Бpycилoвcкий пpopыв Edition
Previous thread: >>47491741
Get in here, post games, miniatures, questions, whatever you like.
List of mini providers:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uGaaOSvSTqpwPGAvLPY3B5M2WYppDhzXdjwMpqRxo9M/edit
List of Historical Tactical, Strategic, and Military Drill treatises:
http://pastebin.com/BfMeGd6R
ZunTsu Gameboxes:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/yaokao3h1o4og/ZunTsu_GameBoxes
/hwg/ Steam Group:
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/tghwg/
Games, Ospreys & References folders:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/lu95l5mgg06d5/Ancient
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/81ck8x600cas4/Medieval
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/w6m41ma3co51e/Horse_and_Musket
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/vh1uqv8gipzo1/Napoleonic
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/bbpscr0dam7iy/ACW
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/bvdtt01gh105d/Victorian
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/b35x147vmc6sg/World_War_One
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/z8a13ampzzs88/World_War_Two
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/z8i8t83bysdwz/Vietnam_War
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/7n3mcn9hlgl1t/Modern
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/8tatre3vd10yv/Avalon_Hill
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/pq6ckzqo3g6e6/Field_Of_Glory
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/r2mff8tnl8bjy/GDW
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/whmbo8ii2evqh//SPI
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/ws6yi58d2oacc/Strategy_%26_Tactics_Magazine
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/lx05hfgbic6b8/Naval_Wargaming
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/s1am77aldi1as/Wargames
>Wargaming Compendium
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cghxf3475qy46aq/Wargaming+Compendium.pdf
>Saga
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/alj31go19tmpm/SAGA
>Black Powder
http://www.mediafire.com/download/o5x6blwoczojmfr/Black+Powder.pdf
>Bolt Action
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/n7jmdnlv1n0ju/Bolt_Action
>Hail Caesar
https://mega.nz/#F!s9xTTDpQ!CasEjRETeqZsJ5LOzYrJdg
>Warhammer Ancient battles 2.0
http://www.mediafire.com/download/uttov32riixm9b0/Warhammer+Ancient+Battles+2E.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ta7aj1erh7sap1t/Warhammer+Ancient+Battles+-+Armies+of+Antiquity+v2.pdf
>Warmaster Ancients
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cifld8bl3uy2i5g/Warmaster+Ancients.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/3emyvka11bnna1b/Warmaster+Ancient+Armies.pdf
>Advanced Squad Leader
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/d9x0dbxrpjg48/Advanced_Squad_Leader
>Impetus
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/28i9gevqws518/Impetus
>Ronin
http://www.mediafire.com/download/m8xke04pc3hne2k/Ronin.pdf
>Battleground WWII
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/cb83cg7ays4l1/Battleground_WWII
>By Fire And Sword
https://mega.co.nz/#!jxgCWTYD!FCp52DAqIUc-EM-TsRsWv7fB92nJ3kkzKsNcD_urI5Q
>Modelling & painting guides
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/7b5027l7oaz05/Modelling_%26_Painting_Guides
>Twilight 2000/2013 RPG
https://mega.co.nz/#F!C9sQhbwb!NVnD4jvUn5inOrPJIAkBhA
>Phoenix Command RPG
https://mega.co.nz/#F!b5tgXRwa!mzelRNrKPjiT8gP7VrS-Jw
>Next War (GMT)
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/eupungrg93xgb/Next_War
>Battlegroup
https://mega.nz/#F!SolyxarJ!GUg6zWBStfznr6BvYedghQ
Desired scans :
Black Powder supplements
Rank and File supplements
Harpoon 3 & 4 supplements
Hail Caesar! Late Antiquity to Early Medieval Army List
Force on Force supplements
Hind Commander
At Close Quarters
War and Conquest
Germany Strikes!
Bolt Action: Empire in Flames
4th June in military history:
1615 – Siege of Osaka: Forces under Tokugawa Ieyasu take Osaka Castle in Japan.
1745 – Battle of Hohenfriedberg: Frederick the Great's Prussian army decisively defeated an Austrian army under Prince Charles Alexander of Lorraine during the War of the Austrian Succession.
1794 – British troops capture Port-au-Prince in Haiti.
1855 – Major Henry C. Wayne departs New York aboard the USS Supply to procure camels to establish the U.S. Camel Corps.
1859 – Italian Independence wars: In the Battle of Magenta, the French army, under Louis-Napoleon, defeat the Austrian army.
1862 – American Civil War: Confederate troops evacuate Fort Pillow on the Mississippi River, leaving the way clear for Union troops to take Memphis, Tennessee.
1916 – World War I: Russia opens the Brusilov Offensive with an artillery barrage of Austro-Hungarian lines in Galicia.
1940 – World War II: The Dunkirk evacuation ends: British forces complete evacuation of 338,000 troops from Dunkirk in France. To rally the morale of the country, Winston Churchill delivers, only to the House of Commons, his famous "We shall fight on the beaches" speech.
1942 – World War II: The Battle of Midway begins. The Japanese Admiral Chūichi Nagumo orders a strike on Midway Island by much of the Imperial Japanese Navy.
1943 – A military coup in Argentina ousts Ramón Castillo.
1944 – World War II: A hunter-killer group of the United States Navy captures the German submarine U-505: The first time a U.S. Navy vessel had captured an enemy vessel at sea since the 19th century.
