"How can I finnaly get into WW2" Topic

This is one of the big periods that have plauged me, I try to start, Paint a few, get a few rules. but then I never get into it.

Might be that I'm never satesfied with the paint job and so kinda loose heart? or mabye I just can't find rules I like.

I've tried skirmish games, and that the ones I would think I would like the most, the up close and personal, no more then a platoon fighting another one. no boring tanks, it's just a few hundre squre meter of terrain, a few soldiers with guns.

But I've never found rules I like.

I've alos tried blitz kreig commander, got the rules and all. but it just don't get my blood pumping.

Have you looked at Pico Armor (3mm) and adapting Memoir'44?

There seems to be a dichotomy in WWII rulesets. Either one goes huge, with stands representing platoons, and sacrifice the feel of modern combat, or one goes skirmish, and largely lose big armored battles.
There are a few which go for something that allows large enough combat for combined arms (Infantry stands are squads or fire teams).
1.I Ain't Been Shot Mum.
2.Flames of War (with all the psoitives AND negatives).
3.Battlefront WWII (by the Fire and Fury guys).
It seems people either prefer skirmish or huge. My club likes big battles, so I've not played the in-between sets I
mentioned.

Wait a while and TooFatLardies will have Chain of Command out. It should meet your requirements. Check out the demos on You Tube.

Well, you could volunteer but you are about 70 years too late…

I'd suggest Memoir '44 – while technically a board game, it has some interesting mechanisms.

I'd also consider Flames Of War – haven't played it myself but there is something very appealing about the convenience. I don't know about your area but here there are a number of well stocked shops.

Take a look at Force on Force. While it's post WW2, it is an infantry game with vehicle support if that is what you are looking for.

Hi there, my rule would fit the bill, and can be freely downloaded from link

I hope you find what you want!

There is no requirement in the rules of being a wargamer to like WW2 games.

Simples.

If it pleases you not then don't do it.

Do what you enjoy and enjoy what you do.

Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the strength to change those that I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

Another recommendation for the Memoir '44 starter set. Everything you need is in one box, ready to go with little prep, not too expensive. You can actually play a game! But you'll need a face-to-face opponent. Which can only be a good experience, eh wot?

Then if you like, you can apply your modelling skills to upgrade the game components. You can work at your own pace, set your own standard of quality, finish when and if you please.

A different way to start 'WWII' would be with air or naval gaming. 'Terrain' is very simple, and you can build your models to very high standards because you only need a few to start playing.

Well the reason I want to get into WW2 is it's one of my favorite periods, I'm not a fan of too fat lardies games, and I've tried ain't been shot mum, and din't like it.

I'll try your rules Herkybird, they looked ok, but I'll have to print them out, hate to read rules in pdf format.

I'll have to solo game for the first while, untill I can strong arm one of my friends to play.

I am one of those who advocates deterining what level of play do you want, first.
Skirmish, man-to-man combat
Tank to tank combat with infnatry playing a minor role
Abstract fast play system with a moderate level of action.
A higher level of command such as you controlling a division or more.
Every level has good sets of rules out there.

An interesting idea is to play the Flames of War 'Aces' games. Small scale, platoon to company action, and some limited troop development.

The different games are also somewhat interplayable. Raiding Aces suggests using the Ace skills from Infantry Aces for the defending forces, for example.

To chime in on what RudyNelson said, choose your level of play before you get into it too far.

I started with company level games with 15mm figures, but I just enjoy skirmish gaming more. I have played many different systems, lots of good ones, but now my favorite is NUTS! from Two Hour Wargames. It's basically a squad-level skirmish game that works fine up to platoon scale engagements. It has a great campaign system, uses a unique "reaction" system instead of IGOUGO , so you don't have total control over what your figures do and there's always action happening, there's never a time when your troops stand about getting shot at. NUTS! plays kind of like watching Kelly's Heroes.

It's also designed to allow not just head-to-head play, but also co-op and solo play using a paper and pencil "AI" for the non-player side. Me and some friends played a PTO campaign set in Guadalcanal. Each of us played one USMC squad and rotated the command section and other support assets from player to player, the Japanese were all run by the solo gaming system.

Here's the core rules, lots of good supplements:
link

Here's an AAR from our PTO campaign.

link

Flames of War has a certain appeal. I've won both the games I've played with them! Not a frequent occurence for me! Have you picked a scale yet?

I just picked up Bolt Action, but I intend to play in 15mm as opposed to 28mm (So I can use my Kajillion FoW unassembled forces.)

Beautiful set of rules. We'll see how it plays!

I largely agree with statements about choosing your level of play.

