Hello Readers,
Fred here. After a short interlude with our special episode related to Star Wars Legion, it’s time for me to get back to good ol’ FoW! With ETC 2025 being in Mid War, I will focus my season mainly on this period, 1942-1943. I would love to squeeze in my favorite period, LW, but it will need events to motivate, and time, which is hard to find! To begin with this new MW journey, I’ve decided to take a new tour in the African desert.
A Brand New World
To be honest, I left MW at the end of 2022. I studied the period to produce a fairly strong list that won French GT, but then turned to work on LW to prepare 2024. While starting the game in V2 with MW, I never really liked this period since V3, so I had little appetite for it. Since, there had been many changes, with Dynamic Points updates (a much needed review of MW, thanks to the huge work of UK B.I.G team and additional from BF), and new rules updates (Missions + LFTF). Needless to say the landscape at the start of this season is really different from what I knew!
Studying MW as proposed right now, I find it quite complex as a player!
There seems to be some awkwardly balance choices, with Units performing the same role on battlefield having huge variances between them (Infantry and Guns), with a clear nerf on Light Tanks and Recce (not too bad considering where they were originally, but perhaps too much), Tank Destroyers slightly over priced but okayish, Artillery level not matching the Inf/Gun defensive techs, and Medium Tanks having huge discrepancies between them (some being OK, and others too expensive to be considered). Eventually, Heavies are still a Damocles’ sword for most lists (notably KVs) – we need the old trapping rule back BF! Moreover, it seems not every Faction has the same chances to perform the Missions, and several ones appear to be locked in specific styles of gameplay (with hard choices to be made and possible glass ceiling).
The two things striking me the most
Fielding balanced Builds seems tremendously hard. Apparently, every time you want to tick a box, you miss another. I don’t really see how a list can be performant and fully all-comers, and choices are to be made in List Building, with the risk of not having the keys for all situations (which is the purpose of balanced Builds). Surely this can create some very frustrating events where the pair up dictate how players will perform, but not their own skills.
Builds have way less tools and toys than in Late War! On one hand I think it’s good: LW tend to have too many models running around, lagging the gametime (unless you play with a clock), and too many ways to have really hard to beat lists (if not unbeatable should you play well) – see ETC 2024 experience. I believe lists have ~1/3 to ½ less models, and even if you want to go heavy in a “horde” concept, you miss key playmakers and firefighters. Same, missing a safety net is good to enhance players’ skills and decisions. On the other hand, there is a lack of tools to perform the Missions which I find quite frustrating and counter-intuitive to emphasizing players’ talents. Moreover, actions are much more decisive, and the dice factor is way too important, with key plays being denied by above or below average rolls from either player. I also find sad to have a lot of great Command Cards (thematic and/or useful, much more than in LW) hard to field on a constrained budget.
In essence, even if MW shares the same rules as LW, I believe it’s a very different game, with pros and cons.
Sand, sweat, and gasoline
While practicing SWL and preparing for the big French Championship event, I used time granted by Real Life to learn this new-to-me MW period. Purchasing North Africa and Eastern Front was a start, reading every Factions, Formations, Units, Command Cards, Updates was a bigger task, and brainstorming with the crew was another layer of learning. I have a holistic approach of things and not make or voice my opinion unless I feel I have covered all the topic… and this one was huge! Throwing in several games, I manage to get a better view of this brand-new world.
Now, what do I play in MW?
A more and more difficult question as time goes by! I believe MW offers players possibilities to play pretty much every gameplay options, from aggressive to passive, but while LW allows several gameplays within a Faction (or even in the same Build), it seems MW pair gameplays with Factions and/or Builds, excluding some for several.
So instead of focusing mainly on “how I want to play”, I go with a somehow not competitive thinking. Call it age, maturity, nostalgia… The season is only beginning, and I reckon I still have time to build confidence in what I will bring to ETC next summer. Let’s favour fun!
If Big Bad Wolves (a.k.a: Germans) were the most obvious choice considering what I own as toy soldiers collection, I wanted to “celebrate” my 15 years in FoW by getting back to basics: North Africa and the British!
My best mate and I were introduced to the game in V2 by sharing a big collection of Italian and British in the Desert. Back then, we had very little idea of what we can do out of this FoW game, and we were happy throwing M14/14 at the face of Crusader for bad tanks on bad tanks duels. Soon, we learnt that inter-arms cooperation was the key to FoW, and we expanded our collection by adding Infantries, Guns, Aircrafts… we both had great memories of this carefree period. And here we go again in the land of sand, sweat, and gasoline.
One thing to note is choosing between British and Italian was more complex now than then. We grew up our FoW, got a more extended vision, and I have to say the Italian crap tanks and feather-helmets are way more speaking to me now than back in 2009! I can only recommend players to buy the North Africa book: it is a beautiful work, very colorful (all senses of the word), and agreeable to have all Factions from a Front in a single piece. One thing that I would like to improve is the Command Cards to be in the Book directly; not only are they hard to get separately, but they are also cumbersome.
