"The Top Ten Things I don't Like About FOW" Topic

I got my med degree by playing Operation. Totally realistic.

:-)

In fact, FoW tactics have been implemented in those wars…by untrained insurgents who don't understand how foolish it is to wander into kill zones!..are these the ones that the Yanks still have not beat for over 10 years?,
@wartopia i agree with what your saying!.

Look, enough splitting hairs. If you don't like the game because it isn't what you think it should be, then don't play it. If game X is better, then go play that one instead. What are you doing here?

It's that arrogance, that guy that says, I have this problem with this game and I must tell the people that play it so they see how much I know. Do you really think fans of the game care what your opinion of the game is? No. If someone tells me a certain movie or tv show is crap, I say great for you, you have an opinion. But I still like it.

So, by posting on a message board dedicated to a specific game that you don't like that game, what are you trying to accomplish? Do you think we'll all read your intelligent, well-thought out argument and say, "gee, I never thought of that way until you told me." Do you think the guys at BF are going to read your carefully crafted points and say "What have we been doing with our lives? We must fix this!" Surely you're not that naive.

So what then? What's your point? It sucks. It's unrealistic. It's nothing like real combat. It's expensive. Their products are poor quality. OK. We get it already. Your point is made. Now, please go away.

"FOW = COD/HALO
There's a perfect parallel in video gaming. FoW is like Call of Duty and Halo. Those games feature low damage models which not allow but also encourage players to move into enemy LOS and blaze away. It's exciting, intense, and encourages lots of movement. It just doesn't require much thought bring focused on twitch skills."

Sorry, Wartopia, but I have to say this: "doesn't require much thought." So your goal here is to insult people that play the games you don't like because they aren't how you think they should be? This is a perfect example of someone trying so hard to convince us of how intelligent they are. Oh, you're from Georgia. That explains a lot.

Seriously, what is the rational for bashing a game and the players that play it on a forum dedicated to that game? Congrats to the troll that started this thread.

"are these the ones that the Yanks still have not beat for over 10 years?"

There always has to be at least one in a thread; doesn't there?

i was only showing that his comment was a bit off as freedom fighters/insurgents have more tactics than 'running' into killzones…FoW tactics have been implemented in those wars..dont see many roadside bombs or suicide bombs for example or drone attacks or cyber attacks or the tactics behind them, which are also used in current wars, in my games of FOW. PBI and FoF are great though so is BKC i think.

I think people are a bit harsh to FOW as a rule. I like the parallel with playing COD (Modern edition).

It's a game like DBA or WAB, you push pretty painted miniatures, have fun for what it is and it has a remote flavor of the period.

So no big deal really.

The slightly more disturbing aspect -IMHO- is the (not so) latent Nazi glorification and trivialization. It's a recurring theme for this company. I believe that people can still take this yestercentury crap for what it is and laugh it off with a shrug. I find it rancid and grotesque, but if people don't, or have another perception that's cool as well.

Overall, it has renewed my interest in WWII, I do my own research. I buy miniatures from a large range of manufacturers and can meet a wider base of gamers, and I agree with ComradeTexas, it's a bit exaggerated to open such a thread

Things that I don't like but happily live with cause the game is enjoyable:

1. Telescoping scale that no longer works due to Polish Armoured Train and Churchill Crocodile. The train's guns do not have the range to shoot across the length of the train.

2. The unbalanced and completely incomplete debacle that is LW.

3. Over availability of rare as hens teeth equipment (e.g. Bunkerflak) over availability of more common equipment (e.g. early model Panzer III/IV's in Blitzkrieg).

4. Overall pro-German bias of the game.

5. Lack of emphasis on infantry.

6. Too much access to divisional/corps/army level support. It's not uncommon to see a depleted company of two infantry platoons supported by several platoons of armour and 2-3 artillery/mortar batteries.

7. Some questionable decisions regarding statistics. For example, there is evidence of Soviet 76.2mm guns penetrating Tigers from the side but it's impossible in this game. Or the fact that an IS-2 can't even scratch the frontal armour of a King Tiger despite historical proof that it could.

