GHQ miniatures played with FoW rules

Azure · Post by **Azure** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:50 am

I want a 1:1 system simply because, as has been stated elsewhere, its hard to imagine 5 tanks hiding behind one small house (and, i must admit, its more fun to see 30 tanks representing a batallion than 6)
Am i interested in arguing rules? no. Ill admit, if Stuarts and Tigers move at the same speed, thats a bit too abstract for my liking, but if people enjoy that sort of system, i say more power to them. If my only choice for gaming was FoW or nothing, i would play FoW. If i had an alternative, id probably use it. In either case, i would use GHQ minis, for reasons of space and price-having to split my "toy money" between my railroad and minis, i want to get the most "bang for the buck".
I think im somewhere in the middle. Historical accuracy, as far as what units had what organization and equipment at what times is extremely important to me. But do i care whether a shell strikes a tank at 45 degrees or 50? Not in the least. We know how Kursk turned out. If we keep everything 100% historically accurate, it will turn out the same way in the game...why bother playing?
People all seem to have strong opinions about how a game should be run. Im willing to bet die hard FoW players do too. I say live and let game...if your having a good time, doing something you enjoy, what else really matters?

Von Omar · Post by **Von Omar** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:55 am

Absolutely excellent comment Azure. I completely agree.

Post by **GHQ** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:59 pm

For the record, we have our own set of 1:1 rules that has been under development for several years. It's based on our 1:5 rules, so all of the things that make those rules so good will be found in the 1:1 rules- historical accuracy, the importance of cohesion, quick play, etc.

When we initiated this thread, we had hoped that it would go just as it has. There have been some really good pioints brought up on all sides. Several times throughout, a few people have wondered what we are getting at with the thread. All that we are doing is market research and trying to see how our customers use our products, and what their interests are. Nothing more, nothing less.

We realize that our customers span the whole specturm- game players that like to count rivets to those that appreciate quality models and just want to play a game with them. Many of our customers are military enthusiasts who don't play games at all. Hopefully a discussion like this brings up some points from all sides and educates those who are unfamiliar with gaming, and causes those who have years of experience to re-evaluate things and either feel stronger about their current preferences or see the value in a point that has been brought up by someone else who has differing tastes.

We apprecaite all of the particiapation on this topic. Let's keep the ideas rolling!

Thanks,
GHQ

Thomaso827 · Post by **Thomaso827** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:57 am

I went through this all today and was very interested. I see at the local game store the FoW stuff on the wall right next to the GHQ, and I always look at the FoW stuff, then migrate on down to the GHQ stuff. I have played with micro armor since I discovered it in '74, and am thrilled with the improvements over the years. I played Tractics, and loved the details but hated the amount of time it took. I played Angriff, and loved the time, but hated the lack of detail. More recently, I have played Battleground WW2 and again love the detail, but it gets bogged down when you play more that a few squads or vehicle platoons. I dont do FoW, dont plan to, but looked at it for possible use in a Piquet module. With having rediscovered GHQ, I think now I will stick with it. I had switched to 6mm for Napoleonics, ACW and Medieval several years ago for the economic side of fielding large armies needed for these games. I looked at GHQ for the same reason when I decided to do Vietnam gaming. At least in my local shop, they are happy to see us bring in new games that will help them sell whatever is on their racks, and the fact that I bought out all the Vietnam era stuff they had really helped, but they are waiting now for me to bring the game in and get it moving before they restock. Now it is sort of up to me to get the ball rolling again and try to get a game on the agenda at Advance The Colors that use these products. On a very good note, I liked seen the test version of GHQ's rules in the Air Cav set I got yesterday. I dont know that I would have browsed another set of rules at the hobby shop right now, but this method gets these out in the hands of potential players. Even beyond a beta test set, I think a complementory "fast play" or sample version of the rules should continue to be packaged in the unit sets. That is truly one-stop shopping, when the unit, the rules and perhaps an important piece of terrain is all in the one package.

ShortRound70 · Post by **ShortRound70** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:57 am

Been out of town for work, so I'm a bit behind on things. Interest in FoW is just getting started here, so I don't think that anyone has tried GHQ minis with those rules. I'm not too familiar with the rules (not being a WW2 gamer), but from what I've seen on the unit boxes (TO&E's) and the rules, I think using GHQ minis is very do-able. Could do quite alot with North Africa or the Eastern Front. Maybe new "Platoon Packs" in the future? GHQ, when do we get to see the 1:1 rules? WW2 and Modern?
BTW, a lot of good ideas and comments on this thread. Thanks guys.

