Wonders will never cease! After 25 turns of play, we finally have a battle to play out. Not that the campaign hasn’t been providing fun or challenging logistical headaches, Continue reading “Campaign System – We have a battle !”
Bought FNG2 today to support THW and see what the final version looks like. As regular readers will know I’ve played a fair amount of FNG v1 although not much recently so I was looking forward to this finally being released. Have to say I’m a bit disappointed. Maybe I’m searching for the holy grail or something, but I am getting pretty sick of buying rules which are riddled with typo’s and errors. Do rules ever get proof read? I know that this has been a labour of love for Darby and I don’t want to detract from that, but its pretty demoralising reading a set of rules and seeing examples that don’t follow the rules, blatant typos and this is just from a skim read really.
As for Ambush Valley, I’m even more annoyed at this one. For a one/two man band to release something badly edited is one thing, but for AAG with their Osprey backing to release not only their error ridden main rules but to continue this tradition into the 3rd supplement, a second edition of both I might add, is a bit of a pisstake in my opinion. I seem to oscillate between thinking theres a good set of rules somewhere within Force on Force, to thinking that for a Blackhawk down kind of scenario its almost perfect but there’s only so many “skinnies” or insurgents I can duck shoot. For Vietnam I just don’t think it works. Putting aside the issues I have with the accuracy of the text for now, some of the rules are just bizarre.
I had a simple scenario set up for a platoon or so of US to escort some Villagers from the ville in the middle of the table off table. Opposing them were some Local Force VC. The US were D8/D8 and the VC D6/D8. The VC had 2 MG Bunker cards and 2 spike board traps (drawn randomly!). The first MG bunker card was played as an interruption of some US movement and placed in the treeline, unfortunately too far for the VC to claim “ambush” (? how there can be a maximum range to ambush the enemy I don’t know!) In the ensuing reaction tests, the US got the drop on the VC and managed to shoot first, causing both figures to become casualties. Purely because they’re rolling D8’s and the VC D6’s.
Every time the VC fired or attempted to fire in the game, they were just simply swatted down like flies. And then we have the “instant nuke” sorry artillery rules. Apparently artillery lands immediately, with no deviation. If the US can call it in, then it’s just devastating. By the end of the game, I had 2 MG bunkers and 3 squads of 5 figures all casualties. Of course I couldn’t actually find out what type of casualties they were because there was no one unhit within the requisite distance at the right point in the turn to check. It’s possible that with that figure close they could all have been fine (admittedly that would have needed a heck of a lot of 6’s to be rolled!). In return I’d managed to cause 4 Serious Wounds and 1 Light Wounded US figure. 2 of the Serious Wounds had come from the spike traps, which meant that for 3 figures hit, I’d lost 19. Now bear in mind that the VC were generally in cover (or fortified positions!), while the US were in the open. For a “outcome driven” ruleset, that just doesn’t sound right.
Back to FNG, I’m just trying out an ambush scenario since the table is still set up from the above game. As far as I can see from the rules, theres even more dice rolling than there was in the old version, something I’m not too keen on. I’ll have to see how they play, the one advantage of FoF:AV is that it’s quick (provided you can work out the rules of course), but that’s probably because one side is dead rather quickly!
Here’s a few pictures of the AV Action though.
If one of my players is reading this, please don’t! For the rest of you, here’s how things are shaping up. Continue reading “Campaign Situation – 26th March 1809”