"Best Alternative to Flames of War?" Topic

actually another great game is Fireball forward, new game they played a lot of it a Hcon. it was a ton of fun and the guy who wrote the rules are great.

fireballforward.com

BKC is the only WWII Game I keep going back to.

Pat

May I add that Derek H deserves a real pat on the head for his last post. If I wanted really badly to sneer at something but was not allowed to, that is the post I would want to have written.

Pat

Kampfgruppe Commander 2. Using 6mm you can get good strategic manoevering and see troops abilities in the bigger picture. It also reflects the command abilites of differing troop typres.

Tim is also being Modest.

His site is a 'must see' for anyone playing crossfire.

And one other thing worthy of note is that no other game has quite managed to capture the feel of bocage fighting quite as well as crossfire. While I have never played pacific games with it, I would not be surprised to find out a lot of people do the pacific war using crossfire, even if they use other rules for other theatres.

Good points Tim.

I'm not 100% sure on the Brits vs. Elephants question but do know that the 653rd PzJg Bn was employed in the Anzio beachhead where British Divisions were also present, but there would definitely be no Churchill Crocodiles there. However as you note it's all about research and making the right choice. Big deal for some, not so much for others, and not totally dependent on specific game system choice.

You are quite right about the overrepresented/ahistoric use of flamethrowers as a primary AT system in FoW. That's something that many FoW players have also had strong disagreements with over the past years. You may be interested to know that Version 3 of FoW significantly altered the effectiveness of flamethrowers against fully armored tanks specifically to addressed this point. So you should be seeing less of this in the future.

Cheers, VB

Tim, IIRC the British did come across a few Elefants in Italy in 1943 or so. There were Crocodile equipped units in Italy but not until late 1944.

You're right about the inappropriate use of flamethrowers! I guess it's also just possible that the player was proxying Crocodiles for standard Churchill guntanks & couldn't remove the trailers.

About the flame-trowers, Version 3 of the rules really tones them down. Before they could destroy a tank on a 50% of the time. Now they just make the tank bail 50% of the time.

Thankfully flame throwers have been very much removed from an AT role in Version 3. That was one of my favorite changes! I mean crocs chasing tanks around? Really? That was silly. Most of the blatant silliness rules-wise has been removed.

As for Historical matchups… that's really just on the players.

I like the "Battlegroup Panzergrenadier" rules by General de Brigade a lot. Great production standards, too.

What he said. It has a command system that is a cross between BKC and DBM.

Senior commander rolls for pips, Company and Platoon commanders on the ground roll to activate, failure can be turned to success by the CO adding his pips to the activation roll. COs can also use their pips to call in artillery or air support.

So troops may fail and COs are at the back co-ordinating the battle by directing their efforts where most needed. Almost like real life really…

In BGPG armour is not toe to toe and at a better ratio relative to infantry than RF.

Thankfully flame throwers have been very much removed from an AT role in Version 3.

Surely Flamethrowers should work pretty well against most Early War Tanks? Almost all of them had gaps you could poke a pencil through. Against Later War stuff I agree they would be less useful.

Pat

At our club we play Panzer Grenadier rules – well we would – since Dave Brown is a club member :-)

We tried FoW for a change a couple of weeks back and it got mixed reactions.

The thing that got the most discussion was the lack of defensive fire which meant you could make what seemed like unrealistic moves with your troops in the face of the enemy.

For us it didn't feel 'right' though fair to say we tend to play out historical scenarios rather than point based competition games. The flow of the game and feel of the result is important to us.

If you like your game to feel authentic and you haven't tried Panzer Grenadier before then I would suggest giving it a try.

I'll throw another hat in the ring for Kampfgruppe Normandy. Points system that works really well for creating historical, balanced forces. Scenarios that make points battles not seem like points battles. Easy to fight a company v. a company. Morale system that is one of the coolest I have seen in a long time.

I have a question.

Say, hypothetically, Battlefront does something on a GW-level to alienate their customers. Battlefront-only models at events, constant price increased, obvious 'power creep', etc.

Can I take what I have for FoW and directly transfer that into BKC? I've taken a look at the rules, and while it seems I won't be trading FoW for BKC any time soon, it never hurts to be prepared.

Yep, it's not a very base-size sensitive game at all.

Pat

There are the odd units you won't need e.g. Lt Mortars and you may want to add a specific CO or HQ stand (but Artillery Staff Group would work nicely) Other than that pretty much good to go.