8. Overall overemphasis on tanks.

9. Lack of many core lists (e.g. Guards Strelkovy, Volksgrenadiers) and too much duplication (how many tankovy lists for LW?).

10. Fact that I suck at playing it.

One thing I forgot--and this will probably make me some enemies--in FoW and many other rulesets you have to buy hvy support for points.
In our games [home grown rules] available bn mortars and mgs are assigned to you by your mission. [I.E., the game master gives you fire from the bn mortars--in reality all of the platoon--and some of the hvy mgs.]

Grand Duke Natokina, I really like that idea.

Personally, having read through the rules:

1. Stupidly short ranges for infantry small arms. Hardly unique to FoW though, just nags me.
2. On board artillery does nag me. If you're doing a "sudden enemy attack" scenario, then cool, really adds to the flavour, but having non-self propelled artillery wander on to the board as the attacker does seem a little ridiculous. Mind you, it nothing that can't be house ruled away.
3. Seen a couple of "wall of tanks" shots. Personally, I feel it's the player's fault – and again, nothing that can't be houseruled away.
4. Telescoping scale? W…T….F? Illogic much?
5. I am slightly disappointed by a lack of Overwatch and the IGUGO system….but gentlemen…. HOUSERULING? God, it's like some people have to play the game out of the box or not at all.
6. The massive sense of attachment people have to the hobby. Personally, I don't give a flying about FoW – I was vaguely interested, but it just doesn't seem like my kind of jaunt to me – but some people here have clearly grown far too attached to their identity of a "Flames of War Player", and equally, some here have become far too attached to their identity of "I don't like FoW."

Sorry, Wartopia, but I have to say this: "doesn't require much thought." So your goal here is to insult people that play the games you don't like because they aren't how you think they should be? This is a perfect example of someone trying so hard to convince us of how intelligent they are. Oh, you're from Georgia. That explains a lot.

Seriously, what is the rational for bashing a game and the players that play it on a forum dedicated to that game? Congrats to the troll that started this thread.

I like FoW. Heck, I just re-based my 20mm moderns using the official FoW basing method and BF bases! The core system rocks and the telescoping ground scale is brilliant.

You're comments are just the sort of thing that turns off gamers to the FoW hobby. Just because someone doesn't think FoW is "realistic" you believe they must be "bashing" the game. It is possible for someone to enjoy FoW while also accepting the fact that it's not representative of history or historical tactics.

There's a strong "purist" attitude in the FoW community. The game deserves better. Compare the FoW community to that of The Sword and the Flame.

TSATF community (I'm among them!) enjoys the game for what it is and makes no pretense about its "historical accuracy". It's fun and that's enough.

But for some bizarre reason the FoW community demands 100% purity in opinion. I just don't get it.

5. I am slightly disappointed by a lack of Overwatch and the IGUGO system….but gentlemen…. HOUSERULING? God, it's like some people have to play the game out of the box or not at all.

I've found the following mod works well: if a platoon gives up its shooting/assault steps it can enter overwatch. During the next enemy turn, after all enemy units have completed movement, units on overwatch may then shoot.

This avoids the complications of real-time interrupts seen with old school opportunity fire ("Stop right there, I'm shooting with this ATG!") while introducing an element of overwatch tactics. It also still limits to shooting "once per gamer turn", it's just delayed into the enemy turn.

And if a gap between terrain bits is small enough for a unit rush past, then so be it. At least said unit can't come around those terrain bits and blast a unit covering the gap before getting shot itself.

Limiting force structure to something more rational also works. No more 155s firing indirect support from on table! When Phil ran his first demo games the forces were like this: realistic platoon to company-sized forces (just like PBI and FoF). The game soon "jumped the shark" since gamers want all their toys on the table and BF is a business intended to make money.

