![How To Paint Moonstone’s Nanny | Goblin King Games [7 Days Early Access]](https://images.beastsofwar.com/2024/12/3CU-Gobin-King-Games-Moonstone-Shades-Nanny-coverimage-225-127.jpg)
Flames of War: The World War II Miniatures Game
Playability
Components
Writing
Art Direction
Replayability
Review: Schmalen Ausfall
Flames of War 4th Edition
I will start by saying this is the first version of FoW I have played, so I do not know how this compares to the previous versions.
Flames of War is a 15mm ww2 game, it has the ability to be a good game, the scale is accessible and commonly used in historical war games. The models that are produced are amazingly detailed and top quality, having cards for each unit is great it is easy to see what you have to role.
However for me personally the game falls down when it comes to immersion, it just does not feel like it gels very well or holds that tension, it is like an arcade shoot 'em up with very little tactical depth and it just loses something on the way. Many of the things I don't like I am sure could be just corrected with some minor tweaks, such as the way it is determined if you hit the enemy tank. you can be virtually 90 degrees on to an enemy tank but still be shooting at the front armour beause the way location of hits is determined is with as straight line across the front of the tank... its just ridiculous where as a diagonal line from corner t corner would be far more effective, and the way most other games do this, easy to tweak but I just cannot be bothered.
@commodorerob I thought the same thing about the armour rule when i first started playing.
It was explained to me via World of Tanks that if you hit a tank at an angle it actually means the shell has to travel through more of the armour than if you hit it straight on. The shell also has more chance of ricocheting off if you the armour at an angle.
@civilcourage I understand the theory, and that like any historical game it is an abstraction of reality so cannot be perfect simulation, but it maybe that i am too long in the tooth and have played too many different WW2 rules that these just don’t do it for me.
@commodorerob I know what you mean i have stopped playing since V4 came out, i go to battlegroup for my WW2 action at 15mm now.
I haven’t played v4 and only late a couple of games of V2 I think before deciding it wasn’t for me. I guess the basics are similar to other versions which has in my opinion the basis of a good game albeit with too much dice rolling (I like the roll to hit being based on the targets skill level). What I didn’t like was the mass of special rules so units could act like their real life counterparts. Surely this is where the players ability and luck comes in and uses the tactics appropriate to the equipment he or… Read more »
The way Fow use this rule is very practical, I just imagine swags of tanks then people getting there micrometers out, the extra time to play and argue, also it’s not a skirmish game so I’m glad they don’t . Also Tiger crews knew there armour would deflect better when they traversed the tank to greater than 90 degrees, they called it Meal time. This tactic is not so prominent with tanks that have sloped armour.
I have similar issues, the rules are to much of an abstraction for me and the game always felt like Games workshop 40k. The Idea of having the heavy artillery on the table when it should be well behind the front line is just wrong. I know all wargame rules are an abstraction but this just strikes me as a set of rules designed to sell figures rather than go for any type of ‘realism’.