Tim of Madaxeman fame has started doing podcasting and I'm on a few of them.
Most recently, we did one on the way to Derby, discussing what keeps a rules set interesting.
We recorded it twice as the first 1 hour session didn't record.
Interesting chat, we discussed why we think FoGAM and to some degree FoGR feel like they have had their day.
So, what does keep a rules system interesting?
For me, its' the army lists and trying different things.
FoGAM went stale for me after a few years as the medieval armies that I love were pretty useless at comps and after a while became all soo "samey".
FoGR has a lot more life in it, the army lists are very different and there are lots of different combinations that you can come up with.
the rules have proven to be very solid and only really needed a few tweaks but I think the current reaction to mass mounted armies has thrown the balance too far in favour of foot.
I'm going to try ADLG in 2017 for a few comps to take a break from FoGR.
I've just recently painted up an Hindu Indian army and looking forward to having elephants on the table