I noticed that Battlefront have announced that ony BF miniatures will be allowed to be used in offical FOW tournaments from now on
Games Workshoppy that, must be worried about the Plastic Soldier Company's new output.
That certainly is BF, if you see what I mean. :D
And Westwind's "Forged in Battle" range, Gordon. They're really nice - and cheaper! :d
Piggy stuff and the Old Glory ones work as well. How they going to enforce it being at the wrong end of the world ?
IanS
Quote from: ianrs54 on 12 July 2012, 11:06:39 AM
How they going to enforce it being at the wrong end of the world ?
IanS
Probably like this
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=88
I am sure these people in the diferent countries organise the events
Quote from: Fenton on 12 July 2012, 09:48:57 AM
I noticed that Battlefront have announced that ony BF miniatures will be allowed to be used in offical FOW tournaments from now on
Good for them. Losers of the world, unite. ;D
Cheers,
Aart
As a major Flames Competition organiser, I can say it's a pain! It's casuing severe ructions! People are even pulling out! :D
Especially as they have decided to drop all their events within a week of the three biggest Flames events in the country, but since they've cocked this up, we'll be enjoying full comps. :o
This doesn't come as much of a surprise unfortunately, this was the only direction left for their business model to maintain sales. The way the BF prices have increased over the past few years, and with more people switching to cheaper alternatives, this was the only option for them now.
The interesting thing now will be seeing whether they've got enough loyalty in the customer base for this to keep the pennies coming in? If there's a strong negative reaction to this, then a price increase will be in the very near future as well.
I can understand someone following certain aspects of the GW model, but what I don't get is why they then continue to make the same mistakes as GW. You can't tell your customers what to do, or force them into a corner, it doesn't work that way. GW get away with it a lot more as they're dealing with a younger market who probably aren't as financially aware.
We'd never dream of telling people they couldn't use our stuff with Minifigs, Pithead, WGS, etc. etc. 'cos that's just not the way to do it. All you can do as a company, is produce good quality, comprehensive ranges, link them up to a good ruleset as a sales engine and back it up with solid marketing and customer service.
But then GW & BF both turnover millions each year, and we don't... :-\
:D
People in certain circles pay very large lumps of money to get told 'what to do' but it usually involves a bit of strumpet dressed in leather, chains and high heels carrying a whip :-[
I see that it basically says on their website that you can't play their game using other people's figs, but what about using their toys to play other peole's games :-\
I've just ordered some scenic items which I'm too lazy (and cack-handed) to produce myself for use with both Piggy's PBI and BKC which I'm just starting out with. Shoud l I let them know that or will the scenery automatically self-destruct when it registers that my troops are "wrongly" based? ;)
Quote from: Nosher on 12 July 2012, 02:10:01 PM
People in certain circles pay very large lumps of money to get told 'what to do' but it usually involves a bit of strumpet dressed in leather, chains and high heels carrying a whip :-[
So, you are suggesting a career move for poor Leon? :o
Quote from: Nosher on 12 July 2012, 02:10:01 PM
People in certain circles pay very large lumps of money to get told 'what to do' but it usually involves a bit of strumpet dressed in leather, chains and high heels carrying a whip :-[
Quote from: OldenBUA on 12 July 2012, 02:49:46 PM
So, you are suggesting a career move for poor Leon? :o
Sounds like a promotion to me... :D
Quote from: Leon on 12 July 2012, 03:02:27 PM
Sounds like a promotion to me... :D
This time I DON'T want pics ! ;D
I sold the rights to 'those' pics of Leon to Readers Wives ;D
Strangely enough though I once saw Pendraken hill dwarves at a GW games day.... :D
can honestly say i have never been as bored in my life...not like a proper wargames convention at all >:(
Anyway back to the point... peopel will spend their pennies where they want and the can still play games with watever they want... if the BF lot wont let them into a tournament then people could always organise their own.
I am basically going to sell of my Flames of war stuff, it did begin to get too pricey... moving all and everything to 10mm now...if i had kept on going with it then, providing other manufacturers figures fitted in and were good quality/ cheaper then I know where I would be going.
oh no.... I used My BF figures to play Savage worlds wierd wars... shouldn't I have???
I have very few 15mm, and intend to buy 10mm for all new periods. So I guess turning up with a 10mm scale WW2 army at a FoW tourney is out? :'(
However, I'm not really a tourney player, so I can live with the loss. It will be up to individual players to decide whether or not they can live with the loss? If they can't then go FoW. If you can then don't go FoW.
I recently aquired Flames of War second edition for £2 off Ebay, I plan on using it with, drum roll maestro please.......................... Pendraken minis.