1944 – World War II: Rome falls to the Allies, the first Axis capital to fall.
1989 – The Tiananmen Square protests are violently ended in Beijing by the People's Liberation Army, with at least 241 dead.
June 4th marks the centennary of the Brusilov Offensive, also known as the "June Advance". This was the Russian Empire's greatest feat of arms during World War I, and among the most lethal offensives in world history. It was the worst crisis of World War I for Austria-Hungary and one of the Triple Entente's greatest victories, but it came at a tremendous loss of life.
The offensive involved a major Russian attack against the armies of the Central Powers on the Eastern Front, launched on June 4, 1916, and lasting until late September. It took place in an area of present-day western Ukraine, in the general vicinity of the towns of Lviv, Kovel, and Lutsk. The offensive was named after the commander in charge of the Southwestern Front of the Imperial Russian Army, General Aleksei Brusilov.
Under the terms of the Chantilly Agreement of December 1915, Russia, France, Britain and Italy committed to simultaneous attacks against the Central Powers in the summer of 1916. Russia felt obliged to lend troops to fight in France and Salonika (against her own wishes), and to attack on the Eastern Front, in the hope of obtaining munitions from Britain and France.
The Russians also initiated the disastrous Lake Naroch Offensive in the Vilno area, during which the Germans suffered only one-fifth as many casualties as the Russians. This offensive took place at French request, in the hope that the Germans would transfer more units to the East after their attack on Verdun.
Brusilov presented his plan to the Stavka, proposing a massive offensive by his Southwestern Front against the Austro-Hungarian forces in Galicia. It aimed to take some of the pressure off French and British armies in France and the Italian Army along the Isonzo Front and, if possible, to knock Austria-Hungary out of the war. As the Austrian army was heavily engaged in Italy, the Russian army enjoyed a significant numerical advantage on the Galician front.
>>47588363
Mounting pressure from the western Allies caused the Russians to hurry their preparations. Brusilov amassed four armies totaling 40 infantry divisions and 15 cavalry divisions. He faced 39 Austrian infantry divisions and 10 cavalry divisions, formed in a row of three defensive lines, although later German reinforcements were brought up. Brusilov, knowing he would not receive significant reinforcements, moved his reserves up to the front line. He prepared for a surprise assault along 480 kilometres (300 mi) of front. The Stavka urged Brusilov to considerably shorten his attacking front to allow for a much heavier concentration of Russian troops. Brusilov insisted on his plan and the Stavka relented, although they denied his request for supporting offensives by neighboring fronts.
On June 4 the Russians opened the offensive with a massive, accurate but brief artillery barrage against the Austro-Hungarian lines, with the key factor of this effective bombardment being its brevity and accuracy. This was in contrast to the customary, protracted barrages at the time that gave the defenders time to bring up reserves and evacuate forward trenches, while damaging the battlefield so badly that it was hard for attackers to advance. The initial attack was successful and the Austro-Hungarian lines were broken, enabling three of Brusilov's four armies to advance on a wide front.
The success of the breakthrough was helped in large part by Brusilov's use of shock troops to attack weak points along the Austrian lines to effect a breakthrough, which the main Russian army could then exploit. Brusilov's tactical innovations laid the foundation for the German infiltration tactics used later in the Western Front.
>>47588371
On June 8 forces of the Southwestern Front took Lutsk. The Austrian commander, Archduke Josef Ferdinand, barely managed to escape the city before the Russians entered, a testament to the speed of the Russian advance. By now the Austrians were in full retreat and the Russians had taken over 200,000 prisoners. Brusilov's forces were becoming overextended and he made it clear that further success of the operation depended on Evert launching his part of the offensive. Evert, however, continued to delay, which gave the German high command time to send reinforcements to the Eastern Front.
In a meeting held on the same day Lutsk fell, German Chief of Staff von Falkenhayn persuaded his Austrian counterpart von Hötzendorf to pull troops away from the Italian Front to counter the Russians in Galicia. Field Marshal von Hindenburg, Germany's commander in the East, was again able to capitalize on good railroads to bring German reinforcements to the front.
Finally, on June 18 a weak and poorly prepared offensive commenced under Evert. On July 24 von Linsingen counterattacked the Russians south of Kovel and temporarily checked them. On July 28 Brusilov resumed his own offensive, and although his armies were short on supplies he reached the Carpathian Mountains by September 20. The Russian high command started transferring troops from Evert's front to reinforce Brusilov, a transfer Brusilov strongly opposed because more troops only served to clutter his front.
Brusilov's operation achieved its original goal of forcing Germany to halt its attack on Verdun and transfer considerable forces to the East. It also broke the back of the Austro-Hungarian army, which suffered the majority of the casualties. Afterward, the Austro-Hungarian army increasingly had to rely on the support of the German army for its military successes. On the other hand, the German army did not suffer much from the operation and retained most of its offensive power afterward.
>>47588378
The early success of the offensive convinced Romania to enter the war on the side of the Entente, though that turned out to be a bad decision since it led to the failure of the 1916 campaign. Russian casualties were considerable, numbering up to half a million, but enemy casualties were almost triple. The offensive is listed among the most lethal in world history.