S/F

SR70

Von Omar · Post by **Von Omar** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:21 pm

Not to start a debate again, but I wanted to make my point about reading the rules vs. playing the rules.
A comment was made several times about FoW being a poor system because it makes things like Stuarts move the same as Tigers.
I thought this seemed odd so I checked back to the rules and that is NOT the case.
Stuarts count as light tanks and effectively move 16" off road vs 12 for other tracked tanks. Also, Tiger's move 8" because they are classified as Heavy. Therefore a Stuart effectively has 2 times the maneuverability of a Tiger in FoW. If both are moving at the double, then the difference is even more substantial.
Dont take this personally, but please realise that skimming over the rules is NOT really understanding them to their fullest degree.

The one problem with all the pretty charts in the FoW books is that people dont finish reading all the special rules that add more "feel" and detail to the game. Something I've been guilty of countless times

jb · Post by jb » Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:18 am

...Thanks V.O. I swear I looked and looked,and that was even 3 years ago. Now I see the little notation that is at the bottom!
I'm surprised some of you veteran FoW players didn't bring that to our attention!
Ah, that is still only one point that keeps me from really getting involved with it...

CBoy3 · Post by **CBoy3** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:37 am

I just came across this on the miniatures page. It fits this topic perfectly, and like the postings here, there are some great points.

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=71312

Based on the postings in both places it looks like the FoW rules are too basic for some, and just perfect for others. Everyone has their own tastes- and that is OK

. However, a few things that all seem to agree on are: the micro scaled miniatures are far less expensive, the number of vehicles available is much larger, the storage space required is far less, they are much more easily transported, the size of the table space required to play is smaller, and with the micro scale armor you can use vehicles from the same army for small actions, and full scale battles. Also, with the difference in scale between 6mm and 15mm, the same as the ratio between inches and centimeters, makes playing micro scale armies with 15mm rules simple even for the mathematically challenged. As I see it, the verdict is in- long live micro armor

!

I hope that everyone keeps in mind, that there is no right or wrong answer on the rules question. Obviously some like rules that are easier, some like them more complex, some like 1:1, some like 1:5, etc. I am new to gaming, but sometimes the idea of a quick fun game, that is a GAME, is just what I am looking for. I have been introduced to some more involved games, and have had a good time with those too. I think that even as I become more involved in historical gaming, I'll still enjoy an occasional quick and easy game, whether it be FoW or ??? Based on price, variety, space, etc. I am going to build my armies in micro scale. Let's remember that everyone here has an interest in historical miniatures games, and that's a lot of common ground that can be shared.

PS Being relatively new to this hobby, I have enjoyed this topic and have learned from all of the varying viewpoints.

8ball · Post by **8ball** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:52 am

"jb"...Thanks V.O. I swear I looked and looked,and that was even 3 years ago. Now I see the little notation that is at the bottom!
I'm surprised some of you veteran FoW players didn't bring that to our attention!
Ah, that is still only one point that keeps me from really getting involved with it...

Yeah, i guess I'm a skimmer.

Actually, I've only used FOW for infantry actions, and even at that, until a month ago, I was using an old beta version I downloaded when the game was still in development.

Extra Crispy · Post by **Extra Crispy** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:59 pm

I'm building a FoW set. I have them in 15mm for largely infantry fights. But am going with GHQ so I can bring big tank battles to my club as well - and 15mm tanks are too expensive. Plus, this lets us have a lot of maneuver room. No "edge of the world" flanks here!

I'd love it if GHQ offered equivalents to the FoW boxed sets, though buying the individual packs is easy enough....