But …

I suggest thinking in terms of what it is that you like studying, reading about, thinking about in regards to WW2. You say it is a favorite period … so what do you favor? The grand sweep? The national characteristics? (Oh those very "French" French fighting those oh-so-teutonic Germans!) The technicalities of Spitfires vs. Messerschmitts, or Panthers vs. Stalins? Or the stories of the individual grunt and his struggles?

Then look at the level of play in individual rule sets.

For me … I like to study the impact of mechanization on tactical warfare. I want to understand why and how a Panther was or wasn't up to the job, or how a StuG fit, or how a US infantry platoon with M1 Garands and BARs compared to a German platoon with Mauser 98Ks and MG-42s. It engages my intellect, and stirs my imagination.

Skirmish gaming holds a certain amount of attraction. But alas, it is almost impossible to understand the impact of the M4 Sherman tank, or even the M1 Garand rifle, when you are playing at the level of the individual soldier. So I look for games with unit-scales that lie on the border between abstraction and individuality. That means squad based infantry and individual vehicles.

I would be even happier to play fire-team based infantry, except that it is simply not reasonable in terms of game mechanics to mix fire-team basing with individual vehicles to create combined arms games. At least, not in my experience. 36 stands of infantry fire-teams and support weapons in a Soviet rifle company, versus 10 tanks in a Soviet tank company, means that any sort of balanced game of armor and infantry will grind to a halt the moment the infantry enter combat. Cut that down to 15 or 16 stands of infantry squads and support weapons and we can do combined arms warfare!

Take it up further in abstraction, where the stands represent platoons, and it just no longer stirs my imagination. If I see a tank, I want it to represent a tank. If it represents something else, I could just as well use a square of cardstock on a game board. That is not to say I don't enjoy board wargames … I very much do. But not like I enjoy miniatures. Seeing the vehicles, the houses, the trees, the bridges, the hills all modeled on the game table is stirring to me! But to stir me they need to represent the vehicles, houses, trees, bridges and hills that I see.

What stirs you may be different. So think about it.

I find that squad level infantry and individual vehicles means that the player needs to use some care in how large his force is. And I need to use some care in choosing the rules, and matching the playability to the size of each player's force.

I find with very detailed rules that it is best to start with a re-enforced platoon per player. If the rules are good, you can work your way up to perhaps a re-enforced company per player as your familiarity grows.

With rules that do a bit more abstraction or simplification of combat, you can usually start with a re-enforced company per player, and move towards a battalion per player as your familiarity grows.

Depending on the rules, you can often also expand your games with more players.

For very detailed rules: I think the best I have played are PanzerWar, which are offered as a free download by Mobius, a member of this forum. These rules are very detailed. The research he has done into every armor facing and every different type of ammunition is nothing short of remarkable. At the same time the game mechanics are VERY good for the level of detail, and games scale gracefully as you add more players. But don't start with more than a platoon per player, or you will become discouraged before you become familiar with the rules.

For more simplified "quick play" rules my current favorite is Mein Panzer (2nd Edition). These rules scale up to larger games (more players) particularly well, as the game turn mechanism (alternatively activating one platoon for every player on each side at a time, rather than one side's entire force) keeps everyone playing and involved. These rules seem to do a particularly good job of giving a feel to infantry in combined arms combat.

For those who are interested, here's an AAR of a 1940 battle between invading Italians and defending French in small Alpine village: link

My second favorite "quick play" ruleset is Jagdpanzer (2nd Edition). As with Mein Panzer this is a revision to a ruleset that has been around for some time (in this case for decades!). I am not quite as enamored with these rules … they do play fast and the games are fun, but somehow they are mostly just "OK" on most points for me. But these rules are popular with guys I often game with, so being "OK" is good enough!

Hope that helps.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

Confused yet?
?

Memoir '44 has a sliding scale. Want a skirmish with just infantry? It's got those scenarios? Larger battles with lots of tanks? Got those too.

Memoir is a bit abstract but it's a hell of a lot of fun.

Holy crap! Mein Panzer is 'simplified "quick play"'?! :)

Maybe you are just doomed never to do World War II. Seriously, I read a great deal about the American Civil War, I visit ACW battlefields whenever I get the chance, I've bought a bunch of 15mm ACW figures, but I don't seem to have the enthusiasm for painting them. I'm starting to think this is just the way it is, and I sould sell off my unpainted figures.

Grelber

Agree, mark, excellent contribution. I would suggest for now you download a few of the free internet rules and use card blanks for units just while you discover what level of play and what figure scale best suits you.

I am in the same spot that Gunfreak. I've tried many times, but every time I lose interest and either sell the miniatures or have them sitting in the selves. I have a German and a British platoons painted for France 1940, but never gamed with them.

