"Open challenge to the editor..." Topic

It's time to do something about the flames of war haters. They need some dog house time. Every single thread has the same set of rants, and conscientious people who should know better than to bother reply to them.

I'm sick of it.

And this board has so many examples of zealous editing, that I'm not at the stage where I'm thinking:

"If Bill Armintrout has time to edit this minor point in a post, why can't he purge the FoW board???"

FoW has tossed their general discussion section, and this board is also becoming a waste of time. This is the Flames of War section, and it is constantly TROLLED by the same people on nearly every single post.

TOSS 'EM OFF THE BOARD!

Thanks, I feel better now. :)

You do realise that most of the "haters" play FOW?

And you do realise you have the democratic right to not read the threads?

I recommend you try out wwpd.net for FOW friendly forums if you don't like the content on TMP.

If you have specific complaints, please contact me with details via PM.

Also, TMP offers a mechanism that is perfect for situations like this. It is called the Stifle. If you're tired of a "Hater," just Stifle them and they can never bother you again.

I visit the TMP web site daily and I hardly ever come across these "haters"… maybe it's because I'm not looking for them.

Looks like "challenge met…"

Well, I've taken the Editors advice!
A few seconds of my life that will never be wasted again.

Bill beat me to it, stifle is your friend. Half my screen is a pleasing shade of gray on some threads these days. It's really quite soothing.

The OP is a hoary veteran of just over a year in these
hallowed electronic halls.

He really ain't seen nuthin', has he ?

If you define "hater" broadly enough, even I can qualify, and I play every other week!

"It's a great game with some stupid things about it, and a tone deaf management."
Does that make me a "hater"?
I have even defended the game (monotonously AND successfully!) from morons who bitch and moan about "hub to hub tanks".
I also agree with everything ThomasHobbes said. Well, only the above, and not much else.

YouTube link

He really ain't seen nuthin', has he ?

I suggest he do a TMP search for …"bricoles".

John anyone who is not a fan accepting everything BF management does is "for our good if only we realised it," is by definitiaon a hater
I suggest you stifle yourself immediately …I know I am!

All of my "Sybil" accounts have stifled me.
So, I stifled them too!

If you want nothing but sunshine and roses and unicorns and ponies, that is what the BF Forum is for.
At least here, you can find differences of opinion, with no one pulling the plug.

There's no fun in stifles!

Inspiration for new style of moderating when FOW is mentioned
youtu.be/C0n88tZQc4Q

TT,

Pete S would probably gladly put all of us in the curry.

I am gonna put that on my next wargaming T-Shirt

Front side – "What happend to the CEO?"
Back side – " I put him in the curry!"

It's time to do something about the flames of war haters.

How do you define a FoW hater? I hate the game – when played on 6x4 tables. I'd rather slam my fingers in a door than play it under those conditions. I also think some of the rules and codex creep thing sucks. Does that make me a hater?

I quite enjoy it played on a 6x12 or larger table with standard sized forces.

I'm sick of it.

Don't read them. Works for me.

Pete S would probably gladly put all of us in the curry.

Given that we are loveable scamps, that would be a Scampi Curry.

I suggest you stifle yourself immediately …I know I am!

How do you know who stifled you? I have a few of them and had no idea what they were.

Scampi Curry and Chips please mmmmmmm
Hope the snow eases off enough so you can reach the chippie
I hates snow

If I stiffle everyone there will he nothing to read. Also no one to remind me of how big an idiot /moron /simpleton /confused /dimwitted/buffoon /etc that I am.

or you could not freqent the WW2 boards.

i have never seen an FoW hater on any ancients topic

My compromise would be leave the FoW board for people who play it and like it. Those who hate the game or dislike it enough not to want to play it should not be posting their criticisms (some of them are just wargaming myths repeated ad nauseum) and moans on the board. They could set up another thread in the WW2 gaming section under "we hate FoW because…" and let them get it out of their system and the people who like the game can ignore it. But it gets a bit much where someone starts a thread with questions about rules, painting guides, basing and terrain for the game before someone shows up moaning about the historical inaccuracy.

Hope the snow eases off enough so you can reach the chippie

Its forecast for the weekend in the UK.

LES

Haters is too broad a category.
There are two types of critics:
Those who really would like to run FoW but are all mouth and trousers and won't join the company as a clerk and work their way up to chief exec to then control direction . These guys are the saddos that one sees at conventions crowding the bring and buy and hassling traders to sell one of an item because they cannot afford a whole pack.

