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

Oh dear !!! Banning someone from playing a game !!! John, you must try decaf ! "You a Mean Man !!!" Reminds me of that old Groucho Marx line, "I'll fight any man in this bar for a dollar !"

What a silly thread. Play what you like.

KAM

Seriously, when I think back to when I was a teenager and getting started in wargaming in the 1980s it was difficult. The rules available didn't tell you much other than a bunch of game mechanics and every club…even sections within clubs would grumble about this set of rules compared with that set of rules and pre-internet, pre-ebay, pre-amazon and pre-TMP it was really difficult to get information about how to wargame WW2, get TO&Es and painting guides; you were left with whatever you could get in model and toy shops.

A typical view in the hobby can be found in the 2nd edition of the WRG 1925-1950 set when it says "The platoon tactics every WW2 wargamer will know…" Well, no. I didn't know. Lots of others didn't know. Why assume everyone buying that rules set will know?

I'm not going to say FoW is perfect or defend its flaws but what it has done is give entry level wargamers or people new to WW2 wargaming a complete guide to it. The concept of the game and a lot of its execution is what I was crying out for when I was starting way back then. It has also raised the game (pardon the pun) of other rules publishers in that more information about the hobby, tactics, painting guides and organisation is contained within recent rules compared with WRG, From Cambrai to Sinai, Combined Arms or Tactical Commander and I think that's a very good thing. I haven't even mentioned the convenience of buying an entire unit in one box or pack without going on some wild hunt at a convention.

I can also go from club to club or group to group and find opponents for FoW without having to rebase or reorganise them to suit whatever rules set happens to be in vogue in each one. For the record, I have IABSM for my 20mm WW2 forces and will play RF…even though I'm not a fan of it. I wouldn't go on a RF forum to tell everyone what I think is wrong with it, though.

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

FoW can be used just historically as you care to use it, just as any other supposedly "more historic" set can be used as unhistorically as you choose to. The key element here is that it's up to you.

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.

Is your assumption here is that there are no FoW wargamers who do the same?

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.

It would appear on this TMP-sub forum, that most often the "fanboyz" are pointing out some of the positive aspects of the game in response to the "haters" starting up the "dump on FoW" bandwagon. You need only look at many of the thread titles and post counts to get a good idea of what's going on here. You seldom see "FoW is the Greatest Game Ever" or "FoW has some semblance of historically accuracy thread" posted here and driving up in the post counts. Rather you see a repetitive pattern of threads like the recent "Allied Super Panzerfausts: The game gets stupider", "Codex Creep!", "Notice anything here?" etc which usually over hype minor issues/aspects of the game in an attempt to discredit the entire FoW game system, the company that produces it, and quite often the players who play it.

Believe me, I'm not wasting any of my time participating on other boards trying to bring down any other game system or those who enjoy them, and I'm certainly not suggesting that anybody should cease playing anything that brings them great enjoyment. Yet others seem to revel in doing just that here and when that does occur, some like myself feel a bit obliged to respond.

Over the next two days there will be 52 players playing 130 Market Garden themed Flames of War wargames on Ft Knox, KY. They will be entirely red vs. blue games. Many players have gone to great lengths to research and recreate historic formations for use in this event, many players have created elaborate themed terrain tables, missions for the five rounds have been selected for relevance and suitability to the type of actions that occurred during the battle. Players are flying in from as far as way as California and Florida and driving I from all over the region. The venue is the old Ft Knox Officers' Club and is open to the public. Sounds like a great representation of historical wargaming and a great opportunity to introduce the historical wargaming hobby, not the "FoW Hobby", to new people. Yet many here on this TMP sub-forum will try to characterize it as totally devoid of any shred of historical accuracy and a disservice to the greater historical wargaming hobby.

You ask me why I like FoW so much? The ability to pull together such an awesome event like the this which is a positive credit to historical wargaming in general is a HUGE part of it. Show me another game system that does as much good for historical wargaming and I'll be happy to shift gears. I see some good rule producers doing some good things and I give them credit for creating systems that many will enjoy when they've soured on FoW, but so far none has created a system with the synergy and broad impact that FoW has had. None has created a system that can effectively replace FoW as a mechanism for drawing more people into the historical wargaming hobby.

