Game: Wings of War - The Dawn of World War II

Thread: Re: WWII minis

angiolillo — 2008-08-28T14:41:57+00:00

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
wow_nexus group:

On ww2 miniatures, would you prefer to have extended or retracted landing gears?
Extended ones are nicer in your showcase and allow you to use the take off/landing rules.
Retracted ones are more realistic during combat.

o Extended
o Retracted

To vote, please visit the following web page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wow_nexus/surveys?id=2754297

Thanks a lot everybody!

Andrea

Thread: Re: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-08-28T11:07:11+00:00

a_ricart2003 wrote:
Chris
I have been more concerned with the flying caracteristics of the Me E-3 as been too maneuverable. the Zero had low wing loading as well as the early spitfire and Hurricane models therefore they all could perform a tight turn at low speed. as their weights increased in later versions the wing loading increased. the zero maneuverability also deteriorated as the ariplane flew above 300 miles per hour. I think the game represents this by allowing the airplane to perform a tighter turn at low speed than the wildcat but at high speed they both perform similar.
the immelman is a different issue that I am still trying to sort out.

Every WWII wildcat pilot has said the zero will get behind you within two turns. I am not sure that holds true in the game. The zero is better but not much better.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

a_ricart2003 — 2008-08-28T05:01:31+00:00

Chris
I have been more concerned with the flying caracteristics of the Me E-3 as been too maneuverable. the Zero had low wing loading as well as the early spitfire and Hurricane models therefore they all could perform a tight turn at low speed. as their weights increased in later versions the wing loading increased. the zero maneuverability also deteriorated as the ariplane flew above 300 miles per hour. I think the game represents this by allowing the airplane to perform a tighter turn at low speed than the wildcat but at high speed they both perform similar.
the immelman is a different issue that I am still trying to sort out.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

Andy44 — 2008-08-26T10:44:34+00:00

angiolillo wrote:
1/144 is quite too large. Too much collisions every time. Already with fighters, imagine what could happen with twin engined bombers like Do 217 or He 111...
...and with B-29: wingspan 30 cm. (about 1 ft.)!

Thread: Re: WWII minis

angiolillo — 2008-08-26T06:55:53+00:00

1/144 is quite too large. Too much collisions every time. Already with fighters, imagine what could happen with twin engined bombers like Do 217 or He 111...

Besides, there are plenty of Japanese makers that have got avalaible almost every WW2 aircraft. If you prefer that scale, you do not need to wait for our minis.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

dernhelm — 2008-08-26T06:48:40+00:00

1/196?

I´ll prefer 1/144, there are plenty of Japanese makers. They´ve got avalaible almost every WW2 aircraft, even some as He100 or twin engined bombers like Do 217 or He 111...

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

angiolillo — 2008-08-26T06:12:17+00:00

Can't promise anything... but it should.

All the best!

Andrea

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

a_ricart2003 — 2008-08-25T22:49:45+00:00

Andrea
Wow!!
Thanks for the link
Now I can`t wait for it.
Please tell me that this will be available by Christmas
Alberto

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

angiolillo — 2008-08-25T05:47:04+00:00

Next WWII box, with dive bombers:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/36482

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

a_ricart2003 — 2008-08-25T04:08:10+00:00

What is fire from the sky?

Thread: Re: WWII minis

Eldard — 2008-08-21T03:00:36+00:00

angiolillo wrote:
We are taking turns, but the work goes on... Vincenzo Auletta is giving the last touches to the color schemes while the sculptors just sent the unpainted prototypes to Nexus.

Great news, Andrea! We anxiously await their release!

Keep 'em flyin'!

Thread: Re: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-08-21T02:33:57+00:00

Welcome back Andrea! Can we get an update on release dates?

Thread: Re: DoW or Famous Aces? or maybe both?

angiolillo — 2008-08-20T21:44:08+00:00

Perfect answer!

I will add that you will find a Polish Fokker D.VII and a Polish Breguet XIV in the "Top Fighters" booster pack if you are choosing WWI; a Polish Spitfire Mk.I (never arrived to the front) is in the Flying Legend booster for WWII together with a Polish pilot on a RAF Mk.II Spitfire, while the Dawn of War starter box for WWII has a Polish pilot on a RAF Hurricane.