You think my rulebook will object????
When they start doing e-version only rules, like the absurd FoG announcement, then most likely the app will indeed have a scanner that detects non-FoW models and blows up the file. Exploding kindle's anyone? 8) Once BF put barcodes inside their models, you know what's coming!
This just goes to show how Forged in Battle, Zvesda and PSC have made inroads into their previous market stranglehold. Rather than get all GW-uppitidy about it, they should embrace the change and start their own plastic injection line of kits and figures at good value prices.
Afterall 2012 is the year of change. That is what the Mayans were really predicting. I might even be buying some 10mm at the weekend which is about as a massive change as all of Syria converting to Judeaism....
Mark
If anyone wants to bring 10mm to Campaign they would be more than welcome, you just might have to be clever with your measurements and basing!
If I could get my club to switch to 10s i would!
Quote from: Leon on 12 July 2012, 01:41:02 PM
All you can do as a company, is produce good quality, comprehensive ranges, link them up to a good ruleset as a sales engine and back it up with solid marketing and customer service.
But then GW & BF both turnover millions each year, and we don't... :-\
:D
Yet...
Quote from: GordonY on 12 July 2012, 07:00:20 PM
I recently aquired Flames of War second edition for £2 off Ebay, I plan on using it with, drum roll maestro please.......................... Pendraken minis.
You think my rulebook will object????
Mine started to fall to bits after the first game. As a book-lover that really cracks me up. :'(
Yeah its a lovely book too, just like Black Powder, excellent eye-candy but not very good rules.
Quote from: GordonY on 13 July 2012, 10:17:30 AM
Yeah its a lovely book too, just like Black Powder, excellent eye-candy but not very good rules.
You have a talent for extreme understatement GordonY. ;)
Which is a shame since their information books are pretty well researched and well presented. What shoots it in the foot is the tendency for pages to start falling out after you've used them for a while. :'(
Quote from: Hertsblue on 14 July 2012, 08:58:58 AM
Which is a shame since their information books are pretty well researched and well presented.
Usually. But there are some major errors in some of them as well.
Topic is up to page 30! ;D
Quote from: Leon on 12 July 2012, 01:41:02 PM
This doesn't come as much of a surprise unfortunately, this was the only direction left for their business model to maintain sales."
Surely they should see the way the wind is blowing and embrace the competition by officially allowing their models in, but then go ahead and invest in their own plastic injected range. The tooling for such is expensive and time consuming, but production is cheap and quick once set up, there is no way PSC and Zvesda can do everything needed. A "Budget Battlefront" range would be a more progressive and popular solution surely? And given the money they have already made, I'm sure BF could invest in more plastic injection moulded items than their rivals put together.
Banning other people's models is just petty, some gamers mix manufacturers on bases, imagine having to prize off non-BF figures from your infantry bases =) I hope as many people pull out as to make any tournament pointless!
Mark
EDIT: Quote fixed.
i have been saying to the kids at our club that 10mm is the way and the rules should make no difference, a 10mm sherman individually based can fight FoW or rapid fire game with no problem only the based infantry is different but the expiediant of adding a dice to the table to mark casualties solves even this problem, but with the vast difference in cost even doubling up infantry would still work out cheeper, but you can only make the suggestion, they are certain that FoW can only be played in 15s as that is the scale in the book.
must be getting too much pocket money.
jon
Seeing what kids spend on GW products, you know they have a lot of money. I was talking to a friend a couple of years ago, and friends of her son are given £100 to go and spend in town on a Saturday afternoon :o.
Quote from: sultanbev on 15 July 2012, 03:48:24 PM
Surely they should see the way the wind is blowing and embrace the competition by officially allowing their models in, but then go ahead and invest in their own plastic injected range. The tooling for such is expensive and time consuming, but production is cheap and quick once set up, there is no way PSC and Zvesda can do everything needed. A "Budget Battlefront" range would be a more progressive and popular solution surely? And given the money they have already made, I'm sure BF could invest in more plastic injection moulded items than their rivals put together.
A switch to plastic would make more sense to me as well. Tooling for the plastic 15mm vehicles we're seeing on the market at the moment is around £8-10k I believe, plus the cost of the 3-up masters. I think BF are paying somewhere in the region of $1500-2000 for their vehicle masters from speaking to ex-designers, so god knows how much they'd be paying for a '45mm' master model as it were. Still though, with their kind of budget, it wouldn't be a problem at all for them.
An interesting perspective may be the perceived lower cost of plastic to the consumer, so they couldn't charge the same pricing? With resin, they can claim any kind of custom resin excuse, ala Finecast, and keep the pricing up?
