Chain of Command and Bolt Action are often compared to each other. They’re both roughly platoon-sized WW2 games, are both often played at 28mm, and both are reasonably new on the scene and generating a lot of interest. It’s only natural that they’re going to be compared to each other (the latest issue of Wargames Illustrated has an article doing just that) but unfortunately some people take it personally and I’ve seen numerous cases of individuals knocking “the other set” online.
If you’re a Bolt Action player that doesn’t mean you have to run down Chain of Command, and vice versa. I play Chain of Command but as far as I can see Bolt Action is doing a lot of good things for the hobby:
- The range of supporting miniatures from Warlord is huge, with lots of new releases.
- The marketing is actively targeting 40K players and trying to get them interested in historical gaming.
- It’s much more tournament-friendly, which caters to a large subset of wargamers.
- Lots of new players playing WW2 games supports everybody involved in WW2 gaming. Not everyone will buy everything from Warlord, other vendors will get a slice of the pie.
We’ve always had multiple rule sets for every period in wargaming. I say just play the set you and your opponents like and don’t worry about what other people are playing.
I can’t sum it up better than a post on the subject I saw recently:
The games we play make us smile, laugh, wince, whoop with joy and holler with despair. The vehicles we each use to drive us through our hours of distraction and escapism i.e. the rules we use to recreate our sanitary and benign little wars, all have their own positives and pitfalls. As long as we look back on these games with satisfaction, a mad-eyed grin of victory or a rueful smile of defeat, does it really matter which rule system got us to that moment.