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.

What would you bring to the FOW range?

I would personally bring in "Cold of War". With a EW (1945-1960), MW (1960 - 1975), LW (1975-1990) you could have fun with using Historical equipment and events to write scenario's (Fulda Gap, Cuban Invasion, Defence of Europe, Israeli-Arab conflict, Suez Crisis) etc.

Alternatively I would like to see a Korean or WWII Pacific....What would you do?

I would not be interested in Cold War era armies. Pacific would be pretty cool.

Korean War and Chinese Civil War would be interesting, if only for the masses of late WWII equipment that turns up.

I've often thought Korea would be easy for BF, as it wouldn't cost much to re-package some their miniatures.

I agree that Korea would be very easy for BF to do, and a Cold War game sounds interesting.

I think a Cold War alternate history game would be interesting, anyone ever play the RTS World in Conflict? (alternate 1989, Russia launches war in Europe, sends a surprise attack on Seattle).

Yeah that was actually quite a good title, except that a couple of platoons wiped out entire Battalions of Russian Tanks. The final battle my 6 Abrams must have wasted 120+ Russian Tanks.

The explosions and Artillery fire in that game were very good.

For me get that Battle of Bulge book out finally for the current stuff.The other would be the Pacfic Theatre.for other Mititery Conflicts maybe the Seven Day War.Which would not take much considering the have Vietnam out.BTW hows is that game?I have been eyeing up some of the Hueys,I maybe picking it up for are next game.Korea would be good,But i would prefer WWI.
Also i did kinda come up with a rule and points value for the Great Sherman Caliope.Combine points for KAt launcher and a Sherman tank.Also just use the kat launcher rules for Barrage.

col. krazy kenny wrote:For me get that Battle of Bulge book out finally for the current stuff.The other would be the Pacfic Theatre.for other Mititery Conflicts maybe the Seven Day War.Which would not take much considering the have Vietnam out.BTW hows is that game?I have been eyeing up some of the Hueys,I maybe picking it up for are next game.

From what I've read, FoW Vietnam is good if you're looking to play battles along the lines of the Battle of Ia Drang Valley. The initial reason the game was created was because some Battlefront employees saw the movie "We Were Soldiers" and got excited about playing that battle out. If you're looking for that type of Vietnam, go to town. If you're looking for a more comprehensive treatment, the Force on Force Vietnam book (Ambush Valley?) is probably more what you're after. The miniatures are pretty cool though, and the rules for Air Cav and their helicopters are awesome.

I'd do the following:

WW2 ETO:
Expand EW army lists to cover more equipment/units for existing armies (i.e. French should have access to FCM and add'l Char tanks, German Heer Cavalry lists, etc)
Add minor nation army lists - Dutch, Norwegians, etc.
BARBAROSSA & Winter War

WW2 PTO:
American, Australian/NZ, Japanese, & Chinese army lists
expansion of naval bombardment rules

Korean War

mwnciboo wrote:What would you bring to the FOW range?

I would personally bring in "Cold of War". With a EW (1945-1960), MW (1960 - 1975), LW (1975-1990) you could have fun with using Historical equipment and events to write scenario's (Fulda Gap, Cuban Invasion, Defence of Europe, Israeli-Arab conflict, Suez Crisis) etc.

How would that work?

"Hey, let's have a cold war battle!"

"We can't, it'd start a nuclear war."

rooneg wrote:The initial reason the game was created was because some Battlefront employees saw the movie "We Were Soldiers" and got excited about playing that battle out.

Strange that such a rubbish movie could inspire them so much. That movie actually managed to be worse than 'The Green Berets'.

There's a lot of support for them to branch off into the war in the Pacific. Yet it's never been a particularly popular subject for WWII wargaming - possibly because the tank v tank combat was so unequal (and relatively rare)? I think the most interesting post-WWII subject would be the Arab-Israeli wars. These involved major armour battles, and a lot of different types of AFVs on both sides.

mwnciboo wrote:Yeah that was actually quite a good title, except that a couple of platoons wiped out entire Battalions of Russian Tanks. The final battle my 6 Abrams must have wasted 120+ Russian Tanks.

