geek
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Nick Irving
flag
Wings of War - The Dawn of World War II » Forums » Reviews
Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution
This is my first BGG review. I'm a long-time lurker, first-time poster, so I should probably start out with a caveat.

I think Wings of War is a great game. I own all three WWI game boxes and four of the Series 1 minis, with plans to expand that collection. Given that he posts and reads here, and this is an excellent way to speak to him directly - my congratulations to the designer.

I'm going to assume that of you're reading this review, you've read one of the other good ones on here that summarises the game mechanics, rather than repeat how they work.

My preferred war (what an outrageous concept - a preferred war!:D) has always been WW2, so I really wanted to like this one. In a nutshell, my hopes were disappointed for a number of reasons. I'll summarise them here:

First up, the revised manuever mechanics. My father (a WWI buff from ages back) said he would have preferred to play single cards rather than three in a row. We'd tried this variant on the basic game with pretty good results (testament to the solid mechanics of the original), so I was expecting the WWII version to play well.

In practise, I liked the two-card conveyer-belt mechanic. What I didn't like was the speed chits. Firstly, the rules were unclear as to how the basic version of the speed rules worked - you take four chits, but the diagram shows one chit face up denoting 'current speed'. That only leaves three chits in the pool, which means you are forced to change speed every few moves. We quickly realised that this face-up counter is only used in the advanced 'acceleration' rule, but it could have been stated clearly to avoid confusion.

But the main problem with the speed chits is that they are unnecessarily fiddly. I concede that a set of counters is cheaper than printing a set of 'fast' cards and a set of 'slow' cards, but that would have been preferable. This is exacerbated by the fact that it seems unnecesary - only engine damage and special rules like fuel even interact with the speed mechanic, which could have been achieved by putting the fast/slow icons on the bottom of the card (like steep, straight etc.). In a nutshell, I guess I just don't see the point of the separate counters.

On a related note, I would have preferred to see larger manouevre decks rather than the multiple copies you do get. Thinking the multiple copies would allow it, we first tried to play two Me109s versus a hurricane and spitfire (a historical and legendary matchup), and found we couldn't out of the box - the deck combinations wouldn't allow that particular combination. Thus, we've found the multiple decks next to useless.

My second issue is the damage counters. I like the fact that planes now do damage dependant on model and range - this gives each different model its own unique feel. But, like the new manuevre mechanic, it's marred by poor execution. At first I liked the counters - on the ariplane dashboards they are smaller and less obtrusive than cards, and easier to shuffle. The problem is they take up much more room on the playing surface, are difficult to handle in quantity, and small enough to easily get lost. Then I tried to put them into the box. There is nowhere near enough room! The central well can't hold them all, and even if it could, they'd all be lumped in together. If you put them all in different card wells to keep them separate, they get mixed in together. It's a small niggle, but enough small niggles can break a good game.

Thus ends my objective issues with the game. The final issue is subjective. My long-time WoW opponent and I just found it somehow less... fun thank its older cousin. The planes spent a lot more time zooming past each other and wheeling around for another pass, and a lot less time engaged, and there was none of the laughter and jesting that accompanied the WWI version. Accurate, perhaps, but less enjoyable. Perhaps if this had been the first version, we would have enjoyed it more, but with WWI to compare to, it suffered.

My advice - contentious as it may be - is that the WWI version is just better-executed. I like the era and the planes better in this version, I like the smaller plane-boards, I like the look and feel of most of the components better than in the original, I like the two-card rolling conveyer-belt, I like the new damage system... I just don't like a couple of little things that mar the overall experience enough to drive me back to the older version.
Last edited on 2008-07-07 02:55:32 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Boris Ginsburgs
flag
Avatar
0708
Hi Nick - thanks for coming out of lurking and posting your review. I am in full agreement with you on all counts, I've also greatly enjoyed the WWI version of WoW and collected all the base sets and a bunch of miniatures.

I had actually started with Dawn of War (I was able to find that first at a local gaming store), so my introduction to the series was in reverse order, but I had the same experience you did. Though there is nothing in inherently wrong with the changes in the game mechanics in the WWII version, many of them do feel somehow gratuitous, and do not add value or playability to the game. I am also a much greater fan of the WWI game.