Try Fireball Forward.

I'm the same with ECW. Tried several times. Collected figures, but then they sit there unused. Like Gunfreak not quite sure why. It is an interesting enough period with lots of tactical possibilities.

Gunfreak, 2 questions:

1. Which WW2 rules have you tried and found wanting?

2. Which are your favourite rules, regardless of period?

Regards

1. I've tried ain't been shot mum,
Weapons, tactics.. thing.
Blitz kreig commander.
Pluss I few and can't remember and even more free ones I can't remember.

2. that one is hard, as I do mostly horse and musket stuff, so you got formed battaltions, cav and artillery, it's very diffrent from ww2. so I'm not sure it translate that well.

That is why I tried bltiz kreig commander, I was thinking of having a division fighting it out, kinda creating a ww2 napoleonic battle kinda thing. but the rules are just so boged down.

What I think I would like is a skirmish game that deals with units. instead of each soldier fireing, just group a squad or fireteam, get a set number of dice based on the general makeup of weapons.

So intstead of say, this guy got a BAR so he does this and this. I simply have a squad that get +1 for automatic rifle +1 for over 50% semi auto rifles then you just throw some dice, get a number of hits based on how hard it is to hit the enemy squad. then the squad that gets hit removes a figure at random.

Only units that are separate are heavy mgs.

I do not want armor, I find armor boring, always have, I even hate to play with armor on the computer, it's so mechanical and boring.

Gunfreak,

I would try Flames of War. However, forget everything you have read or heard about the game. Its base core rules deal with squads.

1 stand = squad. 3 stands = platoon, plus 1 stand for command. 3 plattons plus command = Company. Done.

Add support, 1 or 2 HMG, 1 or 2 Mortars, with command and spotters.

Throw in 1 or 2 tanks.

Screw special rules, screw points. Done.

Add or subtract other rules as you want. Personally I would look for the Version 1 set of rules. I've always felt they were the best.

Okay then, I'd try Crossfire or 'The Infantry Platoon in Normandy' rules from Miniature Wargames issue 15. The latter seems to match what you are after pretty closely.

Regards

GF

May I just ask what you don't like about the TFL rules? (Of course not every game suits every gamer, nor does it need to since we are spoilt for choice.) If it's the card activation then the new rules set CoC uses dice not cards. It seems a shame to discount it so rapidly when it answers all your requirements. Just a thought.

It's partly the cards and partly the big man stuff, they have in all their skrimih rules.

Gunfreak, have you considered Battlegroup Kursk (BGK)? It uses dice mechanics at the squad level kind of like what you're asking for. Armour optional (I haven't played FoW, but my understanding is that it is a bit armour-centric).

Too late. It ended several years ago. But wait around. WW3 might still come along.

Second for BGK and BGOverlord. For the reasons Vikingtim gives:

[URL=http://s820.photobucket.com/user/nickdives/media/Infdismount01_zps249d5dce.jpg.html]

[/URL]

Tally Ho!

Like you tried many sets of rules over the years (Rapid Fire, TFL, Ambush Alley) didn't enjoy any of them and always went back to Charles Grants Battle for 20mm.

When 15mm came popular bought a couple of early war armies and tried FOW. Really didn't like it. Since then have tried Fireball Forward (good) Playtest version Steel Tigers (good), and intend to try out LSNC WW2 soon too.

So my tip is hunt around until you find a ruleset you like and don't listen to what others tell you!

For Company level, one stand equals one section/squad, infantry actions, with few tanks, I'd recommend Crossfire, Still find copies on E-Bay.

John

These threads always turn into people listing their favorite set of rules. Based on what the OP is looking for and the fact that he doesn't like tanks, I would recommend Bolt Action. It's a light game, it uses almost all infantry, yet it's got enough meat to give a feel for WW2. I would recommend, however, playing it in 15mm and keeping all the same ranges as I think this provides a more accurate gunfire range.

I personally like to play at one level above, with either a company or more. I strongly agree with Usrivoy3, I think the core of FoW is a great game that gets muddied with special rules and odd power-gamey lists. I ignore completely all of the special rules, I ignore the army lists and try to be historical and I don't put artillery on the table. If you do these three things you'll actually get a great game. I also have a house ruled version that I play where I borrow some of the activation ideas from BA and IABSM. However, I don't think FoW will really be what you're looking for.

Thanks JJ, I have been thinking about the BA rules, they are new so havn't tried them yet, and I do like the black power/HC rules, I also like the massive amount of high end pictures they put in their books, great way to get inpierd.

I also use bolt action figures, so that works ok, my local game store does have lots of warlord stuff including bolt action figures and books.

