Bolt Action Rule Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ค. 2024
- Did you watch our Bolt Action St. Nazaire wargame last week and wonder how the rules work? This week, the guys at Little Wars TV review "Bolt Action," a 2012 set of skirmish rules for World War II platoon combat. We score rules based on five categories, then offer a final total score at the end.
Visit us at www.LittleWarsTV.com to see how other members of the club scored Fire & Fury. We also encourage anyone who has played this rule set to leave your own review here in the comments.
Bolt Action is a collaboration between Warlord Games and Osprey Publishing. To learn more about them, visit: store.warlordgames.com/ - เกม
![USAB Showcase: CANADA vs USA [OFFICIAL STREAM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m9Cz3xsdDgc/mqdefault.jpg)
I love how he complains about modifiers and then wants a million different weapons otherwise it doesn't have "flavor".
One thing that gets overlooked by a lot of people is that the stated design ethos behind BA was not to create a historic simulation, but rather a fast & light ruleset, capable of recreating the cinematic actions and encounters you would see in famous war films. Long timers will happily recall all the PDFs of various movie-based scenarios that Warlord has released - my personal faves were Where Eagles Dare and A Bridge Too Far. Heck, there are Kelly's Heroes minis still out there. Again, the goal of BA was to recreate the movie action, not simulate the historical action.
That's the problem. Its just a game using ww2 figures.
@@robertkirchner3822that's the cool part
I've been looking forward to this review as Bolt is our veteran club's go-to WW II rule set. I could see many of your points but overall I think you were a little harsh. As others have mentioned, the dice-pull mechanic offers simple yet effective Fog of War and tension. I didn't think the "lots of shooting modifiers" complaint was valid as the shooter moved/cover/long range mods are pretty straightforward.
What about the points system? Well, the game does include points for tournaments, but you can just ignore them (as we do) and just design historically balanced scenarios.
A plus that wasn't discussed is Bolt is a smooth system for larger club games (say with 4 players aside). You can even use 2 colours of activation dice per side if you wish to represent squads/sections of each player.
Heck, I'll even defend the admittedly brutal close assault rules. Let's remember this represents an all-out assault and melee using grenades, bayonet and anything else. It's often used to grab key terrain objectives at key points in games. The "destroyed" unit has actually routed out of the game, not an unrealistic result for a unit losing a close assault in a relatively short battle.
Also, you should include it is important to play this system at the "Platoon" level with a maximum of about 10-11 squads/teams/vehicles per side. I've seen and played bigger games in which hosts want to get more on the table - but that bogs things down too much.
One final point. The raid game you hosted featured both a dramatic and historically plausible conclusion which games should feature.
Thanks for the game and the review. LWTV is a great asset for our hobby.
I agree - It's not hard to calculate a roll to hit, honestly. As you said, it comes down to movement, range and cover, just like 40k or may other tabletop wargames. I don't even need a chart.
“Now that we’ve handled the situation..”
Oh man. You guys have the humor this hobby needs!
I’ve watched too many bland all serious war game channels but yours just ticks all the boxes for me!
Another entertaining video!!
Please keep these reviews coming. The discussion about the rules helps me decide which rule sets to look at. I will probably still get Bolt Action, but I can understand the complaints about Close Combat.
I'm really glad Miles was here to give this review - it seems like he's a veteran of the game and made a lot of good points that I myself (a longtime BA player) can agree with. I was kind of skeptical you guys would shit on this system because it really is "Saving Private Ryan: The Tabletop Wargame" but I found this review really fair and valid.
Pretty much every BA player I know is 100% aware it's not a completely historically accurate game and they're okay with that - in itself it's a really fun system to play.
Miles is absolutely the club's Bolt Action veteran--though we certainly have a few guys here with some playing experience. But I'm glad you found the review fair, because despite a number of concerns with the mechanics and historical flavor in this game, it does have a lot of strong suits. Particularly when it comes to all the top-notch support, availability, and appeal for new players.
Historically accurate is well and all. But if the game system is not fun to play then it wouldn't worth it.
@@viettrungtran4500 Great point and well said. There's a fine balance to be struck between historical flavor and simply having fun!
The point about Warlord supporting the game is a big reason why I enjoy Bolt Action, other rules I try to get into don't have as much direction for actually building up an army or finding other players/events
I'm fairly new to historical gaming - about 6 months ago the Game Police kicked in my door and informed me that, as a man in my mid-50s, I was obliged to play a historical game or forfeit my Gamer Card. But I find that in the balance of playability vs historicity, I most enjoy games where playability is the priority. So I really like Bolt Action. I guess games like this are more "Hollywood" than the serious historical offerings, but the super-accurate and historically faithful games never caught my interest anyhow. I'll never be a rivet counter, and if you're not having fun when playing a game, you're doing it wrong!
