Mr Elmo | 14 Jan 2015 7:26 a.m. PST |
I've decided that for 2015 I want to play something that is not FoW. I don't want to unlearn 2nd edition and relearn 3rd: live is too short. I have FoW forces so the new rules would need to work with that. Here are the requirements: 1) Games finish in 2 hours 2) Game has army lists and points 3) FoW army and basing compatible 4) No codex creep I'm thinking the Commander Series might work but last time I played I think it failed #1 and the army lists didn't allow for Armored Companies. My past experience with Crossfire was bad with units teleporting from one flank to another and IABSM required an umpire as the rules seemed "too English" |
Saber6 | 14 Jan 2015 7:30 a.m. PST |
Sounds like you should keep playing 2nd |
Abwehrschlacht | 14 Jan 2015 7:34 a.m. PST |
|
Extra Crispy | 14 Jan 2015 7:45 a.m. PST |
Blitzkrieg Commander ticks all your boxes. One rule book contains all the army lists. Uses a "Warmaster" style command roll each turn. Written in good clear English. Basing is slightly different but if both sides are based the same should not really be a big problem. |
tberry7403 | 14 Jan 2015 7:51 a.m. PST |
Is it you are looking to replace FoW or you just don't want to learn/play FoW 3rd edition? If it is the latter then, as Saber6 said, just keep playing 2nd edition. If the former then I can't help you as my favorite WWII rules are IABSM. |
monger | 14 Jan 2015 8:05 a.m. PST |
BKC II is pretty good and fits all your requirements. Another set you should look into is Battlegroup (Kursk, Overlord, etc.) This meets all your requirements. However, although no rebasing is needed with your current FoW models to play, you may want to base up some individually mounted models to show casualties to units (looks better than using chits or other "casualty" markers). Also, you will also want to base up models for such things as wire teams, medics, supply vehicles, etc. This is a good thing and keeps you adding interesting *NEW* models to your forces. I should also mention the rules can be played at various levels (squad, platoon/company – like FoW -, or battalion and bigger). Squad sized games can go very quick (my last squad level game played out in three turns… and it was AWESOME). ANyway… deff. consider these rules as well. Another option is Panzer Grenadier Deluxe (just released a few months ago). Although the suggested basing a a bit different (inf. are mounted on bases with 2-3 models) you CAN play with NO basing changes to your current FoW collection. The author even illustrates how to do this in the rules. Can be played where a model soldier represents 1 real guy, or 3-4 real guys (the latter is the intended scale by the author). The rules tell you how to play either way. Myself, I base inf. for these rules 3 figs on a "small" FoW base. I have special FoW "med" size bases I added a lip to secure the "small" base atop it, as well as with 1 or 2 figures mounted already. This way I can place my PG bases on top of my Fow bases to use them in FoW. Here are some pics of what I mean:
I use all the figures above in FoW, BG, PG Deluxe, etc. Works great. Regarding BKC II basing: the rules work perfect with FoW based figs. However, I normally play at the higher level where each tank/base is a squad/platoon. 15mm works good at this higher level otherwise you need a HUGE lay-out and a mass of minis! No need to rebase. Also, regarding FoW 3rd. ed. Why don't you update to the new ed.? |
TheOtherOneFromTableScape | 14 Jan 2015 8:06 a.m. PST |
PBI – Poor Bloody Infantry – from Peter Pig. It can be played in a couple of hours, has a points system with lists, basing is irrelevant, and as a plus has in interesting pre-game setup phase which stops prople producing undefeatable forces. Also great for all-day mini competions. peterpig.co.uk/rules.htm |
elsyrsyn | 14 Jan 2015 8:27 a.m. PST |
BKCII would be my selection, given your criteria. As others have noted, though – if you really like FOW v2, why not just stick with it? Doug |
IainAF | 14 Jan 2015 8:35 a.m. PST |
|
Dave Crowell | 14 Jan 2015 9:03 a.m. PST |
I don't quite understand why you (and your usual opponents) don't stick with FoW2 if you all enjoy it. If you are looking for a game that offers world wide competitions and players in every city, FoW3 will probably better suit that than any of the other options. Really not sure that unlearning FoW2 and learning some other game is going to be any shorter than just switching to FoW3. As for two hour games, play smaller engagements at first, and realize that the first few goes with any game are going to be slower. |
