Bolt Action Vs Flames of War (compare and contrast review)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ค. 2024
- In this video we talk about the 2 biggest World War 2 minis games on the market today, Bolt Action by Warlord games and Flames of War by Battlefront press. discussing the pros and cons of both.
- ตลก
As a former FOW player, I found BA more to my liking, so now I play BA in 15mm👍
I'm thinking of doing the same, did you magnetise the troops?
@@Tipsythomas No, I had hot glued them to bases so I just removed them and glued them to pennies.
I run a military history in miniature club with my roommates at my apartment building and I gotta say, flames of war personally has been such a breeze to play and teach to others. I’ve always found the activation system of bolt action a bit clunky and a little over complicated. With FoW I’ve found that I can ease people into it my introducing rules over time (learning how to move, learning how to shoot, morale, etc.)
The point towards the end rings so true: with WW2 you can buy the scale you like and just change rules sets when you get tired of a specific one.
Love the character! With my group we have been playing Bolt Action for a while and I am glad you compared these two because I personally prefer to play at 15 mm.
15mm feels better on the 4x6 table - it feels like you're doing something. Bolt Action always feels like a meeting engagement. Truth be told, realism in both is far below my taste, and I can't find any rules set that feels realistic to World War 2 the way my favorite wargame, Advanced Squad Leader, plays.
Bolt Action 3rd Edition has just recently been announced. I'm really tempted to dive into Bolt Action after watching your video comparison and your discussion of the initiative system.
Thanks for the heads up
Bolt Action - Platoon game
Flames of War - Company Game
If you already have been playing and collecting Games Workshop scale games, go with Bolt Action as all of your terrain will work (logic the sci fi aspect as you need)
I do not believe, though I am unsure, that this scale (meaning platoon vs company, not 15mmm vs 28mm) will draw you so much into the history of the war. Compared to fielding a whole company of tanks or infantry.
Flames of War is more historical focused (Hold on with the flaming). Meaning you can build around historically accurate units of all sorts. Tank heavy, Armored infantry, even naval support. Yes, they have gotten into the 'MidWar Monster' as an added enticement. But if this is what draws people into a game, what's the harm?
Ok yeah you have a couple of US M6 heavies ... against my tiger tanks or Panthers? You've drawn people into the history that will inevitably be discussed.
Further ...
Flames of War - Early War (not currently available on website) Mid war, Late War, Vietnam, Mideastern wars of the 1960s and 70s, 1980's What if War(Team Yankee).
Though Flames of War is 'tank heavy', Mechanized infantry is something you can make work. Recon Units, Air Mobile, and hoard armies are all possible. As are foot slogging infantry companies which are historically based.
Also, depending on the era you choose, Planes, Trains, and helicopters.
I have played Bolt Action, though I believe it was V1 and not many times, I do pay attention to it to a limited extent as far as what is available. The collection is not as broad, yet. And I admittedly like to have a platoon of tanks rather than 1 or two.
I really enjoy both game systems and have had an absolute riot using FoW scale pieces to play matches of BoltAction. The longer ranges ( same rules as written, just 15mm instead of 28mm pieces) feel a lot better and make the combat area feel larger w/out needing a 10x10 table.
Ditto. I have German and Soviet infantry platoons based individually in 15mm, with IFV and Tank support that we game with using Bolt Action style rules. Works really well on a 4x3 foot table. Handy as we live on a boat.
Flames of War: Parking Lot Simulator
Bolt Action: 40k but with only Imperial Guard armies
You have it more or less right with Bolt Action. I haven't played FoW since 1st edition
@@danepatterson8107 4th sucks compared to earlier editions is what ive heard from vets of the game
@@cloaker2829 Nothing wrong with it other than the standardized army list removes a lot of the niche somewhat advantageous formations that were present. IE Anytime you remove such options the old guard will baulk at it. I've played since 2nd edition and I don't really find anything problematic with 4th edition.
Flames of War only looks like a parking lot simulator when nobody takes artillery.
team yankee is the real parking lot sim
It’s like comparing apple to oranges. Bolt action is Platoon level, FoW is company / battalion level. Both are interesting games but are not remotely close to realistic simulations of WW2 Platoon / Battalion level combat. Good beer and pretzel but that’s about it.
Another good thing with Historical’s: you can use your minis no matter how they’re based in many cases. As long as both sides are based the same.