Would love to see you guys try out Crossfire as a set of ww2 rules
We play Crossfire in the club and it's a personal favorite of mine!
Little Wars TV can only hope it gets a video and rules review down the line!
I was too busy staring at that beautiful table! 🤙 I haven’t had a game yet but it looks like a good rule set to have fun with and get a good start with historical gaming.
Great review! Will you cover the Battlegroup rules from PSC at some point in the future? I really like them.
I first try out the game around 2 years ago when it first introduce to my local shop in Vietnam.
Not my first try at wargame. But it's my first try at historical game.
Buy the Japanese Imperial Infantry box that same evening. And damn it was the best decision i ever make.
Still trying to wrap my head around how you could be so harsh on Bolt Action and not have similar complaints for FoW 4.0. The review for it was almost glowing...
Eh, if you go to our website and read the reviews of other guys in the club, FoW did not fare so well. It shares many of the same weaknesses as Bolt Action. Both are great GAMES, but they don't score well (at least among our guys) in the category of Historical Flavor.
Thanks for the video. I really like how you guys explain your ratings and it’s not just a “good” or “bad”. I really want to start into historicals as I, too have a 40k background. But I’m really stuck between Bolt Action and Flames of War. What is your preference?
Great coverage of rules
BA is a really good gateway game to get into WW2 gaming. We played it for a long time before branching out into other games in the same era. One of the of things I really loved about BA was the complete randomness of the turn due to the dice pool. This was a really good way to get away from the 40k style I move and shoot everything then you move and shoot everything.
The old warlord games webpage was horrible, the revision they did not to long ago was much needed and made things so much easier to navigate. They're a great company to deal with and are extremely helpful and friendly in making sure you're taken care of.
It is interesting how peoples views differ over Bolt Action. For me i would rather play Bolt Action as my WW2 game on a club night. I know we can choose a points level and have relatively balanced armies. We can choose a scenario that we both have a chance to win, and we can sort out what we are bringing before we get there. The rules were not initially designed for tournament play, but do lend themselves very well to it. One thing you dismissed was the dice mechanism and the random pull, which when it was introduced in 1st edition was quite ground breaking for a tabletop game, getting away from I Go You Go, the randomness adds what other games call friction and has been copied in many following games by the introduction of cards or tokens. I certainly agree if you want a "True Historical Wargame" Bolt Action is not my number 1 choice, I would go with Chain of Command. But Bolt Action was designed to be a game of entertainment, and one that was balanced and give each player the chance to win. I would not choose Chain of Command for an evenings gaming unless we were playing a campaign because of how Chain of Command can play out. Bolt Action is a pick up game to play for fun where it works very well, it also has a fair degree of strategy. If you do wish to, you can also tailor it for those more historical combats.
The Eccentric Man ground-breaking?!? There were many other games that used that mechanic, in dice and cards, that preceded it by decades.
+1 Dale Hurtt. I almost spit out my coffee when I read the phrase "ground breaking". Admittedly I've been wargaming for decades, and tend to like buying and reading rules just because I find them interesting. If all you've ever played is 40K, or FoW, then yes - BA is quite eye opening, and does so in a gentle way, as the only the turn sequence is randomized. Everything else is nearly straight up FoW or 40K. So, in that respect, if it opens newer or younger players' eyes to possibilities of different ways of playing wargames, then I can't argue with that. We'll introduce them to Crossfire (no rulers, no measuring, no turns) later.
It is ironic though, that the younger players tend to play rules that are based on archaic mechanisms that most modern historical wargaming haven't used since the 70s or 80s, whereas we old grognards are decades ahead.
@@dalehurtt4586 Please let me know which ones and I'll check them out.
@@tonys4341 Only being 61 and playing wargames since the 70's I also like to try many rule sets, but don't I don't disparage other gamers either by age or game preferences. I will certainly check out Crossfire though.
@eccentricman. My apologies if I sounded disparaging. I did assume - obviously quite incorrectly! - that you were younger, based solely on your comments that the random activation of Bolt Action was ground breaking.
Now, as my basement was flooded a free weeks ago, and I lost a lot of my rules collection, and the rest is in storage while it gets rebuilt, I can only suggest rules that I can remember being older than BA, that also have random activation.
Off the top of my head, the Sword and the Flame leaps to mind. An old and beloved set of colonial rules that use exactly the type of BA activation, except that you use ordinary playing cards and not special dice. I Ain't Been Shot Mum also uses cards to randomize unit activation. Actually pretty much all the Toofatlardies rules use random activation, in varying forms and degrees, most of which were written long before BA.