Had Dawn of War been the only Wings of War release, it would be a fine game, but it certainly pales in comparison to the original.

Thanks again, hope you write some more reviews!
Kevin Duke
flag
Avatar
First, throw out the plastic insert.

Put the damage chits in zip bags. Separate zip bags for each color.

WalMart's hobby area has 3 different sizes of ziplock bags. The middle size (3" x 4" I think) is perfect for holding a plane and maneuver deck, and you can sort everything you have (in either system) that way.

The speed chits are actually easy to use, and-- except by rules in the game-- you will never be "forced" to change speed because you ran out of chits. (Certain moves do demand certain speeds.)

You only need 3 chits, actually-- one for ON the plane card (it's current speed).

A blank one-- which means "keep same speed"

And the "other" speed.

So you have the current speed chit on the card. The 'next card up' gets one of the other 2 chits- either a "same" or "change", and you change chits during the conveyor belt move.


I don't follow at all how the damage chits "take up more room." You can stack them, like you stacked your cards. They take up less room on the card. On the playing surface, you can put them in 3 cups that don't have to be huge, and they are easy to move around or hand each other for drawing. They're actually easier to deal with on the playing surface than two damage decks are.

I very much wish the original game had either used damage chits or printed A and B on the same cards (think A "top" and B upside down, so whichever is 'right side up" on your board is how it is scored.) Going with totally separate decks took a lot of resources and dug them a bad hole on which planes to bring out when.

I think one of the clever things here is having 2 speeds (and sometimes slightly different maneuvers) on the same card. One of the flaws in WWI is that-- except for the stall-- you can't change speeds.


I do agree that having just a single Me109 in the base game was not a good thing, and I've suggested to anyone who asks that they should get the "Eagles" booster at the same time they buy the base game. Adding extra Spits is nice, but the extra 109s make a huge difference.


As for the game being duller than WWI, let me ask how many planes you are putting on the table at once?

Even WWI is a little weak with 1 on 1, altho mitigated if you use "dancers" like the Camel versus Fokker Dr1.

If there are only 2 of you playing, I'd recommend you each run 2 airplanes. (Make them different!). It's a bit slower, but the added potential target helps. It's a better game with 3 planes on each side and even better with 4 on each side, but I wouldn't have anyone command more than 2 planes, and once you get to 3 people per side, you're better off with one each.

I will say that I don't use any of the "ace" abilities. Those do feel 'fiddly' to me and just not worth the time. If I were part of a group who played the game a lot, and who really wanted to get "into" to the system, that might be different. We keep it lighter here, and I'd recommend to new players to ignore that stuff-- and altitude-- until you have a feel for the foundation mechanics. It's a fun game without that, where someone trying to include it from Day 1 may never find the fun game.

Personally, I find WWI air to be more interesting anyway, but I admire some of the changes in DoWWII.
Last edited on 2008-07-06 18:32:19 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Nick Irving
flag
@Kevin - I figured the speed chits out eventually, and want to try the 'acceleration' special rule you're referring to there. I think it will add some challenge to the game.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the use of speed and damage chits - I won't re-state my reasons, as they are stated above and I don't want to take up too much room. I completely agree on the distribution of damage decks in the three major boxes - it almost would be easier to sell the whole game as a modular, semi-collectible game - buy damage decks on their own in blisters, and each mini comes with a manuevre deck. I'm sure this has been suggested before, and probably helped FFG/Nexus etc. arrive at the blister-pack idea.

We did play 2 player 2-on-2. I was thinking of picking up Eagles and the Spitfire blisters, because I think running a four-on-four would reduce the amount of time you spent manuevering, just by increasing the number of targets on each pass. That being said, I will probably wait until the minis come out for WWII to try that out.
R. Sannar
flag
Quote:
...I've suggested to anyone who asks that they should get the "Eagles" booster at the same time they buy the base game. Adding extra Spits is nice, but the extra 109s make a huge difference.


