GHQ miniatures played with FoW rules

Von Omar · Post by **Von Omar** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:04 am

Good comments all.
Remember also that GHQ has a far greater range than just WWII available. I dont think packaging some of their WWII range into FoW compatable box sets would be a big deal. As far as providing support for an altered FoW system based on micro armor scales isn't gonna happen. I seriously doubt the boys down under at FoW would like to see their trade marked product be infringed upon so obviously.

If GHQ wants to get a taste of the FoW crowd and its design, I'd suggest coming up with a comparable style of game with web support based around a Modern time frame. I know of several FoW gamers that wish they would come up with a Modern set of rules based on their system. Being first to do so would give GHQ a real heads up on the market.

Essentially, learn from FoW and make a new set of modern rules based on the quick playing "feel" style of gaming that FoW uses with web support (and a nice manual....presentation is everything after all), and make sets of FoW ready WWII boxed units around 1500-2000 points(called the 1500 series or something). I think thats the best bet at this point for GHQ.
A tall order to be sure and plenty of work and set up costs. However, I think the long term results could be fantastic.

jb · Post by jb » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:36 am

Azure · Post by **Azure** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:36 am

oooh....a modern rules set and supporting rules from GHQ...as i paint my T-90s, and continue to pull my hair out looking for a modern system that i like (honest, painting some T-90s while i type!) id like to see that, especially, as has been said, if it was a complete one stop shopping type system (and 1:1 rules!)
Hmmm...dont glue the turrets on these before you paint the camo...Azure

jb · Post by jb » Thu Jul 13, 2006 3:05 am

FoW,ah yes,fast playing rules,nice "eye candy",Characters,and a complete package. Marketing has done wonders for this "system". After all its not the minis,its not the rules,its not even the online support that has done this "system" wonders. Yes thats right system. All of the above is what got it going and still moving.
I remember when Battlefront sold just the minis in a plastic bag with an info piece of paper in it. They were OK,but they were beside Old Glory and of course the Quality Cast (Mail order only).
Then they started to make more and more minis,and were now just keeping up with the others. Then they came out with their rules,but wait it just wasn't the rules. They also marketed their minis along the lines of their rules. This even included some character types.
But you know something? Their packaging is not any different than regular historical TO&Es. So you see this phenomenon of FOW is nothing more than their "system". Once again great minis,packaging,fast play rules,full color presentation,on line support,and I'm sure some other things that I haven't mentioned. I feel if you take one or two of these away the house of cards would have fell,but I don't think it is a house of cards anymore. I believe that the 15mm crowd will for the most part always be 15. Some will convert over to micro or even 1/72,but for the most part I think the FOW players will be just that.
I think GHQ should package TO&E packs ,historically(ESPECIALLY the INFANTRY!!!)( oh yeah,don't forget Ritter's Soviet riflemen!!). That might bring some converts over,not to mention make a whole bunch of us happy.
As for the fast rule thing...what can I say they (FOW) just eliminated things that was felt to slow play down,such as looking up speeds for particular vehicles i.e. all tracked vehicles move 40cm,a more general resolution with D6s,and so on.
I think Mobius and I went through lenghty writings on what should and shouldn't be cut from a system-ref thread GHQ ruleset vs the other guy-I think that thread s still here.
As for some previuos mention about not playing the game and writing about it-well I spent the money on it,read it and I don't like the fact of Tigers maneuvering on the same level of a Stuart. After all ,the only thing that kept a Stuart ALIVE on the battlefield was it's speed...
I will stick to my game which is also fast moving,but I'm just not a marketeer...
_________________

fullmetaljacket · Post by **fullmetaljacket** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 8:02 am