The explosions and Artillery fire in that game were very good.

That game definatly was unresonable in that sense (thopugh the multiplayer battles fixed that), but I thought the storyline was good.

ancientsociety wrote:

mwnciboo wrote:What would you bring to the FOW range?

I would personally bring in "Cold of War". With a EW (1945-1960), MW (1960 - 1975), LW (1975-1990) you could have fun with using Historical equipment and events to write scenario's (Fulda Gap, Cuban Invasion, Defence of Europe, Israeli-Arab conflict, Suez Crisis) etc.

How would that work?

"Hey, let's have a cold war battle!"

"We can't, it'd start a nuclear war."

That can actually be solved (at least for late Cold War), as the premise that World in Conflict used for the fact that the world wasn't blown apart in nuclear war in the game was that the Russians did not know that the Star Wars program ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative ) had failed, and thus thought the U.S. could shoot down their nukes from space.

I would speed up releases for WW2. Most likely that would mean not releasing 3-4 books for every major campaign, and instead just releasing a few major sourcebooks for each period (ala Red Bear/Grey Wolf and Earth&Steel/Turning Tide). I would supplement this with a Mid War Monsters re-release, in addition to Early War Experimentals and Late War Leviathans, and smaller sourcebooks detailing hypothetical campaigns/ "1946" scenarios (example: Operation Sea Lion) . I would look into Pacific and Chinese/India/Burma Theaters and most likely conclude that the actions were for the most part of too different a nature for successful integration into the existing flames of war rules and European/African Theater.

I would launch a WW1 version of the ruleset, likewise divided into Early, Mid, and Late periods. The technology might not have changed as drastically to warrant three periods, but the tactics, doctrines, and strategies sure did. Likewise, I would try to conclude releases for this system as quickly as possible.

Additionally I would launch several 'Interwar' sourcebooks (to cover Russian Civil War, Second Sino-Japanese War, etc.) but these would be low priority.

Finally, I would launch a Cold War line as suggested in the first post, divided into Early, Mid, and Late periods. The primary focus would be on major historical conflicts (Arab-Israeli, Korea, Indochina/Vietnam, Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, Iran-Iraq, etc.) but also books detailing lesser conflicts (of which there are many, but: Bay of Pigs, various Civil Wars, Rhodesian Bush War, etc.) and of course some "Cold War Gone Hot" books, with the eventual goal of players being able to fight basically any possible scenario you can imagine during that period of time.

And when all is said and done... COLONIALS! Books covering 1850-1914, so Crimea, Franco-Prussian, ACW, etc. etc. etc. Possibly go back further to Napoleonics, but I kinda lose interest on events prior to the mid 19th century.

ancientsociety wrote:I'd do the following:

WW2 ETO:
Expand EW army lists to cover more equipment/units for existing armies (i.e. French should have access to FCM and add'l Char tanks, German Heer Cavalry lists, etc)
Add minor nation army lists - Dutch, Norwegians, etc.
BARBAROSSA & Winter War

WW2 PTO:
American, Australian/NZ, Japanese, & Chinese army lists
expansion of naval bombardment rules

Korean War

mwnciboo wrote:What would you bring to the FOW range?

I would personally bring in "Cold of War". With a EW (1945-1960), MW (1960 - 1975), LW (1975-1990) you could have fun with using Historical equipment and events to write scenario's (Fulda Gap, Cuban Invasion, Defence of Europe, Israeli-Arab conflict, Suez Crisis) etc.

How would that work?

"Hey, let's have a cold war battle!"

"We can't, it'd start a nuclear war."

Despite popular opinion saying otherwise, most of the Cold War was geared up for Conventional War. The chance of going Nuclear, was vastly increased if one side started losing badly. Read the book 1985 by Sir John Hackett, it's an interesting run out of the probable results. How often did we go to the brink only to pull back as the two rational super powers sheathed their swords? The Cold War in no way stopped conventional war, if anything it increased it as the Superpowers fought proxy conventional wars all over the globe.

