|
Acebuckeye13 posted:My biggest problem with Flames (And I say this as someone who actively plays it) is that it's selectively historical-German, American, and to a lesser extent British units are all lavished with unit-specific briefings and historical supplements, but god forbid you want to play non-generic or veteran Soviets. The game certainly has lots of good things going for it, but it could really use some major rules revisions-and at this point, I don't trust Battlefront to not make things worse. Yeah, the Soviets are a big problem for the game. I feel that having a horde faction is a fun thing to be in the game, but their implementation leaves much to be desired. Still, the good outweighs the bad and even the worst soviet lists are just Less Likely To Win rather than Why Did You Bother, at least outside of tournaments.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 20:12 |
|
|
It doesn't help that their attempt to create non-horde Soviet lists (Heroes) were so ill-considered that many of them are borderline unplayable. Really, it all comes down to interest-Battlefront could make fun, interesting, and historical lists based off of Soviet interests, but the writers only give a poo poo about nazi tanks, so gently caress it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Looks like Plastic Soldier Company is the only place to get the Battlegroup rules, and I'll bet they'll be at Salute so I'll check them out. I'm sure I've already bought the Chain of Command rules but want to have a look for Bolt Action. E: does the Bolt Action main rulebook come with at least some unit stats for the main armies, or will I need to get the US and German army books? krushgroove fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Apr 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Id recommend I Ain't Been Shot Mum 2 as an alternative to Flames of War over Battlegroup. It's great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:It's always odd to me to see people's complaints about Flames of War, because in most cases they are the exact reasons I like the game. I want a company-scale wargame that uses historical units and such, but that worries about being a fun game first rather than historically accurate. I like the game-y special rules that lead to interesting combos that would never happen in history. I even like the countries becoming caricatures of themselves (soviet hordes! super elite but impractical germans!) because that makes for a really fun, instantly recognizable game. If you went with history, everyone would be much more similar, and then it's just a question of if you want tan and green or green and tan camo on your tanks that more or less all function the same. Aside from anti-soviet bias (and I hate that it even extends to the "fluff"), I don't really care that it's "gamey", it's that the game rules are really massive and full of nitpicky-exceptions and game turns are super slow and stuff. Also it's IGOUGO with no way of interacting, which sometimes feels a bit weird but I feel is way less of a sin in company-scale. In-game balance is not anywhere near 40k bad, but I feel like there's a lot of "traps". Acebuckeye13 posted:My biggest problem with Flames (And I say this as someone who actively plays it) is that it's selectively historical-German, American, and to a lesser extent British units are all lavished with unit-specific briefings and historical supplements, but god forbid you want to play non-generic or veteran Soviets. The game certainly has lots of good things going for it, but it could really use some major rules revisions-and at this point, I don't trust Battlefront to not make things worse. Absolutely agreed about the soviets. I think remaking the rules would be good: Given how insanely long-winded V3 is, I wouldn't mind a TY condensing. Aircraft are their own chapter in V3, but in TY they're units with unlimited movement that only get to appear on a 4+ and otherwise behave similarly: That's so much simpler! EDIT: Also I'm interested in Battlegroup and I Ain't Been Shot Mum; what's their respective pitches? I usually use 1:1 Fistful of Tows. spectralent fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Apr 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
https://meeples.wordpress.com/reviews/rules-reviews/world-wars/i-aint-been-shot-mum-3rd-edition/
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:https://meeples.wordpress.com/reviews/rules-reviews/world-wars/i-aint-been-shot-mum-3rd-edition/ ehhh... I'd be willing to try it out, but honestly I'm not sold on not having point values. Building an army is one of my favorite parts of wargaming, and while I enjoy the occasional scenario game I'm not sure I'd want to invest in (Or convince friends to play) a game where scenarios are the only way to play.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:https://meeples.wordpress.com/reviews/rules-reviews/world-wars/i-aint-been-shot-mum-3rd-edition/ This hits a lot of my personal "ick" rules in wargames. Random activation (including maybe not activating at all), random movement distance and no point values. I just don't get how people enjoy those rules, even though I know several people who do personally. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Random activation should be required in all games, but I'm with you on the other ones.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Random activation should be required in all games, but I'm with you on the other ones. I'm good with non-static activations but "random+you may not go at all" is a pretty unforgiving variant. Alternate activations, reactions, and randomised activation orders are all pretty good, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
I can never stand random movement distances myself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I'm good with non-static activations but "random+you may not go at all" is a pretty unforgiving variant. Alternate activations, reactions, and randomised activation orders are all pretty good, though. Yeah I'm not sure on that "you won't go at all" bit. Random movement I suppose could represent morale in a way, or leadership? But there are better ways to do that (Black Powder does it well).