Say, hypothetically, Battlefront does something on a GW-level to alienate their customers. Battlefront-only models at events

If this should happen then I'd be done playing in or running any "official" FoW events.

Good news is I don't think it's at all a likely scenario. BF seems to be doing well enough without having to employ such a strategy.

Can I take what I have for FoW and directly transfer that into BKC?

Yes, as others above have noted. But I really think IABSM3 may be a closer fit, it would be my choice anyway for 15mm WWII gaming after FoW.

Cheers, VB

Ummm the problem with crocs being used in an anti tank role is simple, a Churchil at flamethrower range (about 100yards) would be pumping AP shells from its 75 into the target, No need to waste valauble and limited fuel on it.

The problem with Crocs in FoW was that its Flamethrower, even with a very limited range, ended up being the AT weapon of choice when dealing with Panthers/Tigers. Not at all historically accurate as noted. The new flamethrower rules changes in Version 3 of FoW have made that techichnique non viable and very much a waste of the Flamethrower "shots" the Croc has, which are appropiately limited in FoW.

As for Historical matchups… that's really just on the players.

---------
thats a topic I always find interesting as a mainly ancients player, as whilst i can accept that an early Nap Wars Russian army vs 1815 french might look as odd (though less so that 1939 brits v 1945 Germans) when one goes back earlier time becomes more elastic as otherwise someone with say a Romano British army is going to be short of opponents when people as in the group I game with have later Saxon and Viking armies – I think the categories in Ancients tend to be broader (Biblical, Classical, Early Middle and Late Roman, DA etc) though still in effect covering several hundred years rather than the 4 to 20 years of many later wars – though we draw the line at Vikings v Samurai!

though we draw the line at Vikings v Samurai!

Always best.

An alternative for this anal fistula of a thread? A root canal or bowel resection under conscious sedation.

GRNEP8 What about this?

link

We tend to play IABSM or on occasion BKC. And its a terrible thing to say, but of all the issues I have with FOW, the biggest seems to be that it brings out the worst in people. We have had more yelling and arguing playing FOW then any other system.

For a company level game, Mein Panzer works well. It is an excellent infantry game too. It really shines in combined arms battles. Info is available at the ODGW website, odgw.com.

We have had more yelling and arguing playing FOW then any other system.

Do you have any theories as to why that is?

Pat

Do you have any theories as to why that is?

Pat

Perhaps they yell and argue about the correct usage of then/than in the rules books?

I Ain't Been Shot Mum for a smallish game (up to a company a side), Battlefront:WW2 for anything larger.

Yeah, would toss in another vote for Kampfgruppe Normandy.
It seems to deliver the right balance between providing point-based lists and being very suitable for scenario play.

The detail of the system is in the armour (guns and armour values), so it should appeal to FOW players in that respect as well, but infantry combat works out fine as well.

Crossfire looks good (haven't played), I wonder if you married the vehicle system of KGN with it…?

ok,, I know I must be daft cuz I know all the rules, but I can't think of what PBI stands for. Senior Moment?

I've always prefered the scale where a tank is a tank. In that category I've played Mein Panzer and found that it was really easy to play and it flowed well. And the rules were well thought out. Unlike many rules that favor armor over infanty, these play excellent infantry rules for the non-skirmish genre.

PBI = Poor Bloody Infantry

IABSM – silly question really.

I always like to listen and respond to Combat Action Command comments on The Miniatures Page. Since the free CAC Light Rules were intentionally "Infantry Centric" to demo the rules, some gamers have requested a sample AFV Data Card to download.

Therefore, I have added a link to download both Tiger I & II Data Cards (pdf format)under the small picture of the Tiger II (King or Royal Tiger) Data Card on the website Home Page. Enjoy! Lee

PS. If you do not have the full rules set, some of the terms (such as PAV and FAV) might be unfamiliar. Feel free to ask here or via email from the website. For example: FAV = Fully Armored Vehicle (i.e. a tank) while PAV = Partially Armored Vehicle such as a halftrack.

[trollface]Axis and Allies Miniatures [/trollface]

I have used crossfire for the pacific war and it was a blast. So far the Japanese have lost the battles but were oh so close to winning.

Another vote for Panzer Grenadier [2 edition]

though we draw the line at Vikings v Samurai!

or Waffen SS vs Viet Cong.

or Waffen SS vs Viet Cong.

Wasn't that Dien Bien Phu?