The Spitfire Mk.II with Polish pilot (and small Polish markings on the fuselage) will be released as a miniature within the year and will be on the cover atrwork of the WWII DeLuxe box.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

angiolillo — 2008-08-20T21:37:30+00:00

guzzoid wrote:
I think all of the people in the know are on vacation.

We are taking turns, but the wiork goes on... Vincenzo Auletta is giving the last touches to the color schemes while the sculptors just sent the unpainted prototypes to Nexus.

Wulf Corbett wrote:
guzzoid wrote:
My daughter has requested that the pink one be made.
That would be an unarmed reconnaissance aircraft, wouldn't it?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5121688714954530247...

Actually, the pink Spitfire on the video is a later Mk.IX one. Our own is an earlier Mk.I for armed recon...

Thread: Re: WWII minis

Andy44 — 2008-08-15T21:09:01+00:00

Wulf Corbett wrote:
angiolillo wrote:
They will come in a few months, sorry if I can not be more precise.
Does anyone know the scale these will be in?
1/196.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-08-15T02:30:12+00:00

Wulf Corbett wrote:
guzzoid wrote:
My daughter has requested that the pink one be made.
That would be an unarmed reconnaissance aircraft, wouldn't it?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5121688714954530247...

Not much good unless you want to run away really really fast...

Or for missions other than shooting other planes.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

Wulf Corbett — 2008-08-14T23:14:00+00:00

angiolillo wrote:
They will come in a few months, sorry if I can not be more precise.
Does anyone know the scale these will be in?

Thread: Re: WWII minis

Wulf Corbett — 2008-08-14T23:13:01+00:00

guzzoid wrote:
My daughter has requested that the pink one be made.
That would be an unarmed reconnaissance aircraft, wouldn't it?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5121688714954530247...

Not much good unless you want to run away really really fast...

Thread: Re: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-08-14T23:02:35+00:00

I think all of the people in the know are on vacation.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

kalevi1999 — 2008-08-13T10:29:21+00:00

guzzoid wrote:
angiolillo wrote:
They will come in a few months, sorry if I can not be more precise.

They will be:

Supermarine Spitfire Mk.I Squadron Leader Eric Clive Le Mesurier 1416 Flight Royal Air Force
Supermarine Spitfire Mk.II Flight Lieutenant Adolphe Vybral 312 Squadron Royal Air Force
Supermarine Spitfire Mk.II Flying Officer Jan Falkowski 315 Squadron Royal Air Force

Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3 Leutnant Werner Mölders JG53 Luftwaffe
Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3 Hauptmann Wilhelm Balthasar JG27 Luftwaffe
Messerschmitt BF109 E-4 Oberst Adolf Galland JG26 Luftwaffe

Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Chūsa Tadashi Kaneko 6° Kokutai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu
Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Heiso Saburo Sakai Tainan Kokutai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu
Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Daisa Saburo Shindo 1° Koku Kantai – 1° Koku Sentai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu

Grummann F4F-3 Wildcat Major Robert Edward Galer VMF-224 United States Marine Corps
Grummann F4F-3 Martlet III Lieutenant-Commander Alan F. Black No. 805 Naval Air Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Grummann F4F-4 Wildcat Pilot Hamilton Mc Worther VF-29 US Navy

My daughter has requested that the pink one be made.

My gf too would love it!!!

btw any update on the minis?????

Thread: Re: DoW or Famous Aces? or maybe both?

unixrevolution — 2008-08-11T18:21:51+00:00

DoW is significantly, but not radically, different than Famous Aces. DoW has speeds, different maneuvers, and damage tokens rather than cards, with a more variable mix than FA has. DoW also has you plan constantly one move ahead, rather than plan 3 and execute, plan 3 and execute. It feels more real time and the planes are easier to control.

However, DoW is slightly heavier than FA, so if you have younger gamers to consider FA may be better.

As for ordering both, I own both, and don't regret it, and am not trading either

Thread: DoW or Famous Aces? or maybe both?

MacTele — 2008-08-09T15:01:41+00:00

So i want to buy and play Wings of war game but i am not sure which one should i pick?
I have read personal comments and reviews about both games watched pictures and still i am not sure. I think that WW2 would be more interesting as history period for air battles but i still feel romantic atmosphere of WW1 airplanes. Mechanicaly both systems are not very different at the first glance and without playing it is difficult to say which one i would prefer.
So pls tell which game is more better aka more fun to play and gives more satisfaction after winning.
Or maybe both are so good and different that it is best to buy both?