Anyways, I wish to again emphasis I meant no disrespect towards yourself. On the contrary, if you are intrigued how the simple addition of random unit activation makes for a much more interesting game, I think you may like exploring the wide, wide variety that other historical rules writers have been exploring for quite some time.
There is a reason Bolt Action and Black Powder are two of the most widely played historical games...just sayin
mostly played by people who have no idea, just saying
Bill Burnside. A bit of a condescending and elitist statement. Just sayin....
Just because you may be at the more ‘simulationist’ end of the wargaming spectrum, doesn’t mean you’re better than all the others (the majority) who are at the more ‘fun game’ end of the wargaming spectrum. I’ve been wargaming for about 35 years now, from Firefly and Challenger and I love Bolt Action.
Very true. They are both beautifully presented, heavily marketed, and backed by a large, well-run company that makes it easy to get started in the hobby. And as games, they are fun. "Fun" is not a metric we specifically cover in our reviews, but obviously there's much to be said for that.
the little wars review was pretty balanced but I don't understand all the hate for Bolt Action either
@@sams3046 It's not our favorite game around here, but the strong feelings of hate toward Bolt Action among some comments don't make sense to me. It does some things very well.
Bolt Action was my first step into historicals. Given that this game scores fairly low, could you guys recommend some other 28mm WW2 games that you'd rate a little higher? I'd like to get deeper into WW2 table top.
Chain of Command is by far the best 28mm WW2 skirmish game on the market.
Bolt Action is the first step MANY players take into historicals, so nothing wrong with that. It's an excellent gateway. If you're looking for a little more historical flavor and tactical realism in your games, we've also reviewed (and recommended) Chain of Command, Disposable Heroes, and Combat Patrol. Each of those three have slightly different strengths and weaknesses, but they are all games we play and enjoy here.
@@StormofSteelWargaming And you can use your Bolt Action kit, as is, for Chain of Command!
The best game is one where you can find players. ;)
In my country, hardly anyone has heard of the Chain of Command ...
@@MarekKrassus53 Very VERY well said. Finding people to play is top priority!
As my WW2 game of choice, I was really interested when you guys said that you were going to do a rules review of Bolt Action. I wish more channels would format rules reviews like this! Anyhoo, you pretty much picked out the strengths and weaknesses that I have identified having played the game. My biggest gripe is, as was alluded to, the shooting element. I don't think light/medium/heavy machine guns perform how they are mean to operate insofar that pin allocation is negligible, their overall effect is minimal and points wise, often simply not worth taking. While the pin mechanic works to represent units under fire, I just think the shooting could be ramped up a little. Saying that, a really good balanced and thoughtful review. Cheers! :)
Yeah, my main problem with Bolt Action is how while it gets a lot of the 'ideas' of WW2 combat right, with the pinning and such, machine guns are for some reason just "better rifles". A machine gun's role was to suppress, not to just be a "bigger rifle". It's so odd to me that they include the pinning mechanics but don't have machine guns affect them. Then, of course, tanks with LOADS of machine guns (looking at the Stuart) become amazing unstoppable death machines because they are basically rolling boxes of accurate 20 rifle's fire.
A lot of things in BA are 'approximately' good, but all the uncanny valley wrongness added up makes it fail flavor-wise as a whole. The rules are like a slightly more interesting 40k, but it's just that: 1940k. The stuff that was put in to make it more WW2 just means you still get disjointed kampfgruppe where you are playing the right period, just using the wrong pieces.
An interesting review. Although I am far more positive about this game myself, I do think you make some interesting observations.
Any game review is highly subjective - even when we try to organize them by 5 separate categories. BA may not be my favorite WW2 ruleset but I can see how others can and should rate it higher. I do think it it a great introductory game and suspect I've got a fair number of BA games in my future. WW2 is consistently the most popular historical period in the "Great Wargamer Surveys" so having an effective entry level set of rules, such as BA, is very important to the hobby if we want it to grow.
Great review! I think you hit the nail on the head with describing the game as "40k in olive drab". I do find Bolt Action fun to play on occasion and it is a great "gateway game" to get Sci-fi and fantasy players into the historical hobby, but the roll buckets of dice, then roll a slightly smaller bucket of dice aspect gets old fast.
I think that if there's any fault the game has, it's that it does "buckets of dice" a la 40k, but without the level of complexity and specificity that modern 40k has sometimes. For instance, where BA has light, medium, and heavy AT guns, 40k would probably give each tank a specific, slightly different gun
@@rileyosteen6470 I consider that an advantage in favor of Bolt Action. Weapon profiles in 40k don't always make a lot of sense, some are useless while others are overpowered, it leads to min-maxing lists and wastes time in the game.
@@HeadHunterSix You say that like min-maxing isn't a huge problem in any sort of organized play for BA as it sits.