The plastic 15mm tanks are CAD designed rather than 3 ups IIRC. The Perrys and Warlord use 3 ups on their 28mm figs though. Apparently BF are trying out CAD, 3 ups and another method for their plastics. Ironically perhaps they are using Renedra for the tooling and moulding.
Quote from: NTM on 15 July 2012, 07:23:24 PM
The plastic 15mm tanks are CAD designed rather than 3 ups IIRC.
That would make a lot more sense actually!
Quote from: NTM on 15 July 2012, 07:23:24 PM
The plastic 15mm tanks are CAD designed rather than 3 ups IIRC.
It's the way pretty much every other industry designs plastic mouldings, the CAD file is fed straight into the machine to cut the tool. With something like a vehicle it can be drawn more accurately quickly than sculpting.
Organic shapes, ie figures are more realistic if sculpted hence why the Perry's use 3 ups.
Cheers,
Kev
Back track and compromise has been announced by BF:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=57&art_id=3380
Sounds like they are listening... ;D
They will definitely be 3D CAD as opposed to 3 Ups. The fit on the Zvezda kits is amazing and could not be achieved any other way.
Quote from: mad lemmey on 16 July 2012, 08:29:00 AM
Back track and compromise has been announced by BF:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=57&art_id=3380
Sounds like they are listening... ;D
Well that was quick, kudo's to them for actually listening to people. They're still calling it the 'FoW hobby' though, which has an unnerving ring to it...
Quote from: Steve J on 16 July 2012, 09:07:16 AM
They will definitely be 3D CAD as opposed to 3 Ups. The fit on the Zvezda kits is amazing and could not be achieved any other way.
I've always wondered how much it costs for a CAD designer to draw up the designs.
:-\
Our CAD designers are charged out at about £800 + per day. If you had good 2d reference drawings, they would take a few days to model up. You could probably get reasonable freelance designers cheaper, but you need ones with injection moulding experience.
The problem comes with scaling stuff up to allow the plastic to flow through the mould. This is where the experience element comes into it. You can get simple tools made for anything between a few hundred pounds up to a couple of thousand. Runs would then be up to about 10,000 units before you had problems with tool wear etc.
Just to clarify my doubts about Flames of War and Battlefront (insert GW/Finecast here):
It is the modern way of doing bussiness to tell your customers where to buy, what to buy and charge them insanely for prodcts of questionable quality?
It is OK if a big company bullies smaller competitors, its retailers and customer base with "rules" and "guidelines" and re-inventing rulebooks whenever they feel like it?
It is cool to segment markets and tell retailers to whom to sell and to whom not?
Lets just say I am glad I can still choose who gets my money and that Pendraken (and others) still do business a bit more the oldfashioned way....
What's interesting is sevel of the 'Old Guard' have completely unsubscribed from the Forum...
Including one each of the US, UK and Antipodean big hitters!
Still enough people to feed the greed....
Sad but true.
They have obviously struck a raw nerve if 'Old Gaurd' members have un-subscribed. They really need to look at the way the Plastic Soldier Company and Zvezda have really changed the market in the past few years. If they can do it, so can Battlefront.
I'm just happy that my 'lead addiction' has moved to 10mm :).
I cannot for the life of me understand how Zvezda can afford to turn out excellent 1:144th plastic kits that retail for £2.50-£3.00 here in the UK. I would have thought distribution costs would have been more than that. Or have the Russians transferred production to the Gulags? :o
I heard from a friend who has Russian contacts in re-enactment groups over there that they are 97p a box in Russia, equivalent of.....
Last time I was in Russia, the tanks were 77 roubles each which works out to about £1.50 and that shop was known for being expensive!
Anyway, I've played a bit of FoW and was largely disappointed by the rules.
Anyone else think these are crappy ?
Actually, I quite like them... :-[
A few bits don't ring true, but I still like them (and I run one of the biggest comps each year)... :-[ :-[
I'll get me coat! ;D
Have played several FoW games, and I state that it is a good game but a poor wargame 8)
I wouldn't play it out of choice :d
But then, I've got a better set of my own rules :P :)
Which are free to anyone who wants a set, just email me (they cover WW2 to modern, and pretty much 1930s+ as well)
I've tried FoW but it never really grabbed me the way BKC did (and still does), but each to their own. Some things just plain annoyed me, others I thought worked rather well.
Quote from: barbarian on 17 July 2012, 05:41:48 PM
Anyway, I've played a bit of FoW and was largely disappointed by the rules.
Anyone else think these are crappy ?
They are the worst set of WWII rules ever written.
Flames of Warhammer.
