Battlegroup & Flames of War – A Comparison of Two Gaming Systems

Battlegroup & Flames of War – A Comparison of Two Gaming Systems

Here’s an informative comparison between two popular 15mm war gaming systems. I put it together to try and give people an idea of what each game has to offer on the table top. This isn’t about which one is better, it’s about showing the community what to expect once the dice start to fly. Enjoy the Show

13 Comments

  1. Steve Gusky on April 1, 2020 at 2:39 pm

    Battlegroup is a more "historical" to&e
    You can only have what was in theater and some things are very limited
    For example
    You can’t play a tiger tank list in Battlegroup because they weren’t historically used that way
    They are used as attachments to your platoon
    Where in flames of war – you could play a tiger company list .
    I personally like the feel and flow of Battlegroup
    But
    It is easy to play all of the 3 major games in any scale of choice
    Even the creator of Battlegroup found it strange how we here in the states are "locked" into one game system and don’t look into others
    All 3 of these major games are worth taking a look at and enjoying!
    No haters please
    Roll well everyone



  2. House of Hengist Comics on April 1, 2020 at 2:45 pm

    Both systems are good at their respective levels…what we have done is combine both concepts into ACHTUNG panzer so it’s fast, simple, tactical with detail so best of both worlds which is why we set out to achieve. Nice objective commentary



  3. juan luis argemi martin on April 1, 2020 at 2:54 pm

    Battlegroup is simillar Bolt action in small scale?



  4. Martijn Waegemakers on April 1, 2020 at 3:03 pm

    Great comparison of the two systems!
    I moved from FoW to Battlegroup and never looked back as I find it has more depth tactically and the slighty more random elements to morale, etc. give it more of a fog of war feel.
    Ironically, I became fed up with FoW due to the imbalance between lists, especially as they tended to have what 40k players would refer to as Codex-creep; with each new list inlcuding more powerful and outlandish special rules.
    I also, found the defender in most FoW scenarios to be at a huge advantage especially in time restricted tournament rounds.

    I have since concluded that tournament play and the highly cinematic style of FoW is just not for me.

    Keep up the good work!



  5. Eric Skov on April 1, 2020 at 3:03 pm

    Great review of the systems! I have looked a lot at Flames of War, mostly because its all that is played in my area, but it doesn’t look like the right kind of game for me. I hadn’t heard of Battlegroup before today, but between this and one of your after-actions I think I have a decent grasp of at least the feel of the rules. I’ve read through another rule set called I Aint Been Shot Mum that should be approximately a compromise between these two systems. Force organization and lists are much more like Battlegroup, but it is designed to get a whole company on the board. Rules are more fast-play than Battlegroup it seems, but has more simulation of fog of war and difficulty of command than FoW (and maybe Battlegroup as well, will have to compare). Anyway, sounds like it might be a good fit if you like both of these systems. You can find their rules for ~$15 pdf from toofatlardies.co.uk. I’ll be giving Battlegroup a serious look.



  6. Fog of War on April 1, 2020 at 3:05 pm

    I’m looking forward to getting a look at the Battlegroup rules. I’ve watched some of the games – including yours – and it has an interesting feel and I look forward to trying the different game mechanics. The orders limitation is interesting and as you say forces some strategic play. This is half way between the I Go – U Go of Flames and the Orders-in-a-bag model of Bolt Action. Thanks for this comparison/review.



  7. Techsaint on April 1, 2020 at 3:07 pm

    Do you have a preference between the games, and if yes, why?



  8. Hans Otto on April 1, 2020 at 3:11 pm

    I have a collection of 15mm miniature and I am looking for a game to play them. After watching this video I favour FoW because I want an easy, fast and tank heavy game.



  9. Helcarexe26 on April 1, 2020 at 3:15 pm

    I just ordered the Battlegroup Rulebook and Barbarrossa, Trobuk scenario books. I’ve played FOW and Command Decision in the past, so looking for a more tactical system than FOW.
    Looking forward to seeing how they shake out with each other. Thanks for sharing your videos and batreps.



  10. Carlos O on April 1, 2020 at 3:18 pm

    Yes been waiting for this video, if the models are compatible it wouldn’t be a bad idea to check a new rule set



  11. Saltech on April 1, 2020 at 3:20 pm

    I’m getting back into World War 2 wargaming for the first time in decades and I’m totally torn on what system to use. In the old days I and my brother would fight using a set of rules we devised ourselves, in which 1 figure = 1 person, based separately. 

    I am no longer interested in that level of game ("skirmish" level or platoon level). When I read about battalion level actions nowadays I find my fingers twitching to start gaming. The "Combat Mission" games on computer have convinced me that battalion level infantry focused games are the way to go, with tanks playing a relatively supportlike role.

    My ideal would be a fast moving infantry focused game in which each infantry element consists of three figures but represents a whole squad of 8-12; AND in which tank models each represent one tank. The closest I can find are WRG rules from the 80s (in which, however, 1 figure = 1 man) and Command Decision (in which, however, 1 tank model = 4 tanks). Maybe my brother and I will have to revive our ancient system from the 90s and try to modify it to fit my ideal!



  12. Little Legions on April 1, 2020 at 3:22 pm

    a good, and objective summary of the 2 systems. thanks for posting! good stuff.



  13. Steve Gusky on April 1, 2020 at 3:22 pm

    Well done sir