Help support TMP

"Peiper's Charge: Bulge 1944 scenario FOW 3rd Ed. AAR" Topic

3 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the WWII Battle Reports Message Board

Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land
World War Two at Sea

Featured Ruleset

Featured Showcase Article

GallopingJack Checks Out The Terrain Mat

Mal Wright Fezian goes to sea with the Terrain Mat.

Featured Profile Article

Mal Wright's Akagi at Midway

Mal Wright Fezian's commission from one of our own.

Current Poll

551 hits since 26 Oct 2018
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

TMPWargamerabbit26 Oct 2018 9:38 a.m. PST

At HMPD-PSW Mini-Wars convention (October 13-14), WR ran his grand table Flames of War (3rd Ed) Battle of the Bulge scenario called Peiper's Charge. Using his 20mm collection, eight players, playing as two teams of German and American, battled lengthwise along a long 18 x 5' table. The complete winter AAR, with lots of photos, is posted to Wargamerabbit blog.

Link to AAR: link

Some during play photos:

Booby traps and Otto Shorzeny American jeep teams in play:

Even the mighty sometimes get brewed up:

Stavelot under bombardment by the SPA Grille battery:

Towed TD A/T battery vs. the German advance outside Stavelot:

In the end the Germans fall short of the last fuel depot, when scenario time period was called. Fun for all during the convention afternoon.

P.S. Seems the posting split and came down as two separate posts. Tried to crosspost Bill.

Achtung Minen29 Oct 2018 7:57 p.m. PST

As someone who regularly finds that I prefer older editions, I'm compelled to ask: any comments on why you went with 3rd instead of 4th?

TMPWargamerabbit30 Oct 2018 10:17 a.m. PST

A M. To your question about Ver3.0 vs. Ver4.0.
Copy of my post on older TMP 4th Edition topic post below: TMP link Another TMP Topic on V3 to V4 issues: TMP link. If interested… I would work through the Flames of War TMP board for additional discussions. Wear a hard hat or steel helmet.

"……Our group (8-10 players) stayed firmly with Ver3.0 and have developed Ver3.2x. Most house or group rules cover aspects of the game not covered.

Some reasons for why I avoided Ver4.0:

1) Game became way too much towards the tourny scene and away from historical even by FOW standards.

2) The wealth of material under Ver3.0… and can include the earlier versions, vastly outnumbers, in detail, historical background, difference of subject and ease of use. Ver4.0 will most likely will never see half the .pdf forces documents I have saved on the computer plus years of "outside Battlefront" material produced and posted on the internet. Think you will see Ver4.0 of the Jewish battalions in NA?

3) The movement of Ver4.0 vs. Ver3.0 with infantry especially. Leg infantry can in some cases out walk tanks. The movement options …. another story.

4) The Ver4.0 points system is total junk if you desire some grainer equipment options. Mixing the older Ver3.0 to Ver4.0 leds to some weird options and costs.

5) Drops entire teams from the organization charts….. I purchased them, I painted them, now they cannot be used. That alone killed the game for many players from going over to Ver4.0 near me. Sorry…. a Pak battery will have a command structure with the platoon….. now it just has cannon and crew?

6) The cards….. pure tabletop clutter. I prefer a clean look to my miniature tabletop action. No drinks, no food, limited charts etc. Table ready for photos at any time and not requiring a clean up. Otherwise play a board game is my view.

7) The cards are needed for the special options. This is marketing by BF. Place the material in the supplements or MRB. Ver3.0 had none of the cards or special rules on cards stuff.

8) Why should I purchase again the same books and material for a system which I have complete. I have almost every BF book printed from Ver1.0 to Ver3.0. I never bothered to collect the free Ver4.0 booklets as I knew Ver4.0 wasn't for me or the gaming group.

9) Good thing about playing Ver3.0…. everything is discounted now with the release of Ver4.0. Considering the rate which BF is releasing Ver4.0 material…. it will be a new decade before they cover anywhere close to the material pool of Ver3.0.

10) Trouble now with FOW….. there are two player camps and the divided camps total of players is smaller then the former Ver3.0 player base total. Thats says the entire picture in my mind.

11) Play what is going on in your gaming neighborhood. Only Ver4.0 will have support (with rule corrections and omissions) going forward. No Ver3.0 tourneys I know of but I don't care. I arrange six games at regional convention for Ver3.0 rules based on historical background scenarios. Large table format games which are total eye candy for the convention gamers. I generally outdraw the pool of Ver4.0 gamers for some of my themed games. Even the Ver4.0 players join in, but without their Ver4.0 rule changes. Still… when a Ver4.0 player asks why the Pak 40 platoon has a command team…. I smile…. because their historical organization or OOB had them, and not just three Pak 40 cannon is my simple answer……"

Another post on same topic page linked above. I also reference the recent convention at Fullerton:

"…..In many places like my local group we looked at the new rule 4.0 versions, the release schedule for new material reflecting the new rules, and decided that the going forward with Ver4.0 wasn't for our majority of the group and game enjoyment.

The trouble became soon all relevant as some of the group players decided to leave the group and only play Ver4.0. Most were of the young players, new to the hobby or FOW format. the older (game playing time wise) FOW members in general had years of FOW Ver1.0 to Ver3.0 experience and didn't wish to change their considerably larger miniature collections and learn another game. So the group split apart, played on different days/evenings at the LGS, and in the case of Ver3.0, playing games at the warren, Overall neither group was liking the end result….. manly being two smaller groups vs. a united larger player base. The LGS had to support the Ver4.0 as that is what they sold…. but FOW sales dropped 60% or more, because the older players stopped their purchasing stream…. and the younger Ver4.0 players in total couldn't cover the historical sales difference. Thus FOW slowly dropped away at the LGS from a sales point of view….. until both groups slowly built their cadre of players. Present day at the local LGS the Ver4.0 group is still smaller but active and us old timers with Ver3.0 run the historical campaigns and themed scenarios, large multi-table games with player teams or smaller one or two vs. same player scenarios…. while the Ver4.0 crowd is all into matched one on one play or tourney. But…. this worked out at my LGS and my gaming warren. In many areas the divided player pools never returned to the game,,,, the Ver3.0 went over to other game rules and the Ver4.0 players became so scarce that games became all too infrequent.

So…. In our case we kept playing the game and use the former rules Ver3.0…. really now Ver3.2x with house rules for material not covered by the MRB or supplements. I consider myself lucky in that both Ver3.0 and Ver4.0 have active local groups. I have a large 18x6 foot table FOW Ver3.0 Bulge scenario scheduled for the upcoming HMGS-PSW regional convention (Oct 13-14th at Cal State Fullerton) and at the same convention the local Ver4.0 player group have their tourney. Plus there are some great TY games scheduled….."

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.