Rather than dishing on FoW, its detractor's efforts are better spent acknowledging what good that has come from it and how they can leverage some of that positive energy it generates to get players interested in other historical wargames and periods, and yes…even other WW2 games.

VB

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 ?).

If Brussels took that step FoW would become the national sport of the UK within 24 hours.

No, just limit the armies to 50 points max.

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.
Is your assumption here is that there are no FoW wargamers who do the same?

Oh no Sir, that will not fly. I imply a criteria for an historical game (accurate reflection of forces, equipment and tactics), Lewisgunner contends that

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

and when I disagree with him you interpret that as me implying that no FoW players accurately reflect historical forces and tactics?

Your Ft Knox event sounds like an impressive tournament, you make a strong case for FoW to be as 'historical' as any other WW2 set, and I sincerely wish you well. I do think, however, that you still have an uphill battle as, on the same day you make your positive post:

- A criticism is created out of thin air, making the author look a little over-defensive (no names, no pack drill);
- In a thread on banning FoW started by a man who is usually a defender/advocate of the game (with friends like that…?)
- On another thread someone posts

What we have here is a contention between those who are promoting realism and those who are looking for game balance. I presume that BF beef up the captured panzer fault because they want to give Allied troops a boost for game balance. Those who think that a weapon should have the same performance characteristics whoever is using it are just not on the same page so there will never be agreement.

I do sincerely wish FoW well, but for now I personally remain with the skeptics.

I hate to repeat this again, but the reason for FOW is for them to sell miniatures, and refresh it every so often so they can sell some more miniatures. If someone has some fun too well yeah, they can live with that as long as the smiling fellows buy some more miniatures……..

Well if you enjoy the game and can live with an endless succession of special rules to enhance national characteristics then why not play it. It's not my cup of tea but I doubt everybody would agree with my choice of rules, scales or periods.

This is so incredibly silly. Have some of us forgotten what the ultimate function of a game is? Probably not. Obviously other motives at work here.

What Tazman forgets is that you can use the FoW rules with miniatures made by other manufacturers.

Grey Panda is right: This thread is extremely silly. There's enough grumpiness and prejudice in wargaming already without pointless mud slinging over one game.

Well stirred John

It's interesting. As hobbies goes historical wargaming is enjoyed by a tiny number of people. The players are spread thinly around each country. Then the players use differnets scales and a miriad of rulesets.
I don't think any other hobby can have so many divisions within it. It's amazing that anybody finds anyone else to play with!

As for FOW, I've never played it and probably never will, as play our universal ruleset for all periods and have long ago given up on slow cumbersome commercial rulesets.
But a set that is played by many is a good thing. It is popular, so must have something in it.

I've been very amused reading this thread. My points are:

1. Like some have said…I don't understand anti-FOW people going on a FOW discussion to influence those FOW players they're playing a "stupid game". I say mind your own business.
2. Except FOW for what it is. A popular fun game. I struggled with the realism of system until I excepted that fact.
3. There are more realistic WWII sets out there but none of them have the popularity of FOW. If I wanted to play Blitkreig Commander for example I would would have to rely on the ONE friend I know who plays or contact someone I dont knopw so well ( and who know where that person might live). Yet, I went to the hooby store this weekend where I know a FOW Market Garden campaign was playing and there were ten players. I could go to almost any hobby store on a given weekend and see a FOW game.
4. Battlefron and FOW are a very successful business. Their job is to make money while satisifying customers. Books and minitures are their business. I wish I would have thought of it.
5. Like someone else said. What other minitures rules set has brought over the youth to play historicals in a way FOW has? I thank them for this.

Personally I just don't like seeing a game I like go down the same path of crap the other game I once loved did.

And FOW is definitely treading the same steps 40K once did.

I don't care for 100% accuracy – it's impossible to recreate this in a game. I do care about consistency, a general application of historicalness and not having a bazillion pointless special rules erode the balance of the game.

FOW has become more inconsistent, less balanced and more reliant on special rules. It's ruining my fun with the game as well as that of some of my opponents who have made similar comments.

As for house rules, I don't solo play so there's no point to them other than for areas where the rules are grey and difficult ot interpret.

Getting opponents to try something different can also be difficult.