@@rileyosteen6470 No, I say it like someone who doesn't care about competitive play - because anyone who does, needs to "git gud" and learn how to play the game as it is.
That aside, it should be easy to see that standardized profiles for weapons and infantry make for a more level playing field than it would be if each unit or weapon had its own stat line.
@@HeadHunterSix That doesn't track. Why would standardized profiles translate to a more balanced playing field? I can see the argument from a simplicity level- less stat lines to keep track of, but if we're ignoring the competitive scene, why even talk about min-maxing? If you're worried your friend is gonna choose a certain vehicle because it has a slightly better gun but worse armor in a casual play-environment, that sounds more like a personal issue.
Would love to see you review Pulp Alley after a dozen games or so.
At approx 5:50 they talk about tanks and such and the “point” system. Meaning you pick your units under the each “unit cost so many points” pretext.... They make this sound bad. Do like we do, don’t use points, pick the units you want and battle. Maybe limit it to the scene your fighting or a specific number of units per side. I. E. Choose 6 units each, whatever you want them to be. Until they come onto the table, neither player knows what’s coming...we also have a better rule for, “hidden units.” All rule game sets of rules, are adjustable.
Games that use the random draw activation are better served with a 'reshuffle' dice (or two) where it /they are drawn the sequence is over and all dice go back in the bag.
It stops players making unreasonable moves when they _know_ that they have the remaining 3 (or whatever) actions left without interruption. Re-starting the turn / sequence also mixes things up and allows a different risk / reward profile for bold tactical choices, which is sorta fun in a skirmish game.
We do that in our large group games. We put two neutral dice in the bag. When the second is drawn the turn ends. Since you never know when the turn will end, leaders become more important as they can use the "follow me" action.
Admittedly this is one which I've got sat on the shelf waiting to be played, as it's pretty popular with my local club. Out of curiosity do you have any alternative recommendations which may offer a more historically flavourful experience?
I find this to be a great game to play with kids and people who are not as much into historical miniature games, to get them into historical gaming. The support for the game is also quite good overall which is wonderful as I have boxes of games that no longer have any support and no one knows how to play anymore. Overall I find that I play this fairly often.
40k in olive drab? Pithy but I think a little harsh and frankly at least as accurate a description of fow (which received a much more positive review) as BA. Still a lot I agree with. I think perhaps BA has stronger competition than fow which makes it look worse than it really is.
Bolt Action is early 90s Games Workshop by way of WW2 films. That's what you get when you play this game. It's just fun.
I like Battleground published by Easy Eight for WW2 skirmish play. Could you do a review of this? Would like your opinions of the rule set. Thanks.
Guys I really enjoyed this review. Yes Bolt Action is a gateway for me and it has roused my interest in historical gaming. If I am enjoying this I might venture to some of those other games. Perhaps that viking game I've seen on TH-cam?
Bolt Action for me is a great game. The fact that you never know whose dice is going to be pulled adds to the excitement. It is a fairly easy game to play. The fact that there are not a lot of statistics to learn is a bonus in my book. I recognise that it might not be the most historically accurate game but then it is war and I don’t really want to replicate it too accurately on the tabletop. It is an easy game to pick up and I have introduced several friends into tabletop gaming through the medium of Bolt Action. It is great that there are other World War Two rulesets too that can cater for differing styles of play and what people want out of an evenings fun playing with toy soldiers around a table.
Good review. I agree its 40k with a WW2 skin and nothing wrong with that if that is what you are looking for. Good for tourneys with its emphasis on list building. I never could get on board with the super short weapon ranges. For 28mm WW2 I prefer Chain of Command but that is not as pick up game friendly but great for campaigns. Would like to check out some other systems when I can as well, though I think I'd like to go to 15mm.
It has a lot of advantages over 40k - there are some good videos that go into depth on exactly why. If for no other reason, they don't make all of your books (and many of your units) obsolete or irrelevant every two years. And you don't have to buy proprietary miniatures to play.
I think its fair to give this the rating you have from a historical context. Having a background of working for GW, whose design principles Warlord use which was always "you have two guys armed with a spear, one had a bronze tip one has an iron tip who should have the advantage? Who cares! You have two raging warriors going at each other who cares whats on the end of the spear!". They never embraced the minutiae that FoW have become mired in with their army lists for example.
I like the cinematic feel to the game and the huge breakaway from the popular UGOIGO format, but every army does feel very much the same.
Good review. Sounds like rules are cookie cutter like Black Powder and Flames of War. Apparently Battlegroup can be played as skirmish and in 28mm. Have not tried this out yet but this is what I hear. Cheers!
Six sided dice manufacturers love BA and Warhammer!
I have a love-hate relationship with Bolt Action. But I keep coming back to it because it's easy for pick up games and it allows you to bring all your toys to the table.