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
krushgroove posted:Looks like Plastic Soldier Company is the only place to get the Battlegroup rules, and I'll bet they'll be at Salute so I'll check them out. I'm sure I've already bought the Chain of Command rules but want to have a look for Bolt Action. It does come with some army rules. Good to try it out, then get the pdfs on sale or something. Kaza42 posted:This hits a lot of my personal "ick" rules in wargames. Random activation (including maybe not activating at all), random movement distance and no point values. I just don't get how people enjoy those rules, even though I know several people who do personally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Yeah I'm not sure on that "you won't go at all" bit. Random movement I suppose could represent morale in a way, or leadership? But there are better ways to do that (Black Powder does it well). It's not quite true you don't get to go at all. If a units leader hasn't got to activate at the Tea Break ( turn end card) it gets to use any reserved dice it may have ( for ambushes etc) or it gets 1 fire action. Obviously this is a penalty because a unit activated normally gets between 2 and 4 actions dependent on its troop quality. I'm not over keen on the random movement myself but it works in context. Nothing stopping you house rule movement as something like 4 inches an action or similar. There are loads of scenarios and campaigns out there for IABSM so the lack of points is no real issue. The game has extensive lists and organisation charts for each nation to help you build balanced and reasonably realistic lists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
I'm perfectly fine with random movement, and I like systems where you can't rely on activating all your troops at all time, that's to me where you start to have a wargame instead of a boardgame. Random movement is usually representing timing rather than leadership or morale. For example, I can tell my squad to run across that field. But I can't know if an enemy tank will appear before they get across. Random movement represents this: you thought you would have time to run up and support your troops down the road, but you roll 3 on 2D6, representing that poo poo hits the fan far too soon: you gambled, and now your men are in the open. With set distances, you don't get any of this: "Oh, that tank is 12 inches away from the building, while my troops have to rush along a 6 inch gap. Easy peasy, they have a 8 inch movement, so it's safe". That, to me, feels more like a boardgame than a tactical wargame. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 07:26 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
I'm all for random or alternating or whatever activations, but random movement distance and God forbid random charge distances can go suck it. Incidentally, one guy on historicals thread on 4chan foams in the mouth at the mention of Lion Rampant because it just so happened that in one of his games his army failed to activate at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
JcDent posted:I'm all for random or alternating or whatever activations, but random movement distance and God forbid random charge distances can go suck it. I like systems where you don't get to activate everything all the time, but you either push your luck (each additional activation making you risk a turn-over, for example) or where you roll dice to get a set of activations that you then have to decide how to use. Then you're always able to do something, but it's also requires some thoughts as what to prioritize, instead of simply "I'll just do everything".
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
The whole TFL schtick is around the influence of leaders/ officers on troops. In that context the system works incredibly well. A unit of men operating without guidance is much less effective than one with a leader coordinating. It's a different take on command from systems such as Black Powder or Bolt Action. Personally I really don't like games that only reflect leadership and command through 'your unit leader improves your morale roll'. That's lazy. Everyone should try a TFL game. They are very different but hugely enjoyable and pretty straight forward to play. Also Sharp Practice 2 pre orders go live tomorrow!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:The whole TFL schtick is around the influence of leaders/ officers on troops. In that context the system works incredibly well. A unit of men operating without guidance is much less effective than one with a leader coordinating. My future SP2 opponent will be away for 3 months, better get my French painting on asap!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
Most people are soured on random move distances from how badly Warhammer hosed them up. GW tried to combine fixed movement with random movement and that was a mistake. It already used a random mechanic to represent traversing rough terrain, and then tried to recycle that into charging. A Warhammer turn always lasts exactly long enough to move 6" - except when you're charging, when suddenly a game turn lasts an elastic amount of time. Because Warhammer established fixed timing, its random charging felt wrong. lilljonas posted:Random movement is usually representing timing rather than leadership or morale. For example, I can tell my squad to run across that field. But I can't know if an enemy tank will appear before they get across. Random movement represents this: you thought you would have time to run up and support your troops down the road, but you roll 3 on 2D6, representing that poo poo hits the fan far too soon: you gambled, and now your men are in the open. With set distances, you don't get any of this: "Oh, that tank is 12 inches away from the building, while my troops have to rush along a 6 inch gap. Easy peasy, they have a 8 inch movement, so it's safe". That, to me, feels more like a boardgame than a tactical wargame. Agreeing 100% here. Random moves reinforce that both sides of the table are happening simultaneously. With fixed movement, models essentially teleport between cover. It's much better to think of it as an elastic time length or flexible initiative. Your guys are still running at full speed, but how far will they get before the next thing happens?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 10:58