The other haters are those who really thought that they were running the company and got hurt and disillusioned when they found that their vaunted opinions (and often factually correct points) were not listened to. They have fallen or been pushed from the FoW boards so the by stalk the TMP board trying to pUt others off BF product.
You mostly all remember the fable of the fox that lost its tail. It tried to persuade all the other foxes to cut off their tales to be like it was and that's the sense I get of a few of the posters above. Recently there was a govt. minister in thee UK whose divorced wife brought him down by going to the police to tell that she had once taken a speeding ticket when he was driving. Thankfully both he and the disloyal wife got eight months in chokey for perverting the course of justice. These FoW haters are often just like kthe scorned wife. They thought that BF loved and listened to them and it didn't!

Meanwhile there are the rest of us normal well balanced folk who are. Mostly annoyed that it is all Vietnam at the moment and that they are not allowing us to buy 45 BT7s and infantry with the model 36 helmet which looks so cool!

Ahhhh Barbarossa, where art thou?

maybe there is another group. we don't go on the bf forum, we love much of the bf kit (and buy lots of it) but don't care for the rules too much – but are willing to listen and learn, and enjoy debate with fellow wargamers. So we are interested in the discussion, don't agree with everything and have an opinion. sounds like normal free world behaviour to me.

Grandview road does have a valid point though…
There are those that just troll because of the attention it gets them and thye like being a pain in arse and then, well, there are others who honestly want answers… or do feel let down because the hype didn't lead them to the end of the rainbow with the game…

To each their own. I rathe rlike reading everything.

maybe there is another group. we don't go on the bf forum, we love much of the bf kit (and buy lots of it) but don't care for the rules too much – but are willing to listen and learn, and enjoy debate with fellow wargamers. So we are interested in the discussion, don't agree with everything and have an opinion. sounds like normal free world behaviour to me.

Well said!

There are two types of forum participants who are death to good discussion and debate.

"Haters" who offer nothing more than "these rules suck" over and over without specifics or recognition that all systems have something redeemable about them.

"FanBois" who defend everything about a system, even glaringly obvious flaws.

The TMP FoW forum certainly has both, but NOT many of either, and I'd say there are a few more FanBois that true "haters".

I know that lots of folks who don't love everything about FoW are often automatically labeled "hater" even if they enjoy the majority of the rules.

If you really want a good FoW forum then ban haters AND nonsensical fan boys.

not good enough, but it's the inadequate response I expected.
Makes me glad every time I don't choose to become a supporter of TMP.

"Haters" who offer nothing more than "these rules suck" over and over without specifics or recognition that all systems have something redeemable about them."

The true critics gave specifics…not any of this fow player civil war stuff. BAr? TDC? who gives a flying fudge…are the models decent?

Grandviewroad,

Bill has done what you asked for in the past including kicking supporting members, but it doesnt seem to have improved ….it has started feeding on itself with its King lear-like "who doth fanboy me the most?" style of fighting.

Perhaps Bill will be fed up with it, remove the board and push that type of discussion over to wwpd or frothers or anywehere else that pampers crybabies. < cue to stiffle like bill suggests!…and watch the arrival of cute fluffy bunnies and daisies and rainbows…or grey blandness

Personaly, I dont stiffle anyone because there is far too much comedy value.

what sort of forum would we have if it isnt full of opinionated rubbish based on fairy stories.

And another type, who have played all sorts of WW2 rules and are astounded that these fow rules have become the most popular when, in their opinion, better WW2 rules exist.

And a further type who think fow is a new GW and is ripping off customers by providing poor value for money and 'supplement creep' etc etc.

I'm neutral, having never played them, but it's the impression I get having read TMP for a little while.

Grandview,

be consoled – at least as a wargamer you will have plenty of toys to throw out of your pram.

For a long, long time WW2 wargamers wanted a set of rules that were more than just for skirmish games, could handle infantry, armour, support weapons, artillery, air and naval support, could cover ever theatre, army and time period of the war and had a 1:1 figure and vehicle ratio. WRG 1925-1950 seemed to offer it, but treated infantry with contempt and made them useless. Rapid Fire and Command Decision came along, but used abstracted figure ratios which is a sticking point with a number of WW2 gamers I know (myself included). Other rules were REALLY panzer fanboy efforts, only seemed interested in the major nations and for the late war or went into too much detail about armour and gun velocities. Then along came FoW and it met the needs I outlined above. A side effect of its popularity is that other rules such as IABSM and Bolt Action have come along doing something different but still being the all-encompassing combined arms rules sets. I can't say the best bit about FoW are the rules; for me the best bit is that it makes getting into WW2 wargaming easy.

I hate the people who hate the haters.
Can't we kick them all off TMP too?

LOL, this is an internet forum. By definition, not a place where the only people who are allowed to post are those with same opinions as me.

As mentioned above, specific threads can be complained about and there is always the stifle option. The latter I have reserved only for two particularly obnoxious individuals, one of whom seems to have disappeared anyway.

I haven't commented on FOW for a while, thanks for reminding me:)

The Editor won't make the people who have different opinions than you do go away?