Another great rules review...even if I'm not a fan of BA. Not my cup of tea for many reasons. You guys did a fair review of how its a gateway from fantasy to semi-historical and a fun point-tournament game play. That's awesome for those new players. I'm a bit more into my WWII gaming than what this system offers. As you mentioned my biggest complaint is the constant searching through the rule booklet for something. Yes, I've played this about three-four times...we, the group spent more time looking up stuff than having "fun" playing. A lot of rules can be interpret differently...too many issues there. Curious on what Kieth had to say, since he did a review of Chain of Command and wrote his own set. Thanks again for the review.
You guys definitely touched on some good points for what could be improved but I feel like there is a lot of mechanics in the game that weren’t given any attention in this review. Yes, I agree that shooting can sometimes be ineffective when a lot of veterans are in play but most games have a balance between different levels of experience in troops and that really makes a huge difference compared to if all of the units on the table are vets. Having vets cost more points really makes you pick and choose who you want to have more experience and for what reasons. You might want to have your tank be a vet for gyro stabilizers, or a small team so they can dig in and do some damage before they get shot at by a full squad with machine guns and assault rifles. If you field an entire army of vets your going to have a much smaller force and this can put you at a sever disadvantage and limit your options in a fight. Also, this was my first tabletop that got me into the hobby and I found that it was fairly easy to pick this game up and play right of the jump having never played a tabletop before, So I think that you guys may have been a bit harsh when it comes to playability. There is a lot of small rules and modifiers in the game that once you learn the basics, you can apply to your army and use to your advantage to add a bit more “spice” to your games. The game is slightly more vanilla and basic than other tabletops but there’s enough to make each game interesting and different which in my opinion makes it very replay-able. There is some great scenarios out there to add objective based gameplay and the rules aren’t incredibly complicated so after watching one game someone who has never touched BA could likely jump in and play the game. All in all, I think bolt action is a great tabletop game to get into if your entirely new to the hobby or if your transitioning from 40k. It’s order dice mechanic is great and can really make for interesting matches, and there is a lot of options for different army builds to keep the game throwing new challenges at you every time.
CoC and Battlegroup are my choices
Agree with most points but Alexander , Napoleon , Patton would all say luck 🍀 is an important factor of war. Just look at midway
Our group has been playing Bolt Action, in 15mm, for about 5 years now. The guys really like it. The random activation system is exciting, but can really decide the game if the die pull becomes lopsided, and I do agree that the vehicle rules are somewhat generic. All in all, I believe Bolt Action to be a fun, fast and playable game system for WW2 small unit combat.
I think just doubling the range of all weapons makes a difference. Units will take more fire, and therefore more pins and casualties, advancing on a target. This reduces the effectiveness of the super tough mob overwhelms in assault. Extending the ranges makes machine guns and mortars more effective and more valuable.
That's the way I like to play too, realistic ranges, a tabletop is what about 250 to 300 meters in scale, I could suppress an enemy at 700 meters with a good gunner on a Medium MG
You need to consider a “fun factor” section to your reviews, maybe just on the website. These are games after all, and a section on how enjoyable the game is to some players might help the review be more balanced. Just watching this video might scare some players away from a game they might have enjoyed with friends. I do really enjoy this channel though, keep up the great work!
The "fun" factor is definitely one others have mentioned before. And we agree. Of course, we ONLY review games on the channel that we actually like. So they would all get a thumbs up for fun.
Everyone at my club went mad on bolt action but after a few games moved on .....it's not a popular set at the club anymore. Agree with everything said and then some....
Just wondering do they do civil war ones
Glad you weren't too snobbish about Bolt Action. It seems to attract a fair few naysayers but it still has a lot of good aspects, such as the dice draw mechanism, it is excellent. We still play it occasionally but we play Crossfire at our club mostly. Crossfire is faster playing, easier to teach, has less modifiers & charts, and is more intuitive, even for newcomers. Crossfire rewards tactical play rather than rule-book/codex gamesmanship. I'm still waiting for your thoughts or a review.....
fair review, although I would call this a ww2 skirmish-style game, not epic size. It does what it does fairly well.
With a review like this I think it would be fair to tell what you think is better in the same size and scale.
Chain of Command and Disposable Heroes-both better platoon level games. But that’s just a matter of opinion! Plenty of folks love Bolt Action!
@@LittleWarsTV We tried Chain of Command but we hated it. It has some neat ideas, but on the whole very clunky, restrictive (can't play with my models which I hate), zillions of tables and separate dice rolls for this and that. Couldn't finish a game in an evening.
I'm NOT a fan of Bolt Action either, but at least the game kinda works. Plus it's easy to teach to new players.