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:I'm perfectly fine with random movement, and I like systems where you can't rely on activating all your troops at all time, that's to me where you start to have a wargame instead of a boardgame. I totally love this idea, but I just don't know how easy it is to explain to regular gamers, unfortunately. I'll be ordering sp2 for sure
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
The TFL blog has some great articles on these sort of themes. Well worth a read
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 12:11
|
|
|
I've never played a TFL game, but I'm really tempted by Chain of Command, there's just nobody down here who plays it and all my wargamey friends are Warhammer or Warmachine people and refuse to even touch historicals because apparently history is boring?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:I'm perfectly fine with random movement, and I like systems where you can't rely on activating all your troops at all time, that's to me where you start to have a wargame instead of a boardgame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
Endman posted:I've never played a TFL game, but I'm really tempted by Chain of Command, there's just nobody down here who plays it and all my wargamey friends are Warhammer or Warmachine people and refuse to even touch historicals because apparently history is boring? How can you think that cool WW2 machinery isn't awesome???    E: did I post my 1:48 Marder III? It's a _cheap_ (8 bucks or so) die-cast toy I bought from China with free shipping on e-bay. With some washes and rust pigment, it's probably the best value for money I've had. 
lilljonas fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 12:58
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:How can you think that cool WW2 machinery isn't awesome??? I know, right? Those are totally rad! Seriously, great work. Reminds me that I need to work on my British Light Tank. I've had it sitting on a shelf for about six months now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Who makes that Kubelwagen? 28mm?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Endman posted:I've never played a TFL game, but I'm really tempted by Chain of Command, there's just nobody down here who plays it and all my wargamey friends are Warhammer or Warmachine people and refuse to even touch historicals because apparently history is boring? I feel your pain =/ my friends say historical like it's a four-letter word and just assume they're going to play some 75 year old garage screaming racial slurs and throw a tantrum if they don't get their way except the people that play 40K and poo poo are just the same
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Enentol posted:Who makes that Kubelwagen? 28mm? It's a 1:48 kit from Tamiya. Us German players at our club decided to go 1:48, while we're doing Western Allies and Italy in 28mm, and our Soviets are kind of mixed 28mm and 1:48. And most factions are getting close to matching our German vehicle park:  E: I got a second Kubelwagen, a Kommandeurwagen and two motorcycles with sidecars in that I ordered back in autumn 2014. That's what you get for ordering from cheap webshops in China! 
lilljonas fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
quote:Milhist is rad. 8rad, even
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Endman posted:I've never played a TFL game, but I'm really tempted by Chain of Command, there's just nobody down here who plays it and all my wargamey friends are Warhammer or Warmachine people and refuse to even touch historicals because apparently history is boring? Well there is a 40k CoC conversion http://toofatlardies.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1891 I think the lardies have tried it themselves
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
Historicals also have top tier camo patterns:  And dirty trucks:  
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Dirt Worshipper posted:Well there is a 40k CoC conversion Zog me, it's... well, it's not bootiful or finished. But you can maybe find "Bolter Action" rules somewhere. I wish for Force on 40K
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
British desert camo is loving ace, from baby blue Matildas to pink SAS jeeps. Shame they got boring when they hit Europe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Pre orders for Sharp Practice 2 are out http://toofatlardies.co.uk/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=6 Decent value too. They are also releasing videos about how to play. https://youtu.be/fwH6-2K9voc https://youtu.be/S-fl0ddqud4
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:It doesn't help that their attempt to create non-horde Soviet lists (Heroes) were so ill-considered that many of them are borderline unplayable. Really, it all comes down to interest-Battlefront could make fun, interesting, and historical lists based off of Soviet interests, but the writers only give a poo poo about nazi tanks, so gently caress it. I'm loaning Red Bear and Gay Wolf off a friend and they're cool little books. Lots of typos tho. Tbh FoW is a good game cause the player base is so easy to annoy here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:Pre orders for Sharp Practice 2 are out  I'm browsing the Perrys' American War of Independence range right now. Any other recommendations for 28mm figures for the same period?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:22
|
|
|
I think warlord and wargames factory do plastics for AWI
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
Endman posted:
I have a full american AWI army from Perry, I love them. Careful mixing in wargames foundry, even though they are also Perry's, they are a bit shorter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 20:12 |
|
|
I have nothing but Perry AWI minis, back when there were no plastics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:57
|
|