|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 10, 2011 18:38:28 GMT -5
So, I was thinking of getting into some 1:100 scale WW2 games, with the hopes of being able to play some larger [company to brigade] scale games. Any recommendations for rules sets or miniatures companies?
|
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on May 12, 2011 11:33:12 GMT -5
The first one that springs to mind is Flames of War. I have heard it is quite good but have never played any. |
|
|
|
Post by Fire For Effect on May 18, 2011 23:09:08 GMT -5
I gave it a try, I had fun, it's just a bit counter-intuitive for things like shooting if you come over from 40K
|
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 19, 2011 12:06:10 GMT -5
How so FFE?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fire For Effect on May 19, 2011 12:47:50 GMT -5
Well, the way shooting in Flames of War works is that the developers figured that even the most basic conscript could be taught to shoot a rifle with a reliable degree of accuracy in a few days so there's nothing really equivalent to ballistic skill for individual troops. Instead what you get is a sort of defensive skill based on how well trained and how much combat each unit has seen the rules consider that they'd be more skilled in moving, going to ground, and making use of cover. So rather than a group of fearless veterans being better shots they're harder to shoot, which makes battles short lived against things like green conscripts but a lot more difficult against another group of fearless veterans.
The other problem you can run into in Flames of War is the time period, most gaming stores I've found it played in are actually running specific campaigns, and if your army is too early or too late in the war, you can't play. It also makes it frustrating for some players if they've built their entire army around say, a Tiger tank or two, but it's too early in the war for them to be there, you've suddenly gutted one of their best units. Honestly it's a small gripe, but coming from a game where you can take whatever you want whenever you want it's another stumbling block for some people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 19, 2011 14:07:53 GMT -5
Thanks FFE  Just looked over the FoW rules. Interesting fistful of concepts, but I think I'd prefer a superior system - they lack certain components that I find tend to "spice up" alternative wargames |
|
|
|
Post by Fire For Effect on May 19, 2011 14:12:11 GMT -5
Well, I'd say don't just go off the base rules, look at the campaign books too, several add rules and units unique to certain aspects of the war that don't make it into the 'vanilla' version.
|
|
|
|
Post by havoc on May 19, 2011 14:36:55 GMT -5
T but I think I'd prefer a superior system And what is this superior system? (i am actually curious about this) Don't say 40k |
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 19, 2011 15:22:51 GMT -5
T but I think I'd prefer a superior system And what is this superior system? (i am actually curious about this) Don't say 40k Something employing a more vigorous and dynamic initiative based system, so instead of: 1. You roll dice. I roll dice. I roll highest. I move, then shoot, then assault with everything I have, then you do that (IGoUGo), we have: 2. Initiative based systems are a lot more varied. A simple initiative based system would be: I pick a unit, I roll to activate. I pass - I then move the unit, shoot with it, then assault. Then we roll off again. Personally, I prefer the Ld-based initiative system, where you pick and activate a unit, then get to move, shoot and assault with it, and it's only when you fail an Ld test (either activation, from enemy shooting or from losing casualties in assault) - then the enemy seizes the initiative, may activate a unit etc.... Also, FoW has extremely short ranges for infantry small arms. Not my thing at all - I like my infantry to be able to engage at reasonable ranges. |
|
|
|
Post by Fire For Effect on May 19, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
I never noticed the infantry ranges, but we were playing an Eastern Front/Stalingrad scenario both times I played so the city streets really limited range on everything. That being said, some of the larger, open scenarios, like North Africa, they probably could come up a little short.
|
|
|
|
Post by Machine Gun Kelly on May 20, 2011 12:31:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Fire For Effect on May 20, 2011 21:43:38 GMT -5
I've always wanted to try Tide of Iron, but it just seems like a step down. On the other hand, having everything you could possibly need in one box is attractive too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Machine Gun Kelly on May 22, 2011 11:06:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 22, 2011 16:29:10 GMT -5
What? Pay?
|
|
|
|
Post by Machine Gun Kelly on May 23, 2011 8:41:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Fire For Effect on May 27, 2011 13:37:46 GMT -5
You know, I was thinking it's not exactly table top gaming but have you looked at the old Combat Mission series? I used to play my dad's copy of Beyond Overlord all the time and it's an interesting computer system. Both sides issue orders and then your forces execute them at the same time, sort of a 'we go' rather than the old 'I go, you go' system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Machine Gun Kelly on May 27, 2011 14:55:44 GMT -5
It's an intriguing idea. I've used similar system when playing Full Thrust, but I haven't considered using it for other miniatures games.
|
|
