Many people tell me that the Recce section and Siggo's extended overview are the first things they turn to in Battlegames. Like all online predictions, it seems to me that rumours of the death of printed reviews of any kind are premature. Sites that review figure ranges already exist: http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/, http://www.deepfriedhappymice.com/, http://www.coolminiornot.com/, and many others. that hasn't stopped large numbers of people appreciating experienced gamers giving their opinions about figure ranges in BG and elsewhere. People seem to like a subjective opinion, even though yes, they might logically be able to see stuff portrayed more 'objectively' elsewhere. It's part of the personality of a magazine. If people send me negative reviews, as long as they seem well-reasoned to me, I print them. I have never yet edited out negative comments -- the whole point is that if the reviewer thinks they are justified, then I trust them to be telling the truth, and if that offends an advertiser or potential advertiser, then they shouldn't be submitting their stuff for review. In this issue, Osprey get a couple of comments I'm sure they will be disappointed with, but they ought to be big enough to realise that there ain't no such thing as bad publicity. Remember all that aggro a couple of years ago when I printed our own dear Mr Baber's opinions of those badly translated "Ambush Blitz" rules? Goes with the territory. Don't for one minute imagine that the editor of a magazine won't stand up to the bullies -- often, it's the reviewers themselves who are shocked at negative feedback of their negative reviews! Siggo even got death threats when he wrote for WI: ridiculous, outrageous, but true. Trouble was, dear Duncan wasn't terribly supportive. I had major problems with Neil Thomas when Siggo was less than fulsome in his praise for "Wargaming: An Introduction". I refused to print a retraction of Mike's perfectly justified opinions -- as I know, if you write something which is published in the public domain, you have to live with the likelihood that not everyone will like it. Reviews are printed purely according to the space I have each issue, and any that are held over get printed in the following issue. I'm actually getting so many review that I'm considering publishing some of them on the website instead, just to keep more up-to-date. Apart from tidying up spelling and grammar and cutting out unnecessary waffle in order to make them punchier, I try to edit them as little as possible. I certainly never edit the writer's opinions. As mentioned above, if someone wants to propose a figure comparison piece, then I will contact manufacturers and ask them to send samples of those ranges to the reviewer(s) concerned. If you have an idea for an article, write it. Don't expect anyone else to magically pick up on the idea and run with it. Like any editor, I certainly don't have time to punt an idea around with half a dozen other folks to see if they might be interested in writing it. So, next time you hear yourself thinking, "Wouldn't it be great if magazine x did so-and-so," then remind yourself that the only way that you're ever likely to see it is if you do it. After all, I spent years thinking "Wouldn't it be great if someone produced a magazine to replace Practical Wargamer and Battle for Wargamers?" And the only reason it happened was because I got off my arse and did it myself.

I agree with HH's views. There is definitely a place for reviews in mags, obviously those that are honest and thoughtful. I think that book and rules reviews are preferable, as I can see figures from ads/websites myself and form my own view. john

I agree John, book, rule and PC game reviews are useful but these days I feel that the net has made pure figure reviews redundant almost or certainly at best less useful than in the past as they can be better assessed on line. There is still a place for a news item announcing the appearance of a new line/batch etc of figures with perhaps a reference to a website where they can be viewed. I also wonder if the days of manufacturers taking out whole pages to display pictures of their figures are also numbered again for the same reason (I used to love the old Battle Honours ads in WI when the figs were first released for example and didn't fonudry do the same later?). Perhaps though with this in mind we may see more of articles/games/refights in the future specifically aimed at displaying painted ranges in action @Henry - I certainly don't regard Mike Siggins articles as a primary source of figure reviews, he writes an engaging and entertaining column that I often look at first for its overall content rather than what he may have to say about a particular figure range Reading a wargames mag is like a meal -everyone has favourites bits that they like to devour first or keep till last to savour - the overall effect or taste is what matters and of course Battlegames provides that very well, how you cater for the person who wants lots of gravy versus the one who only wants a smidgeon is quite impossible of course Hmm... now I feel an article about sprouts and wargames coming on.... :)

Right my contribution is in the gallery in Theo's 25mm ECW topic.

I think reviews are still a major part of any hobby magazine be it WI or Gimp Monthly. Yes, there's some great review sites on the interweb, but there's also a lot of dross. I also think 'State of the Hobby' types columns and editorials are also invaluable, especially for those of us that don't get to go to a lot of shows. I've never had a problem with Siggo. I may disagree with a lot of what he says, but he's always entertaining. I thought it was a sad day when he was dropped from WI.

I probably should have stated that I don't regard Siggo's "Battlegames" column as a "state of the hobby" one (it's far more than that), or at least if it is then it's one that is certainly worth reading. I was thinking back to a specific period in the life of WI when every issue seemed to be packed with little else - certainly some of the commentators had something worthwhile to say, but it got boring when the world and its mother decided to chip in with their thoughts about whether the hobby was dying off etc.

Gents, bought the Sept issue of WI (the one on Caesar in Gaul) and it reinforced my earlier comments. Almost no opinion and lots of potted history. Some useful painting guides if you are painting the figs in question. The next issue focuses on the Western Desert in WWII, so I assume that this will have a pretty strong FOW focus. 10 minutes browsing was all that I really got out of it. Interestingly, there was an thread on TMP where about peoples magazines tastes. BG was more popular than I thought given TMP's mainly US audience. Good news for HH... JB

i'm of the same view. I've flicked through the last two copies on the shelf in Smiths and had no inclination to buy. Presentation is great but the articles don't grab me at all.

Sorry if i`ve joined this one late, I only read it through because of baxterj new post. In our magazine we have roughly 10 pages (out of 56) of reviews in each issue, split between - books, 15/20mm figures, 15/20mm kits, smaller scales, larger scales, rules/supplements, terrain and sometimes boats. We`ve recently had a long rabbling debate about The Journal and figure/kit reviews..... Some were of the opinion such reviews were now better served by the internet and forums, but most (at least those who bothered to write about it) felt that a thoughtful review written by someone who was unbiased (not always evident through the net) who has actually handled "the toys" was a valuable resource. Just a quick comment on the "new" Miniature Wargames, very colourful, very pretty, the review sections in particular have improved greatly. But I`ve got to say 5 pages of coverage of two wargames shows is a little much, plus the "Guide to Salute" too......

Yes, it doesn't show up when I try to edit it either. I blame Eccles.