Have some sympathy for BF they have to keep developing the game to keep people interested. Their model means that they release new books with new armies and new special rules in them. If they released new rules at the rate of less popular sets they would be issuing one set perhaps every five years and a couple of army list books. That would make them really just a very active figure and kit manufacturing company. To create value they release books which have to have some raisin d'κtre hence the special rules. However, if you have a set of rules which doesn't constantly add new items then players get bored and leave.
But if the special rules get to you just don't pay them or play some other set of rules.

The new books don't need special rules especially the poor quality one's being released by BF.

E.g.

Bulge – availability of new American fortified lists, Chaffees, Sherman variants, M3 Jackson etc. Germans get Western Front Sturmtiger, Volksgrenadiers, Jagdpanzer 38(t), Panzer IVL-70, Sd Kfz 234/1 and 3, Jagdtiger as well as Panzer Brigades.

So why special rules for 2ID especially one's as illogical as "Winter Training?" Why numerous Sherman rules that could've been simplified with current rules (e.g. Easy Eight = Light Tank instead of several different rules)?

Same for Market Garden/Scheldt – Canadians, Paratroopers, Challengers, different Sherman platoon structure, ad hoc German units, Tiger training unit.

All of these don't need new special rules.

And many are new models people will gladly fork out cash for.

They do this in 40K too – every unit gets moronic special rules that eventually unbalance the game due to difficult to foresee synergies. And this has already happened in FOW (e.g. American TDs, infantry rules or EW British Armoured Regiment)?

Really I'm not enjoying playing a ruleset where infantry move through ruins or forests or rivers at the speed of light tanks or where taking German armour is suicide because of dodgy Tank Destroyer rules or where Soviets get more and more penalised because the main games designer doesn't like them.

As stated game is dying in 2 out of 3 clubs in our region and it's partially due to special rule overload.

Really I'm not enjoying playing a ruleset where infantry move through ruins or forests or rivers at the speed of light tanks or where taking German armour is suicide because of dodgy Tank Destroyer rules or where Soviets get more and more penalised because the main games designer doesn't like them.

Then do us all a favor and stop playing FOW. It's obvious from your overall negativity here that you no longer enjoy it.

No one's holding a gun to your head. It's a GAME played with TOY SOLDIERS. Plenty of other players still enjoy it.

The number of grown- men whining about stuff that doesn't really matter to strangers on the internet who have no control over it either on this forum is staggering.

"Change hurts. It makes people insecure, confused, and angry. People want things to be the same as they've always been, because that makes life easier. But, if you're a leader, you can't let your people hang on to the past."

No probs with change. V2 to V3 was for most part a much welcome improvement in my opinion.

People tend to confuse Change with Quality Improvement. Change does not necessarily equal Quality Improvement.

As stated if you don't like it, DON'T READ IT

And as stated previously, I STILL LIKE MID WAR which does not have merely as many badly conceived special rules as Late War does.

Comprehension skills are clearly in decline in TMP or at least in BF fan boi land.

I was miffed when BF cut the number of planes needed from three to one, having bought and painted three of everything including Brewster Buffaloes for Malaya and Boomerangs for my Aussies in New Guinea. However, I got over it plus, if I want to I can still put out the whole Airforce..
On Wednesday this week I have three new players over for a big game of Russians versus Germans in 1942. Two of the new players have ordered armies, are painting and love the Availability of the models and the ease of ordering a pack with all you need for a platoon.
I have played in a few UK competitions, and only had one unpleasant game. In most games I have benefited from the friendly advice of my opponents, particularly in post match analysis.
As a community the UK players have been friendly and supportive. A couple of times I have sat for several moves next to a comp game being played when I had finished my game in another period. Again, friendly and accessible players keen to show you the models (not all fBF models) and discuss their army choices.
All in all my experience has been of a very friendly bunch with nice running and playing in the tourneys.
I want to recommend to my new players to sign on to TMP , visit this list , see nice models, talk about how the rules work and have the same experience on an international basis, but I could not do that because too much on this list is negative and not likely to enhance their gaming experience. If the objective of certain posters here is to spoil the fun for others then they are doing a good job.

thomas/dead1

maybe you'll like it better when you actually listen to FOW forumites advice, use it on the table top, and start to win a game or two :P

you post on the FOW forums and switch between acceptance that FOW is a game of WW2 the movie, and then say the (national) rules are unrealistic, etc on the other hand.