OK, here's a scenario we played out for a historical campaign we were running.
British infantry platoon supported by 2 HMGs entrenched on a rocky hilltop.
German company (3 platoons) attacking up the hill.
We figure, the British will probably lose the position due to German numbers but it'll be a close run thing.
By turn 3 the Germans completely wiped out the British without a single German loss.
Rules that allow that sort of result rally are nothing but a joke. It's the only time i've ever thrown my toys out of the pram at a game table.
Hmmm, that was bad to say the least. I played a game which I had won by the start of turn 2; my Desert Brits outflanked some Fallschirmjager and brought them to break point on turn 1. Not satisfying for anyone involved :(.
I've played several games now, including the one with my Japs and the 14th Army, and I must admit to serious reservations. The rate of attrition amongst the infantry is far too high IMHI and, like a lot of WW2 rules, FOW don't give enough value to the fact that the PBI can hide behind almost anything more than knee-high. However, given they are designed for convention gaming, with the accent on playability, and the avoidance of grey areas, rather than accuracy, they do serve their purpose.
One of the forgotten rules of Flames, non-moving or firing infantry and gun-teams (v3) are always 'gone-to-ground' and concealed, therefore +2 to hit. Long range (+16") adds an additional +1 to hit.
Vets = 4 to hit normally.
Trained 3+ to hit normally.
Conscript 2+ to hit normally.
Then if GTG all get a 3+ save, firing or moving gun teams get a 5+
Means Vets can't be seen at long range and are damned hard to kill at short!
:D
You don't know how fiendishly often my opponents can roll 4+ :o
50% of the time? :P
Luddite's scenario = 3 rifle squads with Brens, 1 PHQ squad with 2" mortar and PIAT, and two Vickers MMG, all sited and dug in
versus: CHQ squad
3 platoons each 3 rifle squads with MG34/42, 1 PHQ squad with PzB39 or Pzshreck
1 platoon with 2 MMG and 2x 81mm mortars or 3x 5cm mortars (if earlier war)
could certainly beat that British force with minimal loss. But not in 3 moves. Suppress and smoke the position with the 81mm till all the ammo is gone, coupled with long range suppressive fire from the MMGs and one platoon, whilst two platoons flank the feature from both sides for a final assault mop up. The mortar and MMG fire will not inflict many (or even any) casaulties, but will suppress and pin the defenders, reducing their fire and spotting significantly. The integral company mortars are the key.
Of course, if you did an unprepared frontal assault with grenades and bayonet, then expect to be wiped out!
The attrition rates against infantry are far too high in most rules, but they are speeded up for game playability.And most get round it by saying "they are not necessarilty all dead, just out of action for game". I agree with Hertsblue, FoW is too lethal that way. And tank crews bailing out and hiding behind their tank to get back in again later is farcical!
All my experience of FoW is v.1 - if that makes a difference.
By the way, we're not abashed at using the models, several club members have 15mm FoW based armies, we just use them with different rules, in our case one base representing one infantry squad.
I dont like the lack of oppertunity fire, no spotting, no hidden movement and all he liittle add ons to make you units special...too much to remember, I have played a couple of good games with it but they were both umpired..If I was going to Play WW2 in no particular order they would be CD, BKC or Crossfire
Quote from: Steve J on 17 July 2012, 06:21:51 PM
I've tried FoW but it never really grabbed me the way BKC did (and still does) (...)
I agree with you. And I was very disappointed with FoW. May be because I'm not a "tournament player".
( I also use FoF for skirmish SCW1936 )
Quote from: sultanbev on 18 July 2012, 09:10:41 AM
Luddite's scenario = 3 rifle squads with Brens, 1 PHQ squad with 2" mortar and PIAT, and two Vickers MMG, all sited and dug in
versus: CHQ squad
3 platoons each 3 rifle squads with MG34/42, 1 PHQ squad with PzB39 or Pzshreck
1 platoon with 2 MMG and 2x 81mm mortars or 3x 5cm mortars (if earlier war)
could certainly beat that British force with minimal loss. But not in 3 moves. Suppress and smoke the position with the 81mm till all the ammo is gone, coupled with long range suppressive fire from the MMGs and one platoon, whilst two platoons flank the feature from both sides for a final assault mop up. The mortar and MMG fire will not inflict many (or even any) casaulties, but will suppress and pin the defenders, reducing their fire and spotting significantly. The integral company mortars are the key.
Of course, if you did an unprepared frontal assault with grenades and bayonet, then expect to be wiped out!
The attrition rates against infantry are far too high in most rules, but they are speeded up for game playability.And most get round it by saying "they are not necessarilty all dead, just out of action for game". I agree with Hertsblue, FoW is too lethal that way. And tank crews bailing out and hiding behind their tank to get back in again later is farcical!