The Brusilov Offensive was the high point of the Russian effort during World War I, and was a manifestation of good leadership and planning on the part of the Imperial Russian Army coupled with great skill of the lower ranks. The offensive commanded by Brusilov himself went very well, but the overall campaign, for which Brusilov's part was only supposed to be a distraction, because of Evert's failures, became tremendously costly for the Imperial army, and after the offensive, it was no longer able to launch another on the same scale. Many historians contend that the casualties that the Russian army suffered in this campaign contributed significantly to its collapse the following year.
This operation provides a chance for strategic wargaming on a major scale, in a more obscure period of WWI history. The use of Russian shock troops and the exotic mix of the Austro-Hungarian forces provide a lot of colour and uniqueness to it.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/h9ro9fa3rkg9sku/Osprey+-+CBT+011+-+German+Infantryman+vs+Russian+Infantryman+1914-15.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/h3wu87l14anhosb/Osprey+-+ELI+084+-+Trench+Warfare+WWI+%282%29+1916-18.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/2lht450uoz0k80b/Osprey+-+MAA+364+-+The+Russian+Army+1914-18.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/692xm8122qkjtp4/Osprey+-+MAA+392+-+The+Austro-Hungarian+Forces+In+World+War+I+%281%29+1914-16.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/3mymq3cc61j903d/Osprey+-+MAA+407+-+The+German+Army+In+World+War+I+%282%29+1915-17.pdf
I hope Empire of Flames pops up soon since I'm getting my amphibious assault troops ready.
pic related.
>>47588537
Foam core and styrene scratchbuild? Looking damn sexy so far.
>>47588568
Thank you. yes it's foam board and styrene scratchbuild. a few more details and then a paintjob and it's good to go to get my USMC onto the beach.
>>47588537
I played the Tarawa scenario from Empire in Flames last month with a mate. We're planning on doing the full campaign all the way up to Okinawa as our introduction to Bolt Action.
Anyway, Tarawa was an absolute blast. I caught his entire right flank in an artillery barrage that annihilated almost the entire force, except for a lone flamethrower-weilding trooper who then struggled through the waves dodging sniper rounds to reach the shore and then proceeded to roast an entire squad of SNLF grenadiers. We christened him Captain Flamerica.
My central bunker held a sniper and MMG team; they were scarcely touched the whole fight until some Marines managed to reach the back door.
My final banzai charge of the game was the remnants of my last SNLF squad against the remains of a Marine squad whose transport went down near shore. I took down a handful with me but the Marines finally claimed the shore.
By the final count I was sitting on 43 victory points to his 11, which more or less mirrors the real Tarawa. It was a total bloodbath and we both had a ball.
For reference, the US gets double the points of the Japanese player and a free preparatory bombardment with -1 to damage. Japanese forces start in foxholes and trench lines, giving them Hidden. US must enter the board by landing craft, but get as many free ones as they like. Japanese get a free minefield for each free transport.
Soldier from my Modern ImagiNation.
>>47588773
It's easier to take photos of figures if you aren't holding them.
In case the anon looking for Eastern Front literature from last thread is still around. Brusilov's own war memoirs were translated into English as A Soldier's Notebook: 1914-1918. It seems to be a bit hard to track down copies online though, you might want to try a library.
>>47588857
I'm still here, and yes! I'll see if I can track one down. The lack of general literature on this is rather vexing.
>>47588867
Apparently my university library has a copy, and we have a drastically underfunded History department. So I guess this is a good omen for the odds of finding it in libraries at least.
>>47588773
>>47588849
pic related
>>47588757
awesome! I'm planning on playing the Battle of Peleliu tomorrow. I'll borrow those minefield per transport rule. to account for the massive hidden Japanese artillery in the mountain caves and mortars, I plan on giving the Japanese's FAO two but one artillery strike.
>>47588773
>Modern ImagiNation.
Who makes these? A google search for Modern ImagiNation turns up nothing.
>>47589327
ImagiNation just refers to made up countries, nothing to do with a setting or specific manufacturer.
So, still no Skirmish Outbreak?
A horse colour chart to help liven up painting your cavalry
>>47590557
:/HWG/ Russian AFV's and Horse Eugenics
>>47590557
This is actually really helpful! Much appreciated!
>>47590557
Great image thanks, sort of makes me want to pick up some cavalry just to make use of it.
Might be an odd request here but does anyone know where you can get 6mm models of bigass missiles etc? Stuff like ballistic missile carriers, anti aircraft emplacements etc?
GHQ have a SCUD launcher but that's it.
What do people think about Pike and Shotte? Any impressions?
>>47588537
aaaand done. quick and dirty.
>>47591491
I haven't played it but I've read it, it's built on the same platform as hail Caesar (which I have played) and black powder (which i have not)
As far as a more simple/beginners intro to war gaming the era, I think it's pretty good, you might end up satisfied with it or eventually want to move on to something more intricate and detailed. HC didn't disappoint me, but for hellenistic war gaming I was left wanting more, so I've been thinking a lot about trying war and conquest or to the strongest. It pretty much did what it promised which is (presumably as with black powder and Pike and shotte) give you an adequate framework for playing large multiplayer games to a decisive conclusion quickly (within three hours). It's intended also to provide a platform for customization and house rules to the players taste, but I felt there was only so much that could be added on this front. The rolling for orders system was a little confusing to my group (used to warhammer) but didn't really give is any upset results, possibly because I gave each player a command 9 general (Ptolemy, seleucus, antigonus, and demetrius for an early diadochoi battle loosely based on ipsus) as well as cmd 8 division commanders
If you haven't read through the P&S rules yet, they're in the OP's folders, can't hurt to give em a try
Hi, anyone got a wargame that would be quick and easy to learn, and use 1/72 models? It also needs to be on a relatively small scale as we don't have many tanks.