Sierra 19 · Post by **Sierra 19** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:12 am

Well, I guess it's time for my 2 cents. I recently got into FoW (just in the last few months), and I'm in the process of painting up my desert British and my German (Ostfront) Grenadiers. I also just ordered the ruleset and the 1941 Panzer Kampfgruppe Command Set from this site. I've been a WWII history buff for several years now, and just got involved in miniatures gaming. FoW is a nice, easy to understand and use ruleset. From the posts I've read, most of the critics are either A)Hardcore wargamers who love pouring over various charts and tables, spending several hours to play a game, or B)Those who have never played the game. I'm not a hardcore wargamer. With a full-time job, a wife, kids, and a house to take care of, I don't have 6 or 8 hours to spend playing a SINGLE game/scenario. FoW may lack the sophistication of some other available rulesets, but it plays quickly and smoothly. I don't particularly care about angle of penetration or angle of deflection, I want to have FUN! I think I will use Micro Armor with the FoW ruleset, as well as the GHQ ruleset. Do I mind sacrificing some of the "historical accuracy"? Not if it makes the game go smoother and makes it more fun to play. And an easy, fun to play game is what will keep this particular genre alive. I also like the 1:1 ratio, it just "feels" better to know when 1 tank model is knocked out, it's just 1 tank, not a platoon of 3-5, or when 1 infantry stand is taken out, it's only half a squad, not an entire platoon! To GHQ's benefit though, I think it's a smart move to try to get FoW players to use GHQ models because A) It's definitely cheaper and B)GHQ sales will keep the company around a lot longer than hstorical "snobbery" will. Boy this post got long...

cbovill · Post by **cbovill** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 5:18 am

All this talk of FoW got me very intrigued as I had no idea what it was. At the same time I discovered that we now have two new gaming stores in Vegas - which is awesome, now have a place to game besides my dining room table!

Well, both stores stock FoW and all that endless fantasy stuff. Neither stocks GHQ unfortunately. It was the first time I encountered FoW and I must say I was VERY impressed with the marketing they've done. It is exactly what historical wargaming has needed if we want to grow the hobby. The packaging draws you to it, they've taken all the barriers to entry and blown them away. No stacks of books to buy to figure out who had what when and how to paint this or that. They even package sets of paint together for each country. They have all the combat commands like GHQ. They take all the research out of it and put it together for you. If I was a fantasy gamer who wanted to try something new, I would be all over this stuff. FoW is an excellent medium for introducing new people to the hobby. And just like anything else, you're going to reach the limits of FoW's introductory superiority and be craving something more - bigger battles, more vehicle options - that's when these new people will turn to GHQ.

I see FoW as the perfect tool for getting people into the hobby, and GHQ as the more advanced version once you get familiar with wargaming. It's a bit daunting for the instant gratification generation to make the switch from no gaming or fantasy gaming and go straight into our level. FoW looks like it can provide this transition.

At the same time I would love it if GHQ marketed their products the way FoW does, then I think the gaming stores might actually start stocking it. And I would love to be able to walk into a local store and buy GHQ products. I haven't been able to do that since 1996. I always thought GHQ should try marketing their products like the Warhammer folks so that we can get more people interested in gaming. Looks like FoW did just that and they are spreading like wildfire.

Chris

Steelwhip · Post by **Steelwhip** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:11 am

With all due respect in stating a Stuart and a Tiger moving the same distance in FoW....

A Stuart can move up to 32" in a turn....
A Tiger can at best do 24"...and has a good chance of breaking down if it tries moving that far....

if yer gonna bash a system....at least get the rules correct.

And I hate to say it but Iâ€™m seeing alot of the same type of elitist crap I saw back in my days of playing ASL before I left that. Iâ€™ve been gaming for over 25 years. Cut my teeth on Squad Leader and Napoleonic Minis in the late 70's. I have played and seen pretty much every minis and rules system that has ever come out.

FoW is a simple system...guess what..alot of people LIKE that. Yet for some reason the people who play the more 'sophisticated' games systems seem to think that people who donâ€™t play the same way they do are somehow less of a gamer for it. And quite the opposite is true for those who like the simpler systemsâ€¦.we donâ€™t really care if you like your harder gamesâ€¦more power to you for wanting to play like that. But for the love of all thatâ€™s Holy donâ€™t discriminate against those of us that like the simple systems. I saw it in Napoleonic circles, I saw it in SL/ASL circles, and yet again Iâ€™m seeing it. What is it that makes people feel the need to feel superior to othersâ€¦especially when we all share the same love for gaming. I just donâ€™t know. I want to play a fun fast game that doesnâ€™t take up much of my precious and few remaining brain cells I have left. I donâ€™t want to be made to feel like Iâ€™m a 2nd class citizen for not playing your more complex gaming-and unfortunately thatâ€™s one of the basic feelings Iâ€™m getting from these messages Iâ€™m reading.