Noticed the Original Poster changed the title of the Post to "The Top Ten Things I dont Like About FOW" from "Top ten things I Hate About FOW". Thanks for the troll war. If you go down the list of Posts there's a post about this once every month or so. Not everyone likes FOW and it definately isn't the most "realistic" of miniature games. To bash the game because it isn't realistic is faulty because some things the game does well(Pinning, Smoke, Artillery) and IGOUGO definately has it's faults. It's preference and it's simplicity.

I like the Axis and Allies Board Game(Not the miniature game) but is it a realistic wargame. No. Is it fun, yes. The fun of Flames of war is buying and building nice miniatures and being able to find someone to play a quick simple and yet not too simple of a game in a couple hours. Bashing it makes little sense because even if you hate it, it still draws folks away from the Evil Empire games and into the category of "Light" to "Medium" historical gaming.

Wargaming is what you make it to be. If you want an indepth historical miniature game you go out and find one. If you want a fun semi-tactical quick game you play Flames of War.

I can understand the upset about the prices of miniatures and the previous faulty nature of the rulebooks and it's not like Flames of War players don't hate that stuff too. They complain and surprisingly most of the time Battlefront cares and makes changes.

They have some of the best customer service in the industry and they do prize support of local tournaments and provide supplies for demo games if a club or store would run one. I'm by no means saying the game is "REALISTIC" or "HISTORICAL" I'm saying it's fun and simple and it's accessable and it's the gateway drug to other miniature games.

Because of FOW I've converted from 40K(Love the fluff hate the game) and have researched World War 2 history and love all faucets of its history. It's led me to invest in 1/285 and 28mm miniatures and to even start building 1/35 scale AFV models and dioramas. It's a perfect entrance to wargaming.

It has its faults, but I definately can't find enough to warrant an almost monthly flame and bash post.

Top of my list is the sculpts on the Early War French helmets,they look more like "GUZZ UNDERS"
LES

"While certainly enjoyable Flames of War allows on-table support situations that aren't historically accurate or plausible".

To a reasonable person that's a simple statement of fact since, with FoW, a single understrength company can include things like 155s providing indirect fire support on-table. You can also have Rommel and Patton engaged in single combat.

But to hysterical members of the FoW hobby stating the obvious "bashing".

Maybe FoW would have a better rep if its most ardent supporters simply accepted FoW as it is?

Wartopia,

Why do you keep on insisting that Flames of War has to be "accurate".

Once you take in that it is an abstract game like chess or stones/cissors/paper but with themed models, it's much easier to enjoy.

I really take it as a kind of WWII WAB. When I want something else, I play something else. That's that simple. Now in regard of anyone who'd says "yes, it is accurate", "no it is not accurate", I don't think we should really care as long as you are enjoying the game you are playing.

For instance, I know that sometimes I want to play games that are more involved and represent (IMHO) better WWII. It is very simple, I call up a friend and we play another game together.

FoW is fun, I push models, my gaming buddies push theirs and they shoot at each other. We can try different combinations. My opponent has exactly the same range of options as me and if he fancy to do "funny" things that are legit, I'll learn and do the same things next time. When I was playing WAB, I lost against some armies and it made me want to counter them. That was a lot of fun to try and have another go with slightly different units. Fow is the same. There are lists and you can try to beat your opponents with them. The principle is not too complicate

Honestly, wanting to link Fow to an "accurate" simulation or not is -IMHO- a misguided debate. Whatever anyone thinks, that's cool with me and I accept your opinion, just let me enjoy the few hours of gaming with my friends.

Tis a brave soldier that dares raise his head out of the foxhole to offer even the most constructive critisim of Flames. A brave but futile gesture. It is what it is, it ain't what it ain't.

The telescoping ground scale makes it almost impossible to make any reasonable modifications and, in any case, the whole point of FOW is that a huge player base exists all using the same rules.

As to tournament mentality, I have played in lots of DB tournaments and have not problem with people actually trying to win (though admitidly the FOW "young bucks" could tone it down a bit).

