"Larger Tables with Standard Scenarios" Topic

Hello,

My understanding is the standard Flames of War scenarios are to played on a 6 foot by 4 foot table.

I have a 8 foot by 5 foot table and I am wondering if the scenarios would be unbalanced on this larger area.

The simplest solution would be to block off the extra space, but I actually enjoy having the room to play with.

Is there another way to scale the deployments zones, etc?

I am curious to know what people have done.

Thanks

I myself like a lot of room for any game with tanks – which is probably the reason most of my tanks are 6mm

One option would be to just run with 12" deployment zones, have 36" between.

The other would be to have 24" between deployment zones, 18" deep deployment.

I would suggest 15" deployment zones, which are 1/4 of the table width.

We have been playing Flame of War scenarios about every other week on my 9'x5' Ping Pong table for 5 years.
Most of the 6-8 regulars are regular tournament players. Not me, though.

Now, by "scenario" I mean just that. Not one of the cockamamie "missions" or whatever they call those puzzling things in the books. I mean REAL SCENARIOS, like Crete. Or Team Cherry. Or … name it.

"Real" battles with roads to come in on, etc.
None of this "defender sets up in the NW and SE quadrsnts with an ellipse in the center" stuff. Like a real map.

We do fine. We even play with lopsided points! 3000 points on defense regularly defeat 4500 attacking.

Play the game like it is a real game designed to "simulate" real battles, instead of a weird construct with tournament trappings forced upon it. It will play much better than 1750 vs 1750.
1750 point equal games are designed to let both sides get just about everything your fairy godmother quartermaster has painted for you. Trying to get 3 companies out of 3000 points to cover a large table gives a much better feel. IMHO. YMMV.

Imagine for a minute, that your 155mm artillery CANNOT reach the entire table! Nor can your Tiger hit everything from its own baseline!

Some of the biggest fans of FoW are 10mm and 6mm WW2 gamers who play using the standard measurements, so using a slightly larger table with 15mm figures should be an improvement.

Thanks for the feedback

Heh we did a massive 4 company vs 4 company Pincer (old rules but each player could only come in from one side for reserves) on a 10x6 table. Some of the old grognards who were used to other systems had a minor meltdown when some reserves came in from behind their lines.

Larger tables will favor sides with artillery/naval gunfire support and AFVs. That extra foot may be enough for 1-2 extra shots from the longest ranged weaponry.

John the OFM
As traditional thought is that attackers need a three to one superiority over defenders I'm not surprised that 3,000 points armies hold 4500 attackers. ;-P

Fatman

A. We prefer playing the same scenarios on larger boards. It allows more maneuver room.

B. If you have indirect fire weapons, you have to give serious thought to when to displace, just like in the real world. You can't just park them and sit the whole game; this is one of the things I like about FoW.

Fatman. And in a "traditional" FoW book scenario, you have even points for both attacker and defender.

Yes, but the defender is also paying points for his fortifications!

(and for the record, I rarely bring on-table artillery larger than mortars)

My brother plays on a 5 x 8 and they just set up the table as a normal 4 x 6 with the extra space around the outside of the deployment zone (picture a 6"-12" border running around the table). They use this space for maneuver, even though they don't initially deploy in it. This way some one can't deploy in the corner & use the table edges to protect the flanks.

Table size does significantly affect the standard FOW missions so you will probably need to tweak the victory conditions for them to work the same as on a 6'x4' table.

John OFM,

I thought of one question. Does your club still use turn limits and objective markers?

Thanks