Andy - How's FOW Vietnam? I quite like the period and dont have an army for it, and it's unusual enough that I probably cant be bothered trying to retrofit another game to do it. We've played a bit of CWC at 3/6mm and its got interesting guerilla rules, but I dont necessarily want to take it up to 20mm.
How bad are FOW games for taking liberties with historical TOE? The preponderance of Panthers/Tigers/King Tigers in WWII games is something that never fails to irritate me...
Vietnam hasn't really taken off here as well as some hoped, a few of us have the rulebooks but haven't made the leap into getting an army, I have plans for a US airmobile force but it'll cost about £130 to get all the choppers together. So I don't wanna commit until other people have got forces. Which I guess is what everyone else is doing.
In terms of history, its split into 3 periods of war but yes there can be some liberties taken with history, King Tigers, Panthers and Tigers Is however all have their weaknesses in late war, and aren't as common as you think. Recent rulebooks have upgraded the British 17pdrs to have new APDS rounds so they go through heavy armour with ease and unlike other games (where you can always save on a 6 or fail on a 1) in Flames if there is no chance of stopping the round, it goes through.
Battlefront has a massive love of '44/'45, so there are more source books / lists for that period so by the same token it becomes the most popular. Mid War is pretty balanced but lacks the "flavour and toys" of late period and I've not played any early war but I have read a lot that it struggles with game balance, one massive reason that Operation Barbarossa keeps getting pushed back is that battlefront are struggling to balance massed T34s the game.
I love it though, it plays much better and smoother than any other Games Workshop game, its properly scenario based as well.
Nevermind whats been selling...ROIDH