I'd like to see the newer current day tanks and stealth bombers. Imagine aircraft drones as your spotters for guided missle lauches and coordinating artillery.

chaos0xomega wrote:I would speed up releases for WW2. Most likely that would mean not releasing 3-4 books for every major campaign, and instead just releasing a few major sourcebooks for each period (ala Red Bear/Grey Wolf and Earth&Steel/Turning Tide).

The 3-4 smaller books are what make up the larger compilations and allows Battlefront to get feedback before they're published in the compilations. It wouldn't really speed up the compilation books and they would be missing the feedback from the players (see the changes they had to make to the British Armoured lists in Blitzkrieg and Hellfire and Back).

My stance is that they could just as easily gain that feedback from releasing all those lists as free pdf lists on their site like they do now w/ certain other briefings.

General Seric wrote:I agree that Korea would be very easy for BF to do, and a Cold War game sounds interesting.

I think a Cold War alternate history game would be interesting, anyone ever play the RTS World in Conflict? (alternate 1989, Russia launches war in Europe, sends a surprise attack on Seattle).

I love that game, and yeah I would love to buy a cold war era bf game. Maybe they could do a modern era too...

ancientsociety wrote:I'd do the following:

WW2 ETO:
Expand EW army lists to cover more equipment/units for existing armies (i.e. French should have access to FCM and add'l Char tanks, German Heer Cavalry lists, etc)
Add minor nation army lists - Dutch, Norwegians, etc.
BARBAROSSA & Winter War

WW2 PTO:
American, Australian/NZ, Japanese, & Chinese army lists
expansion of naval bombardment rules

Korean War

mwnciboo wrote:What would you bring to the FOW range?

I would personally bring in "Cold of War". With a EW (1945-1960), MW (1960 - 1975), LW (1975-1990) you could have fun with using Historical equipment and events to write scenario's (Fulda Gap, Cuban Invasion, Defence of Europe, Israeli-Arab conflict, Suez Crisis) etc.

How would that work?

"Hey, let's have a cold war battle!"

"We can't, it'd start a nuclear war."

It actually works rather well as mwnciboo said. My FRG Bundeswehr are going to be blocking a soviet thrust coming from East Germany sometime soon. It's actually really good reading researching this time period 1955-1990. Plus I was a 80's child so I have some vague recollection of some of this stuff.

AAG's FoF and Cold War Gone Hot make a nice ruleset imho and plays rather well. I hope battlefront does something like this as it's always good to have more options as consumers.

Chaos0xomega wrote:My stance is that they could just as easily gain that feedback from releasing all those lists as free pdf lists on their site like they do now w/ certain other briefings.

And yet that wouldn't increase the speed with which they could produce the compilations and would cost Battlefront a source of revenue. Why would anyone buy any of the books at all if they were given away for free as online Intelligence Briefings?

Simple, you post the rough draft online, release the books with the updated/finalized version, and invalidate the free lists. Gamers are forced to do what they currently do (as they do in fact include pdf lists in the compilation books), purchase the book for the updated list or get the changes from a friend. I dont really know anyone that really buys the books... They either get illegal pdf lists or they split the costs between themselves and photocopy the relevant lists /shrug

Dropping the Battle Books still won't get the lists out any faster. Its not like the staff writing the books have to stop writing to print the Battle Books.

On top of that, the Battle Books actually have the history of the units and of the battles that the two units were involved in. That's something that the compilations don't have.

Ghaz wrote:Dropping the Battle Books still won't get the lists out any faster. Its not like the staff writing the books have to stop writing to print the Battle Books.

I feel that the need to market battle books means that the releases are spaced out farther apart than they otherwise should/need to be. In any case, i would wager that their release strategy is unprofitable... Why should I purchase a 25 dollar book for a handful of lists, of which half or more will be for a faction I dont play, when I can wait a year and purchase a 50 dollar book that will have all those lists, plus several dozen more, mostly for the faction I play and occasionally for its allies?

chaos0xomega wrote:

Ghaz wrote:Dropping the Battle Books still won't get the lists out any faster. Its not like the staff writing the books have to stop writing to print the Battle Books.