Frankly, to me they are both examples of 80's game design, which I remember just not fondly...
I'll check out Disposable Heroes.
Miles always seems so fair. Seems the perfect reviewer!
Oh boy...this is really going to inflate his ego....
@@LittleWarsTV to Zepplin-like proportions!
BA got me into historical wargaming and plunged me deep into the wargaming maw. But since you guys really don’t care for it. What ww2 ruleset would you rather use for the same 28mm platoon based game?
They reviewed Chain of Command last year and it rated very highly.
@@thattassiewargamer How do you enjoy CoC and BA?
Jarl Greedo, I prefer Chain of Command over Bolt Action as I like the story that often unfolds due to uncertainty when units simply don’t activate.
That Tassie Wargamer I can understand that, I’m gonna give it a go.
Do you have a recommendation for a more realistic 28mm rules set?
If you're looking for a more historical bent, Combat Patrol and Disposable Heroes are probably the most faithful to history. But Chain of Command is a nice middle ground, though. Definitely a popular choice to check out!
I just saw your review on Flames Of War and understand a little bit more the low score that you give to Bolt Action. Maybe you are looking at this game whit your FOW player eyes...
You see, I already try FOW and did not really like it, just like is modern brother Team Yankee. Those two games scale really don't make shine the soldier on the field. When I tried Bolt Action, I really fell for the pinned mechanic, the scale (28mm), the command dice and the fact that you never know wich side will play next. I really enjoy your video on St-Nazaire even if it's not really representative of a real game of BA. I understand that some game like Chain of Command are more accurate but each person that never try this kind of game before, really enjoy BA when I made demo game. I think the game is easy to understand at the base for a new player. Just put more stuff time to time for helping the learning curve. I'm doing a four part demo. First, soldier and soft-skins vehicle. Second I introduce tank and anti-tank artillery. Third game, medium artillery. And the last game is a cross over with all that stuff.
I go with you for the fact that it's not always easy to find what you are looking for in the rulebook.
So maybe it's more the kind of game that you really love or really hate because it is a little bit different in front of other game of that kind.
P.S. : Is there a good reason why Keith could not talk about BA?
Just a club joke about how I strongly I dislike Bolt Action.
Even though I feel that this channel spends too much time in the WWII period; I doff my hat to you guys for reviewing the two most popular rulebooks of the WWII period. Bolt Action, and Flames of War. What about a SYW battle, and you guys review Die Kriegskunst?!
We heard that we weren't reviewing enough rules that people had heard of before! Admittedly, we do play a lot of niche games in this club...but we also play the more well-known sets, too! I haven't heard of Die Kriegskunst and it's not been run in the club yet, but 75% of our content here is NOT WW2-related and we'd happily increase that percentage.
There's also Osprey's Honours of War for the SYW - these rules quite liked by one of the Die Kriegskunst authors by the way.
I would highly recommend Battlegroup from Plastic Soldier Company as an alternative to Bolt Action
Battlegroup has nothing to do with Bolt Action. Rather, this game is closer to the Flames of War system.
@@MarekKrassus53 Has nothing to do with Bolt Action? Thats a strange statement. It's a WWII miniatures game that can be played on the same scale and therefore can be an alternative.
@@izrador2264 Bolt Action is a Skirmish game. Dozens of figures on the table, sometimes a tank / cannon. Small Battles.
Battlegroup is a larger scale. Several infantry platoons, many tanks ... Lots of figurines, bigger battles.
Bolt action focuses on infantry fighting. Battlegroup is primarily tank clashes.
@@MarekKrassus53 That's incorrect. Battlegroup per the rules can be played from the squad level up to battalion. It's also not a primarily tank game. Many people play it at many scales with a large portion playing it at 28mm
Never played Bolt Action but was wondering if tactics matter or are games decided by die rolling?
The meta game tactics matter more than the application of historical tactics.
We play BA a lot. Just not historical enough for me to like. But it's there so we use it.
I've only played the first edition but you guys are dead right about the 'gateway game' vibe. At first glance, the core mechanics feel like a streamlined 40K (I'm thinking 4th ED) minus the armor saves. Understandable considering the designers used to work for GW. In some ways it somehow felt more brutal than 40K, especially close combat. That being said, it was different enough to give my mostly 40K/AOS playing friends pause for thought.
I’m an historian and a gamer I’m liking the simplicity and affordable price tag 🏷 a casual game with limited time. GW is pricing me out and I’m not pore I just justify £90 for 19 models ! Sad 😢 anymore cost of living
Scores are soooo stupid. Would you buy and play it again, after you bought and played it, if you had the chance to revisit your decisions? Was and is it fun to play? What would you suggest instead? Is there a viable alternative? I only know FoW and Bolt Action. What game has more level of detail without needing hours and hours of preperation and gameplay?