>>47592659
First of all, thank you.
>As far as a more simple/beginners intro to war gaming the era, I think it's pretty good
Doesn't sound promising (I guess I would be considered a veteran then).
>It pretty much did what it promised which is (presumably as with black powder and Pike and shotte) give you an adequate framework for playing large multiplayer games to a decisive conclusion quickly
>it's built on the same platform as hail Caesar (which I have played) and black powder (which i have not)
So, the system, is largely unchanged? From Caesar to Gustavus Adolphus? That is interesting, because warfare, kind of (yes, as everybody knows), changed between those decades....
>It's intended also to provide a platform for customization and house rules to the players taste
That is interesting and from your comments, besides the minis, the only reason why I will have a closer look at it.
>If you haven't read through the P&S rules yet, they're in the OP's folders, can't hurt to give em a try
Thank you, didn't notice them. Will give them a shot.
>>47592780
Bolt Action if you want WW2.
>>47592792
>changed between those decades
:Centuries:. Sorry about that one.
>>47592839
Thank you.
>>47592854
No probs. You can play it with 2-3 infantry squads, some support weapons (like machine guns and mortars) plus a tank.
Any impressions for By Fire and Sword?
>>47588773
>Modern ImagiNation
My god, what have we done
>>47592792
>So, the system, is largely unchanged? From Caesar to Gustavus Adolphus? That is interesting, because warfare, kind of (yes, as everybody knows), changed between those decades....
It's not entirely identical but most of the core game play principles remain constant. Each unit is differentiated by stats (melee ability, firepower, moral/armor, etc.) but also by special rules. The stats are pretty much the same in the three systems, but the special rules are different, and the statlines are different. Hail Caesar has a much stronger emphasis on hand to hand combat (and splits the CQB stat into Clash and Sustained), also gives all the units more dice in melee and iirc gives them more "hitpoints" to make combat more protracted, and also let's commanders join melee Fighting (BP doesn't, P&S might I don't remember)
BP is all about exchange of fire with melee as a Cavalry Skirmish or quick decisive bayonet charge. P&S is kind of a halfway point between the two, so it does a fair job of differentiating eras.
The command/movement system is the same, the stats have the same names, terrain, victory conditions/army break points, etc. All the same more or less, so each of the three rulesets is basically built on the same skeleton, but they mostly manage to avoid being too generic
I think the warlord rulesets can be good intros, but their design intent was for veterans who just want a laid back game where everyone who shows up can throw their entire collection on the table and finish a game in an evening.
As someone coming from warhammer, I'm looking for something more streamlined than WHFB but maybe not as streamlined as these rulesets. They're a great choice when the group doesn't want to take the game too seriously (beer and pretzels and all that) but in different situations or to really accurately represent an era, something else might do a better job.
>>47593155
>The stats are pretty much the same in the three systems,
Meaning they all use the same kind of stats
>...and the statlines are different
Meaning the baseline capability of a given unit type, so, pikemen≠fusiliers≠roman legionaires but if you can read one unit entry, you can read them all, if that makes sense
>>47592780
Chain Of Command is quite nice too
>>47593155
Thank you for this, again.
Been having a peek at the rulebook itself, and I am quite sceptical about the various formations itself. It looks far too fictive in some instances. Will give the game a shot though.
Have you bought any of their minis? Because, irrespective of the game itself, they look quite good. Any comments?
>>47592922
Eh, it's basically what ak-47 republic does. Or that fivecore setting-building supplement.
>>47592922
Not a lot.
This may be a weird request.
Is there a set of rules for a wargame where there are no "turns", just orders, and everyones turn is done simontaneously, but not RTS, still sort of turn-based. Like Diplomacy, if you've played that.
>>47596624
The term you are looking for is WEGO, I believe.
Conventional turns are IGOUGO
>>47596675
well shit. I thought you were rattling my bones, but look at that.
>>47596624
Crossfire?
>>47596866
>8
>>47596624
Yeah crossfire works like this
>>47593472
I have warlord phalangites and warlord/immortal hoplites, both are great value for the money. The Pike and shot sets are a little older and the concensus seems to be that warlord plastic sets are hit or miss, but they look about as good as most other metal offerings, and far cheaper. I intend to collect two Pike and shotte forces at some point, probably swedish and imperial from WLG for thirty years war. I like that they sell metal helmets, caps, musket rests and other accessories separately.
There's also a couple of websites where you can get them at a heavy discount, $25 usd for 40 hoplites for instance
I haven't tried buying from caliver books yet but they claim to offer free shipping worldwide if you buy ₤15 or some such, and they have the best discounts I've seen so far, so I intend to try buying from them for my next purchase
They don't carry everything from warlord but have most of the plastics, including BA, I don't remember if they had P&S though
>>47596866
>>47596928
Thanks friendos
Sorry to ask this but would someone please post the crossfire pdf? It's in the OP link but my phone can't fucking open it for some reason. Thanks.
please
>>47597244
File's to big to post in the thread
>>47597499
I guess I'll just have to read it when I get to my computer. In about 10 days... God I fucking hate phones sometimes.