All my experience of FoW is v.1 - if that makes a difference.
By the way, we're not abashed at using the models, several club members have 15mm FoW based armies, we just use them with different rules, in our case one base representing one infantry squad.
The Germans simply fired up their jet packs, got into assault by turn 2 and chainsawed the British into pulp by turn 3.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Quote from: Luddite on 17 July 2012, 08:19:33 PM
They are the worst set of WWII rules ever written.
Flames of Warhammer.
Well, seeing as they grew out of Warhammer Panzer Battles - a WW2 mod for Warhammer 40k - that's hardly surprising, is it?
Cheers, Martyn
Battlefront have now caved in quoted from webby
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=57&art_id=3380
In all the years we have been in business we have had an open and honest policy about listening to our gamers and genuinely taking their views on board to the extent of sometimes changing our plans. We apologise for the confusion and angst our announcement has caused as it was never our intention. We did not see this change as a big problem as we were simply formalising something we already thought was existing practise, albeit informally.
In the interests of compromise and fairness to everybody’s opinion we will change the word “all†to “majority†(meaning over half) in the tournament rules for the 2013 season. Although we were not clear enough about this last week we did not consider die cast planes, scratch built models or objectives (assuming they are the right size), terrain or models we do not currently make to be covered by this. As is always the case, if you are unsure simply get in touch with your tournament organiser and clarify the situation but we are going to revert to the best option in all cases, common sense.
The new season rules take effect from the masters in December this year and only apply to the officially run Battlefront tournaments listed on our site. Independent tournaments are free to choose their own system, as they always have been.
One of the feedback ideas that did come back from our weekend conversations that we really liked was to also further reward people who came along with 100% Battlefront armies. This is an idea that we will definitely work on for the future.
We are committed to supporting and growing the Flames Of War hobby and want to invest more in the future, in events, the website and programs like the Rangers all of which we are happy to spend money on to provide this to you for free.
We want to thank our moderators for doing such a sterling job this weekend especially given they had no warning at all. We appreciate all the civil comments whether for or against. We feel that our compromise shows that we believed all views have merit. We hope this once again proves that we do listen.
It's that phrase 'Flames of War hobby' *SHUDDERING* :o
A LOT of flamers got upset by that! How arrogently can you treat wwii!
Mad Lemmey
QuoteWe did not see this change as a big problem as we were simply formalising something we already thought was existing practise, albeit informally.
If this were actually the case, would it not have been better to mention it in the original statement and thus save a lot of grief? Looks to me like a rather transparent attempt to save red face.
Have to say I don't use FoW myself, preferring BKC and PBI,but some of their so-called intelligence briefings on the net and in WI are quite useful IMHO.
Mmmmmm, the accolade for the worst set of WW2 rules actually belongs to Rapid Fire, where a platoon of light tanks can machine gun to death an entire infantry company hiding at the bottom of trenches from 300m away >:(
I think I recall nuclear hand grenades as well, being on 50% chance of killing a tank!
Quote from: mad lemmey on 19 July 2012, 05:47:01 AM
It's that phrase 'Flames of War hobby' *SHUDDERING* :o
A LOT of flamers got upset by that! How arrogently can you treat wwii!
Mad Lemmey
I think they probably meant "Flames of War franchise", which is what it is effectively.
Quote from: Hertsblue on 19 July 2012, 08:45:51 AM
I think they probably meant "Flames of War franchise", which is what it is effectively.
As I understand it, Battlefront was started by, and employs, a lot of ex-GW staff. So it's hardly surprising that they are following the same mind-set as GW.
According to GW, it's the GW hobby. And now Battlefront are saying the same thing.
From their point of view, if you enjoy Flames Of War, you're not enjoing the miniature WW2 wargaming hobby, you're enjoying the Flames Of War hobby.
Cheers, Martyn
Yep, set up by ex-GW employees who worked on 40K IIRC.
That's what I was told by a reliable source.
John-Paul Brisigotti (hope that's spelt right!) definitely ex-GW employee, as I remember him from WD magazine a good few years ago.
Hello All
Just to set the record straight. Battlefront was NOT started by anyone who had worked for GW. it was started by a group of New Zealand Wargamers who combined two companies to form Battlefront. They were Military Miniatures and Pendragon Games/Crusader Distributors. There was five individual partners and company called Replica Models (some of the original Military Miniatures owners). NONE of those involved were or had ever been GW employees. The first GW person to become involved was Matt Stevens, he became the Manager (never an owner) and he employed the first of the ex-GW staff. He was replaced by John-Paul, the current GM and now a part owner of Battlefront . He was the one who oversaw the largest expansion of Battlefront with new staff and new idea which Battlefront are following.
