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.

I am interested in getting into world war two wargaming, and I was curious on what ruleset everyone plays. I've heard good things about I ain't been shot mum, but I don't know anyone who plays. From what I've heard, Flames of war is very similar to 40k in style and play. Is that true? What do all of you guys play.

If I pick up an army I think I'd like to play soviets. Is the plastic army company any good? There prices are extremely affordable compared to battlefront minis.

Thanks

FoW is a tad abstract but popular enough for there to be a good following.

Kamfgruppe Normandy is pretty good I hear but the book is a tad expensive. I personally liked Battlefield Evolutions, or at least from from years ago when I saw it. Not sure if it's around or any good these days though.

PSC is a fine company, or at least their tanks are. YMMV on their infantry

I only play Kampfgruppe Normandy now for all my WW2 games...

Is Kampfgruppe Normandy any good? What game mechanic does it use and what scale is it designed for?

Albeezie wrote:Is Kampfgruppe Normandy any good? What game mechanic does it use and what scale is it designed for?

Mechanics wise it has something like mortality chips? Err something like that I cant really remember. Big P though knows the ins and outs though. 20mm or 1/72 seems to be common scale but I believe you can easily convert it to other scales

FOW is pretty popular and actually isn't way more abstract than a lot of other company-level games. Every wargame uses abstraction to some degree. If you know how to play 40k, picking up the Flames of War rules should be pretty straightforward, but there are some differences. FOW tends to be balanced much better than 40k, and of course there is the whole historical scenario aspect that you'll find in most historical gaming communities.

I haven't played Kampfgruppe Normandy yet, but it looks like it'd be a lot of fun. One of the questions you'll have to answer for yourself is what scale you want to play in, as there are different rulesets for different sizes of miniatures (and some rulesets that work for more than one size). If you're interested in a certain scale that could help us point you in the right direction. It also depends a lot on your local group and what's popular in your area. In some groups, 15mm is the most popular for WWII, and in some groups, 20mm is more common. Some people prefer 28mm skirmish type stuff, and there are of course groups that play in a variety of different scales.

Other than the games already mentioned, Command Decision, Nuts!, Disposable Heroes, and Rapid Fire are also pretty well-known rulesets.

Its worth spending a little time asking around locally what people are playing, then choose a system. You don't wanna sink cash into a game no one plays. There's a fair number of FoW players around me so that's the WWII system I chose.

Phydox wrote:Its worth spending a little time asking around locally what people are playing, then choose a system. You don't wanna sink cash into a game no one plays. There's a fair number of FoW players around me so that's the WWII system I chose.

Yup a good idea.

There is a playsheet for KGN on the Warhammer Historical website and an idea of play can be gained from Warwicks blog or my AARs here;

http://www.guildwargamers.com/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=266

I have a part of our forum dedicated to KGN and Warwick is an active member.

Thanks guys! Your advice has been really helpful. I'm not exactly sure what system to use, but I think I'll get some 15mm miniatures since that seems to be the most common scale.

Albeezie wrote:Thanks guys! Your advice has been really helpful. I'm not exactly sure what system to use, but I think I'll get some 15mm miniatures since that seems to be the most common scale.

Actually, I had though 20mm was more popular - you see 15mm because of FoW's proliferation amongst the historical wargaming scene and its continuing popularity.

Then again, the great thing about most historical rulesets is their ability to adjust to different scale sizes.

Is 20mm scale the same as 1/72 scale? Or is it slightly smaller?

Albeezie wrote:Is 20mm scale the same as 1/72 scale? Or is it slightly smaller?

I do believe they are the same.

1/72, 20mm and 1/76 are all really the same...

Its likely to still be the most popular scale/size among older gamers, though 'new blood' often goes to 15mm.

20mm offers far more in terms of available models as all the plastic kits can be used giving a massive selection. As its more established there are massive selections of metal and plastic figures.

Hell... I have started a 20mm WW2 Thai Army!

I will only ever play WW2 in 20mm... To me it looks so good and is the perfect scale for platoon to company engagements.