Why should I purchase a 25 dollar book for a handful of lists, of which half or more will be for a faction I dont play, when I can wait a year and purchase a 50 dollar book that will have all those lists, plus several dozen more, mostly for the faction I play and occasionally for its allies?

It makes sense if you are interested in that particular battle or campaign and don't want to wait a year or more to buy a compilation book to play the list you want.

Also, a lot of people have more than one army, so it's not necessarily a downside to have a book that has opposing factions in it.

ancientsociety wrote:
How would that work?

"Hey, let's have a cold war battle!"

"We can't, it'd start a nuclear war."

Not that there weren't dozens of smaller, more limited, conflicts int he major 'cold war' period. Vietnam being one, of course, but there's room for more. Alls orts of politically-motivated 'peacekeeping' actions where superpowers assisted smaller nations.

Actually, that could be interesting as it'd be smaller-scale conflict that might work well with FoW's ruleset.

On the other hand, I'm almost surprised they haven't tried to start a line that is a setting they can really 'own' by making their own IP. It's interesting that they're the closest thing to a 'mainstream' historicals wargame, and of course anyone can make minis for FoW if they wish.Making their own game line would allow them to do their own designs and be the sole source.

But, hey, they're happy.

chaos0xomega wrote:

I would launch a WW1 version of the ruleset, likewise divided into Early, Mid, and Late periods. The technology might not have changed as drastically to warrant three periods, but the tactics, doctrines, and strategies sure did. Likewise, I would try to conclude releases for this system as quickly as possible.

Sorry Chaos, I completely missed this bit of your post. This concept intrigues me, I wonder how it would work? No Aircraft, well actually straffing runs would be interesting with Sopwith Camels and Fokker Eindeckers etc? No Tanks till late war, although Cavalry would be an option. Artillery would be numerous and Infantry damn near infinite. Yeah I see your point on tactics and doctorine, the British were very good at clearing trenches by the end of the war, the Germans were very good at shock, stormtrooper tactics. The Americans dogged and determined, the French had superb Artillery support. Lots of options for allies and unusual regiments (Indian Regiments at Ypres). Not forgetting all the Russians, although Late War they would not be present.

It's not without merit though, a few rules changes and a more complex infantry combat dynamic could work. British would get "Old Contemptables" fully ROF for Rifle teams at all times? Germans Stormtroopers (same old, same old) French with vive la France (Re-roll in assault?). It would be interesting because you could have special characters like Lieutenant Slim or Lieutenant Rommel.... Yeah, I actually though WW1 wouldn't work but actually with some clever rules changes and some thinking it might work.

I was totally kidding about the Cold War thing but you all made good points.

Bravo sirs!

I would be totally down for Cold War, but only after other things get released.



First, I would finish Late War WW2 and release all the Terrain thats hiding in their warehouses(I know its there! Let me have it!!!"

Then I would release the Pacific Theatre. Probably with only some slight, but important, changes to the core rules set.


Now we got some options.

Cold War(Alternate History)


1965: Russia launches an invasion of Europe. A preemptive Nuclear strike against several European countries levels several major cities and kills millions. US intelligence barely gives enough warning for US troops stationed in Europe to partly evacuate. The Russians take control of most of Europe within several months while the US hesitates to act in a Nuclear standoff. Russia also holds off inciting the US with further Nuclear attacks fearing the supposedly larger and more powerful US stockpile.

The Red Army takes control of most of Mainland Europe as well as making major advances into the Middle East as far as Syria and Afganistan. Portions of France maintain active resistance and their Nuclear weaponry takes a heavy toll on the Russian forces. The fighting lasts for several months and leaves swathes of France, Belgium, and Western Germany radioactive wastelands, creating a barrier that prevents the Russians from attacking in force. The US and Great Britain funnel supplies to France to keep them in the fight.