>>47596940
>>47596940
>I have warlord phalangites and warlord/immortal hoplites, both are great value for the money. The Pike and shot sets are a little older and the concensus seems to be that warlord plastic sets are hit or miss, but they look about as good as most other metal offerings, and far cheaper. I intend to collect two Pike and shotte forces at some point, probably swedish and imperial from WLG for thirty years war. I like that they sell metal helmets, caps, musket rests and other accessories separately.
I've bought from warlord their plastic kits in a bid to keep down costs are somewhat monopose (looking at you firelock boxed set) not so much a problem as apart from hats/helmets in the tyw/ecw both sides utilized the same gear and formations.
The immortal/cutting edge ancients stuff being an 'outside range' is smaller/slighter than other brands.
One worrying thing is they've been pushing gates of antares so much that they've put a stop to the old system of being able to do custom orders and i've noticed their article content is in steep decline as they reuse stuff.
Although they have put out ads for contributors they specified that the person must be close to Nottingham and while they would have access to products/bits early they would not be getting payed money.
I've noted as well their staff articles while interesting are also impractical, sure Rich Dando from mail order can get ahold of bits for a load of custom jobs...the average Joe cannot, if he wants to copy Rich he needs to fork out for a load of boxed sets/blisters in order to get a few components.
I worry warlord seems to be going the way of GW.
>>47599127
>they've been pushing gates of antares so much
They have? I have still been seeing zero discussion of it pretty much everywhere. Maybe like one thread over on lead adventurer. That game has fucking nothing interesting going on.
I do get your concerns about them going a bit GW. Though I've been getting them given how they've just been buying up other people's ranges. Now whilst there's nothing wrong with that in principle since it is often niche stuff that the creator wants to not deal with/push to a larger audience and really it is helpful to the consumer to be able to get more stuff from a single source instead of having to dig through a ton of stuff to find things (and there is still plenty of competition), well, the way they've been handling it has been less than satisfactory as suddenly stuff is unavailable or changed.
I don't want Warlord to become the GW of 28mm historical wargaming.
>>47599857
>47599857
>They have? I have still been seeing zero discussion of it pretty much everywhere. Maybe like one thread over on lead adventurer. That game has fucking nothing interesting going on.
Exactly, it's quite clearly flopping (just like the kickstarter) most of the races are generic and boring, the Ghar kinda look interesting(especially the outcasts with their scavenged gear) but overall i'm gonna give it a miss.
I both love and hate their snapping up of other ranges, on one hand they've saved a few ranges that probably would have died out, on the other they sit on products for ages, they bought arsenal miniatures years ago and previewed some gorgeous Malta defenders by Paul Hicks...in Christmas 2014...
Also concentrating on new ranges and neglecting their 'own' stuff, at the moment they seem to jump between pushing gates of antares and project Z.
I don't want Warlord to become the GW of 28mm historical wargaming.
So do I :'(
>>47599127
>The immortal/cutting edge ancients stuff being an 'outside range' is smaller/slighter than other brands.
Yeah, I have both it and the Phalangite set and it's pretty much too small to exchange heads between the sets, unfortunately. It also has a much wider variety of body poses (8 on the main sprue and 2 on the "command" sprue, vs 4 from the Phalangite set).
That said, they're about as slight/small as the LotR figs I have, and they don't look terrible alongside the WLG phalangites, in separate units.
I've also heard how even the sets they produce themselves can vary, for instance the notorious Caesarian legionaries.
>Gates of Antares, going the way of GW
I've also noticed this and had some similar concerns, in particular the price-gouging they've done with the rereleased wargames factory figs, especially the zombie-related kits (which cost, on average, more than three times what WGF charged).
Pushing GoA, Project Z and that stupid terminator game is lame. It seems like they've almost abandoned releasing new plastics for Hail Caesar, just as Victrix starts ramping up hard-core with what might end up being more than 10 new kits released this year for ancients.
Also, a pet-peeve is that immortal was planning to release (and had sculpted) plastic Persian infantry to complement their hoplites, and WLG seems to have just bought it and not released it. They also bought a plastic landsknecht project that was a failed kickstarter, but released it as metal, very lame.
I get the rationale, it costs more for them to make plastic and they can charge more for metal, but still very disappointing.
>>47599857
>well, the way they've been handling it has been less than satisfactory as suddenly stuff is unavailable or changed.
>I don't want Warlord to become the GW of 28mm historical wargaming.
This.
>>47596624
2 Hour Wargames.
Basically the usual IGOUGO, but because of the reaction system, a lot of stuff happens every time you move something.
http://watchs.me/how-its-made/how-its-made-season-27-episode-1.html
Episode of "How it's made" for perry miniatures. It's the last segment.
Thought you bros might like it.
>>47600445
I'd also warn that even warlords own metal ancients i've heard are smaller than other manufacturers.
I agreeing that they have almost completely abandoned their own ranges apart from bolt action which like GW is slowly but surely becoming all about the tanks...we do not need a million and one variations on bloody tanks and half tracks.