As to cost 20mm quick build kits (much easier to build then resin and more detailed) sell for $12.00 USD for a set of two so about half the cost. A Box of 50 plastic figures sells for $10.00. So 15mm costs are wildly inflated. Thats not FOW's fault – if people will pay it you can hardly blame them for collecting the money.

FOW stormed the market because most WWII games are unplayable, driven by "experts" who insist on trivia regardless of the costs to playability. I tried to convince Frank Chadwick years ago to smooth out the mechanics of Command Decision and provide a "tournament system" and that such a product would storm the historical world. Instead he went with more complexity. The results speak for themselves.

TomT

"Maybe FoW would have a better rep if its most ardent supporters simply accepted FoW as it is?"

I have accepted it as a popular miniature GAME… what have you accepted it as?

'I have accepted it as a popular miniature GAME… what have you accepted it as?'

Poor representative game design?

I have found this thread to be very entertaining. It seems rather odd to me that anyone that does not like a set of rules would care about what those that play the rules system care about them or think.

It is almost as if there are those that dislike the rules have some sort or strange obcession with bashing it, or those that play it, or discussing the merits/dmerits of the system.

I have yet to find a rules system that is historically accurate…they do not exist. If you are looking for historical accuracy I suggest you stop playing with toy soldiers.

So what is the motive behind those that seek to bash different rules sets.
Does it help them to feel superior?
Do they really think they will change someones mind, especially when theres are so closed.

It is a popular miniatures game because it delivers on what it has set out to deliver. The game has many positive features, and some drawbacks as well. If I do not like a feature of a game I change it.

I think it is a largely a TMP thing to be honest. There are a lot of people here who simply dislike any game system that has a lot of support at tournaments or that is seen as 'mass market'.

I only ended up playing FoW because it was played by a lot of other players at my club and I wanted to give WWII a try again. As an outsider I mocked a lot of things that are being used in this thread as bad things about FoW. Once I actually played the game and got my head around the way it works I am overall pretty happy with what I get.

OK, I might grumble about BF prices but there are alternatives. The visuals aren't perfect but there are not a lot of alternatives at this representational scale that will work as well so I manage. The game is not a slide rule fest which is good and that makes it plenty playable.

Wartopia,

Why do you keep on insisting that Flames of War has to be "accurate".

I never said it has to be accurate.

In fact, there are inaccurate aspects that I enjoy (eg the ambush rule and the telescoping ranges) and others that I dislike (eg lack of overwatch tactics, high unit density, and on-board arty at company level.)

A couple of the most recent hysterical post by FOW gamers indicate the all-or-nothing attitude of FOW gamers.

One might say, "I enjoy FOW's telescoping ranges, ambush rule, and overall simplicty compared to other WWII games. The lack of op fire of any kind, the unity denity, and over-generous support levels aren't realitic, but it's still fun."

Hysterical FOW gamers choose to only hear, "The lack of op fire of any kind, the unity denity, and over-generous support levels aren't realitic." And then they sputter and rant about people bashing and hating FOW or, as Helmet implies, trying to "stop" them from playing the game.

Being the level headed sort who keeps gaming in perspective I found that puritanical attitude off-putting and mostly bailed on the game. I guess when it comes to gaming I'm more of a Unitarian. The FoW community reminds me of the Inquisition! :-). I mean really, folks are trying to stop people fom playing FoW? How?

Thanks, Thomas.
As an infantry company CO I didn't have 12000 points at the start of the year to buy support from the Bn 4.2" mortars in January and 2 of the Antitank gun jeeps in Feb, etc.
If you are making the main Bn effort, the Bn's 4 4.2" mortars fire in support of your attack.

Wartopia.

Are you really surprised that a group of people who have emotional investment into a game do not like ANY idea of negativity about it being expressed? These are the people who want FOW to 'grow and develop' or 'expand'.

Anyone that says 'I dont like fow because of X,Y & Z' is
'a hater' because of Fow's popularity and success and tournaments….like as if that can influence anyones likes or dislikes!

