"Oh you've fixed the issues with MF/HF etc so we'll come back to FoGAM now." I just don't see it.
For me two fundamentals that have contributed to loss of interest in FoGAM are:
1. boredom with the 3.5 to 4 hour 800 point game (it just takes to long for ageing players)
2. non-themed open competitions which lead to min max army list optimising and perceived 'unfair' match-ups e.g. there's absolutely no point fielding a Madigan NKE army in an open comp no matter how pretty it looks on table.
I suspect Terry's work won't address either of these points and therefore the current ancients/medieval rule set diversification will remain (and all power to it). The DBX guys won't suddenly move to FoGAM as a result of V3 and the ADLG guys won't switch back.
1> There is a definite move towards shorter games all round.
In the main, FOGAM is easily concluded in 3 hours - if both sides are interested in playing.
Certainly at my local club games normally finish within 3 hours. The problem occurs when one player decides early on that he is unlikely to win and plays for a draw. DBx is no better than FOG when this happens. At the BHGS Challenge recently, FOGAM, FOGR, DBMM and DBM all scored about 50% wins - if you consider a win to be 'breaking your opponents army'.
ADLG gets around this problem by using less figures on a smaller table. I've never played a game, but from a distance it looks more like a FOGAM game played at 650pts on a 5x3 table (for those who've played in one of those competitions). Those games had a time limit of 2.5 hours.
Page 156 of the rules states:
Recommended table sizes are as follows:
15mm 650-800pts 5ft x 3ft
-------- 800-1000pts 6ft x 4ft
Recommended playing time is 2.5 hours for 65pts to 3.5 hours for 1000pts
Competition organisers have long recognised that player like to get lots of figures on the table and gone for the 800pts on a 6x4 table as standard - and that playing time should be around 3.5 hours.
We are, however, expecting FOGAM3 games to be concluded quicker - mainly because we'll be reducing the options for players to 'play for time', but also by other means - including an increase in attrition and speeding up combat resolution.
2> Don't blame the rules for the reluctance of competition organisers to theme a competition - although the only 2 truly 'open' competitions are the Challenge and the Worlds. All UK competitions (other than the challenge) have restrictions of some kind. I agree with you about the min/max list optimising, and that is one of the main issues we are looking at. Too many armies 'pick themselves' because of the range of permitted troops and that fact that superiors are always the first on your list. We want 'average' to be the first on your list, with superiors an option to be used for specific tasks. We're also improving poor troops so that, on occasion, they may even be used as front-line troops.
.. With an improvement planned for LCH and 'average' troops in general, we MAY actually see a Madigan NKE army back on the table.
Don't 'suspect' anything about the new version until you're read it!
However, I do agree that once someone has 'switched off' from a set of rules it will be difficult to persuade them to return. All we can do is to ensure that FOGAM remains an enjoyable experience for those who do play it, while addressing as many problems as possible perceived by those who no longer play it.