Thanks for the breakdown. I ended up getting both games. Island Assault for BA and Hit the Beach for Flames of War. Excited to get started in this new hobby.
As you mentioned it is a lot of personal prefernces. I know a lot of GW players entered WW2 with Bolt Action. It is mostly the scale they are familar to. More details and so. The activation system is kind of nice, but in the end it is a skirmish game.
Compared to FoW which aims for company level action with combined arms approach if you want. Yes you can play tank heavy if you want but most of the time a well played balanced force has a better standing vs a one sided force in my years of experience. You got more options here. That is one thing I personaly like more about FoW. You can haven Infantry, Tanks, Artillery, AT-Guns and even Groundattack aircrafts, while in skirmish game you have the posibility of a lot of cool toys but in the end your army has few of them.
What I've heard about the current edition of FoW is that it's vehicle (tank) dominated, and that the survivability of infantry has been nerfed so that they're no longer better at holding objectives. I don't know if this is true or not, but I've heard only negatives about how the current edition treats the notion of "combined arms" or "infantry dominant" armies. WW2 should be about infantry combat, to me.
@@danepatterson8107 Yes it is trur that current FoW is very tank heavy. But that doesn´t mean that Infantry don´t stand a chance vs tanks.
One reason you "see" so many tanks is the current marketing. Nearly all army deals are mainly tank forces with some add on guns and/or Infantry. As a longterm player I dislike that but I can see the point that tanks attract new players more then PBI.
But tank armies suffer from some major deficits. First their higher costs limits their number making your army more fragile to morale failures. Also it limits your access to tools that work well vs dug-in infantry.
An infantry army in FoW is seldom only made of just foot soldiers. Due to their lower costs and acces to support weapons in their own formation, they are more stable to morale failure. And since they save points they got access to better support options. So a well played infatry army should always stand a chance vs tanks.
One big problem I see is that new players enter FoW with tank armies and if they then play in a closed enviroment with a tank heavy meta they will miss a part of the game. As tank armies are not fitted for defensive missions, players tend to play mostly symertical missions. Those mission are good but in the end that could lead to a one sided view on the game.
At least from my experience you see a lot of expierenced players ( also on torunaments) playing infantry armies as they are more flexibel in options.
Totally agree the two systems arn`t really comparable as they are set at different levels of play
love the intro boss
I'm playing FoW with Bolt Action activation dice, and adding Overwatch and Opportunity Fire to make it more realistic. I hate the way units in FoW's IGYG system can race from cover to cover or even to flank other units without Opportunity Fire. I also see no reason to have artillery on the board unless you want it to shoot direct fire. Both of these systems are set up for tournament play. Neither has time or range/distance scales. FoW, without changes, feels like 40K in WWII. Tanks in Bolt Action are expensive to buy and in points and are too generalized. I find tank battles with 15mm or even 6mm scale models work better for me. I don't care about Tournament play, I'm just trying to play a game that feels realistic for WWII.
Please can you tell me more about your gameplay? I love realistic games, I already play FOW but I’d like to test something more realistic!
@@tacfamily14 This is what I'm trying out now: Doing the FoW Starting Step at the beginning of the turn for both players. Both players then mark units that will be in Overwatch, not moving with the option to fire at any time during the turn (Opportunity Fire). Using Bolt Action Dice for the rest of the units and randomly drawing dice for Activation. For each dice, like BA, the player selects a unit to fire, move and hold fire until later that turn (Opportunity Fire), move and fire or fire and move (using FoW moving fire rules). Opportunity Fire can be used at any time an enemy unit appears in your line of sight (LOS) including during their movement of that unit. Once a unit fires, mark it as fired with smoke or Bolt Action die. I'm also thinking about tracking shots fired so a unit could fire more than once during a turn up to its ROF.
I'm using Hidden Units instead of FoW's "Ambush" rule. This is easier if you have a GM or just write the unit's location down on a map or by grid, e.g. so many inches up and so many from right map edge in woods, etc. Hidden Units aren't revealed until they move, fire, or are spotted (FoW Ambush rules imply 4" from enemy units).
I'm also thinking of giving Veteran crews +1 ROF, and -1 to the Hit Number to show their real skill in combat. I think given the approximate scale of 1"= 50 yards, based on typical German 88's having an effective range of 2000 yds and an FoW range of 40", that the FoW ROF is far too slow given a tank that is moving at Tactical speed of 10" has moved 500 yds. Historically moving tanks when spotting a target would do a "short halt" to fire and then continue moving. I also read that a M1Abrams crew, without an autoloader, can fire up to 10 rounds per minute for a short time. I would think trained and veteran crews in WWII tanks could fire more than once during/after moving.