When was the last time you heard anyone say "I don't like cheese, its too damn popular"

If you then say it actually is what about x, y and Z you don't like, whether its related to game design or speed of play or some bit of gameplay that can be exploited, then you are a basher and you don't understand it, ''It's 'just a game'''….boy should they practice what they preach!

I'll be away now to get my sliderules out for PBI and force on force and Spearhead and battlegroup panzergrenadier and blitzkriegcommander and I ain't been shot mum…It is essential equipment for counting rivits apparently.

It must be my previous lack of sliderules and rivets that makes these games all seem playable…completely unintended by the authors. If I can't find my sliderules, I'll just stop kids in the street to make sure they are not on their way to play FOW.

Where's the horse-flogging icon?

As long as we have a

"I don't play it, but man I don't hate it.,you know ? Cool."

Option then I'm cool with this poll, even though it is giving me a totally weird feeling of like deja vu or something, man.

I like blue cheese…I use it to grease up my slide rules

..thats a poll option right there!

Add a new one:

11.) Wojtek the Bear.

That's right – in the new Cassino book you can use a bear to improve the rate of fire or bombardment capability of your 25 pounder battery.

God that's stupid. It really is like 40K after all.

shrug…

Now on a case like that I'll agree with Wartopia. If Wojtek the bear is in the game and does give that type of benefit that's pathetic. Argh… Doesn't help Battlefront is picking up all the former Games Workshop employees. Perhaps trying to copy a little too much from their horrible system.

Guess the excuse is to add flavor to the game, even if the flavor leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

This

"FOW stormed the market because most WWII games are unplayable, driven by "experts" who insist on trivia regardless of the costs to playability. I tried to convince Frank Chadwick years ago to smooth out the mechanics of Command Decision and provide a "tournament system" and that such a product would storm the historical world. Instead he went with more complexity. The results speak for themselves.

TomT"

"Doesn't help Battlefront is picking up all the former Games Workshop employees. Perhaps trying to copy a little too much from their horrible system."

Rick Priestley, John Stallard? Thought they were involved in some other venture!

No not higher eschelon. No most of the FOW lower level folks especially in Battlefront UK and USA are former GW employees.

So you actually meant a large proportion of BF's lower level staff are former GW employees rather than BF is picking up ALL the former GW employees. Interesting that you surmise lower level staff are responsible for driving GW style work practices and former upper echelon GW staff are not.

I'll admit I play FoW and I really love the playability and speed of the games but I would love to see the hero's go away. It does add a bit of fantasy feel to me which I could really do without. I treat it as a fun tournament game using WWII models and ideas. I think a big factor is also what systems did the players play before. I grew up playing all historical miniature games in all periods up to 1900. FoW was my first WWII game and I understand realism is virtually impossible with "modern" combat, I accept that fact and choose to play the game as a game and have fun.

Except realism isn't impossible. Total, 100% realism is impossible, but making a game more realistic neither makes it more complex nor does it make it any less fun.

"Realism" is an absolute value that wargames can only approach – they can never be totally realistic. However, they can be quite realistic, without spoiling the fun of the game, and believing otherwise is just stupidity.

At one of the conventions Joe Krone the Battlefront Events Coordinator for the US and Europe stated that half or more of the US Staff are all former GW Employees(Including himself). He didn't state what their positions were in the company but I'm assuming they are all mid to lower level. That is all that I know.

I'm assuming they are all mid to lower level.

Why on earth are you assuming that?

Their head man, John-Paul Brisgotti, used to work in the GW marketing department.

Regarding BF USA, I had read on their forum that the staff are definitely ex-GW. This actually impacted on one of their major tournaments where terrain was deployed in traditional GW manner – illogical and in small clumps.

staff are definitely ex-GW

Which nicely dove-tails into my own list.

