Information

Fields of Fire

Dedicated to the 2008 GMT release of the same name. A rare solitaire effort that leverages some unique elements of squad/team level combat.

Members: 68
Latest Activity: Oct 25

Discussion Forum

Canadian Army Variant Project 6 Replies

Started by Tony. Last reply by Rick McKown May 21, 2013.

Vietnam Mission 2 1 Reply

Started by Eric A. Quintero. Last reply by Eric A. Quintero Aug 16, 2009.

Things Missing From The Rules 4 Replies

Started by Doug Cooley. Last reply by Doug Cooley Jan 18, 2009.

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Fields of Fire to add comments!

Comment by Chris Hobbs on April 1, 2013 at 3:00pm

Love how much recent action this game has gotten on BGG recently, probably because of the announced P500 for the 2nd Volume. Looking forward to getting hold of that one and seeing more folks get into this gem!

Comment by Kazunori Iriya on October 5, 2009 at 11:23pm
Hi Suzuki-san,

Thanks for the update, this article is published in Command Magazine vol.89. Now I can also confirm it through TOC of vol.89 at http://commandmagazine.jp/com/089/index.html

Thanks,
Kazunori Iriya
Comment by Kazunori Iriya on October 4, 2009 at 11:33am
Hi Suzuki-san,

Great! This article will be included in the forthcoming Command Magazine vol.89 to be available on 20 October?

Best Regards,
Kazunori Iriya
Comment by Stephen Parker on July 5, 2009 at 11:15am
I have the game and no local FtF opponents, so the solitaire theme appeals. I led two light infantry US Army rifle platoons, and sometimes, acted as company commander. How is the game?
Comment by Hobiecat on April 3, 2009 at 9:59pm
I was thinking one person taking CoHQ XO 1st SGT, one each taking 1st PLT' 2 PLT and one taking 3rd PLT
Comment by Doug Cooley on April 3, 2009 at 8:19pm
I've been thinking a bit about that idea, having taught the game to three friends who each had a copy set up side by side. I think perhaps the best way to do it is to consider that each side is a company in a larger effort, and the boundary of your right flank matches up with their boundary for their left flank (with or without a "buffer" column). The things you'd need to adjust for would be the Higher HQ table (slow down or speed up events would affect the non-coop flanks), and you'd have to have some equivalent response for when one player was advancing faster than the other. Of course, having the battalion HQ visit would preclude them from doing the same to the other side, and you'd have to find a way to limit communications between the two sides. You'd also have to figure out how to adjust contact/engaged levels when an enemy was between areas of operations. Certainly worth thinking about.
Comment by Hobiecat on April 3, 2009 at 2:25pm
Hey, I am looking for people intrested in playing FoF coop with Vassal, just let me know if you would like to give it a try.
Comment by Hobiecat on February 13, 2009 at 8:22pm
I am ordering it today so that would help, I am not feeling the rule book to much.
Comment by Doug Cooley on December 31, 2008 at 1:59pm
Jerry, I know you're working on the FoF VASSAL module (and kudos to you for that effort). While we can argue about how well written the rules are, what I'd prefer to do is work on a series of computer screen-based videos that can show the new player how to get up and running quickly. The rules tend to focus more on the trees than the forest in many instances, or vice versa, and I'd like to give conceptual overviews of some of the more novel systems in the game as well as step-by-step demonstrations of VoF/PDF placement, command structure, vehicle use (another thing I'm struggling with), etc.

To that end, because I'm not working with Flash animation and would prefer not to have to do a ton of scans to get basic unit information into the game, I'd rather use VASSAL, video screen captures, and voice overs to relay the information, and thus a VASSAL module is more or less critical to my effort. If you had even a playtest version of a VASSAL module, that would at least get me started on scripting and even a few basic videos out to test if I'm accomplishing my goals. Please contact me if you have something that would work, even if it's not final-art ready yet.
Comment by Jerry Tresman on December 28, 2008 at 1:29pm
Although the rules are good they have mainly developed over the last 3+ years with contributions from play testers experienced in the system. It is more complex than it looks. In the months before final release I was having a hectic time at work and home so I am now looking at it with fresh eyes. Some areas of the rules could use a makeover from the eyes of a newcomer. The core is great. Like any system with a fresh approach there will be growing pains.
 

Members (68)

 
 
 

Help Center

Latest Activity

Joseph replied to John Kranz's discussion What are you playing?
"Played: Hollandspiele's "Horse & Musket" with basic rules. Easier to play with…"
9 hours ago
Profile IconTim Wilcox, ashley morton, Richard Valle and 3 more joined ConsimWorld
11 hours ago
Dave Smith posted a blog post

Happy Thanksgiving

There certainly was a good share of disappointments this year, and yet so much to be thankful…See More
15 hours ago
Wayne Rotella posted a status
"Happy Thanksgiving to all!"
20 hours ago
Jim Thomas updated their profile
Tuesday
Jonathan Kapleau updated their profile
Monday
Steve K commented on Steve K's blog post Games I'm Playing 2017
"Circus Maximus (above) and Imperium (below).  From GMT's "Rome" 2002. …"
Sunday
David Wessman updated their profile
Sunday

Events

Members

CSW Related Links

Please be sure to check-out these CSW services.

© 2017   Created by John Kranz.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service