As stated game is dying in 2 out of 3 clubs in our region and it's partially due to special rule overload.

is the other part in some way due to playing rules wrong, interpreting them wrong, and then blaming FOW the game for shortfalls?and then perhaps fronting that negativity onto other players, cue downward spiral?
you say you like MW better, so if you ignore Late war and play mid war (remember lack of "rules overload") what is the problem?

remember that time you said that FOW cityfighting rules were broken/stupid? Because you were using the abbreviated V2 softcover rulebook and you didnt even know that the main rule book (v2 hard cover-which you didnt have) actually covered cityfighting rules pretty thoroughly?

to paraphrase someone else:
i hate apples, but i dont go to the apple growers of the world forum and bitch about it (if such a thing existed)

As stated if you don't like it, DON'T READ IT

so post a thread in a FOW/TMP forum complaining about FOW rules etc, then get all antsy when people call it into question? one actually has to read something to see what the writer is saying, and then when one disagrees (or finds one is reading the same retreaded threads) its too abd, you shouldnt have read it? is the purpose then to just foment more anti FOW sentiment among those who dislike it anyway?

As stated if you don't like it, DON'T PLAY IT :P

The overall impression I'm getting is that the core rules are OK with most people…it's the special rules and stuff in campaign books that are getting some steamed up.

There's a quick and easy fix here. It's something wargamers have done since the beginning of the hobby. Change/ignore/replace the rules you don't like with the consent of your group and opponents. Or play something else. Your 15mm forces will work with PBI, IABSM or a slew of other systems.

I met some gamers from a club at SELWG last year and they play FoW with their own artillery templates as they don't like the square ones. Fair enough. In tournaments, you play by tournament rules. Same as it ever was. The arguments I've heard here are the same as I heard in the late 1980s about tournament players being strict about WRG 7th edition Ancients.

As for clubs and group dying out in regions…well, wargamers are a fickle bunch. Many fine games at my club won't get played because a couple of players refuse to play them because of some rule or other and those players contribute to the club in other ways we can't eject them or sideline them. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The 3rd club (in his region) that dead1 mentions has 30 people on the email list, of those, 20 are regulars.

The 'club', really just a bunch of mates who are interested in WWII history, gaming, painting, terrain building, etc started about five years ago, during V1 of FOW.

We play almost exclusively FOW and have gone from strength to strength numbers wise. At the moment we are playing the tank aces campaign (mixed with CanCon practice games) and loving it.

Armies played range from Canadian, Polish, German, US, Russian, Greek, Finnish, British (in the future, Italian, Romanian and Hungarian) EW, MW, LW.

We recently built and displayed a 40'x 7' board based on Market Garden that TT (who likes the game BTW, despite what some on TMP think) posted a link to a youtube video and with additional pictures on another board of TMP. Previously built a 28' x 8' board of the Normandy landings

FOW has its quirks, but what rule set doesn't.
We accept the game for what it is, a GAME of soldiers that is FUN to play.

So, it's not all doom and gloom in the land of TH/D1.

@Rooboy its good to hear such positive news..
Good to hear Greeks being used. My most exotic is Dutch.

is the other part in some way due to playing rules wrong, interpreting them wrong,

Wow that's the lamest ad hominem attack I've ever seen in 15+ years on being on various forums.

My statement: "There's too many special rules in LW and they keep growing in number."

Your response: "You're playing the game wrong."

Here's an ad hominem attack of my own – you only signed up to TMP three days ago. Did you do it only for the purpose of trolling on this thread?

The overall impression I'm getting is that the core rules are OK with most people…it's the special rules and stuff in campaign books that are getting some steamed up.

Excellent post NickH. The crux of the matter.

FOW has its quirks, but what rule set doesn't.

Problem is growing number of quirks and no rectification of issues.

Wow that's the lamest ad hominem attack I've ever seen in 15+ years on being on various forums.

You learnt that one last year when a BF staffer corrected you between ad hominem and strawman arguement, right?
Ad Hominem or not, I have seen some of your posts at the FOW forum and here, and can't help but think you're playing a different game to everyone else.

I have to wonder: If your grasp of tactcs, terrain and rules were a little bit better, maybe you would be a lot happier with the game?

