history) and believing that it is the truth!
All the best,
Bob
I think perhaps you are a little harsh about the historical v.s ScFi/Fant divide - I suppose there are plenty of gamers who do both, and clearly the SF/F side of things is a big part of the market which the magazine and its publishers clearly believe they need to cater for if they want to stay in business. Having said that, quite a good proportion of the articles is still 'historical'. I think Phil Dutre has indeed hit the nail on the head - it's the commercialisation that gets me down. Many articles seem to be driven by whatever game or ruleset or expansion is 'new and shiny', and the 'game' aspect does seem to outweigh the 'history' side these days ( is it that gamers are happy to allow the rule-writers to do the research, and get straight to the game? ). Actual considered critiques seem thin on the ground - understandable given that the producers of the games will be spending money on nice big advertisements, I suppose? Equally the content probably depends quite a lot on what people can be bothered to write and submit - though your experience with Portable Wargame articles is disappointing. If only you'd been buying ad space..? I think there is perhaps a section of the readership ( I know it includes me ) who came on board when Henry Hyde took on 'MWBG', having liked his old-school 'Battlegames' style, and are less keen on the inevitable change of emphasis since he left. But again it probably comes down to market forces, to a large extent - presumably in the end Henry couldn't make an 'old-style' magazine pay. If we don't like the direction, ultimately we will probably stop buying it, but of course sadly that would reduce the sales, and might lead to its demise.. For the moment, Conrad is always worth reading, ditto Arthur Harman, John Treadaway is clearly 'one of the good guys', and the big Waterloo game was quite a spectacle! I am hanging in there..
ReplyDeleteDavid in Suffolk,
DeleteI probably was too harsh about the Historical vs. Non-Historical content in MW ... but it strikes me that what started out as a magazine about fighting historical wargames (or at least, historically-based wargames) has gradually changed its emphasis and begun to go in a direction that I don't like. I agree that the motivation for this lies with the need for the magazine make a profit in order for it to survive, but it was exactly this sort of attitude that drove me away from WI.
Years ago I used to write the occasional article for wargame magazines, and although getting paid was sometimes a bit of a challenge, I enjoyed it and saw it as part of my contribution to the hobby. Nowadays, unless there is some sort of commercial 'tie in', magazines seem somewhat reluctant to accept the sort of articles that I used to write. I now only write for THE NUGGET and the occasional professional publication, where 'shiny and new' is less important than relevant content.
I did not begin to appreciate how good BATTLEGAMES was until quite late in its publishing life (I was going through one of my 'I don't bother to buy wargame magazines' phases at the time), but once I began to buy it, I was hooked. It was much more like the 'old school' magazines I enjoyed, and when Henry Hyde moved over to MW, I moved with him because of that. When he left, I was prepared to stick with the magazine to see where it would go under its new ownership and editor, but as I commented some time ago in a previous review, I don't always think that John Treadaway has the same level of editorial control that Henry had. I may well be wrong, but I feel that the drive for commercially-related content has had an impact.
I know Conrad Kinch and Arthur Harman, having wargamed with both of them, and I enjoy reading what they write ... and as long as they are regular contributors, I'll probably stick with MW. As to the huge Waterloo game ... well it was spectacular to look at and raised money for a great cause. Its just a pity that it did not get better coverage in the media.
All the best,
Bob