This first editorial of my tenure will start by saying "Thank you" to Ben for all the hard work he put in on the first six (plus one) issues of "Battlefields". For those of you who have patiently (or impatiently) awaited the next issue, let me say that an enormous amount of work is required to put a magazine of "Battlefield's" character together - as I am finding! Ben earns his crust at a demanding, full-time occupation. As a young shaver, he has to give his full attention to his career and can only devote as much time as is left to his hobbies, of which editing is the most voracious. Having said that, subscribers pay their hard-earned cash and are entitled to expect something available on a reasonably regular and not too infrequent basis. I know Ben did not want to relinquish the reins but felt the subscribers must be the main consideration. I trust I can do at least as good a job and maintain an acceptable level of regularity with the magazine's appearance.

Next, our contributors, who have been just as patient - if not more so - will, in due course and where I have their addresses, receive a personal note from me to acknowledge their patience, together with a grovel in the hopes of receiving their ongoing support. I have certain items, including some transparencies, which I hope will be used in this and future issues and then returned where appropriate. We need your writings, chaps, and hope you will resume a regular correspondence with your 'umble editor.

Now, how will "Battlefields" develop under my custodianship? The scenarios will, of course, continue as long as we receive submissions of a suitable quality. We have a backlog but the periods represented tend to be few in number, and these are covered by several submissions each. To ensure variety, we need some scenarios for Ancients and some of the more "obscure" periods (e.g. Franco-Prussian).

In addition to this, I propose retaining the "Wargames Forum" and hope to receive plenty of mail responding to points made and raising some new controversies. As far as new features are concerned, we have the first of one called "Fields of Battle", which examines a historical battle in terms of the terrain and its effects on the progress and outcome of the fighting. Medina de Rioseco was the subject of a visit I made on a recent trip to Spain and my report attempts to correct certain misconceptions contained in older histories of the Peninsular War. I would welcome contributions from those of you who have visited battlefields and are willing to give us the benefits of your views as a result.

Another possibility is to examine and compare sets of rules by fighting the same battle using two or three different rules sets. The reports should take the form of a brief description of the historical action, a description of the game (again brief) in terms of how it compared with the real thing and then a review of the rules used comparing how the various sets coped with run-of-the-mill situations and the unusual occurrences which crop up in almost every game. Club reports would be of considerable interest here.

Finally, can I make a plea? My ability to make a success of the job is in direct proportion to the manner in which contributors submit their work. The ideal form is a floppy disk with the article in "*.txt" (Text Only) file format. This makes it much easier for me to edit and submit to the printers and avoids my PC telling me that a "style file is not present" or that "This is not a Word Perfect file". Typed or hand-written articles can be used but I have to retype them into a Word Processor in Text Only format, which creates delays. Maps should ideally be on A4 paper (what ever the size of the map) and can be re-drawn by our artist if necessary - please include the title of the article on the map. If you want us to return disks, transparencies, photographs, etc., then a stamped, self-addressed envelope or jiffy bag would be helpful.

Well, that's it ... time will tell. I look forward to getting the show back on the road. Vorwarts!