"Cheap" KGN

[zedeyejoe]

True but then if you take that view so is the rest of WW2. One of the plus points is the support users of KGN are providing to expand the rules.

On gliders/paratroops I think the solution is simple; don't worry about the delivery system, just say that the troops are there ready to fight.

[Sirius]

Everything I have read about the KGN rules suggests to me they are uber oldschool and klunky (there was even a most unfortunate comparison made to the old Airfix rules of 1970s vintage, yikes), and I am pretty sure I wont ever try them out...

...but at the sale price i ordered a copy anyway...

[NTM]

Even if I decide the rules are not to my liking I will most probably make use of the scenarios both generic and 'historical' for other systems anyway.

[Colonel White]

Yeah Ok they are old school so what?

Thats what attracted me to them for me its pure nostalgia and yes I loved the Old Airfix rules.

The problems with a lot of the the modern rules of today eg FOW and some of the people who play them is that they are treated as a sport with a "win at all costs mentality" instead of a game of which to savour, enjoy and have fun. Any tournament players , I decline to game with because they tend (not all) to take the fun out of gaming .At end of the day I hate games lawyers as well.

I am hoping Justin's rules are going to be more to err on the side of gaming .

[zedeyejoe]

I will say again, I have played for 40 years now and play both at clubs and tournaments. I think of a tournament as just a place to meet wargamers that I have not met before. The people that want to Win At All Costs (WAACKy) exist in both those environments, so no need to steer clear of tournaments.

However I was there at the rise of FoW, which happened just as people that people playing WAB were accused of being WAACKy. Strangely enough a lot of the WACCKy WAB players went off to play FoW and lo people now complain about FoW players (and think WAB is played by nice people).

IMHO it is people that are the problem, not tournaments or indeed even the rules.

It would be nice to see players using an historical mix of weapons, instead of walls of Panthers and Tigers. Hell I even fight my WW2 with Italians and struggle with my M13/40 tanks.

[NTM]

IMHO it is people that are the problem, not tournaments or indeed even the rules.

You've hit the nail on the head there.
My favourite one is when some current rulesets (FoW particularly) are blamed for the 'tank parking lot syndrome' some people seem to take offence when I state it's down to the players as the rules do not force you to put vehicles track to track and refuse to believe that I first saw it 30 years ago (a wave of Panzer III stretching across the table followed by one of Panzer IV and so on was a site to behold ) It is then claimed that there should be something in the rules either stopping this or discouraging it. I think there is a lot to be said for the TooFatLardies principle 'playing the period not the rules'

[BigMike]

I got a copy of 'Over the top' in the WHH sale and they're trying to encourage the use of earlier armies i.e. before the massed use of tanks, HMG's and LMG's by giving players a free preliminary bombardment in a tournament game if their force is earlier than their opponents -which i think is a nice touch!
I'm not sure it's necessary, as the amount of troopers you get in earlier armies isn't even funny, but i think it's good to have these things mentioned!

[zedeyejoe]

Just a heads up, it seems that the postage from WHH is now per book rather than for the whole order. I got lucky and ordered over the phone and got a flat £3 postage for the whole order. So telephone ordering seems the way to go.

[NTM]

As I have pointed out I think some of the weapon stats in KGN are wrong. Some I have found already; an American BAR counts as a machine gun (properly should be like an assault rifle)

Agree that a BAR is not really in the same league as lmg such as the Bren & KGN rate both the same but the FG42 is also rated the same as these so really it is an assault rifle rating. Like the way that the MG34/42 are rated differently to Bren/BAR etc but hate that MMG is used as description. Bren type LMG's should really be rated somewhere between BAR and MG42 I would suggest a firepower rating of 3 rather than the current 2.

[zedeyejoe]

Yep a BAR and and FG42 should be assault rifles. Bren is true LMG (because of 2 man crew, bigger magazine and quick change barrel). However as you say, KGN does not do it like that.