Battlefront was started with the idea of making WWII miniatures made by Evan Allen (one of the original owners) and the rules were to support that manufacturing. The rules were to be simple and quick and easy to play. The original concept was provided by Phil Yates, who is a New Zealand gamer and NEVER worked for GW.
Things have change a lot since the first few years when it was kept going by the owners working on the weekends and holidays, providing lots of cash to keep the company going and pay for materials and did conventions funded by their full time jobs. Only one of the founders is still involved, the other owner, John-Paul, was a late comer to Battlefront, all the others sold up or were brought out by the major shareholder. (he still is).
So PLEASE never say Battlefront was started by ex-GW staff as that would just piss me off. You can say it is now run by ex-GW staff which it is, but never started, it was started by New Zealand Gamers with good intentions. So please be careful about reliable source.
Signed
David (one of the ex-founders of Battlefront and Proud New Zealand Gamer)
Thanks for the update
Can I ask a question..If you dont want to answer then thats ok
Do you like what Battlefront and Flames of War has developed into?
I ask I was intrigued by your words it was started by New Zealand Gamers with good intentions
Or am I reading it with my TMP head on?
Cheers
Hi David,
many thanks for the background info on how they started out. Sorry for having caused any offense by my lack of background knowledge (see below) :(.
For all of the gamers that I know who have played FoW, they got into it with the release of the 2nd Edition rules. At the Bristol club that I used to attend it was an unknown ruleset before that. So IIRC (and apologies if I've got this wrong), John-Paul was involved at this point and that is why it was thought that it had been set up by ex-GW employees.
It certainly soon got the tag of WWII40K in our neck of the woods, for good or bad, followed by the (to me and my friends) very GW orientated marketing strategy, again for good or bad. Peter Pig certainly benefited from the interest generated by the 2nd Edition rules and the massive exposure to 15mm war gaming as it saw a large increase in their sales.
Hope the above makes clear where the errors on my part came from.
I was going to ask the same question Fenton! I would be very interested to hear your views David, what ever they may be.
There are a lot of ex-GW staff out there following a very different trading model.
Quote from: sultanbev on 19 July 2012, 08:37:33 AM
Mmmmmm, the accolade for the worst set of WW2 rules actually belongs to Rapid Fire, where a platoon of light tanks can machine gun to death an entire infantry company hiding at the bottom of trenches from 300m away >:(
I think I recall nuclear hand grenades as well, being on 50% chance of killing a tank!
All rules have their quirks, but FOW still beats RF hands down for the worst published set.
I'll see your Rapid Fire Light Tanks / nuclear hand grenades and raise you FOW's Universal Carriers. Teleporting, invulnerable mega death machines. Insane.
@-)
The real shame is that the figures are actually pretty good. Scaling's out on some of the vehicles, and everything's overpriced, but still pretty nice for not-10mm figures. The rules fail hard though.
In fact, that's where FOW & GW coincide...both decent models and dreadful rules...
:D
Quote from: Squirrel on 15 July 2012, 08:32:42 PM
It's the way pretty much every other industry designs plastic mouldings, the CAD file is fed straight into the machine to cut the tool. With something like a vehicle it can be drawn more accurately quickly than sculpting.
Organic shapes, ie figures are more realistic if sculpted hence why the Perry's use 3 ups.
Cheers,
Kev
That explains why good vehicle models and good infantry models tend to come from different companies and why several make vehicles but not infantry. Thanks. This has become a short but high quality discussion.
Hello All
Sorry about my annoyed comments before, but Battlefront turned from a passon to something else, once the first ex-GW people got involved. I will not comment on the direction the company has taken as I am still friends with the principle owner (Not John-Paul) and he has a right to set the direction of the company make a profit after all the money he put in to develop it and keep it afloat over the years. They are also a very large employer for the industry and have a responsibility to provide a wage to their staff and a return to the investor. People will always try to cut down tall poppies, but Battlefront do a good job of creating a gaming world that interested people can adopt if they wish. Or not. You can buy the miniatures and don't have to buy the gaming style unless you want to. They created a world that may or not be what you like that is you as the customers choice. Don't like it don't buy into - don't buy into it don't complain. bit like voting - don't vote, don't complain about the people who get elected.