Lastly, I'm not trying to make it harder to play, although turns may take more time, both players will be involved with moving and shooting during the entire turn. Real warfare is not IGYG, movement and shooting happens continuously. Frequently the first to shoot is the one that wins. The BA Activation Dice with Overwatch/Opportunity Fire lets that happen and the enemy can't race around the battlefield without risk. I have some other ideas and I'm interested in other opinions to make a more realistic game without bogging the game down. Thanks for your interest.
@@davidschneider5462 thank you very much for your answer! Yes that’s the problem with IGYG system! When it’s your turn you are not afraid of anything and nothing can happen cuz it’s your turn... I’ll try your rules asap. I play FOW with battlefront (15mm) and also with GHQ (6mm) that’s why I’m trying to find an other way to play.
No such thing as realistic gameplay. There are some systems that are more involved but you take 6+ hours to play 1 scenario and nobody gets any force choices and it's very historical.
@@slimjim7411 If you read what I wrote I said more realistic. If you like the current rules the way they are then fine continue to play that way, just don't bother trying to believe your are playing anything that resembles WWII. You are playing 40K with WWII tanks!
First time watching your videos, and this is awesome! Very informative, you’ve got a good vibe and a good sense of humor that I found very enjoyable! I’ve been playing various GW games for many years and just bought my first army for bolt action so I’m just watching different videos about it. Thank you for your content, I’m gonna explore some more of your videos!!! PEACE ✌🏼
Glad you enjoy them man,😀
I play and enjoy both.
I'm planning to get started with my grandkids (8 yrs old). For that, I like the sound of FoW's simpler IGYG system, but I think BA's 28mm scale would be better. I've heard some people talking about playing BA in 15mm; how feasible would it be to play FoW in 28mm?
It is possible that is for sure, but I do think the initiative system for BA is pretty simple especially for younger players as they will enjoy pulling a die out of the bag and then just put it next to the unit they want to use
Best Music Intro Of Any Gamer Show On TH-cam
I used to be a big fan of all sorts of alternating activation systems (card draw, dice rolling, etc) but not I'm not so sure that they are worth the extra time they take to resolve the actions. Quick moving games like FoW might end up being more fun per hour.
I won't deny that Bolt Action's activation system can add a bit of bulk and is a place you can easily break the fun of the game (the main reason I won't try to do engagements higher than the 1000 point mark) I still think it is a lot of fun, and can really add something to the game.
If nothing else, BA plays quickly and easily, and it seems fair to both sides, with the activation system adding plenty of randomness/narrative flavor.
Island assault is the other B.A starter and it's damn good
I think it slightly edges the band of brothers box
Hey mate i big fan of both games they are both lot of fun. I play 3rd edition of flames and enjoy bolt action so many diffrent games and 3d print and resin print and buy trade for stuff off friends to get into the games.
Thanks for this very through! As for me I have more bolt action models then FoW but I have more models at 1/100 aka 15mm scale with WW3 team yankee, World of tanks Miniatures and plan top get more at that scale like Gunpla, 3D prints and Company of Heroes Board Game 2nd edtion... But man do I ever like to pick up a bolt action models when they are on sale/ I need free shipping and warlord games has been good to me adding an extra sprue just becuase they thought my pazner fuast guy needed help. Which I would like to collect 2 armies one day and acually play the game as it does look fun even if the randomness of the turns fill me with dread.
Bolt Action hands down because it was written by Rick Priestley the daddy. The greatest wargames ever Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40,000.
Nice comparison review. What is your opinion on BA vs Crossfire?
To be honest I have not played crossfire, I may need to give that one a go.
Bolt action in 15mm works as will Flames of war in 6mm.
I own both games there each great in there own way
Both are unique and different 1 is reinforced plt scale the other is reinforced company+
I play Team Yankee a bit on the side and considered FoW, but my TY faction (France) isn't exactly a WWII style army LOL
I loved Flames of War, but when they pulled a Games Workshop moving into 4th edition and instantly made all of the books I’d bought over the years obsolete and expected us to rebuy all of them…my interest never fully recovered.
They changed all of the force organizations and basically just hit the reset button.