But,at least here you can deride FOW products and rules with some kind immunity, unlike the company one where they can remove tiresome broken record threads and posts that repeatedly slander their product. Nothing like going to a company Forum and beating against the walls like a spoilt child for attention proclaiming all is doom and gloom, and hey " If you don't like it, don't read it". Don't forget to "rage quit" and delete posts when general opinion gets sick of it all.
Have a nice day.
I think FOW is great.

Your comments have nothing to do with the state of the game which is debated by a lot more people than myself.

And still you don't respond to:

you only signed up to TMP three days ago. Did you do it only for the purpose of trolling on this thread

Guess absence of answer answers that. Sad little dweeb you are signing up only for the purpose of attacking my posts.

You wouldn't happen to be Meat off the FoW forums? He was a particularly unpleasant fellow who attacked even the most unoffensive of posts (e.g. trolling on a thread of mine announcing details of a FOW tournament) and very reminiscent of you.

Worst kind of fanatic fanboi really.

All ANY set of rules is (or should proclaim to be), is a set allowing us to play with our toy soldiers! Thats what is IS about, and what it IS at its core. How can it be anything else? Isn't this just us boys fighting in the sandbox? Some things never change I guess.

Good Lord ????!!!!!

Guess absence of answer answers that. Sad little dweeb you are signing up only for the purpose of attacking my posts.

Hi, though I have only signed up recently, it doesn't mean I have not had previous accounts here or other places. I thought the time was right to re-enter the forums here and discuss FOW with you.
And no, I am not "Meat."

No, I guess my comments do not have much to do with the state of the game. You would note they didn't actually attack yourself, but called into question the way you play the game, and how that may affect your viewpoint of FOW. Perhaps a poor example would be like a American football player trying to referee, or critique an Aussie Rules game. Sure there might be some concepts he is familiar with, but until he learns all the nuances of the game, he may not be able to provide the best rulings or feedback that could actually influence the game in a positive manner.

For instance: Terrain was often a factor, and I recall an instance where you were discussing the rules around hedgerows, transports and roads in Normandy. You stated something along the lines that down roads there should be concealment as the evidence you provided tried to show that roads along the bocages were narrow, had concealing turns and other ideas to that effect. You stated the rules don't properly allow for this. When another poster suggested you could use or make terrain (bocage and roads and tree lines) that could reflect this, you said something like that was too hard, and the rules should be changed.
There was also a thread in which you said that V3 recon (I believe it was E&E) was worse than V2.
You had previously said that your group didn't normally use recon (especially for E&E) , and this was the first time you had seen it used in V3. You then claimed V2 recon was better even though the general public opinion that said it was not. All based off one example
So, as previously said, perhaps a better grasp of the game might provide you with better results and insight as to how some rules work. then perhaps you could make better informed proposals to rules changes, and see how new rules affect the game.

I find your methods into trying to change the game mildly amusing, and perhaps your attitude is somewhat revealed here, on another forum:

As for FOW, I've fought the battle on the forums to have the game change direction back to what I liked about it in the first place. That might be viewed as negative but I viewed it as customer feedback.

Even the Battlefront team members had to ask your "customer feedback" be toned down. However you continued to post comments that were written in negative/destructive tones that could only ever result in the Battlefront staff deleting your posts. So you cried foul. On other threads you would try and discuss issues and ideas you had, but when the majority of the other posters proved you wrong or provided an alternative view you would change the argument and repeat the cycle. Again, if anyone didn't like what you had to say, that was too bad, as they didn't have to read what you had written.
When Battlefront staff and other posters tried to enlighten you as to why you shouldn't really make the comments you were making about the company on the companies forum in the way you were doing, you stated it was customer feedback and you were doing nothing wrong. Maybe if you tidied up your manners you would have been better received. Now you lurk here without fear of being censored by Battlefront staff.

There are a number of crusaders out there for better FWO rules. Some do it in a constructive way by providing feedback in a positive manner with sensible solution and don't get worked up when people counter them . Others do it by gathering a posse of their favourite followers and presenting a situation in a way that undermines any actual achievements they could make. You provide "customer feedback " in a way that Battlefront could never accept even if it had some good ideas. Even the customers think your feedback is in poor form.
Perhaps if you addressed your attitude to a milder form, you may find people actually start to take notice. I'm not even sure you think you are doing anything wrong, as seen in the previous quote.

regards, Bart (and don't have a cow, man!)

