Fog of War

[triangular_cube]

I agree.  Fog of War only benefits the defending side because it slows everything down.  In the past I've used a couple house rules to mitigate FOW.  The first was games with 60+ units require a 17+ for FOW to take effect and the second was the side with the higher initiative can subtract one from the FOW roll) but now I'm also going to use another house rule that says if the FOW roll ends the turn, all demoralized units that have yet to activate must make recovery rolls.

I like the idea behind the Fog of War rule, but unfortunately it wasn't thoroughly thought out enough.

I think the problem is less that Fog of War as written isn't thought out, but more that Fog of War was written at a time when scenario turn counts were much higher. As an attacker you either fizzled out or not, very rarely was it a matter of one or two turns making a difference like it is in the more up tempo new stuff. It generally made the players be more thoughtful of activation order, while cutting out a lot of the faff 1 and 2 column shots that rarely had any impact. 

Playing without it would really distort much of the old stuff, as much so as playing with it distorts the new stuff. Jungle Fighting for example had an even more aggressive FoW rule rolling after 2 activations per and cutting off at 15. (actual text even called for six dice in the roll but most considered this to be... incorrectly worded). Pair this with very few adjacent activations due to the original jungle rules meant that activation choice was very important. Take those bigger brigade level actions in that module and play them without FoW and tell me how different those scenarios now are from the original intense decisions about which sector of the line was most critical