Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Aussie_Digger2

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    , NT, Australia
  1. i bought some from here in Oz and some from LnL javascript:void(0);/*1350887192494*/ This is the list of all the titles in the LnL series
  2. I have been playing, band of heroes (US Airbourne in Normandy) Heroes of the blitzkrieg (France 1940) Plus the expansions: No one step back (Russian expansion) Swift & Bold (British Airbourne exp) Dark July (Kursk exp) Noville (adds regular US troops, plus is a linked campaign exp for fighting around Noville) and soon to ship is the expansion adding the british to the 1940 cmpaign (HotB)
  3. I have sent many emails to Rob (the designer of FotB) asking when a FAQ / eratta would be released for the expansion. As well as individal question relating to rules and unclear scenarios. Below is a response I got a year ago when asking about a FAQ. "I am unsure about the scheduling of an FAQ/Errata. I am polishing up a project right now. After that, I can see about putting one on the schedule." Thanks FFG And thats all i have received although I have tried to clear up unclear rules with them many times. Myself and others have repeatedly email FFG trying to get more information but they never get back to us.
  4. Kingtiger said: I wouldn't say that they don't care. The problem for them is probably that TOI is not much of a cash cow for them. Obviously the blame for that lies with FFG for not supporting the game enough, and perhaps even more importantly, for the enormous quantity of ill-balanced scenarios that they're not really doing much about to fix anymore. I personally find TOI one of the very best tactical miniature wargames I own that has a lot of potential, but it does require more commitment from the comapny! Exactly, "ToI is not much of a cash cow" this means they dont care about supporting the game and its fans. Money makes companies care! Personally I have found the lock n load serise and it has become my favoriate tactical game now, there is more detail to the rules (some which I wished were used in some way in ToI) yet I found it quicker to pick up then ToI. So many more options open to the players. Its been around longer than ToI and it always has something in the pipline and the designer is always communitcating with the community. It dosnt use minis but counters, which to start with I was a little stand offish, as i do like minis, but after playing the game i dont care about that sort of thing anymore, plus the artwork is amazing.
  5. There is never any word from FFG, they dont seem to care about the ToI system. FotB was released some 2 years ago and they still havent fixed the errors with that expansion (and there are alot)
  6. I have come across the lock n load system, I have lock n load: band of heroes & lock n load heroes of the blitzkrieg plus all the expansions for them. Its a squad level game, it uses counters not minis but it dosnt bother me as the games are alot more compact, easy to set up and all the parts look amazing. I have found it deals with alot of rules that I wished had some sort of a part in ToI. It feels alot more detailed (and you have alot more tactical opions open to you because of this) though I found I picked up the concepts and uderstood the rules quicker than I did for ToI. Every scenario I have played so far has come down to the last turn (Havent found any scenarios that are truly unblanced) The support for the game is also amazing with the community very quick to respond to any questions on the geek and also the creator being active. There always seems to be a project in the works for the system aswell.
  7. Brummbar said: I haven't even had a chance to play any of the Fury expansion, but this one looks like it will be on my must play list. Don't worry about the scenarios that came with FotB, If you are enjoying the fan created (and your own) ones you will be disapointed by the ones you had to buy. I found with most that after playing we were left with a feeling that there were gaps in the scenarios (many with errors that can be seen without even playing). The most frustrating thing is playing the scenarios and discovering the errors that are not noticable at first glance, its just a waste spending an evening of gaming trying to get through an unplaytested scenario. I really want to get back into ToI so that I can get back to finishing the scenarios I was working on, But 3 things have made this avery slow process. 1. I have lost motivation with ToI, other games I play have so much more support and the designers are always involved with them (even years after the release). 2. I really only have 1 other person who I can playtest with face to face. 3. My wife recently gave birth to twins, so when I do get the time I would rather enjoy playing agame not playtesting.
  8. Yea corrections can be made for some of the scenarios, but these too would require some play testing. If FFG wanted me to play test their scenarios, then they should hae sent me FotB for free. I still cant believe a company like FFG would sell something of such poor quality. To me FotB was released in its play testing and unedited phase. Very Poor
  9. Grand Stone said: For example 'the germans starts with 8 infanteri bases, 8 halftracks, 2 tigers, 2 panters and a panzer' The russians starts of with two AT-guns, and 8 infanteri bases. Defensive position: not extermly good. Ok, the russians do get 3 tanks as reinforcements, but who cares. It takes me 5 min and no testplay to see that this is broken. Personaly I then only have hope for the tow last scenarios. The very last is actually said to be balanced. Thats a plus. I also know that Bill made one extra scenario (see boardgamesgeek battle refference) which is great. But that one is typically not published… However, when playing proper and good scenarios this game is still good. So I'm waiting for good fan based scenarios for FoB. I forget the name of this scenario, but IMO its the one needing the most attention, We played as it is written and its pretty much impossible for the germans too lose, in fact we have never seen the game last to where the russian reinforcements make it to the board. There are many issues with theis scenario (i think even the setup of the command tokens is wrong) Why wont FFG fix their errors, not too much to ask since we all payed money for the game.