It's creepy how much you focus on remembering my posts.

Also you took a lot of my stuff out of context.

E.g. comments about Recce rules were only abotu Eyes and Ears and not recce as a whole.

E.g. comments about hedgerows were about Line of Sight down roads whereby someone commented that roads generally aren't straight – the issue is FOW sliding scale does not allow for windy roads. Someone was stating that one should have massive road networks sop trucks could drive around at top speed.

As for BF forums, there was a lot of people who viewed the game as in decline or at least starting to suffer from bad rules design and who also viewed the company as becoming disrespectful towards it's customer base.

A company that does this does not deserve respect.

I also stopped posting cause there is sweet FA all interesting to read/see on there in the sections I enjoyed – After Action Reports section has become dull, not much interesting happening in Galleries/Terrain too often (one gets sick of seeing pics of SS and Tigers).

It also got too painful watching Phil Yates constantly argue with people about historical facts which he was constantly getting wrong.

The weekly updates have become boring too – there's very few historical articles, scenarios, modelling/terrain, or AARs.

It's more about "here's our new shiny thing. Buy" and resurrections of articles previously released. Their website has infact turned into a free version of the GW catalogue White Dwarf.

TMP is a lot better in terms of historical stuff, different miniatures (even in WWII), AARs, etc etc. The attitude is a lot better and more fun, even from FOW fans ala John The OFM.

Now you lurk here without fear of being censored by Battlefront staff.

In case you hadn't noticed I've been on TMP since 2010.

Thomas I have to agree with you on every point you made.

Flames of War as a whole, at least in my eyes, seems to be bogging down with codex creep and special rules. Now apparently I'm some form of heretic in the UK for pointing out these facts…

I really loved this game, but I see it on a sharp decline. The casual gamer has no hope in going to comps because whatever he brings will get out right pushed aside from super units..which IMHO isn't what the game was about when I got into it back in 07. Sooner or later this filth will start seeping into club games and the game will become a cheap clone of 40K people get into because they think it's not 40K.

Oh sure the Germans lost the war. Yet as battlefront keeps pointing out, this is a game "based" on world war 2. Now if the balance continues to shift towards the Allies no one will play Germans and we'll see comps with Allied lists fighting one another…tell me how that works out?

Yet hey what do I know, I've apparently trolled people for years with Tigers and Panthers and never lost a game because of those tanks…

I think it's clear someone along the line made the "well lets round up choice" during the design of the Americans for Blood and Guts…notice all of the issues started to snowball from that book? First it was the super charged yank tanks, then it was their tank destroyers, coupled with even cheaper artillery…and every-single-allied-list from then on in got cheaper and more powerful whilst the Germans stayed the same with little-to-no-hope of competing. Now I've talked to several persons from around the world who've run Germans and done well and they keep coming up with the same answers…the Germans have 1 maybe 2 decent lists left to fall back on…outside of that you're hosed.

The game just isn't fun anymore.

come on Dale, It's not all doom n gloom :)

Most people you play are just wanting to have a good time too. They attend events just to throw dice for a weekend and generally shoot the . Not everyone brings these new 'uber' armies. I only have Eastern armies at the min (Polish, Romanians & Soviets) and always have a good time.

Oooh, actually i do own Germans, but it's the Beutepanzer company ;) so that doesn't count lol.

My point being lol, is not everyone will be following the 'Codex creep' as most people will just carry on playing with what toys they own.

Cheers

@Gottmituns I trust you see the irony that your handle suggests. I am afraid that your rant sounds rather like special pleading. Germans were the super army in mid war now that has been rebalanced, maybe over balanced and its hurting you.
That doesn't make it right that this rebalancing has occurred, but it makes it sound as though you have an interest to declare.

Played Mid War Russkies versus Germans and Italians in Russia last night. The Mk IVs pop up over the crest and put six shots into my tanks. They brew a couple and stormtrooper back to safety. My guys are easy to hit I advance, they pop up again, two more gone!! One German platoon doesn't make it back behind the line so I shoot at it and get one. Next move the other German comes over the crest plus the two that stayed stationary plus the 2ic. that's eight shots, that's four down, that's a morale that I fail!!
But do I go whingeing to complain about it to the whole world???? No, so why do you have to.