Rats are back…
North Africa offers quite a wide array of toys to pick. From the Queen of battlefields (Infantry) to all sort of Tanks (Recce, Light, Medium, Heavies), passing by a wide choice of Anti-tank guns and even Aircrafts, British can field every FoW positions. They even have something nobody else has, the cruiser tanks, a somehow in between vehicle, not really a Light nor a Medium one.
I started to look at those to start and was confronted to a first challenge. Those tanks seem cool on paper, but battlefield reality is hard! Crusader, as many British tanks, are fragile. This is due to them being 3 per Unit, Aggressive, having an armor that is not that protective, and having a Last Stand 5+ (4+ if Death or Glory). At the same time, while very speedy (35cm/14’ + Cross 3+), they don’t strike hard (only ROF3 MG, hitting on 4+ in Assault, and AT7/FP4+ is limited; 6pdr increasing to 9 is great… but Overworked hurts so much). They feel like “I’m going to hide as much as possible, seize the initiative and exploit a gap when available, pop my head and … nothing”. Exploring other British tanks, this is something quite consistent in every line, with variances. Stuart appear more or less same as Crusader, slightly less mobile, more efficient against Infantry and Gun, but not able to withstand a Tank duel or dig out a Inf/Gun position. Valentine are interesting as Medium Tanks with a Light AT gun (and possibly Careful): they compensate the vulnerability, but not the efficiency. To compensate both, Grant and Sherman (both can be Careful) could have been an option, but they seem too expensive for 3 Team units with a Last Stand 5+! While Churchill compensate the fragility of all, they are far from being exceptional, especially at a whooping 11 points/model. Last but not least, the Dynamic Points nerf quite strongly the Daimler and Humber: not that they didn’t deserve it, but it’s hard to consider such Units being priced the same as they were in V2/V3 but without having Eyes&Ears and ambush protection bubble.
I then studied the Infantry, and their counterpart, the Guns. From both the Book and the Cards, the British sure have a lot of possibilities! The riflemen (Rifle, Motor, Airborne, Commandos) have quite a choice, some more evident than others. I find the elite harder to field due to prices being steep, but it can surely be done. The Rifle and Motor are on par with other Factions infantry, if not better most of time (but pricier). They all seem quite competent, expect when they meet tanks: one big difference with LW, having integrated AT is not the norm in MW. Even if you can pay for extra AT (PIAT, Sticky Bombs), options are not great and pricey. It seems they need to rely heavily on guns to perform, and here the feeling is mixed. While the light AT (Bofors and 75mm arti) seem OK, 6pdr are decent (not cheap, no HE, but AT9 and Fearless), the 17pdr and 25pdr are very expensive (3,5 points/gun) for guns with limitations and without mobility. It seems quite hard to balance the number of Infantry you need (possibly including HMG and Mortars) and the AT protection to back them up. From first sight, it seems easier to build up a decent force based on Inf/Guns compared to Tanks.
In the area of Support, I’m not a fan of Priest and Aircraft. Priest appear way too expensive (4.5 points/model) for something quite vulnerable and not that great at dealing properly with any target. I don’t think the AT on the Hurricane is strong enough to make the plane attractive. Kittyhawk can be interesting, as it is a somehow “cheap” asset that will resist much (quite hard to take down a plane in FoW, even more in MW), not do much damage, but can be an helper. And let’s not forget the Bren Carrier, quite a steadfast support to all British forces. They feel kind of meh at 4 points (hefty 5 points to get the not so great Boys ATR); I guess they got a lost bullet from the recce nerf from Dynamic Points (3 points would have make more sense ; 4 if you want to punish them and have the Boys ATR compulsory). I should also mention the “Wildcards”, even if they never saw combat. Apart from the Boardhound which is well balanced, I don’t see the others (T14, TOG 2*, Churchill GC) as interesting: their price is quite significant for what they bring… which ain’t much.
Ultimately, should budget allow, there are some interesting Command Cards I’ve noticed, my favorite being “Death or Glory” both because it was one of the first list I ever played and because I like the spirit of it (you have to wreck all the tanks!). I would have stated Artillery Expert also, but unfortunately British appear quite bad with Artillery in MW.
All in all, I think the British have tools to produce some interesting game play, from Gun Line to Offensive Push. I believe they lack reliability, an attribute making them super steady in LW. They have to pull complex resources together, have to make significant sacrifices in list building, bet perhaps too much on above average rolls to perform, and maybe lack some steam to be properly competitive.
… but not alone!
After the basics, it’s time to write up some Builds! I won’t lie in saying it was easy. The adaptation to the period is complex, and I’m quite convinced the British were not the best choice to re-adapt to MW… Nonetheless, I remind the mindset I was in, and start assembling some forces that could look like decent. One thing to note here: I produced those lists prior to Dynamic Points 2025, which has been proposed recently by BF and will changes things (more of this in the last part of this article).