"What I think I would like is a skirmish game that deals with units. instead of each soldier fireing, just group a squad or fireteam"

That does sound like BA to me. It looks like a skirmish game because individual figures are used and the weapons they carry matter. But they move, shoot, take casualties and generally operate as a unified squad. It lets you get all into micromanaging your weapons which can be annoying because often the nco with the SMG will be out of range, the riflemen will be at long range and LMG will be at regular range. So you have to do a lot of math to figure out what your firepower is at any given time. But that's the "skirmish" part I suppose!

I've played several games of Bolt Action with just infantry only and it was enjoyable.

I,have been reading all of the comments and it occurs to me that no one has mentioned "BATTLEFRONT WW2". these are great rules for 'skirmish' battles and full scale battles
involving a 'Battle group' or bigger--if desired.

Basing is platoons, with 10 bases to a company. I base my troops 4 to a stand which comes to about 2 'men' per fig.

This rule set can be used for big actions or small actions with or without armor.

The TOO's in the back alone are worth the price of the rules.There are Tables Of Organizations for Russians,Germans,and American forces from Company to Regimental combat groups.

Agree 100% with Tim. Crossfire. Nuff said.
Peter

A different way to look at it.

Are you going to play solo or with others? If solo, then this thread has given you a lot to think about.

But if you want to play with other people, then the best thing to do is look around at what they play. And, it will give you a chnce to play sometyjhing without investing. Most eople are more than happy to break out thier toys and let you take a shot with them in hopes you will like what they have.

I have a number of sets or rules and the troops to go with them because of that. FoW for one. Not my favorite game, but there was a group hwere that played, and I could get a fun game with them, so collected a fair number of them. For a long time there was always a game to be had at FoW night at the FLGS.

So take a look at what is around. Many times something that doesnt sound that great on the cover, or here on the boards is a lot more fun when you actualy try it.

And if you are into solo gaming disregard all I have said.

Owen

I never found a commecial set that did it for me. What I wanted was a mix of armour and infantry that allowed and encouraged tactics close to the real thing. Giving battles that went a bit like I read. Most games do not do armour well, They do the ammo amd the armour but get nothing of tactics except maybe Phil Barkers stuff but the command and controll was not simple enough to enact, dwaring maps and then getting it right is hard). So in the end we wrote MG.

link

It covera all period and we are putting out a WWII set of lists and some reccomandations for minor re-setting of proabilities.

It covers games from platoon to company. We have played bigger but it is not for the fait herted. The rules are simple but that means he game is hard. Many players don't like for instance the ability to go from one side of the table to anothetr in one bound. That means you have to decide a not too bendy route, and work outy whether the enemy may be teir as traveling fairly straigt and fast make you and easy targe. In otherw ortds you have to plan, nothing written but you have to plan, note everbodies idea of fun. Plus it sits in a place where you can just about approximate the real world. You can map real roads onto the battle fiels and get the right sized villages, but not the right number of houses.

Note the carboard terrain is not required its and option.

As always we publish for fun. Read the Bulletin no 1 its free. It gives a flavor of our thinking.

Questios ask. for WWII we now have the lists for the desert ready to go and the small cahnges (which will be free). If you are in a rush we could get copy to you to look at.

What you do need to do in understand what sort of game you want to play. Others don't like ours as it is difficult to blame the dice for losing, Many gamers like the gambling side of the game. I do not random factors will not save you sound planning and a good grasp or real world strategy will.

Sorry for the ramble but seriuous players are rare so should be encoraged.

PS playable in 1/72 small urban or 1/144 for open armour with a few foot. Other scale OK but 6mm is a bit small as you have to turn turrets. Difficult at 6mm with small vehicals like armoured cars.

I am really digging Battlegroup Kursk lately.

It actually feels like WWII and the rules are pretty casual in a good way.

The scale is good as are the more smaller numbers of troops on the board.

FOW is good for mindless fun but it doesn't feel like WWII especially when you're fielding hordes of tanks.

It feels more like WH40K especially due to emphasis on assault and thus short engagement ranges. Sliding scale also helps this due to heavy artillery being on the front line.

E.g. last game I played I just rammed 15 T-34s + 4 x BA64 into a platoon and the game degenerated into assault and counter assault. Shooting was negligible.

My T-34s might need bayonets on their tank barrels. :P

The Battlegroup games IMO both Kursk and Overlord are first class. They have been written by gamers for gamers and extensively tested . On the Guild they have an excellent rules query section .

Sometimes you will get answers in a matter of minutes. I may be wrong but I havnt seen that type of backup before.

Also you can still use 15 or 20mm models whichever floats your boat.