So, I picked up this month's WS&S for some hobby reading on holiday. I had high hopes as at first glance it has a nice finish. But I must admit I was a little disappointed. Firstly, there were typos on many pages, including mis-naming an interviewee on either the introduction or throughout the interview text (Nick/Neil). Also, pretty much every shot of painted Napoleonic figures (adverts excepted) seemed to be Victrix miniatures - making the Napoleonic special seem a bit like a Victrix advert! Even to me, relatively new to Napoleonics there seems to be many amazing Napoleonics manufacturers just as worthy of showcasing. The miniatures reviews weren't particularly insightful and consistently positive and the introduction to Napoleonic gaming was incredibly brief.
There were a good number of redeeming articles: I'll probably re-work 'catch the pigeon' for Peninsular Napoleonics, the Zulu skirmish game is inspiring (though I should be able to resist) and the front-page diorama is a great use of Victrix plastics - I almost wish I'd done grubby Napoleonics rather than my virtually-pristine Redcoats! I also enjoyed Rick Priestley's article, having an opportunity to regularly read the thoughts of such a long-time wargaming stalwart is great.
I accept many of the articles may not be written by native English speakers (it seems to be a Netherlands-published mag) but typos did rile me as almost all could be eliminated by a good proof-read. There was even a comment in one article about not being able to get away with typos, the irony!
So, probably not worth a subscription: I've yet to find a Wargames mag I want to buy every month.
EDIT: For clarity, I did enjoy much of the issue and would definitely consider buying WS&S again, especially if the theme appealed to eras I'm interested in gaming.
PhilH
