Flames of War/PBI

general discussion points related to gaming, painting and modelling in this period
Post Reply
User avatar
lenin
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 pm
Location: Yorkshire, England

Flames of War/PBI

Post by lenin » Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:08 pm

:D Hi All,
First I've been away for some time, but I'm back.
I realise this is probably one of those 'piece of string' questions, but as a recent dabbler in 15mm WWII, could anyone give me a sensible comparrison between FOW and PBI? I realise that FOW probably has a bigger following but I would really like to know if one system is more realistic than the other.
Thanks, Andy
Top
User avatar
j1mwallace
Major General
Major General
Posts: 724
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 12:18 am
Location: Dumfries, Scotland

FOW Vs PBI

Post by j1mwallace » Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:59 pm

FOW is FUN. Good games, combined arms. Different from PBI. I prefer FOW and from the number of armies at our club (now 11) you pays your money... Not really much use in helping you decide though. I would say I,ve been playing WW2 since 1969.Tried loads of different rule/systems, got lost or bored in the complexity but have got excited by it againthrough using FOW.
Jim W
Top
azeroth
Captain
Captain
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: Bellshill, Lanarkshire
Contact:
Contact azeroth

Post by azeroth » Fri Jul 27, 2007 7:49 am

PBI is played using a grid system, you fire by and at grid squares rather than units, i bought them and don't like them due to that fact. FOW are quick and relatively argument free

IanB
A moth eaten rag on a worm eaten pole
It does not look likely to stir a man's soul
'Tis the deeds that were done 'neath the moth eaten rag
When the pole was a staff and the rag was a flag.

E Hamley
Top
RenevandenAssem
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:59 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:
Contact RenevandenAssem

Post by RenevandenAssem » Fri Jul 27, 2007 7:45 pm

As far as experience goes:

FOW 1 game
PBI 1 game (plus a bit of looing around games)

To be honest I dont particularly like the PBI approach, altough I understand the reasoning behind it it just is not IT. Maybe what azeroth already mentioned the square movement and shooting gives it just a bit too much chess feeling.

FOW has gotten some critics (barry ?) but if anything the game is really well worked out and caters for a lot. I have never walked into any wargame where youcan play the game almost completely from the sheet without the need for reference, and in my opinion that counts for A LOT.

Where PBI has a square approach with the already chess effect I would also warn that FOW games are very much dependant on well made terrain. If you play on the bowling green it reminds me a lot of the old line them up and start shooting with all those tank games. But with a proper terrain you can have a pretty tense game.

The only thing that in my opinion is still a NONO ia all that arty on table. But just measure from a table edge and you have instant off table artillery.

If I would be giving a choice between only PBI and FOW I would pick FOW.
Top
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5905
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:
Contact barr7430

Post by barr7430 » Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:53 pm

You may have slightly misunderstood my view of FoW Rene, I'm pretty much a fan of that rule system :D . I think one or two things are slightly odd but no more so than any other rule set. I like the artillery system in GHQ Microarmour rules best. Delayed effect, manual range estimation... as good as it gets for me 8)
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
Top
RenevandenAssem
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:59 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:
Contact RenevandenAssem

Post by RenevandenAssem » Sat Jul 28, 2007 6:42 pm

Hi Barry,

Sorry if I made the impression.
Guess I can comfortably (hopefully) blame the language barrier ????

René
Top
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5905
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:
Contact barr7430

Post by barr7430 » Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:56 pm

No problem Rene.. your English is much better than my Dutch :wink:
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
Top
User avatar
MikeH
Corporal
Corporal
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: Aberdare, South Wales
Contact:
Contact MikeH

Post by MikeH » Fri Aug 10, 2007 8:14 am

barr7430 wrote: I like the artillery system in GHQ Microarmour rules best. Delayed effect, manual range estimation... as good as it gets for me 8)
hear hear Barry, I think the ghq rules for artillery are the best in any game system, mind you the writer of GHQ was an Artillery officer in the American army so he seems to have some experience of it :-)

to also echo Rene's words, I also believe that the artillery should (at least) have the option of being off table. I can see the reason for having it on table (they can sell miniatures of the guns, which means more profit), but for me it doesn't feel right in a company scale game

just my 2p's worth, I'm off now to paint up my FoW Italian artillery :(
Top
Post Reply

Return to “WW2 General”