I just bought the basic set, but I am curious about this comment. How does just the Eagles booster make a big difference? I am considering getting both boosters, but I would like to know what you mean. Thanks!

By the way, I just made (with my wife's assistance) color-coded bags for each type of damage chit as someone else had shown on BBG. It works great! I haven't played the WWII game enough yet to really compare it to the WWI version.
Last edited on 2008-07-07 13:01:29 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Matt Galarneau
flag
My 2 cents, the game play is just fine. The alternating card method is a little more intense then the WWI system as there is less down time to review your mistake or gloat over your kill. :)

I think people are noticing that the plane speed and maneuverability differences are more pronounced in the WWI edition (SPAD XIII vs Fokker DR1) and not as much so in this game. Most of the planes here have the same turn radius with the noted exception of the Spitfire's slip. I could be guessing wrong but I expect the planes released in later editions will have more variability in speed and turn radius.

Lastly, the speed and acceleration rules may have more of an effect with the right scenario (better tag that Stuka before it dives!)
Kevin Duke
flag
Avatar
NOte for R-- the answer is in the part of the sentence you cut off.

Quote:
I do agree that having just a single Me109 in the base game was not a good thing, and I've suggested to anyone who asks that they should get the "Eagles" booster at the same time they buy the base game. Adding extra Spits is nice, but the extra 109s make a huge difference.



With your base game, you have six total maneuver decks,but only one which can run the Me 109.

While we can do some interesting Pacific early war things (Wild cats vs the Japanese)- unfortunately, the Hurricane belongs in early pacific battles too and it shares a deck with the Japanese, so hard choices to make there.

Given the box art and period, I think the major draw to the game is "Battle of Britain" type scenarios.

Want to use all 6 decks and fly 3 planes on a side?

Allied side-- One Spitfire, 2 Hurricanes.

Axis side-- One Me109.... 1 Vichy French plane... One Italian plane that is really not of this period.

Add Eagles of the Reich and your 6 plane BoB scenario is 1 Spitfire, 2 Hurricanes, vs 3 Me 109s... and you can put some variety in 109 types for balance.

Hope that helps.
R. Sannar
flag
Thanks, Kevin! Yes, that does help. I will at least get the Eagles booster. However, I would like to fly more of the Spits, so I will probably get both.

My wife and I played the first scenario last night and she said she much prefers the WWII over WWI because she likes having more movement possibilities (because of speed). I love the game. It is quicker than the WWI version and I feel like I have more control over my airplane. I think it would have been nice to be able to do 2 BF 109's on 2 Spitfires out of the box. Not a gripe, but a wish - and I can simply get the two boosters to take care of that. I also think the zero should have had a tighter turn radius as they were very manuverable. BUT, I am not a game designer and it is better to have a playable game instead of a game that is only historically accurate.

Last edited on 2008-07-08 15:11:51 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
N J
flag
Yeah do keep writing reviews, very informative.

The damage cards from the ww1 was so simple who had the daft idea to change it to tokens? Do most players have hands the size of a 5 year old? The cards were an elegant solution, the tokens are just the opposate. And expecting a player to get bags from Walmart is a laugh, its a review of the game not the players ability to fix the game.

And i agree about the speed counters. A) fidly again, and B) why? a manuver deck with fast options would have been a hell of a lot better and you would spend less time faffin around with fidly tokens and deciding which path your on.

I didnt like the conveyor belt system personaly but i can see that others might. It semed to put you in a perpetual state of planning and took away much of the meta gamming aspect of the ww1 version.

Im not an average board gamer, in fact i normaly wouldnt touch them but Wow famos aces was so good that im addicted, hence im here. But Wow Dow just aint up to the standard set by its older sibling.

Any way good review, its nice to see some critique rather than some gushing love letter. Keep it up.
Last edited on 2008-07-08 23:16:02 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Kevin Duke
flag
Avatar
Quote:
The damage cards from the ww1 was so simple who had the daft idea to change it to tokens? Do most players have hands the size of a 5 year old? The cards were an elegant solution, the tokens are just the opposate.



