RoE versus Bolt Action?

[BA Barrukus]

I must admit, I had very high hopes for BA. But after playing it for about a year I fail to see how this game could ever be considered "historical" by any means.  I have travelled far n wide playing at different places and different people.  The more I play the worse it gets. Power lists are only the beginning of this rulesets problems. I find more n more people playing on 6x4 tables with very little terrain, which makes that classic 40kish I line up my guys you line up your guys and roll dice to shoot n save thing with little movement all too common.

Instead of ranting on I can recommend two games I have read great reviews about in the historical community.  "I Ain't Been Shot Mum" and "Chain of Command". By TFL.  Check it out.

[Poiter50]

Chain of Command by TFL?

I must admit, I had very high hopes for BA. But after playing it for about a year I fail to see how this game could ever be considered "historical" by any means.  I have travelled far n wide playing at different places and different people.  The more I play the worse it gets. Power lists are only the beginning of this rulesets problems. I find more n more people playing on 6x4 tables with very little terrain, which makes that classic 40kish I line up my guys you line up your guys and roll dice to shoot n save thing with little movement all too common.

Instead of ranting on I can recommend two games I have read great reviews about in the historical community.  "I Ain't Been Shot Mum" and "Command Decision". By TFL.  Check it out.

[BA Barrukus]

Yes sorry that's what I meant.  thanx

[Johnno]

I played my first two WWII games this weekend using a customized combination of RoE and Bolt Action funnily enough. Mind you, it was simplified for a convention but I picked it up quickly and decided to play a second time. Then bought the rules and two forces.

The bulk of rules and charts/templates were from RoE. I believe the priority rules (a bag of colored marbles representing each players units) was from BA.

The only con I noticed was the lack of point system but that perhaps fell on the GameMaster. The Canadians and German forces had the same number of units. 1 command, 2 squads, 1 mortar, hmg, anti tank team and 4 tanks. The problem was evident when my panther, stug and two panzer 4s systematically knocked out 3 Canadian tanks in 3 turns.

I would recommend RoE

[mrtn]

So, please, do tell me a bit about Bolt Actions WWII game, pros and cons

I think Bolt Action is great fun. The pinning and activation rules are very interesting. It's easy to learn, most of the time you don't really need the rulebook. It's easy to modify the rules as well since it's based on the idea that "all regular dudes with rifles are the same", I'm working on a couple of WWI forces which I'll use with BA rules, most conflicts of the 20th century should be applicable. Personally I think the point system is a good thing, but if you want to use OOBs instead go ahead, the gaming police won't arrest you.

I don't get the comparisons to 40K and think they play totally different. Sure, a dickhead that used to play 40K may now play BA, but that's nothing to do with either game system, he's just a dickhead. 40k is the quintessential IGOUGO game, and BA is nothing of the kind. It's never your turn.

I wouldn't mind giving you a demo.
Stockholm doesn't really have a "Bolt Action scene" so it doesn't suffer from any maladies other people may have experienced in other countries.

[jp762]

You will probably get more opponents with BA.
I own and use BA, RoE and CoC.
RoE is, in my opinion, best for larger scale games. CoC is lovely for smaller games.
Bolt action is more popular in general. Doesnt mean its better.

[pixelgeek]

I don't get the comparisons to 40K and think they play totally different.

They are both focused on tournament play and despite a wealth of background material neither plays in a manner that matches the background 

BA strikes me as being a very tournament friendly set of rules that was created to make a fun and cinematic game that was easy to play. The emphasis is on the game and the game experience and not necessarily making a game that is historically accurate.

[mrtn]

They are both focused on tournament play

How can a game be focused on tournament play? Nothing in the BA rulebook say that "you have to play in a tournament, and if you don't you're doing it wrong". The fact that a few people play BA in tournaments doesn't change the rulebook one iota. They have to adapt the game for tournament play, the tournament doesn't make the game adapt.

Chess is a tournament game, and anyone not called Kasparov is doing it wrong. Obviously. 

[General]

I also would recommend Chain of Command and for company-level battles I Ain't Been Shot Mum by Too Fat Lardies.

[pixelgeek]

How can a game be focused on tournament play?

The way the game is written and the way that it is marketed. Also its intended audience. And how the army lists are structured.

Nothing in the BA rulebook say that "you have to play in a tournament, and if you don't you're doing it wrong".

What a strange thing to say

[Stan Hollis]

Not played RoE but do play BA.

The BA activation adds a really nice element to the game and does lend to a more piecemeal reactive action which in my mind does evoke a sense of ebb and flow that would have been within a battle.  The rules are fairly simple to pick up and yes they are not giving a sense of massive historical accuracy and depth.  Warlord have gone down the simple and fun route which means that it is really accessible.

You can find situations where a tank can be a bit of a steamroller but it just makes you build a diverse force I have found.  The army lists are fairly 'abusable' for all those who like to meta/power game.  However within a group of 'gentlemen wargamers' you can have some really enjoyable games and do not have to break the bank to do so.

Definitely worth a try...

[Bowman]

The way the game is written and the way that it is marketed. Also its intended audience. And how the army lists are structured.

What a strange thing to say

You never answered the question. How exactly is BA written and marketed as a "tournament game" in a manner that CoC or RoE is not?

Tournament games, in my experience, tend to be more simple, so that set up, playing to an unambiguous result and clean up can be accomplished in under 2 hours. That makes BA a better game for competitive play than say, Disposable Heroes, a game I also enjoy.

"Power gaming" is a defect of the player and not the rule set. It is frankly ludicrous to assume that certain rule sets are immune from exploitation by these individuals. Unfortunately, tournaments tend to attract this type of person.

People get their panties in a bunch because a rule set includes a point system? Aren't there more important things to fret about?

[pixelgeek]

You never answered the question.

Mostly because I didn't like the tone of the post.

How exactly is BA written and marketed as a "tournament game" in a manner that CoC or RoE is not?

Well I think you answered that in part yourself

Tournament games, in my experience, tend to be more simple, so that set up, playing to an unambiguous result and clean up can be accomplished in under 2 hours. That makes BA a better game for competitive play than say, Disposable Heroes, a game I also enjoy.

BA is a much simpler game, has quite generic army lists, doesn't focus on historical accuracy in order to maintain the consistency of the rules and the ability to have "even" games.

They picked a person to write the rules that was/is a dedicated tournament gamer, they promote and run tournaments for the game and the biggest market for the game and the biggest audience that I have seen so far are people that play the game competitively.

I'm not really sure why one would need to point out something that is really so glaringly obvious from reading about the game on fan sites and the manufacturers site.

[pixelgeek]

People get their panties in a bunch because a rule set includes a point system? Aren't there more important things to fret about?

Who is this addressed to exactly?

[pixelgeek]

The BA activation adds a really nice element to the game and does lend to a more piecemeal reactive action which in my mind does evoke a sense of ebb and flow that would have been within a battle.  The rules are fairly simple to pick up and yes they are not giving a sense of massive historical accuracy and depth.  Warlord have gone down the simple and fun route which means that it is really accessible.

It is a simple and fun game and if it brings more people into historical gaming then I think its a good thing.