Image

kalevi1999 — 2008-08-08T13:36:36+00:00

back and front Plane card showing an Iriaf's F14. Closed wings: high speed. Wings wide open: low speed

Image

Minedog3 — 2008-08-02T22:45:43+00:00

Me109 four finger element

Thread: Re: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-07-17T18:25:44+00:00

angiolillo wrote:
They will come in a few months, sorry if I can not be more precise.

They will be:

Supermarine Spitfire Mk.I Squadron Leader Eric Clive Le Mesurier 1416 Flight Royal Air Force
Supermarine Spitfire Mk.II Flight Lieutenant Adolphe Vybral 312 Squadron Royal Air Force
Supermarine Spitfire Mk.II Flying Officer Jan Falkowski 315 Squadron Royal Air Force

Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3 Leutnant Werner Mölders JG53 Luftwaffe
Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3 Hauptmann Wilhelm Balthasar JG27 Luftwaffe
Messerschmitt BF109 E-4 Oberst Adolf Galland JG26 Luftwaffe

Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Chūsa Tadashi Kaneko 6° Kokutai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu
Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Heiso Saburo Sakai Tainan Kokutai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu
Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Daisa Saburo Shindo 1° Koku Kantai – 1° Koku Sentai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu

Grummann F4F-3 Wildcat Major Robert Edward Galer VMF-224 United States Marine Corps
Grummann F4F-3 Martlet III Lieutenant-Commander Alan F. Black No. 805 Naval Air Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Grummann F4F-4 Wildcat Pilot Hamilton Mc Worther VF-29 US Navy

My daughter has requested that the pink one be made.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-07-16T22:20:21+00:00

Will the zero's maneuver decks be changed or is the zero's reputation undeserving?

Thread: Re: WWII minis

coyotelaughs — 2008-07-16T22:03:00+00:00

Ohh well there goes my budget.

Thread: Re: WWII minis

wittdooley — 2008-07-16T21:39:34+00:00

We love you Andrea! Now....how about an expansion for the WWII with giant Aircraft Carrier cards? Hmm? Hmm?

Or Maybe a Naval version?

Thread: Re: WWII minis

angiolillo — 2008-07-16T21:32:20+00:00

They will come in a few months, sorry if I can not be more precise.

They will be:

Supermarine Spitfire Mk.I Squadron Leader Eric Clive Le Mesurier 1416 Flight Royal Air Force
Supermarine Spitfire Mk.II Flight Lieutenant Adolphe Vybral 312 Squadron Royal Air Force
Supermarine Spitfire Mk.II Flying Officer Jan Falkowski 315 Squadron Royal Air Force

Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3 Leutnant Werner Mölders JG53 Luftwaffe
Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3 Hauptmann Wilhelm Balthasar JG27 Luftwaffe
Messerschmitt BF109 E-4 Oberst Adolf Galland JG26 Luftwaffe

Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Chūsa Tadashi Kaneko 6° Kokutai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu
Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Heiso Saburo Sakai Tainan Kokutai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu
Mitsubishi A6M2 Reisen Daisa Saburo Shindo 1° Koku Kantai – 1° Koku Sentai Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun Koku Hombu

Grummann F4F-3 Wildcat Major Robert Edward Galer VMF-224 United States Marine Corps
Grummann F4F-3 Martlet III Lieutenant-Commander Alan F. Black No. 805 Naval Air Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Grummann F4F-4 Wildcat Pilot Hamilton Mc Worther VF-29 US Navy

Thread: WWII minis

guzzoid — 2008-07-16T20:19:57+00:00

I am sorry if this was answered already, but I couldn't find an answer.

What minis will be released and about when will they be released?

Thanks!

Thread: Re: DoW errata

bdegroot — 2008-07-15T17:21:48+00:00

Just bought the game a few days ago, it's first edition. Is there any way I can get the erroneous cards replaced, or should I try to return the whole box to the store?

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

kduke — 2008-07-10T11:02:33+00:00

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.

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.

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.

Thread: Re: Revised Values

guzzoid — 2008-07-09T18:43:32+00:00

Scratch the A maneuver deck. I meant it should have a similar deck as a deck but with the C deck speed. The speed is right but it is short changed on its maneuverability. I believe that a good comparison for the zero would be the fokker d1. Except it could turn both ways. It was a bit slow, great in a climb but weak in a dive and highly maneuverable. It was weak structurally but heavily armed.