I started to go with the Tanks. While I’m pretty convinced British tanks in MW aren’t great to say the least, they sure have a nice touch.
With this list, I really rode the Crusader wave. I tried to max out those Cruiser tanks which I find quite fun, even if far from being excellent. What I like about this one is how it shows the differences between MW and LW. In LW, having ~30 medium tanks is well enough to be tough in many match ups. A good example being the US Bulge Sherman, both the 3rd AD and Aggressive ones. Here, this is clearly not enough to turn the tide. Granted, this Build will be able to zoom the field in Missions such as Bypass or Counter Attack, but it will struggle a lot to take on a Gun Line anchored around Objectives in No Retreat or Bridge Head.
Let’s address the elephant in the room: a Death Or Glory army without their Command Card? Come on! Well, as much as I would like to field it, the budget is already so constrained it wasn’t even possible. Budget is harsh in MW, and ticking boxes for Missions completion is quite more complex than in permissive LW. This list is more balanced than the Crusader one, but has another spotted issue with MW: Reserves. Even if it can try to mitigate this by setting itself in Battle Plan Attack, it can’t guarantee always fighting without Reserves. It will struggle in Dust Up, Scouts Out, or Encounter.
While trying to address the Reserves issues from the British, I found myself in an awkward situation: can they do it by themselves? I would reckon yes, turning to the Churchill. The mighty beasts may be 11 points/each (more if you card them up), which is too much, but this serves filling the 40% Reserves slots! Apart from that, I have the distasteful feeling their big points lie in Tanks, and Sherman and Grant are less efficient than their cousins from across the pond… Let’s enter the US!
Comparing apples to apples, a UK Sherman is 7 points/tank compared to 6 points/tank for the US. It seems not too bad for having UK CTC compared to US CGA. Careful saves lives, so why not? However, UK Sherman have a very nasty Last Stand 5+ while US Sherman have Stabilisers… It’s even more appealing when comparing the UK Grant to the US Lee. Grant are 5,67 points/tank (6,5 points/tank for a HQ) while Lee are flat 4 points/tank. The only thing the Grant has is… Careful. They lose a precious MG/tank (so 9 shots won’t stop an Assault from Careful or Aggressive+Smoke infantry), they got Last Stand 5+, and they lose Stabilisers. Well, this is too much. I don’t think UK Grant should cost anything higher than 5 points per Tank.
Experience on the field didn’t really change my mind about UK Tanks, they can in certain situation be rewarding, but most of the time they are disappointing. With the worm being in the fruit, my mind set on the US, which, on the other hand, I find quite good to complement the UK. They solve many issues the British in the Desert have, and help them overcome their difficulties when they join them (sounds historic, right?). In essence, this Build resolve around a decent core of British; while many toys are high in price (looking at you Motor Rifle and Bren!) or suffer from the 100 points granularity (6pdr), it is manageable. Then, the US solve both the Reserves, additional AT to sustain duels, mobility, and Artillery (notably thanks to Smoke B.) issues of the British. This list falls well in the issue spotted in MW: it can’t do everything, as it lacks heavy AT to take care of heavy Tanks. Also, with the inclusion of an Allied Formation, its Morale is weak, and it won’t deal with a long-lasting battle.
While this list may surely be bettered, it is my current go to army.
El Alamein Desert Festival 2024… and 2025?
While I think I have my base Build for this Quarter, I’m confronted to the supply chain problem of BF. Finding the right models to play the list is more complex than I thought, and I still didn’t find them all (looking at you 6pdr and Lee!). For sure, FoW is friendly enough to allow “count as”, but we can’t really say it’s great in competition to say “look, this Sherman is in fact a Lee”. 3D print can be a way, but I would much prefer giving my money to BF to support the game… should the toys are made available.
I would probably stick with this kind of Inf/Gun/Tanks combo with the British until the end of the quarter, assessing if the limitations it has are manageable or not. For the future, BF proposed Dynamic Points 2025 to come into effect January 2025. Out of this, I spotted a reduction of price for several Medium Tanks; I think it’s good, those assets are truly the core of FoW ruleset as redacted, and their current pricing appears mainly too much in MW. It could open new doors for several Builds, and UK may explore something for their Grant and Sherman (and for their opponents as well!).
One question that I have is “are those DP 2025 enough to allow the UK to be consistent on their own?”. Currently they can, but the input of the US is definitely valuable enough to question this. Another thought for 2025: Pacific. Not being an historical specialist, I can however imagine you don’t fight Japanese infantry and light tanks in the jungle the same you would fight German panzers and anti-tank guns in the desert. For the Allies, I imagine we will have limited armor and anti-tank. How will it impact their capacity to fight MW battle against non-Japanese Builds? We will see when the book is released and analyzed! Eventually, I like the fact ETC is restricting combo-ing Forces to the same Front: it’s a challenge for players, and I reckon many events this season will keep it.
Knowledge is power: share it widely!
Fred