Military history and wargaming are my hobby and my passion. So, I support what you folks are doing at ACG, and I wish you the best of success. With the future of the magazine in mind, I’d like to offer my own detailed feedback.
There are a lot of magazines that feature military history. There are Civil War magazines, WW2 magazines, and other generalized military history magazines. All of these are what I consider ‘Military History Lite’. They are ‘lite’ because they cannot cover a subject in depth within the confined space of a magazine article. For example, a magazine article on the Battle of the Bulge cannot hope to cover the topic as thoroughly as a full sized book such as MacDonald’s ‘A Time for Trumpets’.
I don’t need another ‘Military History Lite’ magazine. I do need a good wargaming magazine. There really isn’t a quality wargames magazine on the market that I am aware of. I guess Strategy and Tactics was originally centered around wargaming, but when I pick it up these days, it just looks like another military history magazine to me.
I want a magazine for wargamers by wargamers. I hope that ACG will continue to keep the focus on wargaming (and for the casual reader, showing them that wargaming is a decision-making exercise), with a SECONDARY focus on military history.
What really jumped out at me, and told me that ACG was potentially different from the other military history mags at the bookstore, was the ‘You Command’ article about the battle for the Sidi Rezegh airfield. The article presented an open-ended problem, and then asked the reader to think about and propose a solution. This was something I had never seen before, and I sat down to read the article immediately. I bought the magazine, and then went home to write up a solution to the tactical problem. This was a lot of fun for me. Also, notice that this article seems to have generated the most discussion on the boards here. Obviously, this is because everybody has their own ideas about the tactical problem, there are no answers given in the article, and there isn’t a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ approach to the situation. This is what seems to make it the most interesting. Personally, I’d like to see two or three of these tactical problems in every issue.
Other articles have ‘interactivity’ of different sorts, but I generally felt that they were not as interesting, and just didn’t work as well.
The Fire and Steel article about the DD tank was a bit of a disappointment for me. The writing was good, but the whole concept left me flat. As I read the article, my first choice in the story was 1) Drive the tank left or 2) Drive the tank right. I don’t know what this is, but it isn’t wargaming, it isn’t history, and it is decision making on only the most empty level. What exactly is the point? If you just want to tell a cracking story about a DD tank on Omaha beach, it would be better to simply write an engrossing piece of fiction. I could respect that. But, I read ‘Choose Your Own Adventure” books when I was about 10 years old, and it isn’t something that I am interested in today at the age of 28.
The other interactive article was the ‘What Next General?’ article about the battle of Gettysburg. I am on the fence with this one. I found it okay. I liked it more than the DD tank article, but less than the Sidi Rezegh article. As it pointed out what General Lee’s options were on the first day of the battle, and also what the possible outcomes of each decision might be, I felt it had some value.
The next major article is the ‘Walk Where They Fought’ bit about the paratroopers in Normandy. I have not finished this article yet, but the tactical detail is excellent and I like the maps featured in the article. This is the way I’d like to see ACG handle military history articles generally. That is, give me something I cannot get anywhere else. Don’t give me a general overview of the Normandy paradrop. Give me very specific detail that I may not already have. Give me original interviews and analysis, and give me extras like maps that I might not have access to in any other publication.
Another original bit I liked was the ‘How They Fought’ article about the M1919 MG. The photo reenactments are a fun thing that no one else is doing. I’d like to see this section expanded from three pages to four or five.
Finally, I have a suggestion for a new article. Take a page from the BBC television show ‘Time Commanders’ and do a historical situation/wargame after action report article. Present a historical situation, wargame it, and then have some analysis. Don’t get bogged down in the technical aspects of the wargame itself, but instead focus on the options that are available to both players, and the decisions they had to make over the course of the wargame.
If you are not familiar with Time Commanders, you can see a bit at
www.totalwar.com/time.htm
The situation can cover anything from a squad level firefight to the battle of Waterloo. You could also do hypothetical situations, to answer ‘what if?’ type questions. What if Stuart had been present during the first day of Gettysburg? Wargame it and find out.
The wargame used is up to you. You could use Napoleonic miniatures, Axis and Allies, ASL, CM, Korsun Pocket, or whatever. Or, you could make up your own rules for a wargame if you like. For illustration in the magazine, you could use actual screens or pictures of the game board, or you could design your own easy to read graphics to depict the situation.
For example, take the situation in the ‘What Next General?’ article – the first day of the battle of Gettysburg. If you want to look at the options available to General Lee on that day, you could use wargaming to explore the question. Pick out two ACG staffers. Ask them to formulate a strategy for the first day of the battle. Now, choose one of the many Gettysburg board games out there (or use miniatures rules), and have them execute their strategy in the game. Illustrate how the game played out. Discuss the outcome, and compare it to the historical situation. I think this would be fun to read, and also fun for the ACG team to put together.
That’s all for now. ACG, I already have an extensive military history library, and I don’t need more of the same old stuff. Continue to give me something NEW, and I’ll continue to buy your magazine. Best wishes, and good luck with the magazine.
