Topics

Review of Rapid Fire WW2 rules

John C
 

This time our reviewer looks at Rapid Fire, a long in the tooth ruleset, but with a lot of supporting publications, such as scenarios, unit formations for different theatres and FAQ/Errata information.

They are pretty good convention rules in my experience, because they are more or less Wham-Bam-You're dead kind of rules.  In other words you get to a conclusion fairly quickly, which is important in a convention setting.  

We have played them occasionally at IO where Tom Fraser introduced some home rules, principally a random activation system for units, replacing UGO-IGO as the standard mechanism.  That does improve the rules, but slows things a bit.  Not really significant in RF as it is a fairly "Rapid" ruleset to begin with.

One thing the reviewer does not mention is the tendency for most of the published scenarios to use length of table rather than transverse table as the direction of fighting.   This makes things very much frontal assault with no subtlety whatsoever.  No real maneuver, little opportunity to stage flank attacks, no forcing the enemy out of position by lateral threats, etc.   I am inclined to think that it would make for a better game if played transversely rather than longitudinally (I really like long words, no, really...........).

Anyway again I like that he looks in detail at mechanisms and what suits or does not suit his group.

JC

--
JC
"Sophisticated, charming and humble" - all down to his club shirt!

John C
 

Ooops, hit the wrong button and "sent" rather than "attached" - here it is again, but with the review actually attached this time!
__________________________________________________________________________

This time our reviewer looks at Rapid Fire, a long in the tooth ruleset, but with a lot of supporting publications, such as scenarios, unit formations for different theatres and FAQ/Errata information.

They are pretty good convention rules in my experience, because they are more or less Wham-Bam-You're dead kind of rules.  In other words you get to a conclusion fairly quickly, which is important in a convention setting.  

We have played them occasionally at IO where Tom Fraser introduced some home rules, principally a random activation system for units, replacing UGO-IGO as the standard mechanism.  That does improve the rules, but slows things a bit.  Not really significant in RF as it is a fairly "Rapid" ruleset to begin with.

One thing the reviewer does not mention is the tendency for most of the published scenarios to use length of table rather than transverse table as the direction of fighting.   This makes things very much frontal assault with no subtlety whatsoever.  No real maneuver, little opportunity to stage flank attacks, no forcing the enemy out of position by lateral threats, etc.   I am inclined to think that it would make for a better game if played transversely rather than longitudinally (I really like long words, no, really...........).

Anyway again I like that he looks in detail at mechanisms and what suits or does not suit his group.

JC

--
JC
"Sophisticated, charming and humble" - all down to his club shirt!