Awwww!

OFM said "bricoles"
insert Beavis and Butthead laugh.

Personaly, I dont stiffle anyone because there is far too much comedy value.

Now, THAT is the best opinion contra my own on stifling.
I stifle to enrich MY TMP enjoyment, and you do NOT stifle, to enrich yours.
Both are correct, because in the end, your TMP experience is all about what YOU enjoy.

Good point über. we do owe BF a debt. Also if there is something you really need you will find in the BF range. I've recently god sone valentines for my Ivan's and only BF could dish up the right model.

not good enough, but it's the inadequate response I expected.
Makes me glad every time I don't choose to become a supporter of TMP.

That's fine – I don't think you're Lounge material, either.

If you can't bother to get off your lazy backside and provide actual examples of these "haters" so that I can do something about them, then I guess it's not worth my trouble, either.

What is this you're asking for? Gestapo tactics?

Oh wait, this is FOW we're talking about. Carry on, then.

For the record,I don't hate FOW. Hate is such an ugly word. After a great start, we simply grew apart. We both wanted different things in life. There was a long separation, an attempted reconciliation, and finally an amicable divorce two years ago. I found someone new.

Interestingly, numerous attempts to use the complain button "!" result in it timing out 100% of the time. Yet my laptop has plenty of resources to successfully conclude other tasks at the same time. Reminds me of that diagram of a complaints box where the bottom of the box opens directly to the furnace…

Bill, since you make a penny or two off TMP, isn't it really your JOB to be on top of these things? Just peruse the top five posts in the FoW forum, and you'll find they nearly all degenerate into spitting rants led by posters like ThomasHobbes, et al.

As for "lazy backside", I'll set my backside against yours in any competition involving moving from point A to point B any day you like. But your response does indicate that it is the example of the editor that sets the general tone of dross that permeates so many of the boards here.

@ubercommando, FYI IABSM actually was available when FoW was still being playtested. I know because a I was looking for a new set of rules for WWII at the time and the playtest version of Fow was one that I checked out before I found IABSM. I suspect the popularity of Fow had lees to do with the influx of new rules than many supporters want to give it credit for. Just because you didn't know about all the other rules covering WWII doesn't mean that they weren't there and being used by others.

I wasn't aware IABSM went back that far, but in it's current version it is a slick piece of work which, in terms of the layout and presentation, seems to be a nod towards FoW. But FoW took a holistic approach not really seen in WW2 games before: Rules, miniatures, TO&E, modelling and painting and even scenery under one banner. I do think that has a lot to do with why it became popular.

FYI my awareness of WW2 rules dates back to the mid-1980s. Typewritten rules and B&W line drawings were the norm then. My knowledge becomes patchy from 1995-2005, when I first became aware of FoW but I didn't start playing the game until 2 years ago.

"Rules, miniatures, TO&E, modelling and painting and even scenery under one banner" reminds me of Operation Warboard circa 1976, somehow it all fitted in one book……

Huh, the amount of posters here who fail to understand that the so-called "FOW haters" are simply trolls, and NOT players with differing opinions is pretty staggering.

@Grandviewroad: Come on over to WWPD. No trolls there.

It's always better to go to places that only allow your opinion, if you are the type of person that only wants to see your own view repeated back to you.

yourbitterpill: I'm hardly a FoW "hater", but I've been called it here.

Grandviewroad, you are upset because The Editor does not drop everything to cater to YOUR view of how TMP should be run?
Good luck with that,
I tried that once. It didn't work out all that well.

As for "lazy backside", I'll set my backside against yours …

I hope it won't be in public where it will frighten the horses.

Members who stifle should really consider starting their own threads in which they are the only members who can post. I imagine that will make for a nice cosy life for some people.

That way they will also never get into a debate, never find out if they were wrong or right about a topic and will not have to fear those who dared to disagree with them.

But in the real world, people do disagree and have different opinions, generally about anything. But most accept this and have no problems with it. Sadly, others freak out and feel they should never have to read anything that might make them question their own beliefs. No rocking the boat allowed.

I guess those who stifle are just against progress and knowledge being discussed, argued over and shared, in case it challenges their own way of thinking. It is just opinions and different viewpoints although some act as if to be disagreed with is the end of their cosy little world.

End of rant.

Death to the stifle!

not good enough, but it's the inadequate response I expected.
Makes me glad every time I don't choose to become a supporter of TMP.
That's fine – I don't think you're Lounge material, either.

If you can't bother to get off your lazy backside and provide actual examples of these "haters" so that I can do something about them, then I guess it's not worth my trouble, either.

Classic. He'd probably ask to only buy a one day membership anyway.

DM

Altius said it for me too.

I like and buy the books and the miniatures. I'm indifferent to the rules.