Nope never played FOW rules either, but have seen it played many times at con's and like JB says i have a hard time with stuarts and Tigers having the same moblity and gun power. Hmm if that was the case Hitler would have won the war in 1939 and well we may be speaking German at this time in our lives. But if you like the FOW that is it is marketed well and I like how they also sell the paints which buy the way i use a lot of them for my micro. I agree with JB when it comes to Micro you want fast but realistic enough to be afraid of a platoon of Tigers coming down the road. or have to use your speed to out flank a enemy. yea you can make your rules or there is rules out there that are very, very, detailed that is fine if you have the time and play every weekend. But like most of us we get 1 or 2 times a month for 5 to 6 hours to get are fix in. So, yea who cares that you killed the driver in that Cromwell or you blew off the left track and he can only pivot on his right, oh yea i have played with rules that detailed. Which dont get me wrong i like from time to time, but mostly i want to get together tear some armor and infantry up and have fun with my friends in the process. So, if that is FOW rules or another set its totally up to the indvidual/

Oh and by the way JB we keep getting more added to our gameing list and we wont have to market your rules they will market their self.

FMJ

VonTed · Post by **VonTed** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 4:46 am

There is a group out there somewhere that is working on Modern Flames of War (oddly enough the website is http://www.modernfow.com/ )

Been awhile since I checked it out, but things were progressing slowly then...... I love the idea of using GHQ scale to play FoW.

Mickel · Post by **Mickel** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:52 am

It even happens in the home of BF (or at least 7 hours down the road)... Since this thread began I've talked to a guy about trying FoW in 285th. He prefers to play it that way. He uses cm for the movement but retains inches for firing. I hate to think what that does to the mechanisms, but since I've never played I can't comment.

IMO, I don't think there is any need to go into providing packaged armies. You're never going to make one to suit everyone. It's not like a dozen packs of GHQs models are going to break the bank, especially when compared to 15mm, so leave it to the players to decide. I can't say I've ever seen two armies the same on a tabletop. Some of the orgs used are dodgy anyway, elements of an armoured brigade mixed in with an infantry brigade.

I wouldn't want to encourage that.

Mike

Thunder · Post by **Thunder** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:18 am

Ive read much of the rules from FOW. They are not for me. I was not impressed. I do however like the figures thay have and think that is the best thing FOW has going for it. The company also has an excellent website with a lot of great data. Perhapse some day I'll purchase a few of their minies, but I'd definitely use different rules unless there is a drastic improvement with the second edition. So for me, I don't see using micro armor with their rules obviously. Therefore, any move GHQ takes to accomidate this would not benefit me.

On the other hand, if there is a big following out there, thats good for micro armor in general. GHQ sells more, allowing them to further expand their great line. Second, FOW players will have the oppertunity to move on to better rule systems should they desire greater depth.

Von Omar · Post by **Von Omar** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:37 pm

I think a few people are somewhat missing the point. FoW is a QUICK PLAY system of rules. Thats the whole point. Its simple and quick. Its for people with limited time to play but still want to play.
Its good for new gamers to ease them into gaming and WWII. Its good for traditional gamers that want a nice quick game.
Its NOT for sophistaction or detail!
Micro Armor provides the perfect platform for FoW because the terrain is easy to transport, the figs are easy to transport, the rules are easy to learn (FoW).

I dont see how a marginal marketing effort (pre-assembled armies based around the FoW armies that are already available) is a bad thing.
Just because YOU hate the rules doesnt mean they aren't incredibly beneficial for alot of others.

Reading rules and playing several games of a rule set are two different things. I dont really like the rules from reading them alone. However, after playing several games you understand what this system is all about....the "feel".

Couldnt hurt GHQ and could only be a boost. Even if in a small way. Its just a slight amount of new packaging and voila.

Bashing FoW makes no sense here though. If its not for you (which I can completely relate) then you dont need to worry about anything being said here. Otherwise a constructive viewpoint on the benefits of the rapidly expanding FoW market and how it relates to GHQ are most helpful.

thenorthman · Post by **thenorthman** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:57 pm

I would have to agree with Von Omar on his last statment. That reading the rules and playing them are totally different.