Stopping selling most of the old Paul Hicks bolt action is bullshit, they've shown(through 'limited' releases) that they still have all the moulds but refuse to actually sell the stuff.
I'd be angry about the wgf stuff if it didn't look so bad.
Also chin up they just released new ancient sea peopel from their cutting edge line so...maybe?
Bump it
>>47601449
Anyone else played this system? I really like it.
>>47600445
The plastic landsknecht are coming next year when I asked them on FB.
>>47592780
also for ancient and medieval: DBA
>>47600445
What is wrong with the Caesarian ones?
RIP in peace 2 Churchill tanks.
Couldn't handle all those point blank shots from T-34s.
At least they took about 150 soviet infantry with them!
>>47605761
I recognize the Esci female radio operator at the back there
Now here's a rare find - a previously unknown, complete scan of a hex&counter classic: France 1940, from Avalon Hill. It's nothing mindblowing, but it is relatively simple and accessible. Almost half the rulebook is just designer's notes, and there are a lot of alternate scenarios. It's actually a reprint of the game in S&T #27 with nicer design and a little more development, but I'm still chuffed to find it. On the BGG page I couldn't help noticing a really bad review from none other than Chaosium legend Sandy Petersen, who describes this as "Dunnigan at his worst". So, one for collectors only I guess!
http://www.mediafire.com/download/dbsk4e76hg795dh/France+1940.pdf
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/746/game-france-1940-german-blitzkrieg-west
>>47604570
I don't think a lot of people would touch it (let alone play it) simply because of that reaction system.
I mean, troops are supposed to be under your command, right? It's your game - you're supposed to be the one directing their actions.
>>47606273
>I mean, troops are supposed to be under your command, right? It's your game - you're supposed to be the one directing their actions.
Sure, but think about the brazillion games where losing control of your troops happens because of morale and things like that. Or heck, the ones where you can't even be sure you'll get to activate a unit at all.
I think it's pretty nice when troops react to enemy actions rather than just being 100% under your control, it feels more believable that they'll open up on someone running at them instead of every single one shooting at the guy that the Eye in the Sky demands.
>>47606326
Well, yeah - loss of morale is somewhat expected in any wargame. It's sorta like an 'icing on the cake' after the whole 'bash their heads in' part.
But to have your troops charging off against an enemy - or retreating without even having been attacked - is a bit too much 'icing on the cake'. And too much sugar is bad for ya.
>>47606476
I disagree. It's a cute idiom and all but it's just a matter of taste.
To me, there's no real difference in activating a unit and having it completely whiff it's entire turn because you roll like shit, and having it do something else you didn't want, like charge prematurely or run away.
Units reacting in unpredictable ways to the presence of enemies adds another layer to gameplay and makes movement more important, because you try to put your guys in good spots to react.
If I want perfect micro control of every guy, I can play Starcraft.
I get that you don't like it but it's silly to make sweeping statements about how you think most people agree with you.
>>47606273
Yeah, I love their games but they're not for everyone.
Usually there's a leadership option and "stars," where your main character(s) can always act and can order other dudes around, and experienced other dudes will usually be able to act on their own anyway and can also order other dudes.
Of course, they may not do what you want depending on circumstances. It can be a right pain getting a split-up squad back out of whatever cover they've found if things go horribly. But I like that.
They also do cool campaigns.
(I haven't played 2HW in a while, because fivecore is love, but I still like them)
>>47606535
>I get that you don't like it but it's silly to make sweeping statements about how you think most people agree with you.
Well, those 'sweeping statements' have the backing of nearly-unheard-of (niche?) (cult?) status of both THW and The Perfect Captain - both of which are based on these principles.
IMHO, there is a point in the 'reaction' games where wargame becomes management-game.
i.e. did you win or not becomes a matter - not of against whom you put your men, but of under whom you put your men.
And most of people don't like that for the same reason they don't like logistics (which is even more important to winning) in the their games:
It takes focus away from war - and into bean-counting.
>>47606605
>logistics
ugh, thanks for reminding me that I need to try megablitz one of these years.
Any other good (miniatures) wargames that include logistics as a meaningful concept? Probably quite high-level ones, although, related to ongoing chat, the 2HW 'nam game has a microsupplement for helo resupply missions.
>>47604570
The single-stat troops are too same-y for me, especially when everyone outside your own squad gets "average".
Also the scale is uneven - one squad of personalities with backgrounds and the rest of a reinforced platoon all cardboard copies.
>>47606631
I meant to attach that.
>>47606476
Thats how some battles went down though. Not all should be fair in a battle.
For example in the thirty years war you would often have cases of units standing around all day waiting for orders. Now in a tabletop battle, you usually want to have full control over all your forces at all times, but really this wasn't the case, and still isn't even with modern radios and satellites. You can get pretty close to total control in modern times, but back when orders had to be sent by horseman, it was a real struggle to command an entire army.
Personally I love limited command control, and I love having enemy reactions in your turn.
For example: Your infantry are waiting for tanks to cross a clearing, say between two buildings and have very limited line of sight.
An enemy tank moves past this line of sight, but moves right past and out of view.
