Bolt Action v. Victory Decision

[pixelgeek]

Has anyone played both of these rules and perhaps comment on the pros and cons of each?

I have both rulesets and am tempted by both but was curious if anyone had any experience with both that they'd like to share. Most of my ViDe reading has been from this forum and most of my Bolt Action reading has been from their forum and the Boltaction.net site. Both of the latter are very competitive places and the discussions there are enough to put one off the rules.

[NurgleHH]

Maybe this thread can help you: http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=40940.0

[pixelgeek]

Thanks

[BA Barrukus]

BA amongst friends and some house rules  anything other than that . The other I don't know enough about.

[Agis]

Well i am biased on both games, I wrote the Japanese book for Warlord and also the whole Victory Decision line.
Both games have a similar approach and are also different.
Both are GAMES and not historical simulations.
The scope , platoon lvl games is also the same.

Otherwise they differ, I had some nice talks with Alessio about the games over skype, whenever i randomized something he did not, whenever he randomized it I did not.
ViDe allows remeasuring, BA not etc etc

If you want to focus more on infantry action with only one tank, BA is for you.
If you want a platoon of infantry plus 3 to 6 tanks and dedicated 6-15mm support in the rules ViDe is for you. In the end it is simply a matter of taste.

[Conquistador]

Interesting - this has stayed very polite and fact oriented.   

While I may never  get back into WW2 in reality (time/space/money/priorities) I do enjoy the idea that I might and the rules out there seem to run the gamut of style and game mechanics.  It is very educational to read specifics of comparisons/contrasts and not so helpful to hear either comments comparing (and debasing) Rules "x" as Rules "y" with "<insert gaming aspect/mechanic  poster doesn't like> " or overly generalized judgments.

Just thought I would stare my appreciation of the non-confrontational discussion so far.

Gracias,

Glenn

[pixelgeek]

If you want to focus more on infantry action with only one tank, BA is for you.
If you want a platoon of infantry plus 3 to 6 tanks and dedicated 6-15mm support in the rules ViDe is for you. In the end it is simply a matter of taste.

Could you elaborate a bit on this?

[Agis]

Well in BA you are limited to one Afv, infantry is king, a unit of GIs can pin a Tiger tank.
Iirc they have corrected that but in essence BA is infantry centered.

In ViDe you play a platoon but you can add way more than one tank.
Especially the early war list give you plenty of vehicle options, simply because the tanks are far inferior to late war tanks which is reflected in the points value.

[BA Barrukus]

"Both are GAMES and not historical Simulations"

I believe a game can be historical without being a simulation.  It is a good game, it's the gamey loopholes I'm not a fan of.

[pixelgeek]

It is a good game, it's the gamey loopholes I'm not a fan of.

What sort of gamey loopholes?

[pixelgeek]

Well in BA you are limited to one Afv, infantry is king, a unit of GIs can pin a Tiger tank.
Iirc they have corrected that but in essence BA is infantry centered.

In ViDe you play a platoon but you can add way more than one tank.

I'm not a big treadhead so that difference won't be compelling :-) If I wanted to do a lot of tanks I'd go for 15mm or Micro Armour.

[Agis]

I'm not a big treadhead so that difference won't be compelling :-) If I wanted to do a lot of tanks I'd go for 15mm or Micro Armour.

Well then BA might be your thing!

[BA Barrukus]

What sort of gamey loopholes?

To be honest Agis there is quite a list but without bashing this otherwise fun game I'll give you a few.
Power lists..being a point driven game people tend to bend the arm of history in order to create powerful armies difficult to beat.

As per rules only one man in a targeted squad has to be in LOS and whole squad takes casualties. Which means your entire squad can be behind a building except one man and instead of losing that guy you can possibly lose everyone in that squad.

The game in attempt to have a level playing field has created MOSs that historically didn't exist.  Like US sniper teams.  WW2 not existent! On top of that the second man in that team"spotter" can't even shoot a weapon of his own. How many guys hit the battlefield without a weapon??? Not many!!

Last would be the use of a medic to drive vehicles and fire it's MGs.

Like I said its a good "GAME", but historical, not by a long shot!  I guess that when I first heard that this game was being put out by WG and Osprey, two historical based companies I was expecting something better than another Fantasy WW2 game, but after traveling and playing this game for about a year now I'm not impressed.

[Agis]

@ BA Barrukus: I presume you are talking abot Bolt Action? If so no further comment from me.
I am responsible for Victory Decision and the BA Japanese book - no more. 

And I am not going to comment badly about anthother game...
 

[Conquistador]

@ BA Barrukus: I presume you are talking abot Bolt Action? If so no further comment from me.
I am responsible for Victory Decision and the BA Japanese book - no more. 

And I am not going to comment badly about anthother game...
 

Such gentlemanly propriety is appreciated.

Gracias,

Glenn