That pushed me into Bolt Action which I love. I’ve still got my FoW Armies and I won’t get rid of them. I hope to rekindle my interest eventually, but it’s been years.
Command Decision played with 6mm/1-285/1-300th scale is the best gaming scale for big games
Never tried it, may have to put it on the roster.
I played both, last edition of FoW is somewhat lacking but okay, Chain of Command is great system to go pair on pair with Bolt Action but still i prefer Battlegroup system from Warwick Kinrade. While i consider both systems - BA and FoW good entry systems (and play some smaller games using FoW with my son) if you are seriously looking into WW2 try something else
what do you play? Battlegroup?
@@danepatterson8107 yes most times we play Battlegroup
You fool I combined both games flames of war figures with bolt action rules!
Been playing BA since version 1 and like the dice system a lot. Been enjoying FoW since early version 2 also but it has lost some appeal for me, mainly due to having to buy all the army books over every few years (standard GW BS) Both are good, but I enjoy infantry game and since Version 3 FoW has gone tank happy. Version 4 took it further with a new twist. Almost World of Tanks in miniature now to the point they are pushing in an old line of "never were" or one off tanks. Tanks like the TOG*, Tiger (p), Or Churchill Gun carrier. The "Midwar Monsters" line of experimental tanks has been around for years but was an Option. Now they are folding them into rule books where newer players will go straight to them because some are more powerful than historical stuff (American heavies, Italian Super Mediums, Ect). Others are just fun like the TOG* which a lot of WOT players like (yeah, me too).
Other FoW problem are they have been going to all plastic figures and have been cutting some units from the unit army books likely because they had not made molds for them yet. Cases in point are the Matilda's in Mid War Afrika books and the Standard Italian Infantry. They only use Elite Infantry formations for the Italians now likely because they do not have plastics for them yet and do not want to deal with 2 SKU's for every ATG, Mortar, and Heavy Machine gun because of crews.
My biggest hope is a company level Bolt action in 15mm where you can use your FoW minis and still keep the dice system. Restrict your tank options to 5 max and shorten ranges to give it more room to maneuver around before engaging. Both are still fun and have their pluses but there is some truth in people calling Bolt Action... Warhammer 1.94 K.
I am kinda curious as to what the new combined arms box will bring to the table
Are there any company sized war games out there?
@@Flowerz__ Well Flames of war is company sized with support in a 100 point game. It is 15mm though. Bolt action in 28mm is more of a platoon sized game.
FOW v3 was peak FOW unfortunately , TY is a 6mm game unless you like car parks but bolt action is worth it
I agree 100%. V3 was it’s peak. Then they Games Workshopped us.
@@rokassan"Games Workshopped"?
@@KT-dj4iy changing the rules and force organizations and making you buy all new books and making models useless or you need to buy even more.
I want to get into Flames of War but always was put off by the amount of tanks in vs infantry. Just seemed like a unhistorical imbalance. That, plus the tanks and vehicles all lined up next to each other makes games look kinda silly. I play BA in 1/72 scale and it works really well.
At the very least it nakes flames better suited to tank battles ober infantry ones, so urban fights in Stalingrad make better since in BA where flames is better suited to Rommel 's Afrika campaign
@@NerdRageAgainsttheMachine Yeah it definitely seems like it suits certain theaters much better than others. It also works better for other wars than WW2 like the Israeli-Arab Wars, Team Yankee, heck a Gulf War game would work pretty well with this system.
My view is that Flames of War is not far enough along the route from toys to realism. You can go really far and play Advanced Squad Leader, but IMHO that is too far as playability is low. As with another commentator I have picked Battlegroup from Plastic Soldier Company. You get to play from platoon to battalion but normally it is company level (squad when starting out). The scale is 15mm so you do not end up with tanks touching each other as they roll forward. It is alternating play, but there are lots of interruptions like ambush and other reactions. So far I am pleased with them and they are much more historically accurate and feel more authentic to me. But in the end just play whatever you and your friends enjoy, let's not start another war of religion here.
I play Arty Conliffe's Crossfire with individually based 28mm (Bolt Action) miniatures. Lots of terrain on a 7x4 board. Just brilliant.
0:54 Dude is speaking TRUTHS...lol
How do these game systems deal with the different time periods of World War II, if at all?
After all, the Wehrmacht of 1939 is very different from the Wehrmacht of 1945.