A large part of the problem with any tournament scene is that the good players dominate it after a number of years. Its a bit like tennis. The odds on one of four players winning every major tournament are huge. As FOW has matured the guys who really get it and practise and search through the books for a new wrinkle win most times.
Man up Gottmit205 and Hobbes

Lewis, Really? "Oh waaaa my Germans can't win anymore!"

I see you skirt the WHOLE issue on the new Allies being boarderline broken and skirt right into Russians (which is a box even I'm afraid to go near.) Seriously discuss the issue or move on and not shift it to another group of this deranged game that needs work!

Germans were NEVER a super army. Stormtrooper makes up for the fact that my number of hulls are limited. Dare I ask, have you ever seen a Conscript T-34 company kick the unholy out of a German list…I have. Russians in mid war take losses. In fact LW they are so crippled by a few key things, pieces of their army that did not play critical roles are being abused and used like they rolled right into Berlin!

Stormtrooper isn't the issue, the issue is Allied armies getting AT bumps and not paying for them. It's the issue of losing key restrictions that kept certain units in check. It's the issue of a mountain of special rules for dirt cheap infantry that is the issue.

Sorry if you got your ass kicked by storm trooper, I know it's frustrating but it's never had any of the super players up in arms over it like any of the previous issues I've brought up.

come on Dale, It's not all doom n gloom :)

Most people you play are just wanting to have a good time too. They attend events just to throw dice for a weekend and generally shoot the . Not everyone brings these new 'uber' armies. I only have Eastern armies at the min (Polish, Romanians & Soviets) and always have a good time.

Oooh, actually i do own Germans, but it's the Beutepanzer company ;) so that doesn't count lol.

My point being lol, is not everyone will be following the 'Codex creep' as most people will just carry on playing with what toys they own.

Cheers

Funny, this coming from the guy working on SU-122's. A prime example of what Battlefront has done wrong.

SU-122's weren't even touched in LW in V2. Now everyone's gotta have em! If you don't see my point with that, you either don't care, or oblivious to it. I'm done trying to explain it when the facts are blatantly staring you in the face.

oh dear

SU-122's weren't even touched in LW in V2.

I used 8 a few times in V2!!
LES

TH – as a member of the LGC where you occasionally play, but the member you reference as having moved, I would dispute that all of those that have left have been driven off by the rule set, that may be your personal axe to grind. As previously discussed on the local forum, my view, supported by some feedback from those who have left the system locally is that its this negativity that have been the greatest influencing factor. New members? Who wants to shell out $300 USD – $500 USD for an army when they read on the local forum or from local members how bad the system is…

Likewise you extend your opinions as being representative of other clubs. The comment I had from the other club in Hbt was that they were having a spell from FOW, not abandoning it. Have you spoken to members of that club and have they expressed undue discontent with FOW, or again is this your extension to the situation. To my understanding one of their members went to Cancon and played FOW and they still have their FOW tourney later in the year with an excellent turnout. Some may also be interested in coming to the DOW Tourney in Lton.

Having relocated, I have been to the local club nearly every meet, the club is full of enthusiastic people who voice opinions on issues with the rules in a reasonable manner, but still enjoy the game and company.

Perhaps a change in attitude would see a change in both where you play.

My summary, yes free to voice opinions, yes others are free not to read, but really if its that bad, just don't play it. As you often say rules are ruining your fun / gaming…what is the negative attitude doing to others fun and gaming…??

I love that John starts these pathetic threads, then never returns to them.

supported by some feedback from those who have left the system locally

How many are "some"?

Most of the players that quit FOW, quit well before the negativity – they either quit many years ago when the club moved location or quit straight after the Firestorm campaign.

That leaves one player that could have quit due to negativity who went from absolute FOW fanatic to not playing overnight.

For the last year or so, the club's full time Flames of War group has been 2 players (one being the fellow mentioned above) with several part timers (including both you and I).

We never really attracted new players – out of four in last year, one has work commitments and lives out of town, one seldom plays anything, one works on ships and can seldom play and not sure what happened to the fourth.

Even you seldom played even before your went away – as you stated yourself you weren't that into the gaming and preferred the painting/modelling aspect of it.