  10. We found the same issue with the scenario when we played (so time ago now) Once the Germans had 1 more VP they just had to sit the tigers in the forest hexes, and they were almost untouchable. The russians had to advance on them which was pretty much suicide for them. But if like you said the Germnas had to exit off the board then things would get a little more interesting as the russians could wait and get in close, this would help with the game coming down to the wire.
  11. Scammer said: In the Tank Fight at Prokhorovka scenario in Fury of the Bear, the Germans are supposed to start with the Operations Card "Elite Tankers". There is no such card as "Elite Tankers". Do they mean "Elite Tank Crew"? Bill's already aluded to the fact that there appear to be typos in the Prelude to Breakout scenario. Although what typos exactly, it hasn't been said. I'm assuming Elite Tankers is supposed to be Elite Tank Crew. Do FFG pay anyone to proofread before they go to print? And as an aside, has anyone played any of the scenarios in FotB (besides me)? I've seen a lot of talk, but not too many people playing. Yep its amazing how many issues there are with what FFG puts out for ToI. I do remeber Bill saying there were printed errors with some of the scenarios he was involved in though these errors have not been corrected or even made aware to the community yet (this was some time ago) I have played half the scenarios in the FotB (they were so.so with minor errors) the others i havent even bothered with as they still need larger corrections (I only have 1 other person I play ToI with so I dont want to spend a game night testing if something should be right or not, that is why I spent money on the game so that I could sit down and enjoy a well play tested scenario) I have pretty much stopped playing ToI (for now, might get back into it to make my own scenarios, but like i said play testing can be bit of a problem) at the moment I have invested in another game series, where the designer puts so much more support into it and contuines to do so, and it has been out longer than ToI. I have been really enjoying the series and there are still more expansions and games on the horizon for it, so ToI has been gathering dust for now. i may even start to think about selling some of it off. But as I have said before FotB was my last FFG purchase and will be may last (unless there is a major shift in how the company treats its customers)
  12. I may be wrong but I think Dogma79 is asking about the units values as in movement points, armour values, firepower and the such, not point buy values. The official player aides that come with the game are the correct values for the units. There are no official 'point buy values"
  13. dutchy124 said: My friend and I played a scenario he has created called ''The Meeting Engagement version 1'' One of the special rules of this scenario states:- ''Players receive one Victory Point for each Victory Point Objective they control.'' There are three Victory Point Command Objective markers on the battlefield. All well and good. Also in this scenario both sides are allowed to choose any two Operations cards from the 18 available from the base game. I choose ''Tank Ace'', which states:- ''At the start of the game, place a victory objective marker on one of your tank units. This unit gains 2 firepower. You opponent receives 3 command if this tank is destroyed'' I am of the opinion I should get an extra victory point for this each command phase round until the tank is lost and my opponent gets his three command points. My mate says no, only the three victory command objectives on the board qualify for points in the command phase and that the tank marker could be any marker to indicate a special value tank. I disagree and say victory points should be gained whilst the tank is not destroyed. You may say, well he designed it so go by what he says, yes I can see that, but, whilst I agree to a point, most of us don't know the designer and in the middle of a game we just have to go by what is written down in the scenario and if it is not as clear as it should be or if the designer had not thought of something then how do we come to a compromise? I think as a commander of an army I have to use all available edges I can get. He may not have even thought of that particular card, but the reason I choose it was to get that victory point each round.. Did the British say we cannot use the information gathered from breaking the Enigma Code as it was unethical, of course not. What you do think chaps? Should I get a victory point each commasnd phase while I still have the tank on board or not? PS In our game I did not get any victory points via my tank, but did say I would ask for opinions here. All the best Clive. If I were playing with the rules you just posted I would have only played as the 3 VP tokens on the board as being counted for VP's since the special rule states that you need to control them , the token given to the tank ace is not controled by anyside (only the tank is controlled by a player) it is just a token to show it is diffent to other tanks on the board.
  14. Brummbar said: 'Unspotted' is also a good idea. I've always thought that practically all units should start out hidden until spotted. It would make recce units a valuable aspect of the game that is currently missing. I've written a scenario on that theme that might come to light one day (if I get more playtesting in). I have been getting into lock n load a lot lately and a lot of the rules can be used in TOI (its the sort of rules i would have like to have seen in TOI) with not too much trouble, the way the lock n load system deals with spotting is pretty effective yet simple to follow. There is a demo of the game with some of the core rules on the lock n load website.
  15. I know in the base game sceanrio book the "stavelot express" scenario says that the germans receive 16 elite units but in the errata on the support page it say they sould receive 12 elite and 4 regular.
  • Create New...