The game has list of what tanks, vehicles and weapons you can use for a specific campaign or time period. So if you are playing 1940 France , the Germans will have to use only small tanks like Mk2 and Mk3s. For 1944 France, the Germans have to use Mk4s, Panthers and Tiger1s etc.
As a long time gamer I loved the evolution description from serious historical simulation to “it’s just toys”. Best description of our past-time is “man-Barbie’s”.
Thanks for a great review. But Dude, for gawd's sake, comb your hair! Even better, get a trimmer, remove the guard completely, and shave it all off! 😎
Flames of war in 15mm makes for a better game.
I think they both have their strengths
Chain of Command
A very good system from what I have read, it's by no means as well known as BA or flames, but definitely a good game with some inventive ideas
A game where your armies teleport onto jump off points from the starship Enterprise.
@@pbeccas
Or BA where a tank rolls one die with HE round.
Or a rifle per scale can only shoot ~75 yards, and to wait until everybody gets to have a go.
I think that is why it is called a war GAME.
This is not to suggest I disagree and I think some combination of BA and CoC could be a better system.
@@thomaschase7097 The game is called Disposable Heroes.
@@pbeccas
If you say so.
looking at this review I wish we had cut directly to 4:28, a you go I go system is soooooooooo antiquated and isn't good for a realistic war game in my opinion. I'd rather play smaller scale games that feel more realistic than giant swingy nonsense
I get it, I have never understood the point of you go I go unless perhaps it is unit by unit, but the I do everything, then you do everything mentality has never worked for me. Even in Battletech they at least stay that if you move all and fire all, actions are simultaneously done so any affects happen after the last guy gets his shots in.
I am a model builder--not a wargamer. I started model building as a kid in the 60s with the old Airfix 1/76 scale, then graduated to the more realistic 1/72, then 1/48 and finally the most realistic 1/35 scale as an adult. I also have armor and toy soldiers (like Conte) at 1/32 scale, and finally, the ULTIMATE SOLDIER and 21st Century Toys--1/18 airplanes and soldiers! I do like the 1/56 Rubicon models but am hesitant to start collecting this "odd" scale. I HATE wargaming figures, like the 28 mm Bolt Action, etc., because they look so unrealistic, with their huge, pumpkin heads, hands and weapons. Why do they not try to make wargaming products more realistic, like the Rubicon 1/56 line? They will generate a whole lot more interest and money!
Mostly out of tradition. Most minis war games before were either 15mm ( roughly 1/100, like flames of war, ) or 25mm ( 1/72 ) but often sculptors have slowly added to the scale for their ease of sculpting/ modeling with most minis games sitting around 28mm to 32mm. There are a few games that talk about how to scale measurements to make other scales work from 6mm to 54mm. But as Warhammer as probably the most popular minis game sits in that range it is what wargaming customers are used to. Additionally larger models like 1/35 are more mass to store/transport which is an arguement against them I have heard from gamers before. RPGs such as D&D also embraced 28mm from their wargaming roots, so roleplayers also prefer this scale as they mesh well, (i.E. I can use my Warhammer fantasy orcs on my D&D map if I want.).
Dude, the intro is too long and really clipping people's speakers.
Bolt Action at least has some semblance to actual WWII combat. FOW is simply Warhammer WWII with massed armies designed to sell as much product as possible. It has NOTHING to do with WWII. What a mess.
I have heard that, I have also heard groups say pretty much the opposite. That BA. I personally prefer BA but will play FOW.
For me, Bolt Action (the only one I play in current edition format) is flavorless. It's so much simple that I can't care about any of my decisions or die rolls. It's just move & die, shoot and kill, blah blah blah, repeat. Eventually one side or the other brute forces its way over the other in a way that makes victory assured, and both sides agree on who wins and who loses and stop playing. And none of it will be remembered tomorrow (by me at least). I literally don't care if I never play again.
Don't know much about how FOW plays but BA has always just seemed like 40k WW2 too me.
@@cantbanme8971 Interesting as BA has no mechanics anywhere close to 40k......
@@1teamski Whatever bro I'm not some geek of rules minutiae. I meant in the sense its clearly aimed at the younger/got into wargamming through GW demographic who consider the most winningest meta more important than building armies and fighting battles that bare some semblance to historical reality just for the sake of it (yes I understand any rule set for a historical setting has to find a balance between the realistic and actually being fun to play but BA leans more towards the fantastical for my tastes)