Bolt Action is such a mainstay that I figured it would rate higher. Would you say its a better convention game than it is a club or home game?
Absolutely a GREAT convention game. Bolt Action is not something we like playing in the club that much, but it's very good for a convention setting because (a) lots of people may already know the game; and (b) the mechanics are easy for new players to grasp. Pulling the activation dice makes it clear in a convention setting who is going when and what orders they are issuing.
It is great for a home/club game too as it can be quick to set up and play a game in about three hours or less. Of course, historical scenarios would take longer to set up and work out special rules or objectives but the game is flexible to handle it.
I came from the game after playing Flames of War for about five years and the first thing I noticed and liked about the game was that I didn't see a very clear case of one particular force being completely dominant over all others. I've seen far more draws or very narrow margin wins than lopsided wins and in two years of playing, I've only seen two outright massacres but both were due to some really bad luck and extreme risk taking that didn't pay off that left troops in the middle of a crossfire. This was quite a change from seeing Flames of War "alpha strike" forces roll over opposition within a couple of turns.
One other point I make is that generally I have found that players are more inclined to run "reasonable" lists and discourage players from taking obnoxious lists (e.g. no one is showing up at the local game store with an engineer company loaded with multiple flamethrowers supported by Crocodile flame tanks). Perhaps it is just a local thing although I doubt it because videos I've seen from players across the world with similar outlooks. Miles mentions the Japanese spear horde being overly effective but I haven't seen players in my area running mobs of these guys.
My problem with this game (aside the ground scale that I think is easily corrected by playing with 10mm miniatures) was that, at least in version one, suppression was basically useless. You couldn't use the main WWII infantry tactic of suppressing and assaulting since the suppression was removed before the assault phase. It just killed my interest for the game straight away.
I think you can do WWII in 28mm on a 4x6 if you stick to a squad per side or at most just the forward elements of a platoon (2 squads for attacker and 1 for defender) and leave off the support weapons. With that said, I agree things look better for platoon and company in 15mm on a bigger table.
I have had success with suppression using German infantry. I've even broken an enemy squad through the accumulation of pins. I've seen other players using Soviet, US, and Late War Free French forces successfully use suppression. Tactics and terrain play a big part in being able to pull it off. Having an HE support weapon also really helps.
I feel that the biggest issue with Bolt Action is the lack of a clear and concise index. Because at various times you will find various rules that seem to contradict themselves. Far too many times in a game it would bog down in rules disputes which would lead to on line searches for clarification. Most games would then be resolved with one player feeling hard done by as the rules decisions that had to be agreed were a compromise and not plannerd for or expected. In short - these rules are shiny, pretty and underwhelming.
try battlegroup please!
Who provided the 7th SFG order "bag"? :D
I don't know. It just showed up at the club one day 😄
It's interesting that the club seems to enjoy playing it but the consensus is "Not Recommended". Is it just easy?
I think the best way to put it is this--we have fun playing almost every game (including this one), but we do not play it regularly in the club. Or really ever. There are just too many other WW2 skirmish games we enjoy more.
It's great to see a slightly disguised Robert Downey Junior interested in wargaming.
Enjoyed the review, pretty much agree with everything you guys mentioned. Its a fun game, so long as you dont take it too seriously. Keep up the good work, and id love to see a review of battlegroup in the future.
Stig.
God knows what rules systems these guys actually like but I'm scared to ask
For World War 2 skirmish? Chain of Command and Disposable Heroes. For company and up-Crossfire and Fireball Forward!
@@LittleWarsTV Yeah I figured. I have even tried I Aint Been Shot Mum. I have not tried Fireball Forward I will have to look into that one. I like my rules pretty dense and sadly miniature gaming doesnt capture that too much
This is a beer and pretzels ww2 skirmish game. It is a great intro to Historical gaming . Lighten up ! If you haven't noticed Historical gaming has suffered in the last 20 year we need new blood ! This doest that.
"Scoot the f*** over right now" hahahahaha
You don't have to like the game (I don't) to see why people play it so often. Jumping from Infinity or W40k to historicals leaves many people disoriented and Priestley-Warlord combo helps them get their bearing with familiar mechanics (and business model to some extent). With the current state of FoW, they hardly can choose. Hope that many initiatives like your channel will show them it's just a border checkpoint to a world of better, IP-free wargaming of real conflicts.
How complete is the 28mm (roughly 1:56th) scale? Is that just in relation to the minis, or does the distance scale adhere to 28mm/1:56th, too? In other words, speaking in scale, a 40k Space Marine can run faster than his Bolter shell can travel. In this game, do the gun's ranges accurately match - or at least compliment - the movement scale of the minis?