China is wary of Russia's movements, but also desires to profit from the turbulance. In 1967 secret negotiations with the United States lead to China launching a surprise attack on Russian troops in Afganistan and invading Siberia in exchange for the United States, reluctently, ceeding Japan's protection to the Chinese government. Japan is annexed several days later.

A coalition of US and British troops makes landings in Egypt and India to begin an opposition to the Russian invasion of the Middle East. They are joined by the Pakistani and Indian armies as well.

The United States has also developed a missile to shoot down ICBMs and has a limited number of them deployed with their forces, giving them and the US homeland limited protection.

By 1973, Coalition forces have pushed Russian forces back to the caucuses but heavy losses have been sustained. Russia threatens to unleash their entire arsenel if the Allies do not surrender. The President knows an invasion is impossable and on August 9 the combined Atomic Arsenels of the US and France obliterate every known Russian military asset. The few Russian nukes that are launched are stopped by the US missile defenses.

In 1974, the Coalition takes premptive action against China and covertly neutralizes the modest chinese stockpile. Without Nuclear weapons the Chinese army is helpless. The gains China made during the War against Russia are given up, the Chinese army is reduced in size, and all capabilities for Nuclear weapon production are destroyed.

The United States sets up a global task force to ensure that no additional countries gain access to Nuclear weapons.

Grey Templar wrote:I would be totally down for Cold War, but only after other things get released.



First, I would finish Late War WW2 and release all the Terrain thats hiding in their warehouses(I know its there! Let me have it!!!"

Then I would release the Pacific Theatre. Probably with only some slight, but important, changes to the core rules set.


Now we got some options.

Cold War(Alternate History)


1965: Russia launches an invasion of Europe. A preemptive Nuclear strike against several European countries levels several major cities and kills millions. US intelligence barely gives enough warning for US troops stationed in Europe to partly evacuate. The Russians take control of most of Europe within several months while the US hesitates to act in a Nuclear standoff. Russia also holds off inciting the US with further Nuclear attacks fearing the supposedly larger and more powerful US stockpile.

The Red Army takes control of most of Mainland Europe as well as making major advances into the Middle East as far as Syria and Afganistan. Portions of France maintain active resistance and their Nuclear weaponry takes a heavy toll on the Russian forces. The fighting lasts for several months and leaves swathes of France, Belgium, and Western Germany radioactive wastelands, creating a barrier that prevents the Russians from attacking in force. The US and Great Britain funnel supplies to France to keep them in the fight.

China is wary of Russia's movements, but also desires to profit from the turbulance. In 1967 secret negotiations with the United States lead to China launching a surprise attack on Russian troops in Afganistan and invading Siberia in exchange for the United States, reluctently, ceeding Japan's protection to the Chinese government. Japan is annexed several days later.

A coalition of US and British troops makes landings in Egypt and India to begin an opposition to the Russian invasion of the Middle East. They are joined by the Pakistani and Indian armies as well.

The United States has also developed a missile to shoot down ICBMs and has a limited number of them deployed with their forces, giving them and the US homeland limited protection.

By 1973, Coalition forces have pushed Russian forces back to the caucuses but heavy losses have been sustained. Russia threatens to unleash their entire arsenel if the Allies do not surrender. The President knows an invasion is impossable and on August 9 the combined Atomic Arsenels of the US and France obliterate every known Russian military asset. The few Russian nukes that are launched are stopped by the US missile defenses.

In 1974, the Coalition takes premptive action against China and covertly neutralizes the modest chinese stockpile. Without Nuclear weapons the Chinese army is helpless. The gains China made during the War against Russia are given up, the Chinese army is reduced in size, and all capabilities for Nuclear weapon production are destroyed.

The United States sets up a global task force to ensure that no additional countries gain access to Nuclear weapons.

OOOOKKKKAAAAYYYY THEN......... someone has been reading way to much "Tom Clancy"

Nah, I literally just pulled that out of my

Who's this Clancy fellow?

Any one here ever play or heard of Twlight 2000? Read that games background.