"Should gamers be banned from playing Flames of War?" Topic

To hear from posts on TMP, it is obvious that the game is stupid, un-historical, brings out the worst in people, causes scurvy and measles, etc.

So, should Congress ban it outright, to save us from its dire influence?
And should the Euro Court ban it in Europe, and the UN in other parts of the world?

Obviously, its players are having fun in ways that must not be allowed! Why, they even might think that they can "play" wargames without learning true historica facts and tactics! The horror!

We got trouble, yes trouble right here on TMP! That's trouble with a capital "T" that rhymes with …. uh…. "F" or "W" do not rhyme with "T".

Well, it might be a start:)

Seriously – I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist over it. I think the game is alright played on big tables (with just the basic rule-set without all the add-on rules from the myriad of army books) and some mates, a pizza and a few beers.

Playing Flames of War is a war crime against humanity in any other dimensional continuum. Dunno why it shouldn't be any different in ours.

The heiniousness of FOW is akin to clubbing baby seals and then eating them with mayonaisse and dolphin spread.

On a serious note, it can't be that fun locally as we've had over half our players quit over the last couple of years (1 other moved) with no replacements in sight. And out of the remaining 4 players, one is busy playing anything else and not happy with FOW (no not me). 1 other local region club has also stopped playing it (and there's only 3 clubs).

Clearly guys locally are either not having fun or they understand the greviousness of their crimes against humanity and want to distance themselves from anything that could end up as evidence in an ICC case.

Why are you stirring the pot?

Sure why not. They tell us what we can not speak, do, own or drive. Might as well give up games as well. Welcome to the land of the free.

The heiniousness of FOW is akin to clubbing baby seals and then eating them with mayonaisse and dolphin spread.

That is a bit rough. I like baby seal with a cetacean aioli. Don't knock it til you've tried it.

Fair enough for you yuppy elites.

Me, I'm a simple manchild whose life's pleasures are enjoying simple spiced poodle burgers washed down by pureed koala shakes.

Delish!

My tastes could not be satisfied by such meager fare. Why just today I finished off the last of the barbeque dodo that I made out of the last dodo from the secret dodo coup my family has kept going these last 350 years.

They taste so much like chicken, I'm not sure what the fuss was all about.

Closest I can get to dodos is babies except the dingos keep stealing them.

I live in West L.A. – I don't even think it's legal to joke about eating endangered species around here, let alone extinct ones.

I live in West L.A. – I don't even think it's legal to joke about eating endangered species around here, let alone extinct ones.

I am not sure if you are joking or not.

Seal Flipper Pie is a great Newfoundland delicacy.

In West LA, endagered species eats you.

Should gamers be banned from playing Flames of War?

Only those who use Allied captured 'Super Panzerfausts' with the bunker busting rule.

I heard that to enter the 2013 GT you need to include the severed head of a kitten with your entry. Says it all really.

…The heiniousness of FOW is akin to clubbing baby seals…

Speaking of which…

link

Does "I don't give a fat rats' ass whether others adore or hate it" count? My friends and I play it sans tournament, sans cheese, just for fun and it works for us. It is fast, fun and collegial.

It's not a game it's "A HOBBY", as per the BF Web Site!!!!

It's an enigma inside a contradiction!!

I am not sure if you are joking or not.

He's not.

Wargamers should be banned from playing any rules that they find enjoyable. This hobby (wargames, not FoW) should be about a suitable combination of boredom and mental meltdown, with no fun or enjoyment involved.

Now, where did I put my copy of Firefly?

Now, where did I put my copy of Firefly?

Good rule set!

We had a dingo steal a baby here in Pittsburgh last year.

I am sure each one of my grandsons (the oldest is almost two) would LOVE to steal a dingo ! And since us Dutch are a rebellious lot, I am also sure that in case of a "FOW verboten" order came from Brussels sales of rules and figures would sore (sp ?).

I am Spartacus, BTW.

"Now, where did I put my copy of Firefly?"

A pretty lightweight set, 40% chance of a Sherman 75 knocking out a Tiger frontally at close range.

Anyway, wrt the OP, I thought the more puritanical nation-states around the world generally liked to ban things which are fun. Of course things which are banned my well be more fun just because they are banned.

What lies beneath? What is Hobbes hidden motive?
I suspect something deep and dark such as how Aussies feel about successful New Zealanders or how well Oz didn't do in the recent Olympics . There's some deep angst behind all this.
BTW TH you have no need to mince Koalas up, this has already been done to create the 'fishermen's friend' .Koalas of course get the same effect by eating their own sh…l

Apparently ,I have been eating horse meat.

Apparently ,I have been eating horse meat.

link
LES

I've never understood the need some people who hate Flames of War have to go to a Flames of War forum to tell Flames of War players that they shouldn't play Flames of War

Just play. Anything.

Already in effect round these parts. we have to play in seperate cells,in secret basements ,no more tournaments.
Players are shot on sight and their families are forced to play twister or MTG, the horror.

Now now, Congress only wants to ban the Assault Phase. There's no reason for it to exist other than to kill people.

Never played it.

Has it got tables in it?

Mmmhh…. I have to say that a lot of games and books have been banned in germany for far less than the content in flames of war books. I think if someone would file a complaint against it in germany or austria because it idealised nazi war criminales it would surly be banned or put on the index were it belongs.

The topic is far to complex and has a liability to all the victims of the holocoust inorder handeled lighly by a some gamedesinger in downunder who invent a super panzerfaust.

With all due respect.
Greetings

No they shouldn't – play or do not play, but don't whinge about fer hecks sake.

Oh, for goodness sake--it doesn't need Congress to be banned--that can be done by executive order, dontcha know.

Really, I don't see what all the fuss is about.

