New historical gamer looking into Flames of War: A few questions.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**durecellrabbit**

mdauben wrote:
Yes, these new command cards, while looking like a tacked on attempt to address the meager lists in the two army books, do seem to add a lot of missing variety to the possible army lists you can do for MW. Still not enough details about exactly what the two sets of cards add, beyond the examples given in the article so although I'm not a fan of the cards in general I'm cautiously optimistic that they will make the v4 MW at least playable.

I agree. I think it shows that BF is listening to concerns from the vets and is a good sign. Hopefully we'll get a complete book at some point because I don't like cards very much.

**Eumerin**

What Would Patton Do previews -

Afrika Korps - http://www.wwpd.net/2017/02/afrika-korps-for-v4-previewed-and.html
Desert Rats - http://www.wwpd.net/2017/02/desert-rats-for-v4-previewed-and.html