I purchased the rules and a large Soviet Army (which have since sold them with the rules to another person up here in Anchorage) and would have to say they are a decent set of rules. Quick, easy, with still enough historical feel in them that you would only get when playing them nstead of reading them.

Yet I still sold everything I had for FOW. Personally it a real nice system but just didn't have everything I liked in a rule set.

I still play it if there is nothing else going on at our local club but would pick something else over them given the chance.

Have to agree with JB that getting folks to convert to Micro Armor playing the FOW rules might be a bit of a challange to.

My point....well basically just took the middle ground didn't I?

Sean

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:14 pm

="Von Omar" Bashing FoW makes no sense here though. If its not for you (which I can completely relate) then you dont need to worry about anything being said here.

Saying that FoW is too lite and simple for some players isn't anymore bashing than saying some other rules have too many tables or include too many time consuming features as like track loss. If one is not bashing so neither is the other.

I agree with jb, that most FoW players will always be FoW players and may never graduate to more detailed and entertaining rules.

BTW, as for detailed rules, my "too detailed" rules set has been made into computer game by Matrix called Panzer Commander. One of the criticism now is that the infantry rules aren't detailed enough for some. Some want to roster and count each man.

Thunder · Post by **Thunder** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:48 pm

"Bashing FoW makes no sense here though. If its not for you (which I can completely relate) then you dont need to worry about anything being said here. Otherwise a constructive viewpoint on the benefits of the rapidly expanding FoW market and how it relates to GHQ are most helpful."

Who were you referring to as bashing FOW? I'm assuming it was me, but that wasn't my intent. I just said I didn't like it so please don't get so defensive if this isn't what you want to hear. As a matter of fact, I do really like their models and website.

GHQ asked in the original post in this thread:

"Have you played a game like this? Seen one? How did you like it? What do you think are the advantages/disadvantages? Do you have any other thoughts or observations? "

This is what I was answering.

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:58 pm

="Thunder"]
"Have you played a game like this? Seen one? How did you like it? What do you think are the advantages/disadvantages? Do you have any other thoughts or observations? "
This is what I was answering.

Like the childern of Lake Wobegon all rule sets have to be described as "above average".

jb · Post by jb » Sat Jul 15, 2006 2:16 am

...I think I'm along the lines with thunder about this "bashing" business.
I just see peoples opinions about the FOW rule set. GHQ was asking about the forum users opinoins about people that have used the rules,with micro armour,and the rules in general. I'm not sure what GHQ is up to with this thread.
I've got to admitt,this thread got me to look at the FoW rules again after 3 years of sitting on the shelf.
Sorry, if my opinion seems like "bashing" about the ruleset. But I stick wholeheartedly with what I wrote. Also to note I really don't need to "play" rules if I have read them through,to "get the feel of them" so to speak. As a matter of fact thats why I don't play the FoW rules. There are enough disagreeable points (yes,some even in the authors reasons of why he did certain things) in the rules that keep me from even starting.
As for historical ,the only thing that I find historical is the TO&Es,and of course the minis.
I'm sure I would play if my Grandkids or some others asked me to...

dougeagle · Post by **dougeagle** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 3:34 am

I personally like FOW and have been playing it for over 2 years now. I was skeptical at first, but dove right in a found that the game is smooth and fast. Far be it that the ranges are somewhat in accurate to say the least, but playability was what I wanted. Some people are not into it while others are. I know of one person whom has watched a game or two and wasn't sure about it as it had no real depth to the game. But, from what I understand as well, is that the creators of FOW are former GW employee's/ gamers themselves, and for those of you who have played or are playing GW, you will know that they are quick rules.
FOW is very much like 40K, but slightly different.

I used to play GW then quit and then got into FOW and found out how similar both rules sets are and now I am collecting (slowly) WW2 micro armour as being able to play large battalion sized battles interests me.

GHQ miniatures played with FoW rules

FoW

Bashing?