Prev: Re: [GZG] FT Light: 5 is the new 6? Next: Re: [GZG] Troop potential

Re: [GZG] Changing topics again (FoW) Was: Re: FT Light: 5 is the new 6?

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:15:14 -0500
Subject: Re: [GZG] Changing topics again (FoW) Was: Re: FT Light: 5 is the new 6?

Indy wrote on 07/29/2008 05:55:19 AM:

***HUGE snippage***
> I've found FoW to be a refreshing game system for historicals on a
> levels. First, it plays fast and well. It gives you the opportunity to
> reasonable forces that faced each other (you can do the one-off with
> historical forces if you'd like, but I prefer not to and restrict 90%
> FoW games to historical match-ups). You can do specific scenarios that
> happened in history with historical forces. Hey, I don't see the
> FoW here! :-)
> As far as the people who cry 'cheese', I've seen it in FT, as well, as
> you. If you can put filters on, ignore them, or heck don't even play

> them, but find the good people to play with, you can play any game
> "cheese!" is cried in. With few exceptions to game systems, ofttimes I
> the cheese-criers do so out of ignorance of how to deal with a

> thing or situation, not out of any genuine "cheese" exploited in the
> So, I'd personally say *try* FoW at some point before writing it off
> wholesale. You *might* be surprised. Or you may decide you were right,
> depending on the attitude you take to the game. <shrug> Again, YMMV,
> should at leave give a game system a fair shake before chucking it

First, the appropriate warning: I'm not a FoW player, and I don't even
one on TV. I probably won't ever play, either.

There was a rather large FoW occurrence at the store over the weekend;
opposed amphibious landing against cliff face backed beach...

As there were a few anomalies, such as the presence of King Tigers, it
referred as Cedar Rapids Beach.

I did notice a bit of rolling of eyes at that one, and I don't recall
paratroopers showing up to directly support the landings as historical
either, but I have to say the eye rolling seemed good natured, and a
time was had by all. The game players DID include some GW fanboys, but
several I've never seen playing 40K or Fantasy.

IF I ever did play, it'd be with 2nd Ed Axis and Allies Miniatures, but
that would take folks with an open mind set, and there ARE a few around.

On a personal note: Bill, if you ever took offense at something I said,
apologize. I can imagine calling 'cheese' to the designs you described,
have been concerned by a few folks trying to milk every ounce of benefit
out of small quirks in the rules, but never thought that of you, and any
comments of 'fromage' would have been an attempt at what I referred to
above as 'good natured' teasing on a very reasonable design strategy.

If you ever wish to try out your ships again, I still have 'em. Let me
when and where. While I've blocked out Wednesday nights at the store as
'Fleet' night, for A&A War at Sea, Full Thrust, SFB/Fed Commander,
what-have-you, I'll bring your ships wherever, if I can so schedule,
matching SSD's for the ESU.

You'll have to come up with your own for the Narn... ;->=


Gzg-l mailing list

Prev: Re: [GZG] FT Light: 5 is the new 6? Next: Re: [GZG] Troop potential