In real life you would have a chance to fire rockets or whatever as soon as the tank entered your line of sight and so having reactions like "I fire during your turn" is perfectly feasible and realistic. It shouldn't happen all the time, but it should still be something that can be done in a game. If you can never react in an opponents turn, it starts to feel very static, as troops do things that they just wouldn't have done like taking a charge without reforming, or not firing at point blank range just before the enemy charges, etc.
Cake analogies aside, its down to the period you want to play and how accurately you want to model it. If you want to play renaissance period with complete control of all your units at all times, thats your prerogative. Personally I like any limitations of command or conrtol to be present in a system. I want to feel like I'm at a certain height in the command hierarchy, with orders from above and units to order below me. I want to feel like one of the generals in the battle. And often that includes having no control over some of your units, and just doing the best you can with what you have.
>>47606631
There's also the sf game Starship Marine, where (optionally) extended boarding actions might require you to bring up supplies and carry out casualties.
Interesting that it's skirmishy games that come to mind when I think about this stuff. Probably because I haven't played many operational games, and there seems to be a mid-level that most games operate at where logistics are less noticable. Skirmish games are usually fast and don't need them, but if you get bogged down in a fight then every bullet counts. Massive-scale games really should have something logistical included. Most wargames, though, are in the middle-ground, where fights are battles, and "logistics" are relegated to "attack the supply dump" or "convoy" scenarios, because the force's logistics are handled at a larger scale and the man-to-man stuff is too low-level to notice.
>>47606658
I agree completely - there should be reactions and battlefield friction (Clausewitz-style) - all I'm saying that implementing those things at true scale (i.e. 'as it should be') would take the 'war' out of wargame.
For example: inspired by 2HW & tPC, I actually wrote a wargame to try and implement this - I called the system YOYO: 'You're On Your Own.'
The premise is that once enemy gets closer than their immediately superior commander, any unit and commander will have to test for their Stance: Enraged, Steady, Shaken or Broken.
But the game quickly bogged down to a lot of individual testing, and I found it takes a lot of time just to fight a 4 vs 4 unit battle.
There was barely any fighting (i.e. confrontations) - and a whole lot of running around for a straight-up battle it was supposed to be.
>>47606634
Well, the single-stat troops do kind of make sense: all you really need is morale:
If your troops are shooting at the enemy - sooner or later they're gonna hit 'im.
>>47606631
As far as I know, the only other ruleset with some kind of logistics is Lighting War / Red Storm
>>47606759
We had that with TWH. Love the system and would be happy to use it for single player. But we had what? 4 or 5 per side and in the first player's turn things took forever. React? Run away, hunker down, fire until someone dies or freaks out and runs away.
Can be fun but you have to be in that frame of mind for it (like most things). Bit like Battletech. I know people who hate it, but I am happy to play and track everything. Weird.
>>47607105
Same here.
I'd love to play more of it (Perfect Captain, too) - but, as it stands right now, you have to be a freakin' super-computer to work it all out.
Note: I'm talking about processing speed here - not RAM. For such a great game, it takes a really tiny amount of RAM to run it - if you know what I mean.
>>47605761
No irony, insult or joke: I wish I could play like you, with a bedsheet and some unpainted minis on a card.
Does Zaloga ever sleep? He seems to crank out a book a month!
Downfall 1945: The Fall of Hitler’s Third Reich (Osprey Campaign 293)
As the final month of fighting in Europe in 1945 dawned the Allies embarked upon a series of mopping up operations, destroying the last centres of German resistance as the essentially defeated Wehrmacht fought on in increasingly desperate conditions, driven on by the explicit no surrender order issued by Hitler. Yet at the same time, the Allied alliance was already on shaky ground, as German resistance was crushed the Allies began to eye each other nervously across a battletorn Europe, with the politically driven military decisions to have a huge impact on the future of the continent. This book traces the final operations of the war, from the liberation of Denmark, the Allied drive towards the Baltic straits, incursions in Yugoslavia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and engagements in Eastern and Western Germany, whilst also analyzing how the Allied strategies in the final days of the war were a hint of the future difficulties that would drive the Cold War.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/nrlm9jxb2gx072x/Osprey+-+CAM+293+-+Downfall+1945.pdf
>>47609721
Two options.
He's a very good writer, with little time for distractions and a huge knowledge of the sources.
Or he does like most of my Uni professors, employ a lot of poor fucks who do the job and then he places his name on it, giving pennies to the subordinates.
I like his books, so I hope he's merely efficient.
But
>>47609808
But who knows.
>>47609808
>Or he does like most of my Uni professors, employ a lot of poor fucks who do the job and then he places his name on it, giving pennies to the subordinates.
It will be this.
>>47604588
That is unexpected and also badass, landsknechts are some of my favorite historical figures and the set they bought from that guy looked really great too
>>47605746
I don't own any, but people say (and scale comparison pics seem to bear out) that they are the smallest figures WLG sell, and that they don't really rank up with any other manufacturer
Not necessarily a problem depending on how one wants to use them, but a complaint I've heard a lot
I played a game of Blucher last night, and I can honestly say I've never seen a game in which both sides continuously rolled so poorly in crucial engagements, and I mean really shocking sort of rolls, losing combats with 12 dice against against 6, drawing combat with 8 dice against 3 sort of rolls almost every turn for both of us.
Really turned the game into an attrition slog, units charging in with the advantage, being repulsed and then themselves repulsing the inevitable countercharge.
