Commonwealth 2, Italians 0

[wmtrainguy]

So in a weird bit of good fortune, Blindfury and I have managed to fit in several games of Flames of War lately. We played a 1250 point game of Germans vs Commonwealth Indians, which I'll revisit in a separate post, and then followed up with a pair of 1750 point games of his Commonwealth Indians against my Italians

Comments

Thinking about our games

[blindfury1]

I think that as we play more games and grock rules better, we’ll find tactical complexity more fulfilling.
I know for my part I can’t seem to get past the standard GW archetypes in which any given unit may be good against another. I think it’s fair to say that picking an AT 7 gun against an armor 6 tank is probably not going to be as effective as you had hoped-though continually bombarding them instead of direct fire might have helped more.
The more I think about it, the more I think using fortifications to dictate the game direction is better than expecting passive defenses to win the mission.
I also think that now that we’ll be playing infantry with actual anti tank capacity, the balance of power should shift some.
We can also move to French VS. Germans for a different kind of game.

Re: Thinking about our games

[wmtrainguy]

Despite the Italians poor performance, I'm actually really enjoying the games. I think you've said it best with the need to "break the mentality" of other games, and playing Flames of War as it is and not as a WW2 spin on other minis games. The solution to my problem isn't more AT, it's better play with what I have.

Although it is worth saying that I've printed out some more tanks, as well as some of the flamethrower tanks. Options are good. :-)