Frankly I'm not too phased by the current state of FOW at the club. I've been playing other things and havig a blast.

the club is full of enthusiastic people who voice opinions on issues with the rules in a reasonable manner, but still enjoy the game and company.

Perhaps a change in attitude would see a change in both where you play.

What an underhanded comment. You were the main rules lawyer at the club and you had a tendency to come in and provide gaming help to your mates. In the last game I got sick of it and told you to stop helping my opponent.

I remember just before V3 came out, you bogged several games you weren't even playing for long periods of time in with rules queries. In these cases it appeared you were rules lawyering in favour of your friends again (you were always pushing for the an outcome favourable to them).

When I started playing FOW you were one of 3 full time FOW players at the club at the time and you generally refused to play whenever I asked you for a game, even if the next week I saw you sitting around with your supposed opponent not playing anything.

Indeed in five or so years, I only played against you some dozen times and several of those were tournament/campaign. And this in a club with generally 4 active FOW players at a time.

I also forgot to mention your continuous insulting of other players with little jibes and insults ranging from their playing ability to their intelligence – that might have something to do with people not enjoying the atmosphere at the club either.

I'll take my response offline and direct. Regards.

I will add that the nature of your response goes no end to displaying the main concern of my posting. This is only supported by your comments on another TMP thread "Luckily FOW is nearly dead in my local area so it should be easier to get people trying something better." Posted well before my post and probably supports my concerns pretty well.

The frequency of our gaming and your understanding that it was attributable to my preference for painting, I perhaps cared too much for your feelings. I'm tempted to well and truly rectify that here, but will do so offline. I don't have to be rude or offensive, I just need to be accurate to support my comments. Regards.

The frequency of our gaming and your understanding that it was attributable to my preference for painting, I perhaps cared too much for your feelings.

As stated, you refused to play me when I was getting into the game several years ago and you didn't even know me from a bar of soap.

It was clear from the start this was not due to a preference for painting over gaming.

There were no forums then either.

Guess it was a case of "Don't bother introducing yourself, I've already made up my mind about you".

My feelings about FoW are pretty neutral, altho I play it since it is THE WWII game in 15mm, which is a pretty nicely balanced scale IMHO for this period. 1/285 just makes me want to grab bifocals…

That being said, in lots of different places all I've ever noticed is people who post trolling comments about the game, never any "FoW evangelism scheme". It is the most popular WWII miniatures game evah. It is played all over, and it has definitely dominated the genre and pushed aside peoples other sets of rules in a huge way. People resent that and make snide comments about it.

I have also noticed that those people never put forward another set of rules as "more historical" or "More realistic" or anything else for a very simple reason – they aren't, and if they said "Command Decision" or "Battlegroup Kursk" is more historical then people would tear them up, and they know it, so they just troll.

It's sort of sad, really.

Ultimately, FoW has brought a large dimension to the WWII end of the hobby, which makes it possible for other ideas and rules to be put out there easily if they are compatible with FoW basing. Sort of like WRG and DBx, they've grown the hobby but your pet set of ancient rules might not be able to displace them. Sorry, that's the way it is. If you can convince someone to play Armati / Shock of Impact or whatever, good for you. But if you can't b/c everyone is now playing Osprey's new game, don't put it down.

Its simple play what you and your mates want to play. Have the knowledge that all that we play are games. If you want highly detailed historically accurate games for ww2 get a massive table a big 1 to 1 OB and play Firefly with tweaks to groundscale. You will require a number of weeks for each game and I would recommend no alcohol round the table and plenty of concentration on the rules. Then if you want more bling and beer and pretzels go for firefly, just accept what you play and don't moan and wine about it around the table, do that after. Have a laugh.

My personal hate are rule moaners and tinkerers who tip up with unpainted stuff or stuff that if paited looks like its been accomplished by a chimp with a yard brush inserted where the sun dont shine…..but thats just me I guess

I love that John starts these pathetic threads, then never returns to them.

Ad people wonder why TMPers stifle other TMPers.

Once a thread falls off the bottom of the front page, and it has acheived my purpose in showing how humorless SOME PEOPLE can be, what's the point?
I can't help it if SOME PEOPLE have no sense of either humor irony see everything in black and white.

link

I received my 3rd stifle in the last 24 hours….I think it's because I said "FoW isn't all that bad" or something like it.