21eRegt | 14 Jan 2015 9:15 a.m. PST |
For the typically-sized FoW game, if you shift it to BKCII you won't finish in two hours. No way. I believe that Dave Crowell above has the correct response. Time spent learning a new system = time spent learning the small changes to FoW 3rd. So if you have nothing against the FoW system, stick with it. |
Clays Russians | 14 Jan 2015 9:17 a.m. PST |
I like PBI but it is awkward to read somewhat, but well worth the effort… |
Colonel Bogey | 14 Jan 2015 9:21 a.m. PST |
PBI: new version coming out soon, apparently with enhanced proof-reading which should make it easier to read? |
Who asked this joker | 14 Jan 2015 9:26 a.m. PST |
Corssfire maybe? I would think the FoW stands would work for that game. |
Cold Steel | 14 Jan 2015 9:38 a.m. PST |
Another vote for BKC ll. Using 1 base=1 squad/vehicle, you can finish a reinforced battalion size game in 2 hours. I have played platoon level games with an entire division on the table in 3-4 hours. The rules take about 2 turns to learn. |
PzGeneral | 14 Jan 2015 9:55 a.m. PST |
We're going to try out "Hail of Fire". They're free here: link I like FoW, but my guys only play like once a year….so every time we have to relearn the rules. HoF looks like FoW lite. Dave |
(Leftee) | 14 Jan 2015 11:00 a.m. PST |
'Fireball Forward' retains FOW basing. No codei, scenario books if you need them. Battlegroup Kursk, Normandy etc. also work with FOW basing. Battleground WWII (Fire and Fury) is an excellent set and if both based the same would work well. |
Dan Wideman II | 14 Jan 2015 1:08 p.m. PST |
I vote just learn FoW 3. Then again I am biased. :) One of the easiest things to do to keep from having all the issues we talked about at TundraCon is to use a more basic list. I am fond of Fortress Europe. The lists are essentially generic versions of the archetypical companies for the major powers. It doesn't have the piles of special rules the latest American monstrosities have. The other thing you can do is just ignore some of the special stuff. I know we've played games where people have completely forgotten special rules with no harm done. |
jdginaz | 14 Jan 2015 1:48 p.m. PST |
90+ percent of the IABSM games we play are without a umpire. An umpire Isn't needed as long as the players are somewhat mature and can reason things out logically. |
Wargamer Blue | 14 Jan 2015 4:18 p.m. PST |
When I stopped playing FOW I went to Blitzkrieg Commander. It's a very good game and easy to learn. |
21eRegt | 14 Jan 2015 7:06 p.m. PST |
I had a different experience. I played both BKCI and II and found there was a lot more "fussiness" in it than FoW. I still play BKC on occasion but prefer FoW. No "regenerating troll tanks" in FoW for example. But YMMV. |
Mr Elmo | 15 Jan 2015 4:02 a.m. PST |
Blitzkrieg Commander ticks all your boxes Last time I played it was BKC and the game exceeded two hours. In trying to convert an Israeli army to CWC, I noticed FoW armor forces don't meet the CWC restrictions. That said, it is the most likely replacement IABSM games we play are without a umpire. An umpire Isn't needed as long as the players are somewhat mature and can reason things out logically. It sounds like the game isn't suitable for competitive play which is what I noticed when I last player I vote just learn FoW 3 What I need is FoW "lite" Given that I play maybe 4 games a year it would be nice if the FoW mechanic could be reduced to a FUBAR length set of rules. They problem with FoW is there are too many rules, heck there is a podcast of tournament players with a segment called "commonly overlooked rules." And those people play the game frequently. 'Fireball Forward' Battlegroup Kursk The former doesn't have points that I could tell. The latter looks intriguing as the author is from the golden age of GW, it does have single casualty removal so that means cluttering up the stands. PBI – Poor Bloody Infantry A quick look seemed to have the game played on squares, not in inches. Rapid Fire Battleground WWII It's been many years since I've played Rapid Fire or Fire & Fury. Those games were 4+ hour marathons. That could be play style or the games just take too long. Rapid Fire is individual casualty so there is that problem. |
VonBurge | 15 Jan 2015 7:17 a.m. PST |
