Remember to click on pics for bigger view.
Deployment
Germans counted with two Stugs III, one Tiger I and an asset card which turned to be one Light Artillery round every turn (this card was very unbalancing as it killed two full fire teams in two rounds). US forces counted with two Shermans and one asset card which was Air Strike.
US infantry dug in and tanks hull down.
Tiger blowing up a Sherman. The explosion is an improvised piece of paper :)
Sherman and bazookas were no match for the German armour, mainly because my opponent insisted on rolling nines and tens which I couldn't defend with my D8s, and also because I kept rolling under four during all the game.
I miss a bit more chrome or granularity in the game as infantry weapons and tanks are too much similar among them. I understand and agree with the philosophy of the game to put more emphasis on the quality of the soldiers than on the weapons they are using but even so, I still do not like panzerfausts being exactly equal to panzerschreks, or Tigers practically equal to Panthers, or all the Panzers IV or Shermans being the same thing, etc.
Although the game mechanic is innovative in the sense of not using the IGOUGO activation, I still prefer Nuts! to FoF for smaller scenarios as it is much more fluid IMHO. For larger action I'd incline for BKC for the same reason.
I think I'll let FoF rest until an expansion specific for WWII is released; then I'll give it a new opportunity as I think it a good system anyway.
US infantry dug in and tanks hull down.
The game only lasted two turns as at the beginning of the third turn there was only four US soldiers and one Sherman immobilized that had heroically resisted many shots from the Tiger and Stugs combined with panzerfausts shooting from a very looong distance. The crew resisted all the morale and bail out tests and even force the Tiger crew to bail out! Although the battle only lasted two turns it took us three hours to play it as the game involved too many dice rolling with the rounds of fire and the opposed rolls for everything. I'm afraid the game tends to slow down with so many troops.
Tiger blowing up a Sherman. The explosion is an improvised piece of paper :)
Sherman and bazookas were no match for the German armour, mainly because my opponent insisted on rolling nines and tens which I couldn't defend with my D8s, and also because I kept rolling under four during all the game.
US forces totally exterminated at the start of 3rd turn.
I miss a bit more chrome or granularity in the game as infantry weapons and tanks are too much similar among them. I understand and agree with the philosophy of the game to put more emphasis on the quality of the soldiers than on the weapons they are using but even so, I still do not like panzerfausts being exactly equal to panzerschreks, or Tigers practically equal to Panthers, or all the Panzers IV or Shermans being the same thing, etc.
Although the game mechanic is innovative in the sense of not using the IGOUGO activation, I still prefer Nuts! to FoF for smaller scenarios as it is much more fluid IMHO. For larger action I'd incline for BKC for the same reason.
I think I'll let FoF rest until an expansion specific for WWII is released; then I'll give it a new opportunity as I think it a good system anyway.
.jpg)
I was wondering what good Force On Force rules are. Not in an objective manner, but for my subjective needs.
ReplyDeleteI wondered if they have anything which would make them replace Nuts! or BKC/CWC/FWC series for me.
Your remarks seem to suggest you had similar feelings to mine. So do you feel it has a potential to replace the games I mentioned, or probably you would stay with the games you already used?
--
Mahon
www.ChestOfColors.com