I do not play FOW or have any of the models anymore (take from that what you will) and have gone back to my first, second, third, .... passon(s), War of 1812, Franco-Prussan, SYW and rules writing. Also quite interested in AWBCW. I used to play RF and still like the rules - very modified, because they are quick and easy. They are not rules for anything other than friends playing so they can fix the issues it has, but its fun which is what I believe the hobby should be about. As you may have guessed I am not a competition gamer. I like my tea, cake, wine, lounge chair and miniatures all at the same time
I usual avoid comments about Battlefront and the business model they have adopted but seeing I have broken that by pointing out that I do not want to be assoicated with GW, I feel I might as well comment on what started this thread - that you must use Battlefront miniatures at FOW conventions. I don't see an issue. If Battlefront are running it or are sponsoring it then they have the right to dictate the terms. Its there convention, don't like it don't play. THis is the norm in most sponsorship deals, just look to the Olympic's or the last Rugby World cup. You don't give them money you brand name is nowhere. If Battlefront run or sponsor the event why should there compeditors be allowed in for free. If gamers think the rules for them are different from what is the norm with events they they are deluded. I'm not saying this is right, just the reality. If I but put a lot of money to build a company, employ staff and build a brand then why should I give free access to my competitors. They can run their own events with there own rules. This idea does not apply to any event that does not have the FOW brand on it, the event organisor can choose their own rules and if manufacture puts restriction on them they are within their rights to show them the door in a not so polite way.
Any here endth the lession
Regards
David Brasting
Thank you for your reply
In which case, Leon said it best earlier in the thread...
Quote from: LeonI can understand someone following certain aspects of the GW model, but what I don't get is why they then continue to make the same mistakes as GW. You can't tell your customers what to do, or force them into a corner, it doesn't work that way. GW get away with it a lot more as they're dealing with a younger market who probably aren't as financially aware.
I would suggest that the reason this kind of thing tends to extract the 'rage' from many wargamers is that 'the hobby' is at its heart
amateur, and anything that smacks of corporate greed and consumer manipulation jars against that.
I wonder if we'll see Osprey start chucking out 15mm plastics for Field of Glory?
:-\
Was not the Pendraken painting competition limited to Pendraken models only? Did not hear too many complaints about that on here.
I would love to see PSC or anyone do 15mm Napoleonics in hard plastic, if they can get the price down to around 7p a figure they'd be on a winner. No use tailoring them to FoG though, you wouldn't know how many command sets to include, as they don't have a figure ratio size for units.
I tend to buy 100 figures at a time for my 15mm Napoleonics, or Lanc Games battlepacks which have c70 foot in, and can generally get figures at around 17-25p each in metal, or 15p second hand.
So if they did a box of plastics 100 line figures at £8-10, command in smaller boxes at 4 sets each (total 4x drummer, 4x officer, 8x standard bearers) at say £3-4, would that work?
But if they do, NO multipose figures with arms sticking out all over the place, that has plagued the 28mm so much that you can't base them in close ranks.
Quote from: Sandinista on 26 July 2012, 10:59:44 AM
Was not the Pendraken painting competition limited to Pendraken models only? Did not hear too many complaints about that on here.
Their ball, their rules mate. Which i believe is the point made adequately by
privateer et. al. regarding BF tournaments. I'm not sure the OP or many others have argued against the fairness of that really. This thread has, as it probably always will with FOW (or GW) degenerated into a general moan about these behemoths.
:'( ;D
Actually, on a serious note:
Why do people think that the most financially successful business models seem to tout some of the worst rules around?
:-\
In essence, because wargamers are fussy buggers :o
so to get a lot to game using one system the rules have to be fairly abstract and lose a lot of historical accuracy. The fussy buggers (me included) can't stand that so unjustly pour derision on what is in fact a successful business model. Unfortunately their are not enough wargamers (aka customers) for all manufacturers to be on the same scales of production/success/market dominance, which is where many see the unfairness. So when the large operators say "our models only" it looks like they are taking advantage of their dominance. Whereas they are only taking advantage of the lack of customer base.
If there were 200,000 wargamers (like model railways have) in the UK and not 20,000, then this wouldn't be an issue, as all manufacturers would be the size of GW/BF.
Also of course, wargames follow fashions just like every other market. 15mm is merely a fad between the one true scale of 6mm and, oh, two true scales, 20mm 8)
The daft thing is, 20mm was cheaper than 15mm for WW2/modern, until Zvesda/PSC came along!
Why on earth did anyone pay more for less?
Mark
Not sure about the 'abstraction' point sultanbev. There are some excellent and highly abstracted rules out there, so i don't think abstraction neccessarily means bad.
It just seems to me that for some reason the 'top dog' companies seem to produce decent figures shackled down to dreadful rules. Bafling.