1. Price increases. It isn't that the tanks are too expensive, per se, but that they are double what they were a decade ago (while the rest of the 15mm WWII hobby has increased at a much slower rate that might actually have to do with materials and labor costs).
2. Force List Merry-go-Round. If you thought GW rotated Codexes too quickly, FoW will have your head spinning.
3. Now you see it, now you don't. What Mid-War? We don't produce Mid-War!
4. Infantry sculpts on the decline. Already described by others.
5. I r FoW-cat; This r siriuz game! The mixture of casual rules and book-slamming historical wargaming types makes the FoW "community" even less predictable than the 40k crowd.
6. Schizo marketing. "We don't mind you using any 15mm WWII models in play, but our firing squads are ready for anyone who mentions this on our forum."
7. Europe is the World! Pacific? Japanese? Don't be silly.
8. War is war, and this game is neither. As already mentioned, the game's forcelists often have little or nothing to do with actual formations, asset usage, or equipment availability dates.
9. "What does this unit do, again?" Less a problem now, but there have been models in their line that were entirely absent from the forcelists. I like having British motorcycles, mind you…
10. "But I'd have to deal with that so-and-so to get any." Another problem that has supposedly cured itself, but the US distributor for BF/FoW used to be extremely unpleasant to deal with at the personal and professional level. A shop should not need high levels of intestinal fortitude just to *order* product.

7. Europe is the World! Pacific? Japanese? Don't be silly.

Given Battlefront's location, I'd say they're quite aware the Pacific exists and that there was a bit of a kerfuffle there back in the 1940s.

Not many Tankz in the Pacific Theatre though…

Everyone thinks they can make a better Star Wars than Lucas.

If it's such a bad game and you have all the answers, quit complaining and write your own game, you whiney little **expletive deleted**

A surprising number already have.

Have they? Prove it.

Also, You should know, all of you **Expletive-Deleted** are gonna pay. You are the ones who are the **Expletive-Deleted**. We're gonna **Expletive-Deleted** your mothers while you cry like little **Expletive-Deleted**. Once we find all you Flames of War hating **Expletive-Deleted** who are making fun of Flames of War, we're gonna make you eat our **Expletive-Deleted**, then **Expletive-Deleted** out your **Expletive-Deleted**, which is made up of our **Expletive-Deleted** that we made you eat, then eat their **Expletive-Deleted**, which is made up of our **Expletive-Deleted** that we made 'em eat.

You got that?

Makes Napoleonics look almost civilised.

O.o

When you are done using

**Expletive-Deleted**

as punctuation, feel free to join the game already underway.

Another thing i don't like is the site going down more times than a prostitutes nickers. LOL
LES

The following was written while watching the number of stifles I've received explode!

You must understand, just because you sit in your basement jerkin it to tables and charts, doesn't mean you've written anything.

This thread isn't about having rational and constructive criticism of any game. All of us that play the game realize it's not perfect, nor is it a simulation. Was never meant to be. If that's what you're looking for, play another game you morons.

But no, that's not what this thread is about. It's about socially retarded misfits trying to come across as experts ripping on other's work and interests. It's about that chubby little know-it-all standing on the sidelines at the hobby store every weekend, who doesn't quite smell right, squinting at the gaming that's going on. Eventually he walks over and snorts something like "Boy, you know they never really would have done that." He may possibly drop the tellingly observant line, "That artillery should be miles away. What's it doing on the table." And after about 30 seconds to a minute of everyone looking at him like he farted, which is fair since he just mouth-farted nonsense, he walks over to the Warhammer guys and drops his $.25 USD worth of knowledge about ancient battles on them.

Yes, that guy and this thread is full of, as Buzz Lightyear would say: sad, strange little men. So, you chubby little nerds keep reading Osprey books, memorize the statistics and figures in the Encyclopedia of 20th Century Tanks, and spend 8 to 10 hours playing realistic war games with whoever you can get to sit down with you in your orgy of numbers and nonsense.

For me, and guys like me, we will continue to collect and paint models of armies we love, build terrain to play on, and play the game that we enjoy that facilitates maintaining old relationships and creating new ones.

In other words, you keep bitching. I'm going to keep playing.