"Bolt Action v Rules of Engagement" Topic

My understanding is that RoE has more of a "period feel" than BA. Having read through the rules, I am trying to figure out what makes RoE more "realistic" than BA. As I really dislike igo-ugo, I am trying to determine whether the additional elements of RoE that make it more than BA are worth putting up with the i go – u go mechanic.

You should look at TFLs Chain of Command. Definitely more WW II feel than BA and definitely not IGOUGO.

Chris

Having got a bit jaded with Bolt Action we tried Chain of Command. Hadn't been a fan of the Lard for a while but CoC is very different. What looks to be a complicated system is actually quick and intuitive and it certainly feels more like I imagine a game of say Band of Brothers or Fury or Saving Private Ryan should feel like than BA or RoE (I can't say if this is a more 'realistic' feel as I have no experience). All I can advise is to try it, not Igougo by a long shot.
Also love NUTS as well and that is so NOT igougo as people often have a problem with it…

@Surferdude … so, I take it that BA and RoE are pretty much the same thing, with BA having a better initiative mechanic?

And, before I get anymore recommendations for Chain of Command, I should note, I am well aware of Chain of Command and how it plays. For this particular topic I am actually asking about RoE v. BA. I am not asking for recommendations for other rule sets.

BA initiative mechanic is too random. But that's just me, I hated it.

I to hate IGOUGO rulesets and have purchased both BA and CoC because of their unique systems and enjoy both but I cant speak for ROE. I tend not to look at IGOUGO systems.

Sid – the two are relatively similar mechanic wise it must be said. My mate who worked for GW said of both, at seperate times that they are what 40k should have been. However, the activation does make a difference to the way they feel when they are played.

What put us off in the end is that BA can be played with quite unhistorical lists even when sticking to the 'rules' about building your force. No problem with friends who want to play WWII engagements. But get out of this zone and you are in for a lot of cheesey platoons and flame throwers (of which the vehicle versions are crazy strong). As far as I remember ROE was more build onto a standard platoon type affair (which is way better in my opinion). Out of the two I would say the BA is the better mechanic wise but ROE is the better one feel wise.

The activation mechanic in BA does grate in the end to be honest.

Also says something we have moved away from both in the end though I think.

I bought RoE but put it aside as too 40K like. After playing BA, I'm reconsidering RoE.

I wish game designers would take a 5 year break from any design using random activation, masses of d6 and a move, shoot, assualt sequence of play.

Its been done to death and then some.

TomT

Maybe people like random activation, masses of d6 and a move, shoot assault sequence of play? Presumably that is why designers use them.

What alternative would you suggest TomT?

Thanks for all the feedback. Seems like the weakness of BA – at least relative to RoE – is not an issue. I generally bring both forces and play with others who are not cheesy players.

Time to give CoC as the last of the possible alternatives.

Thanks again.