Thursday, 11 February 2016

I wonder if anybody has noticed yet.....

Regular reader will have noticed that I'm just a tad cynical- it comes of being in the trenches so to speak. But I was having a look at the MWBG website a few minutes ago and of course its moving- to be subsumes into the Tabletop Gaming website of its "sister" magazine of the same name by the same publisher to wit - Warners.
 Now a CB like me is forced to wonder  how long MWBG will last as an "independent" publication. Two Years a Year, less?
Check out the website

I really do hope I'm wrong here but I wonder if we are to be further subsumed into more childish crap

The Following day.

I finally - after far too much faffing about- found the appropriate podcast and after I'd wondered why anyone would subject their lugholes to  such strange noises  on a regular basis found the appropriate part of the Shuck- Hyde conversation . Frankly I'm not convinced though my timespan laid out above was too short - so maybe 3 years then. 3 years is a long time in publishing.

Bizarre or what ?

What I found truly odd about the podcast experience was that people would actually listen to it in the first place. It took 20 plus minutes to get to the bit I was interested in  through what I can only describe as fluff and meandering fluff at that. Now I'm being harsh here as it was my first listen and I will in all probability have another bash but  the whole podcast looked interminable on my slider. The thing had barely moved after 28 minutes so I'd lose the will to live after twice that.
 Not that there weren't interesting bits. There was even mention of the Essen Spieltage- an event I attended for much of the 1990s with the Old Glory Trade stand so I KNOW  how big the boardgames market is in Germany- even the Bundespost  had a stand with a game- everybody is doing it Mein Herr .

 Looking on the bright side maybe Henry will get a chance to put a bit of blue water between MW and TTG in terms of style and content. I'm not hopeful but you never know...


  1. I had a think the other day and came to the conclusion I hadn't read a wargaming magazine in over 12 months now.. I get all my content from the web....

    1. Steve somehow I find that rather well sad- as in unhappy so to speak.
      Perhaps that is because I find much of the web deeply suspect- in terms of accuracy of info and often very impersonal.
      Its also inconvenient- even using a tablet all that farting about with buttons and waiting for downloads and who are these blokes anyway?
      But against that the net is wider assuming you know what you are searching for .....

    2. Andy- I accept your point, but my wargaming life/hobby was "irreparably" set years ago with the subscription to Wargamers' Newsletter... when I look back I think battle reports, comment, conjecture, bit of uniform detail, and letters... now I look for the same content in the magazines and don't see it, but I do see it on the myriad of wargaming blogs, they're like a huge virtual Wargamers' Newsletter.. I pick up MWBG and the first thing I have to do is ignore 4 pages of Fantasy, then a few more pages on a ruleset I've tried but already know I don't like, and then another few more pages of potted history I could just as easily look up myself or am not interested in... etc etc and in the end I read the scenario (not quite so good now Charles is no longer doing them) and Conrad Kinch... which I pay the better of a pint and a half for... and that's why I don't really read wargames magazines any more...

    3. Steve Never yet seen a copy of WN so wouldn't know. Equally I've never yet found anything on the net which was better than a magazine- different yes more inconvenient to access yes. Also you can't throw the internet across the room in disgust- not more than once anyway !
      I'm not for instance a huge fan of battle reports- they can be useful and sometimes amusing but if you were not there you rarely get the jokes so they ARE best on blogs.
      I think my biggest bitch with the net is about how - not only do you read it but it reads you couple that with its "variable accesability" -reading stuff on a phone screen is a pain in the arse even assuming you can.

  2. I play plenty of boardgames and roleplaying games as well as miniature wargames. That said, I'd also be sad to see the magazine subsumed into the Tabletop magazine.

  3. Listen to the most recent Meeples and Miniatures podcast with Henry for the answer

    1. Since I don't know what a meeple is ......

    2. As it happens I had a look at said site- what a mish mash of impossible to find stuff. Taking Steves point about the bits he doesn't like in a mag I'd go double for that. It MIGHT have good stuff there but I lose the will to live trawling through all the crap to find ANYTHING. So no I didn't fimd the appropriate podcast though I was bombarded with loads of others and why would I care which "games" are best.
      Once again the point occurs that there are so many different ways of saying stuff- but so little to say but as long as you say it with extra shazam and kapow does it matter ???

    3. ..... and I still don't know what a meeple is ......

    4. Morning Andy,
      Surely everyone knows what a meeple is?
      Re the MW. I have never met HENRY Hyde personally,although a few years ago I did get a snotty e mail from him. No doubt there are people who know him and will have good things to say about him. Personally I get the impression that he is a 'flitter' ie. a person who has trouble managing his time, because he gets involved in too many projects, and as a result cant prioritise. Prior to Henry Hyde taking on the mantle of Editor of the Miniature Wargames he ran Battlegames. When this magazine first came out, I really enjoyed it. I thought it captured some of the spark that is wargaming. But like many ideas, it began to tail off alarmingly towards the end.The next thing we know is, Battlegames is no more, and Henry Hyde is now editor of MW. At the time I thought this was a great shame for two reasons, 1] I dont like to see any wargaming magazine disappear,
      2] I thought MW under the leadership of Andrew Hubberick [ I think that was his name ] had become a very good magazine again. He had turned it around by sheer hardwork.
      I got the impression that somewhere the dirty had been done to the then present editor.[Perhaps I am wrong]
      With the creation of the MWBG? the first few issues were pretty good, but lets be honest the last few months have been dire, to say the least, I get the impression, that minimum effort had been expended in putting the magazine together.So whilst not being 'in' business, if I was the backer of the magazine I would be a tad concerned about the content and probably the lack of progress in the MWBG? So perhaps its logical that the website is amalgamated with a sister periodical.It will save money and probably time.

    5. Robbie I have come to know Henry a little over the last couple of years and frankly my impression of MW is somewhat different from yours. I didn't like BG much- thought it too 1970s overall and when Andrew Hubback left MW the first few Henries were pretty poor-(Like you I thought Andrew had done a good job) but he improved significantly - see my previous posts on this . Since then there have been highs and lows- as in any mag catering to such a diverse readership but on the whole the trend was up albeit sometimes slowly up but up nevertheless.
      I take the financial point obviously but if as is likely TTG grows then we may have problems in a few years.

  4. LOL.... I cannot really afford to admit that anyone is a tad cynical Andy! It would be a huge case of the pot calling the kettle black! LOL :>)