ibncalb
Senior Member
Well said. Particularly the vagina pain line. You sound like me trying to convince people to play caves.
Caves and Korea both have the same problem IMHO, as do a number of other rules groups (beach landings, paratroops, aircraft, night, DTO, Goliaths, etc.). They require learning a fair amount of rules that once you complete the current scenario you probably won't use again for quite a while, and so will forget them and have to learn them all over again. Some players find that to be a good reason to avoid those rules groups. The effort isn't worth the gain in their view. I personally find that for the most part I retain the rules for the most part and only need a light brush-up to be able to play (EXC: FW IPM exceptions, hence we need a new counter).Well said. Particularly the vagina pain line. You sound like me trying to convince people to play caves.
I would not put all these sets of rules in the same basket. PTO showed that it was possible to devise a set of elegant rules (yes, elegant ) that were adopted by a lot of players as quasi-core rules (EXC: caves&seabourne assaults). Korea rules are not overly complex, the jury is still out whether they are fun to play. The Schwerpunkt release will be decisive in this regard.Caves and Korea both have the same problem IMHO, as do a number of other rules groups (beach landings, paratroops, aircraft, night, DTO, Goliaths, etc.). They require learning a fair amount of rules that once you complete the current scenario you probably won't use again for quite a while, and so will forget them and have to learn them all over again. Some players find that to be a good reason to avoid those rules groups. The effort isn't worth the gain in their view. I personally find that for the most part I retain the rules for the most part and only need a light brush-up to be able to play (EXC: FW IPM exceptions, hence we need a new counter).
JR
Right, spoken like a Jewish scholar of the Tanak given your status as one of the "go to" guys for rules questions!I personally find that for the most part I retain the rules for the most part and only need a light brush-up to be able to play. JR
I do not think that the SP release will be the decisive factor. It will be wonderful to have these scenario published, don't get me wrong. But they will not decide the fate of FW.I would not put all these sets of rules in the same basket. PTO showed that it was possible to devise a set of elegant rules (yes, elegant ) that were adopted by a lot of players as quasi-core rules (EXC: caves&seabourne assaults). Korea rules are not overly complex, the jury is still out whether they are fun to play. The Schwerpunkt release will be decisive in this regard.
Given that there would be neither Friendly Fire nor DTF releases this year at ASLOK, i would expect this Schwerpunkt release to be high on the playing agenda. Unless of course MMP steals the show with a new product.I do not think that the SP release will be the decisive factor. It will be wonderful to have these scenario published, don't get me wrong. But they will not decide the fate of FW.
Thunder stolen: PTOSK!Given that there would be neither Friendly Fire nor DTF releases this year at ASLOK, i would expect this Schwerpunkt release to be high on the playing agenda. Unless of course MMP steals the show with a new product.
That may will be true...it does not make the release the "decisive" as to FW.Given that there would be neither Friendly Fire nor DTF releases this year at ASLOK, i would expect this Schwerpunkt release to be high on the playing agenda. Unless of course MMP steals the show with a new product.
We see you doing your best impression of jrv's schtick there.Missed a huge boat here, by not introducing Medic counters with FW. SMCs for "H Pierce", "T John", and "M Houlihan" would have been much appreciated.
More please!! Rally Point # 15 was great- it served as a nice balance to some of the large scenarios in FW.Do you want more Korean War scenarios, or are you sick of Korea already?
Caves and Korea both have the same problem IMHO, as do a number of other rules groups (beach landings, paratroops, aircraft, night, DTO, Goliaths, etc.). They require learning a fair amount of rules that once you complete the current scenario you probably won't use again for quite a while, and so will forget them and have to learn them all over again. Some players find that to be a good reason to avoid those rules groups. The effort isn't worth the gain in their view. I personally find that for the most part I retain the rules for the most part and only need a light brush-up to be able to play (EXC: FW IPM exceptions, hence we need a new counter).
JR
He's resting. Remarkable equine, the Norwegian Blue.
'E's not pinin' for the fjords! 'E's passed on! This horse is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-HORSE!!He's resting. Remarkable equine, the Norwegian Blue.
JR
It’s really not that bad.FW is forgotten - it is still in shrink wrap and will likely remain there. Too many new rules ...