Rob

On a serious note, it can't be that fun locally as we've had over half our players quit over the last couple of years (1 other moved) with no replacements in sight.

Is that not normal for most game systems/rules sets?

Clearly guys locally are either not having fun or they understand the greviousness of their crimes against humanity and want to distance themselves from anything that could end up as evidence in an ICC case.

Or maybe it's a more natural occurrence and might help to explain why I have more than a dozen sets of Napoleonic rules on my basement shelves?

So, should Congress ban it outright, to save us from its dire influence?

I'd have to imagine that would have a rather negative impact on the rest of the WW2 historical wargaming community. If FoW is what ex-40K'ers migrate to; and BGK, IAMSBM, etc are what ex-FoW'ers migrate to as I've seen mentioned, then what happens when you take FoW out of that equation? As best as I can tell no other WWII rules set, as good as some of them are, is likely to build up the broad based interest that FoW has. It may be that many owe thanks to FoW even though they don't care for it themselves.
The one thing I know for certain is that in my area is that if it were not for FoW we'd only see virtually only fantasy/sci-fi gaming in our local game stores.

The FOW player persecution complex never ceases to amaze me.

Actually if we just banned the evangelising that would be fine.

So, FoW people: please stop trying to convince people holding the contrary position that your game is so great; because it really isn't.

And FoW haters, please stop trying to get the fanboyz to stop playing, just them stew in blind ignorance.

There, that ought to do it. Now can talk about more weighty matters like Ford vs Chevy?

dad-burn-it!! why did you have to go and put that last line in there.. now I'm going to have to watch the Music Man again..

I don't really see FoW players trying to convince anyone here that their game is great Mr Elmo. This is supposedly an FoW board so I think that the onus is on players of other rule sets to be ,respectful of that. I suggest that 'your game isn't great ' and stew in blind ignorance shows you to be less than neutral and therefore to be disregarded.

I've never understood the need some people who hate Flames of War have to go to a Flames of War forum to tell Flames of War players that they shouldn't play Flames of War

Gaming Hipster Rage.

They're angry that no one plays their uber-"historical", overly-complicated, rarely played/marketed ruleset so they act like children latching on to any bad rule/unit, logical or not, so that they can appear superior to all the "FOW Fanboys".

So, FoW people: please stop trying to convince people holding the contrary position that your game is so great; because it really isn't.

I've never heard nor seen this. I do see A LOT of FOW-haters here bashing the game though, proselytizing that they ruleset they play is so much better.

The question, perhaps, is not whether FoW should be banned, but whether it should be banned from describing itself as an historical wargame.

There are plenty of sci fi and fantasy 'wargames' that a small(?) proportion of historical gamers remain sniffy about. Generally, however, said gamers don't feel the need to rant regularly on TMP about it. John the OFM has stated on numerous threads that he doesn't give a rat's ar$e for its accuracy, he enjoys FoW. Fine, but the BF line is that "Flames Of War is a game that allows you to recreate the battles of World War Two using miniatures figurines, and so experience the war from the point of view of a front-line company commander." That, it seems to me, the 'haters' would argue is where the problem lies. One can play any game one likes, but to describe it as recreating the battles of WW2 a game should surely _accurately_ reflect the forces, equipment and tactics of the conflict.

PS. Sorry if I've spoilt anyone's fun and taken the thread too seriously.

shall we ban bolt action while we're at it?

> I've never heard nor seen this.

Every time someone writes "it's just a game" and "you can't recreate it so don't bother". That is when they make the claim that FOW is better.

@Woolygoose, by your definition most wargames could not describe themselves as historical.
I doubt that many FoW players could think that putting a line of 150 mm guns on the table presages an historical game, but then I'd rather that than spend hours poring over small print charts and debating which type of sabot discarding round to load and what the thickness of a Sherman's turret side armour was in 1944 and actually that type of Ww2 game isn't realistic either, it's just complex.
If you have a game to offer that gets the toys on the table so there are ten or so tanks per side an appropriate infantry and lots of other nice models paper and its quick to play …then tell us about it.
Meanwhile whilst we shouldn't be uncritical of successful people, let us not be too critical because the BF guys make WW2wargaming happen and invest more than most of the other rule sets put together.
But hey if you have a positive alternative tell us about it.

Ford, without a doubt.

BKCII – there you go… you asked what fun game set could be played to get 10 (or more) tanks on a table without obsessing over HEAT vs HESH vs APDS or whatever..

by your definition most wargames could not describe themselves as historical.

I disagree, in my experience (admittedly not vast relative to many) most historical wargamers put a great deal of effort into trying to get the armies and tactics right for their chosen period. Whether they succeed or not is a whole other debate. I understand the 'it can't be done, so why bother? It's just a game' argument, but I'm asking how that then sits with the claim that the rules allow you to "recreate the battles of WW2"?

If you have a game to offer that gets the toys on the table so there are ten or so tanks per side an appropriate infantry and lots of other nice models paper and its quick to play …then tell us about it.

I'd offer "NUTS!" by TwoHourWargames (admittedly aimed principally at platoon level), and I've read good things about both IABSM and BGK, but each to their own.

To be clear, I have no axe to grind with FoW and merely proposed calling in the Advertising Standards Agency in the spirit of the original OP. I certainly don't 'hate' FoW or anyone who plays it, but in the spirit of Devil's advocate I do propose that there's a little having and eating of cake going on within the FoW community. Perhaps it's just that the oddities and rule-lawyering gets more press than the examples of FoW creating good games and broadly correct results in historical scenarios.

If we ban FoW for John's reasons, don't we also need a worldwide ban on talking about Napoleonics on the internet?

Just to be clear, you could still play Napoleonics, just online discussion would be banned.

;-)

Cheers,

The Bandit

mine is bigger than yours!