But look at what local players have and also take into account any existing scenery you may have that you want to use.

I can attest to the fact that you should really figure out what scale local gamers play in. There's a reasonably strong FoW following in my area, so that's where I started. Now after playing KGN for awhile with my dad, I'm trying to get some of my friends into it as it I think it offers a lot more in terms of that 'real' WW2 experience, or at least as close as you can get using miniatures.

I was doing some research on 1/72 minis and I stumbled upon this site http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Index.aspx

It has reviews for practically every plastic 1/72 scale minis out there in any time period. It seems to be really useful.

The prices for 1/72 scale minis are really affordable too, so I'll have to take that into consideration with my choice of scale.

Dont forget Plastic Soldier Company too for plastics...

If you want to see lots of 20mm stuff, then join my forum;

www.guildwargamers.com

We are primarily a forum based on gaming WW2 and moderns in 20mm and have many makers on the forum too along with huge galleries and a section devoted to KGN.

Albeezie wrote:I was doing some research on 1/72 minis and I stumbled upon this site http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Index.aspx

It has reviews for practically every plastic 1/72 scale minis out there in any time period. It seems to be really useful.

The prices for 1/72 scale minis are really affordable too, so I'll have to take that into consideration with my choice of scale.

I don't disagree with Big P's arguments in favour of 20mm. However, there is actually quite a difference between 1:72 and 1:76 scale. It's not very clear until you put the same vehicle in both scales side-by-side. I started wargaming in 20mm, and I like it as a scale, but I do think that 15mm allows you to spread your models out in a slightly more realistic fashion. If you look at photos of WW2 AFVs in combat, the spacing between vehicles is usually quite significant. Unfortunately, despite being designed for 15mm, FoW doesn't seem to reflect this, as you still get a lot of bunching up of models.

Also - most of the figures that that Plastic Solder Review deals with are soft polystyrene, which (while cheap) is very difficult to convert and doesn't take paint well. 'Serious' gamers in this scale (Like Big P) use metal figures. Preiser do very nice multi-part 'hard' polystyrene figures, but they are rather expensive and hard to get hold of (and they only do German and Soviet subjects).

Yes...

I mix 1/76 and 1/72 but never the same vehicle in the different scales...

I think the look of models on the table and spacing is more down to the players or the game, not the scale.

If you use loads of tanks it will look odd, whether you do it in 28mm, 20mm or 15mm.

Our KGN games never look that crowded...

Tailgunner wrote: If you look at photos of WW2 AFVs in combat, the spacing between vehicles is usually quite significant. Unfortunately, despite being designed for 15mm, FoW doesn't seem to reflect this, as you still get a lot of bunching up of models.

I think the root of the problem isn't really that Flames of War doesn't reflect this, the bigger problem is some people tend to play on tables that are too small for the armies that they use. The rules actually allow for a relatively large dispersion, if you play on a table big enough to allow it.

Hordini wrote:I think the root of the problem isn't really that Flames of War doesn't reflect this, the bigger problem is some people tend to play on tables that are too small for the armies that they use. The rules actually allow for a relatively large dispersion, if you play on a table big enough to allow it.

I'm not convinced - I've seen many photos of FoW battles where the tanks are bunched together like sheep, even when there's plenty of table space. It's obviously a gaming tactic, and it tends to make FoW games look rather like WH40k games.

I've also noticed in the photos of Big P's games (using a non-FoW ruleset) that they don't feature anything like the same level of clumping, and tend to look more like real battles.

Well thats cos in KGN you play like a WW2 commander... Not a 40k gamer.

Disclaimer - I have never played FOW so cant really comment. However KGN has a reasonable amount of vehicles in it, but as the tactics you will use generally make you disperse (to avoid area fire) and staggered arrival, they tend to look more inline with people perceptions of a WW2 engagement... Rather than a 40k Rhino Rush. We also always play on a 8 x 6 as minimum.