As for scale, i'd say 15mm has passed from 'fad' a long time ago. I'd say the current primary scales are 28mm and 15mm. For me, 28mm works, but 15mm never really has. I much prefer 10mm and lament that the ancients tournament scene went with 15mm rather than 10mm... :'(
Sorry, 15mm as a WW2 scale is a fad I meant, not overall. And true, abstraction is not necessarily a bad thing, but there are only certain things you can use if for before it becomes chess with shiny models.
28mm just sucks, you can't do anything in 28mm that you can't in 20mm, except perhaps make more money. The hype it gets in the wargames press is the reason why I don't buy wargames magazines.
I must be of an older class of wargamer. Traditionally you bought what few rules were on the market (or borrowed them from the library 8), read them, discarded them and wrote your own, keeping the best bits, and refine them as you go along. My micro rules (which work well for 15mm and 20mm) were written in the late 1980s, and I still use, we have added a CWC type command system, a FoW type recce evade, a SH fire priority system, and uprated to firing by platoons on one dice roll rather than rolling for each tank. And they are free to anyone who wants a copy. But's that only because I don't have the time to put them from working draft to publishable order! I have been advised to publish them by someone in the MoD.
So I tend to not take much notice of the 21st century rules angst that is out there currently. If I need a set of rules, I just write them. And our club and house meet all use them happily.....
Just trying to remember the last set of rules I bought. In date order: CWC, BKC1, DBR and Spearhead/MSH, Korps Kommander and Firefly. :-\
Peter Pig allowed other manufacturers models, figures etc at their PBI tournaments held at Portbury Knights. They did not have a problem with this as they knew that their ranges did not cover all of the Nations in the rules. The only thing they did not allow was other manufacturers ranges in the painting competition, which was fair enough IMHO.
Quote from: privateer on 25 July 2012, 09:24:29 PM
... If Battlefront are running it or are sponsoring it then they have the right to dictate the terms. Its their convention, don't like it don't play. This is the norm in most sponsorship deals, just look to the Olympic's or the last Rugby World Cup.
They have a right to stipulate terms but equally we have a right to object.
Mention of the RWC brings to mind a story from 2003 tournament: A small girl arrived at the turnstile for the group match between South Africa and England energetically waiving a England flag bearing the O2 logo. She was told by an official that she could not take it in as O2 were not a official sponsor. At this point a Cornish man-mountain pointed out to this Australian jobsworth that he was wearing a replica shirt which also had the offending logo on it, as did several thousand other spectators, and the official was welcome to attempt to remove it from him. Otherwise would he be so kind as to allow the girl unhindered access.
It is useful to remember the dialogue from Shakespeare's Henry IV Part 1: 'I can summon spirits from the vasty deep!
"Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?"
Quote from: Luddite on 25 July 2012, 09:55:54 PM
I wonder if we'll see Osprey start chucking out 15mm plastics for Field of Glory?
No. An investment in a manufacturer would be a sensible way to do it. But they will not.
In fact they seem to have lost interest in even the books. Interesting to note the story that Version 2 of the Field of Glory will be electronic-only. This suggested that publishing Version 2 of the rule book and the army lists (of which there are a dozen) is not seen as worthwhile. I would guess that FOG (Napoleonics) is seen as a much better investment.
competion gaming is s***e anyway.
There I`ve gone and said it.
Jim
Quote from: Jim Ando on 26 July 2012, 08:23:39 PM
competion gaming is s***e anyway.
It is the same rules that we use in friendly games it is just that the attitude of the some of the gamers is wrong.
Competitions are like clubs: the skill is to hang around with people you like and to keep the encounters with the unfortunates to a minimum. FOW is so popular that this is reasonably easy to do.
Quote from: Jim Ando on 26 July 2012, 08:23:39 PM
competion gaming is s***e anyway.
There I`ve gone and said it.
Jim
Hear, hear. Never could stand the "win at all costs" mentality of most of the participants. >:(
In 35 years of wargaming I haven't played one competition game!
Played one 15mm WRG 6th edition ancients, with it's invisible shield walls >:( (don't ask!)
Points values are for pussies ;D !
No, seriously, we've used points values for campaigns, well, as a budget really
Now we use a Victory Points system, even for budgets. Works like this:
all militia units are free
all other units cost 1VP, except:
Guard units, which are 2VP.
This is regardless of size, quality or type.
In a battle you gain 2VP for winning, 1VP for losing.
Each unit you destroy or rout off table gains you a VP.
Sounds incredibly bad but it actually works! Takes the accountancy out of campaign games. As one of our group said, "I do bloody accounts all day at work, I don't want to have do it again in my leisure time." 'nuff said. 8)
Mark