Yes, the damage cards work more easily than the damage tokens. The problem is their cost, based against the contents. Having 35-40 cards for damage in WoW restricted them to putting just ONE of the decks needed for play in each box. Yes, they might have just stuck in two decks and increased the size of the box and the overall price. For that matter, FA might have included 2 decks for each plane-- most people wanted it that way-- but Nexus had to decide whether to do what they did or produce a game at nearly double the price that would mean fewer people tried it out.

Putting just one damage deck into each WoW game box meant, however, that NO game set is really complete.
FA has the one-gun Sopwiths that need help, and the NEED to release a "B" deck pushed Nexus into some choices in WyB--mixing early and late war planes-- that the system is still struggling with.

The idea of producing A and B damage on the same cards did not seem to occur to anyone, and I did not think of it myself until I saw an early effort at DoW, which aimed to put more than one damage type in each card.

Quote:
And expecting a player to get bags from Walmart is a laugh, its a review of the game not the players ability to fix the game.


Well, I'm happy you got a laugh. Most reviews don't damn a system because a plastic insert does not work very well.


Quote:
And i agree about the speed counters. A) fidly again, and B) why? a manuver deck with fast options would have been a hell of a lot better and you would spend less time faffin around with fidly tokens and deciding which path your on.


While this may sound like a nice idea, if you keep the maneuvers we have now but use separate speed cards, now you're dealing with a 34-40 card deck for each airplane. Or, you have fewer maneuvers. Which would you find a hell of a lot better?

While this is partly a resources issue-- do they keep six maneuver decks and add 60% to the price of the game-- it is also becoming a handful of problem. The most maneuverable plane in WoW has 21 or 22 cards-- would anyone really like to add 12 or 15 more to each deck and play that way?

Once you get used to the idea, it's actually FASTER using a smaller deck and a fiddly token to declare what you want to do. That is, if you actually give it a try.
Patrick S.
flag
Avatar
I was just about to start a post about the same thing. My group has tried out the DoW and we don't think it's nearly as much fun. Our big problem was with the maneuverability of the planes. It seems that the game attempts to be more realistic, but I like the arcady feel of WoW. It just takes too long to make turns.

In theory, the conveyor belt mechanism sounds good, but I've found that it bogs down the game. At first I liked the damage chits and the idea of fuel, but in practice, I prefer the original.

I like biplanes more anyway, but some of my friends want to do WW2. It could be really great with the extra scenarios possible, but I think we'll stick to WoW for now.
Chris Farrell
flag
Avatar
My advice is that far more than WWI, the WWII version really wants multiple planes and asymmetric scenarios - bombing runs, recon missions, that sort of thing. In WWI, with planes of wildly different maneuvering capabilities and with no opportunities to change speed, you could have fun just mixing it up in a random furball. The WWII planes are much more maneuverable, the pilots have more control, and the performance differences are not as stark. So the general melee just doesn't work as well. But, throw in a fixed objective of some kind and two planes a side, and things are a lot more fun. I really look forward to having some bombers for the fighters to escort in the WWII game. I personally felt like the WWI version really got reliably good once we finally had Burning Drachens. I feel like having some bombers to escort will be similar for WWII.

In some ways I like the Dawn of War better than Famous Aces - the tailing rules are better, the different speeds add a lot, and the "continuous play" instead of the 3-card stop-and-go all combine to make Dawn of War feel more authentic. But the game does require a little more work in terms of both rules and complexity of play, so if you just want to slap some stuff down and fly it, I do think Famous Aces gives you better bang for a low investment.
Maximilian Vale
flag
Avatar
I have the Famous Aces game; and have just ordered some of the expansions and boosters for Wings of War, including Dawn of War; I just wanted to add a quick thought to those complaining about the damage chits/cards:

Here's what my group does for non-special damage: buy some 20 sided dice and just use whatever number your plane currently has for a reminder of how bad your plane is hurt. This can be visible or not to your opponent as you choose. (Example: Joe hits my 16 point plane and I draw 4 damage; I turn the dice so that the number 12 is face up) While you still have to put chits/tokens or whatever for special damage, regular damage is no fuss, no muss...
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.