In some games, using 20mm/1:72 minis fit the shooting ranges more realistically.
Chain of Command for me for this scale and period.
I prefer chain of command at a scale that closer matches the groundscale.
This is ideally 15 mm but I compromise and use 20mm (1/72).
Given the relatively realistic ranges and mechanisms involved, I like to reduce the scale distortion, which affects issues like line of sight.
For example, a tank in oversized 28mm ends up having a footprint that is about 30 x 20m, thus presenting far more visual obstruction/cover than in real life.
The less detailed figures and more fiddly painting is a price I am willing to pay for a more realistic and intuitive game.
Harsh but fair....
I personally loved BA as my way back into the hobby, just as you said. But the more I saw of Chain of Command, the more intrigued I became. Once I switched, I began to think, and still do, of BA being generic and bland, with a WWII skin.
Thanks for the review, even though its the first I more disagree than agree. Has anyone considered that wargaming could be changing?
Could be changing? It absolutely IS changing. This is a topic we intend to explore in the near future.
@@LittleWarsTV Good to know you'll discuss it.
Poor Keith!
Ha! I'm used to it by now 😄
I played it once in version 1 , I wasn't impressed I actually prefer 40k.
For ww2 I prefer crossfire with my Homebrew rules added on, it's a simple set of rules but feels very ww2 for infantry combat.
I bought the 1st edition years ago when getting into WW2 gaming. After reading through a few portions of the book I thought, "nah." Sold it on eBay.
Despite lots of pretty pictures it just didn't saw "WW2" to me.
This was my issue although it never really took off in my area. It has IMHO the same problem as FOW: It tries to be the 40k version of WW2 when that's usually the polar opposite of how a historical wargame should work. I mean, if I wanted to play Warhammer I'd just play Warhammer. I wanted to get into historical gaming precisely because it DIDN'T have the problems Warhammer had and attracted "those" Kinds of players. Instead, these games try to push listbuilding and anti-historical competitive gaming to appeal to the disgruntled GW crowd.
I played version 1 a couple times. Then I bought a Nebelwerfer and used it once. We never played the game again after that.
*Laughs in body armor fanatics*
Rules of engagement by great escape games is a far better and more historicaly accurate ww2 game with prototypical army lists
Quite a harsh review I thought guys.Its not a simulation its a fast and light wargame.
The dice draw system is the bee's knees. No game is perfect but it works. Plenty of systems out there, so you *itches pack up yer cryin' towels and take the next bus...P.S. 3rd edition coming some day soon...
there's nothing particularly wrong with the mechanics that I can put my finger on, but the army building is appallingly open ended. Never could get behind bolt action. Larger games also tend to bog down faster than a sherman in a swamp too.
I love Bolt Action.
Last year I was at convention passing through the Bolt Action room. I came across a table where Polish Lancers from ‘39 were being thrown against the ‘44 101st Airborne in a “point balanced” game - just for fun. I threw up in my mouth a little. Never, ever will I play a game system that permits such abomination.
but its the best game ever :(
Wordy AND verbose? HAHA!
Like what we did there?
I wanted to love this game but I don’t. The dice thing is cheesy. I don’t like how there’s no “tank fear”. Infantry can just run up and attack tanks like it’s nothing. Don’t like the “pinning”. The PEN thing confuses me. The penalties against open topped vehicles is ridiculous.
I disagree with this review. It was designed to be a beer and pretzels game. I think it does that well. I have purchased many rules based on your reviews.
bolt action is ww2 warhammer 40k.
the more i played bolt action the less i liked it. I just dont think 28mm is a good scale for WW2 unless youve gotr a football field to play on
Preferred scales is a separate issue, but this topic is also a major discussion point here in our club. Though I own a large 28mm collection, I'm increasingly in the camp of preferring smaller scales to give the appearance of better ground scale in platoon to company actions. But across the hobby, 28mm remains by far the most popular scale.
@@LittleWarsTV I think 28mm is far better for collecting but anything past skirmish I think the logistics of the game create real problems. Ive tried BA in 15mm and 6mm but the rules are so warped for 28mm that you basically have to completely rewrite the rules to make it work.
40k for people to pretend they are playing a wwii war game
the nerd shack I actually got into wargaming because of bolt action. I played a few times after buying all the books and realized I didn’t like wargaming and I wasn’t sure why? I almost gave up the hobby before I got going. :(
These are the only reviews that haven’t liked this game.
Bolt Action is great for new players. Our club here is a bit unusual because we’ve all been gaming for 20+ years. Bolt Action wasn’t written for that audience. And that’s ok!
69 views, nice.
The miniature painting is mediocre.
Bolt Action sucks. Everything coming out Warlords is garbage. Play Chain of Command for a much better game. Nice vid btw! :D