This is very minor, and perhaps unnecessary, but the first issue which springs to mind in using the forums (Especially as a new member).

Is there a reason why forums such as the MTW Singleplayer need to include an empty, unused 'Singleplayer' forum with the 'Main Hall' (Which is the real singleplayer forum) as a sub-forum to that?

Surely, new members will not all realise that the Main Hall (And I use the MTW fora as an example, this setup is also elsewhere) is the Singleplayer discussion, but this can't this be remedied with a subtitle or annotation (e.g. 'Main Hall - Singleplayer')?

I realise that other fora such as ETW and NTW are merged equals and so require this system, but new members clicking on MTW Singleplayer are currently met with the vast, empty void, and must search for the more obscure 'Main Hall' title beyond this.

It's all about convenience and first impressions - and titles such as the Main Hall lead members (Especially those dedicated to one area) to become a family of their own within the Org. It shouldn't be known that there is just a Singleplayer MTW discussion on the Org, people should rather acknowledge 'The Main Hall of the Org' as a sanctuary of our favourite passtime.

-------------

I am also completely against the idea of removing AARs to an AAR sub-forum or separate forum.

I would rather see AAR sub-forums dedicated to each game, but I strongly disapprove of the current wash of different, stagnant and unsorted AARs in that dedicated forum.

AARs are one of the most invigorating parts of membership participation - the most attempted, the most unique and enthusiastic. They have revived the Main Hall many times and they will often be all that remains of some otherwise dead fora. See the EB forum for an example of this - that area still thrives because it has an AAR sub-forum all on it's own.

AARs should be kept close to the source - as close as possible.