I was in the same situation you were late last year, GW didn't appeal to me as much anymore and so I decided to look into historical wargaming. Anywho, one of my friends who was more in the know than I was (he has had a subscription to Wargames Illustrated for a long while) thought I may be interested in Crossfire, and with the Plastic Soldier Company selling a metric tonne (warning, may be an exaggeration) of 15mm Grenadiers in one box I decided to go for it. After a few games I was still looking for other systems and came across several of the brilliant Kampfgruppe Normandy AARs on this very forum. With a sale at WH Historical I bought the book for half price and was instantly hooked. Some PSC halftracks and Panzer IVs with a few Flames of War specialist vehicles (a pair of Hummels, a Tiger etc.) and I was sorted! Much cheaper than GW. I know Big P feels playing KGN in 15mm is pretty much heretical but I find it works well enugh and I still have the models for Crossfire. I know there are other systems but the Morale counters and activations of KGN work fine for me

All 15mm WW2 players are heretics to an old fart like me...



But KGN plays fine in any scale really.

If you are starting from scratch and don't have an active group already, I would take look at this rule set.

http://www.combatactioncommand.com/

Tailgunner wrote:

Hordini wrote:I think the root of the problem isn't really that Flames of War doesn't reflect this, the bigger problem is some people tend to play on tables that are too small for the armies that they use. The rules actually allow for a relatively large dispersion, if you play on a table big enough to allow it.

I'm not convinced - I've seen many photos of FoW battles where the tanks are bunched together like sheep, even when there's plenty of table space. It's obviously a gaming tactic, and it tends to make FoW games look rather like WH40k games.

I've also noticed in the photos of Big P's games (using a non-FoW ruleset) that they don't feature anything like the same level of clumping, and tend to look more like real battles.

I don't think it is either of these (though the small tables could affect it), it is really a lot of the gamers themselves causing the tank bunching. All tanks in the platoon can be at least 4 in. apart (conscript tanks, vets can be 8 in. apart) so the game lets you space out your tanks. I think it is a 40k mentality that infects FoW with the tank bunching, because I can tell you there is no advantage to it in game.

Bunching tanks or infantry just makes them more susceptible to artillery and air attacks, which can be devastating. Infantry bunching is common too, and this has lead to some of my opponents losing half their infantry platoon in 1 artillery strike.

mcyeatman wrote:If you are starting from scratch and don't have an active group already, I would take look at this rule set.

http://www.combatactioncommand.com/

I'd never buy rules that abbreviate to CAC.

Whats CAC like? Does it use the d6 like most wargames, or is it completely different?

Albeezie wrote:Whats CAC like? Does it use the d6 like most wargames, or is it completely different?

I'm not entirely sure. If FoW was not so popular in my area I would give this a go. It seems like it has more of a skirmish style similar to Advanced Squad Leader with both the attacker and defender having actions during the turn. I've read some of the AAR and it seems very fluid and accurate.

I think there is an issue with FoW rules creating the bunching, particularly with infantry.

The penelties for losing your command team are pretty harsh and as such people keep their vehicles close together.


FoW really should change the tank rules so they can each function individually. Maybe the commander only giving a command reroll or something.

If I didn't have to keep my tanks together and allocate hits around I would gladly spread them apart.


That said, i think FoW really requires a good terrain setup to function to its full capability. There is a huge difference between playing on an ok terrain board and an awsome to scale terrain board.

Grey Templar wrote:I think there is an issue with FoW rules creating the bunching, particularly with infantry.

The penelties for losing your command team are pretty harsh and as such people keep their vehicles close together.


FoW really should change the tank rules so they can each function individually. Maybe the commander only giving a command reroll or something.

If I didn't have to keep my tanks together and allocate hits around I would gladly spread them apart.


That said, i think FoW really requires a good terrain setup to function to its full capability. There is a huge difference between playing on an ok terrain board and an awsome to scale terrain board.

Seeing as the minimum max spacing on tanks is 4 in. (conscript), this is not really a problem, as most tanks can stay 6 in. apart and still be in command.

Also, why would you keep your vehicles together because of this? it just makes it easier to hurt more vehicles and bunching tanks is not going to help your commander much (if the command tank is destroyed, the commander can still transfer to another tank within command with a save).