Naw, the french had broken up their nazi foreign legion units by then I believe.

FOW R3. I have played Blitzkieg Kommander, Battle Front, IABSM and Crossfire. It is still FOW.

Tonight we are playing Beda Fomm with Early War British and Italins which the Italians have the Super Tanks.

The newest Combat Action Command supplement, The Pacific 1942 – 43, will be released in late October in time for HMGS' Fall-In 2012 Con in Lancaster, PA USA. This supplement has 10 pages of new Pacific Theater special rules covering items such as Banzai Attacks and Amphibious Landings, plus dozens of new team Data Cards covering everything from the US Marines and Japanese Special Naval Landing Forces, through P-400 Fighters, Zeros and Betty Bombers, to US M2A4 tanks and Japanese M-3 Stuarts captured in 1941. The M2A4 saw its only combat use in WWII with the Marines on Guadalcanal. Also play "what if" battles with famous units such as the First Special Service Force and US Para Marines.

We chose the 1942-43 time period for our first Pacific supplement because there were many interesting battles besides those on Guadalcanal during these years. And also because this period of the Pacific War is perhaps the most balanced portion of the entire conflict. Earlier battles in 1941 with MacArthur's forces in the Philippines and with the UK forces in Malaysia and Hong Kong were all pretty much one-sided affairs. By early 1944 and for the rest of the Pacific War, the Japanese stood little chance against the ever increasing American and Allied Juggernaut of ships, planes, and troops arrayed against them.

But in 1942-43 things were very evenly matched, which is why the Guadalcanal campaign took months to conclude. We've also added in an interesting array of special units that actually fought, or that could have fought, in these battles. Units such as the First Special Service Force and British M3 Tanks captured by the Japanese. They were available, could have been used and make the rules much more interesting.

Visit the Order Now link on the combatactioncommand.com Home Page to place your Pre-Order!

Lee – The Author

What I don't get is why there's a WW2 game based on Warmaster, but not one based on the excellent Epic Armageddon rules. Homebrew time? I might be up for the challenge.

Your googlefoo is weak…

Epic based WW2:
link

Never tried them as it's not my thing, Epic that is, so can't comment on how good they are.

I'd suggest further research here:
link

There are many Epic players there and they may be able to help more.

No, it's not, I am aware of those homebrew rules, but I'm talking of something actually published like BKC. Not that I'm saying rules need to be published, but….blah. I just thought that one wasn't perfect (took away saves etc, a perfect way to represent veterancy like in FoW, that always made sense to me there).

But thanks!

While on the subject, I find Hail Caesar overall a better ruleset for any period, including WW2, than Warmaster.

The command system is a lot better, as are morale saves, fatigue etc etc.

A conversion to BKC is something I've thought about.

I've been going through this dilemma for a little while as well. While I like the simplicity of FoW, I find the special rules, the supplement hamster wheel, lack of c&c and battlefield friction and lack of opportunity have turned me off of the game.

FoW does have some very simple and solid underlying mechanics and plays at a full company, plus supports, even up to a battalion level which is the level I want to play. I find that IABSM is more suited to multi-platoon games and can get bogged down at a full company. Bolt Action is also more of a platoon plus reinforcements level game.

So what I am doing is making my own set of homebrew rules, taking the basic mechanics from FoW, ignoring the majority of the special rules, adding in the initiative system from Bolt Action and borrowing some ideas from IABSM. I'm calling it Flames of Bolt Action Shot Mum.

"I've heard good things about Blitzkrieg Commander but have not played- anyone care to shed some light on it for me?"

You can find a review comparing BKC and BFWW2 in the files section here:

link

Its rather an old review, and there is a BKCv2 out now, but it will give you some idea.

You might find Rapid Fire!2 a good set for your taste, and Kampfgruppe Normandie (OOP for the moment but its replacement is on the way)

What the he** is an Italian Super Tank. Must be humor unless Fow has some other special terms i'm not familiar with.

I'm playing Jagdpanzer 2nd Edition rules.
There's no point system, but experienced WWII gamers have a pretty good idea of what constitutes equal sides. Otherwise, you can always use the points system from FOW or any other to choose the toys you'll be playing with.

IABSM from TFLl. As a soldier of 30+ years of experience I consider it to be far superior to FoW, and a lot more fun. It really simulates the 'friction' of war well I think. Its not a comp set of rules however, which FoW is. FoW is a fine game though IMHO. :) just sayin