Bolt Action by Warlord Games

[forrester]

Irrespective of whether or not one likes the rules, it must be said that Warlord deserve credit for pushing the period seriously and providing a one-stop shop for it--and even getting their ranges into real live shops.

[Helen]

Since purchasing the rules and reading them I'm looking forward to my first game on Monday with my Japanese against the British ... should be loads of fun.

I for one agree that Warlord Games have produced a product that covers the genre pretty well in its basic guise.

Whether you choose to use these rules is your choice and I wish you well in whatever rule set you use to enjoy your WW2 games. I for one will adapt this set of rules for South Vietnam.

Cheers,

Helen

[Sheerluck Holmes]

I am happy with the rules - very simple and easy to play.

 My first game was actually a Vietnam War setting as a skimrish! (Yes, I have adapted the rules to allow 1:1 skirmish play): http://shelldrakewargames.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/nam-project-aar-of-sorts.html

 I will be using them the same way for the Rhodesian Bush War and maybe even modern conflicts.

[Agis]

I am happy with the rules - very simple and easy to play.

 My first game was actually a Vietnam War setting as a skimrish! (Yes, I have adapted the rules to allow 1:1 skirmish play): http://shelldrakewargames.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/nam-project-aar-of-sorts.html

 I will be using them the same way for the Rhodesian Bush War and maybe even modern conflicts.

To be honest I was a bit confused with your 1:1 skirmish play disclaimer. I am under the impression that BA is already a 1:1 game, after reading your BLOG I realized that 1:1 is for you mini vs mini and not unit vs unit, right?
So your are activating not units but individual minis, all the rest the same?

[Sheerluck Holmes]

Yep - I am activating a single figure at a time and only fielding a section/squad in total.

[H.M.Stanley]

I'm also using BA for SCW

[Agis]

Yep - I am activating a single figure at a time and only fielding a section/squad in total.

Interesting, how do you handle morale?

[forrester]

I don't have the rules-nor the cash to indulge my curiousity-but while browsing the official forum I got the impression that there is a lot of time spent in juggling points values and comparing cost effectiveness.
The discussion which particularly caused me to come over all faint was the suggestion of dropping LMGs from a squad, just because choosing riflemen makes better "points sense", and so flying in the face of real life tactical doctrine .
Of course you can ignore all that nonsense, and use historical organisations, as indeed others on that forum clearly do, but there does seem to be a significant nudge towards the contrived lists, and I wonder if that comes across in the rules, with special "powers" for particular troops/nations.

I'm just an old fusspot, I suppose.

And I was also taken aback by the box art of the SS MG42 gunner firing from the hip and holding one leg of the bipod to "steady" his aim. Surely not?

[H.M.Stanley]

Just chose who you game against. Avoid the WAAC Brigade!

[Kitsune]

got my rulebook in the post the other day. Don't really care what other people are up to with WAAC points lists and the like as its not going to affect my games in any way.

[King Tiger]

Just chose who you game against. Avoid the WAAC Brigade!

This.

It's why I don't play 40k, too many Muppets.

[geoffb]

Some people have mentioned that its more effective to have riflemen instead of an LMG. This is a problem with the rules. Regardless of people manipulating lists to max out there is no way an LMG team should be inferior or even equal to a similar number of rifle armed troops.
Of course the fix is to up the shooting value of them and possibly the points values. A decent list should limiot a squad to having only one (or where historically accurate) per squad and that they be more effective generally than riflemen.
In fact the LMG should be perdominantly better at suppressing - which would normally be their job whilst the rest of the team manouevre into an assault position.

[Galland]

A german infantry rifle squad, was built, with a purpose, to support the two LMGs. Tactics and training all revolved around this.

[Elk101]

It's a fair point that geoffb makes. There were good reasons why squads took lmgs and you would expect this to be a fluid element of play. I personally dislike the way lists can be used to create ahistorical forces but it won't affect my games as our group are likeminded. This may partly be where the 40k feel comes from? Games with players using what could be termed 'beardy' forces may well not end up playing as we would expect from a WWII game which may be what is irritating some people? It might be seen akin to ACW gatling gun companies or such like! Each to their own.

[Sheerluck Holmes]

Interesting, how do you handle morale?

 Still working this out a bit - but basically it based on pinning for individuals (too many and they will retreat) and for the group (too many casualties for the squad and the squad breaks).