Thread: Re: Revised Values

guzzoid — 2008-07-09T18:37:49+00:00

The zero should have a 13 on damage and an A Maneuver deck.

Thread: Re: Now that I have some carriers, it's time for the war in the Pacific to heat up!

angiolillo — 2008-07-09T05:34:41+00:00

Here for the Lost Squadron:

http://p38assn.org/glacier-girl.htm

http://www.digitalrailroad.net/lousapienza/Production/PhotoG...

Have fun!

Andrea

Thread: Re: Now that I have some carriers, it's time for the war in the Pacific to heat up!

Brundle — 2008-07-09T04:14:05+00:00

How cool are those ships!! Nice job. The look very playable and at least with out the tower being made from foam they'd be easy to store.

Also: cool story on the Italian P-38 Andrea.
Didnt some one find a bunch of P-38's frozen in heaps of ice some where a few years ago? the boddies were all preserved with the planes and the gun were even usable after all that time. Any one know more??? I think it was in natinal geographic.

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

Brundle — 2008-07-09T03:59:10+00:00

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.

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

headlesstusken — 2008-07-08T20:09:32+00:00

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.

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

kduke — 2008-07-08T03:46:55+00:00

NOte for R-- the answer is in the part of the sentence you cut off.

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.

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

MattG — 2008-07-08T01:22:04+00:00

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!)

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

headlesstusken — 2008-07-07T17:57:47+00:00

...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.

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

angiolillo — 2008-07-07T15:01:48+00:00

Not yet, sorry.

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

guzzoid — 2008-07-07T14:58:40+00:00

Is there a new schedule for new releases this year?

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

Boots01 — 2008-07-07T08:04:12+00:00

@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.

Thread: Re: Fire from the Sky

angiolillo — 2008-07-07T06:24:13+00:00

No, it's been us to miss the date. Some kore moths are needed, alas.

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

kduke — 2008-07-06T23:30:20+00:00

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.

Thread: Fire from the Sky

guzzoid — 2008-07-06T20:55:55+00:00

I know everyone hates this question but fire from the sky was supposed to be released in June. Now it is July. Did I miss a new release date or what?

Thread: Re: Revised Values

kduke — 2008-07-06T14:57:04+00:00

I'm also glad on the F4F (I had already changed my cards). But I don't know if I agree about the Zero, which is using the same maneuver deck as the Hurricane and is below the Spit and 109 in maneuver abilities.

Are you referring to how much damage the game allows it to take?

Thread: Revised Values

Toshach — 2008-07-06T14:34:19+00:00

I'm very happy to see the revised values for the F-4. I think the Zero is still rated a bit tougher than it actually was though.

Glad to see that the game can evolve like this. I'll be buying v. II.

Thread: Re: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

tafkapao — 2008-07-06T14:25:40+00:00

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!

Thread: Wings of War Dawn of WWII - Good concept but flawed execution

Boots01 — 2008-07-06T12:27:52+00:00

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!) 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.

Thread: Re: DoW errata

Old Blue — 2008-07-06T01:03:05+00:00

Aloha - any word on replacement cards for those that purchased the original version?

Image

angiolillo — 2008-06-02T17:37:23+00:00

Two additional Russian Hurricanes included only in the Russian editon of the box.

Image

angiolillo — 2008-06-02T17:36:34+00:00

The cover of the Russian edition, with a special drawing by Vincenzo Auletta.

Image

AbeLincoln — 2008-05-20T07:30:17+00:00

The squadron of Zeros fly low and fast towards the USS Intrepid. Wildcats scramble, but will they be too late?

Image

bayonet — 2008-05-03T15:10:12+00:00

Blank and hopefully fixed Dawn of war card

Image

EndersGame — 2008-03-17T17:57:21+00:00

Coloured bag for hit counters (elastic keeps the neck of the bag closed, and it stretches open when a counter is selected secretly)

Image

EndersGame — 2008-03-17T17:43:53+00:00

Customized matching coloured bags for the three different coloured hit counters

Image

angiolillo — 2008-01-16T13:06:17+00:00

One of the two Russian Hurricanes added to the Russian edition of "The Dawn of World War II" (Tehnolog 2008).

Image

SpaceButler — 2008-01-01T19:56:46+00:00

I've thrown the useless insert away and use small plastic boxes for the damage chits, much more comfortable during play, too.