The most important question might be "what are your gaming biddies willing to play with you?" There may be a set that perfectly suits you…but what if you are the only one in your area that likes that set? It seems BKC/CWC is your lead choice ATM and I have to say I think a lot of that game system and would play that with you on your 4 games a year…but I'll be likely playing FoW with a lot of other folks throughout the rest of the year. Good luck, VB |
Who asked this joker | 15 Jan 2015 3:13 p.m. PST |
Mr. Elmo, Sorry for the bad post suggesting Crossfire when you specifically mentioned you did not care for it. I am at work and sometimes have to read things quickly! If you want something under 2 hours, I suspect the rules have to be fairly simple. Hail of Fire (mentioned above) might be the ticket. As it is very similar to FoW in many respects, you might even get away with using FoW army lists. |
Kimber VanRy | 15 Jan 2015 9:13 p.m. PST |
I love FOW, but another vote for IABSM. Great fog of war elements, movement on blinds, use of command is super important, random activation of units, etc. packed into a slim single volume of rules. Feels less gamey than FOW and does require more open minded fairness in two player games (of which I've played many). Some AARs below…. link link link |
McWong73 | 16 Jan 2015 12:02 a.m. PST |
Just keep playing v2. The rules changes to v3 cleared up issues that came from stressing the v2 rules engine with excessive tournament play (daisy chain defensive fire and assaults), though mostly it was "time" for a renewed product cycle. Like you I will play maybe two or three games a year, with guys who haven't stopped using v2. BKC2 is good, but it has a different game scale in terms of the command level sweet spot for what your units are capable of. Battlegroup is a very different experience, whereas FoW and BKC roll up a variety of combat variables into as few steps as possible, BG provides a wider game experience by pulling those variables out into more steps per turn. Stick to Flames, at least you know the basic contents. |
Mr Elmo | 16 Jan 2015 7:16 a.m. PST |
Stick to Flames, at least you know the basic contents I'm going to try and play a couple games using ONLY the 3rd edition QRS. PDF link It seems detailed enough that it's almost "Flames of FUBAR." It will be interesting to see what rules questions develop and what would need to be diced for a solution (even if the answer is in the rulebook). It should make a fun experiment. I also plan on ordering Battlegroup Kursk when it gets back in stock at the Warstore. You can never have too many rulebooks! |
myrm11 | 16 Jan 2015 9:22 a.m. PST |
We moved to V3 fairly easily – mostly it cleared things up though there were a few weirdnesses However we also moved to PBI using FoW based armies with no difficulties whatsoever (and that's the ruleset we have played most recently for more than a one game wonder most recently). Blitzkrieg COmmander got a run out and the four involved all opined that you could easily play it with no need to rebase FoW figures. Crossfire gets played with no basing changes by some of our players. PBI and Crossfire are more heavily for infantry companies – for those that want tank forces the guys playing BKC said it worked fine for tank heavy collections but I didn't get involved in that particular game. |
RetroBoom | 16 Jan 2015 12:19 p.m. PST |
Hail Of Fire is a great choice, though with the exception that it doesn't have army lists or points. Although for someone who is already familiar with the rules for FoW you could use FoW lists and acknowledge the places where you're paying for abilities HoF doesn't account for (only 3 levels of quality in HoF rather than the more granular 9 in FoW, etc.). I do it and it works. While I prefer HoF, my biggest suggestion would be to just play 3rd edition. It's improved, simplified, and for the most part the changes are few and simple. Here a PDF explaining the majority of the changes. You can pretty much use this and ur 2nd ed book and be fine. PDF link Playing using just the QRF is an interesting experiment. You're sure to hit a couple walls here and there, but it's an excellently designed and thorough QRS. If you try it I'd be very interested to know the results! |
sismis | 19 Jan 2015 12:27 p.m. PST |
I had great fun with Hail of Fire. Even modified opportunity fire: each side rolls a d6, higher wins. For each advantage (by being in cover, or enemy is moving) you roll 1 die more. It added realistic suspense, as you never knew who might go first… |