[Lurken]

I expected a solid game with better story than v1 and v2. Because both of them have plotholes the size of buffalos. Plotholes that created a lot of hot discussions on how to resolve them and make them understandable. Discussions that have mostly been resolved, other than possibly the canon status of Howling Wilderness.

When FL promised a remake of v2, we expected that. Same general plot, tweaked of course, to make use of our now better knowledge of the countries involved and the gaps earlier discovered and hotly discussed. We did not get that. We got Year Zero with a paint job of T2k slapped over it. Year Zero is a nice game for what it delivers, quick non-complex gaming.

T2k is not non-complex however. Logistics needs to be taken heavily account for. Traveling and planning as well.

I did some thinking, and under the hood, v1+v2 is not that different from v.FL. Both rely on random encounters from tables, or from a deck of cards. Both have a town/settlement generator. What I find different (from memory) is that v2 has a fairly good chapter about detailing how different generic groups may operate and their motives. Also GDW detailed a large number of towns in where ever the sandbox was placed. Be they occupied or abandoned, they were defined. So also a large number of military units, rebels and marauders. This gave a good background to work with in co-junction with the encounter tables.

The intel briefs for Sweden and Poland in v.FL are lacking in that regard. The number of towns/settlements defined in them are very low, be abandoned or not, and the military units feels disconnected from each other in a way. Can't quite put words to it. Meaning that using v.FLs story and setting will put a lot more focus on the GM to weave a understandable, coherent, reasonable and logical world for the players to move around in.