In ref to the original questionâ€¦.would GHQ be well served by packaging FoW style for its 6mm line. I canâ€™t say one way or another. Personally I wouldnâ€™t buy any. And out of the 12+ FoW players at my LGS there would be maybe 1 that would want to try and converting the system to 6mm.

/steps of soapbox
/apologizes for any offense given

jb · Post by jb » Sat Jul 29, 2006 5:35 pm

Steelwhip wrote:With all due respect in stating a Stuart and a Tiger moving the same distance in FoW....

A Stuart can move up to 32" in a turn....
A Tiger can at best do 24"...and has a good chance of breaking down if it tries moving that far....

if yer gonna bash a system....at least get the rules correct.

And I hate to say it but Iâ€™m seeing alot of the same type of elitist crap I saw back in my days of playing ASL before I left that. Iâ€™ve been gaming for over 25 years. Cut my teeth on Squad Leader and Napoleonic Minis in the late 70's. I have played and seen pretty much every minis and rules system that has ever come out.

FoW is a simple system...guess what..alot of people LIKE that. Yet for some reason the people who play the more 'sophisticated' games systems seem to think that people who donâ€™t play the same way they do are somehow less of a gamer for it. And quite the opposite is true for those who like the simpler systemsâ€¦.we donâ€™t really care if you like your harder gamesâ€¦more power to you for wanting to play like that. But for the love of all thatâ€™s Holy donâ€™t discriminate against those of us that like the simple systems. I saw it in Napoleonic circles, I saw it in SL/ASL circles, and yet again Iâ€™m seeing it. What is it that makes people feel the need to feel superior to othersâ€¦especially when we all share the same love for gaming. I just donâ€™t know. I want to play a fun fast game that doesnâ€™t take up much of my precious and few remaining brain cells I have left. I donâ€™t want to be made to feel like Iâ€™m a 2nd class citizen for not playing your more complex gaming-and unfortunately thatâ€™s one of the basic feelings Iâ€™m getting from these messages Iâ€™m reading.

In ref to the original questionâ€¦.would GHQ be well served by packaging FoW style for its 6mm line. I canâ€™t say one way or another. Personally I wouldnâ€™t buy any. And out of the 12+ FoW players at my LGS there would be maybe 1 that would want to try and converting the system to 6mm.

/steps of soapbox
/apologizes for any offense given

First off welcome, Steelwhip...ah a true FoW player,and a 15mmer to boot. BTW GHQ's Cossacks are easier to paint up than the BF Cossacks ...
Now as for the M3 vs Tiger I think you need to read through the thread,and not too far back. It was stated as a mistake-My mistake -JB's I still really don't find the need to go out of my way to play the game.Yes I have just gone through it and I really don't care to put a lot of time into it. It is like everybody else's,just a game. But it has too many abstraction for me-one is the "save" roll. This is a direct WH thing. It is great for WH because WH is SciFi. Using this save roll we could put Captain America or maybe the Hulk into the game,and still have fun.
The artillery in FoW is also borderline SciFi soviet 122,and german 105s being out ranged by 4.2' and 120mm mortars is pretty out of kilter. I'm sure this is done just so you NEED to put the arty on the board. This is also the WH Basilisk or Whirlwind type of thing going on. Going through the weapon stats told me that if I played to a semi serious degree I would need to simply change some of that.
Another BIG similarity with WH is,is that the battles in 15mm look just like a WH game. Everything is smucked up against each other,just like a Napoleanic formation of tanks,or that box art from WH40k.You know I can come up with a lot more of WH type things in this rule set,but I'm not going to keep going on about the specific numerus WH similarities of Flames of War.
Another thing,this Simple" aspect of the game.I really don't beleive it exist. Take a look at all the pages you need to thumb through. Of course if you photo copy what you need you will have a pile of charts to go through.
Now as for elitist.I really don't see any here.I just see a bunch of guys stating their opinion and "cutting" no one down about what ever rule system they use. As a matter of fact they ENCOURAGE you to play what you like. So don't feel discrimanated or insupperior here,if so then you got that from a different forum...