>>47611621
> Heavy underperformance from both sides
You weren't playing Austrians vs Italians, were you?
>>47611639
Unfortunately not, it was Spanish (expected performance really) against French (underwhelming).
Neither army broke in just over 3 hours of gameplay which I suppose is expected if neither player can actually kill anything. Disappointingly the Spanish won a fairly minor victory on points which is a pretty dismal result for the proud French.
>>47608826
its the simple life anon, just a man and his ruleset, playtesting to perfection.
introducing HEAT properly is changing everything, allowing infantry to deal with heavy tanks much easier, but its going to take some re-balancing in mid and late war. Heavy tanks will become cheaper, as they're already under-performing (the pic should have been a balanced battle - but both churchills were raped)
get ready boys!!!
>>47612229
> Embarked in a newly-painted model in its first game
Those boys are fucked.
>>47612229
Move it! GO GO GO!
>>47612271
Machine gun right ahead!
>>47612315
死ね!このヤンキーやろう!
>>47612334
Sudoku karaoke BANZAI!
>>47612240
>> Embarked in a newly-painted model in its first game
>Those boys are fucked.
USMC won the game with ease. preliminary bombardment fucked a lot up (including the tank) and ridiculously good roles on the USMC's side ensured the rest.
Anybody knows how to make some cool maoist red army infantry for Bolt Action? I saw the other day The Red Detachment of Woman (an old chinese war movie) and I find the idea pretty awesome.
Seen-better-days-BMP
historical bump
You might get away with using the Orion Boxer Rebellion figures with some modifications if you're OK with 1/72. Did some reading on the 2nd Sino-Japanese war a few years ago and I seem to recall that there were plenty of actions especially early on where the Chinese were basically only equipped with spears and swords.
Maybe throw in some of the Imex Norks and PLA or some Vietminh for more gun-armed troops.
Since they're 1/72 plastics you could get enough for a BA army for under $30 or so even if you normally play 28mm. Get a Pulitov from HaT and a maxim or a couple mortars from some USSR kit and you're set.
>>47616191
8ch's /k/ has two large webm threads in the catalog if you want to have more than that single clip you keep posting
>>47618693
>spears and swords.
To clarify, those were more like small bandit raids rather than trying to storm a base with a dao.
>>47618693
>/k/ has two large webm threads
The problem being that 99% of those webms have sound
>>47618815
/k/ has sound enabled on webms? I thought that was only on /gif/ and /wsg/.
>>47618987
On 8ch it does.
>>47619003
I always wondered why there was no /hwg/ on 8ch or 8ch /tg/. I know we're a small community and would probably quarter in size on 8ch but it's a much better site for the most part, and I don't think people in /hwg/ are here for the constant bumps anyway.
>>47612355
I lol'ed
What Osprey or smth is best if I want to see many, many pictures of T-55? I 3D-printed one, and I want to find out if I can greenstuff rubber skirts or smth over the wheels to hide some imperfections
>>47621464
This might help, anon
T-54 and T-55 Main Battle Tanks 1944-2004 (Osprey New Vanguard 102)
The T-54 and T-55 tanks are the most widely manufactured tanks of all time. They have become ubiquitous to wars around the globe since the 1950s, starting with Hungary in 1956, and including the the Arab-Israeli wars of 1967, 1973 and 1982, the Vietnam war of 1967-75, the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88, the Afghanistan conflict, Operation Desert Storm, the Yugoslav Civil Wars, and the recent conflict in Iraq. This book will examine the roots of this prolific tank family, starting with the Soviet Army’s first attempts to replace the legendary T-34 during World War II, and covering the T-43 and the T-44, the more successful T-54, and its ultimate evolution into the T-55.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ryynj63x7667z7c/Osprey+-+NVA+102+-+T-54+and+T-55+Main+Battle+Tanks+1944-2004.pdf
>>47621765
Thank you, I somehow managed to miss it!
>>47621979
Don't worry it wasn't in the folders, I just added it now
>>47619157
I've started /hwg/ threads on 8/tg/ in the past but they don't seem to really take off. The slow pace over these would be better than 4 or 5 BMPs in a row but idk
Scale model building building on 8/k/ have been very popular in the past.
bomp
>>47612334
The Japs are in the treeline!
>>47623175
>chess board at nose
>>47623175
Oh man. I just got a bright smile seeing this as a Pole
>>47623227
>>47623175
Jan Zumbach front and center
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Zumbach
>>47623257
nice
>>47623257
> Zumbach died in unclear circumstances on 3 January 1986, in France and was buried at Powązki Military Cemetery in Warsaw, Poland. The investigation into his death was closed by order of the French authorities without public explanations.
Spooky
>>47625310
Sweet.
Any source on that black shields?
>>47625528
No idea sorry
Does anyone have the new P&S Religious Wars?
>>47621992
Can anyone upload to the folders or does one person control the account? I have a few ancients ospreys I managed to dig up elsewhere which I could add
>>47612229
What material is the mat made out of, and where is all the foliage from?
Makes me want to finally get my wehraboo army started, played BA once with IG proxies, was pretty good
>game of black powder ends in argueing about rules and complaining about random movements
>won because the enemy randomly retreated of the map
I will admit, this ruleset is ridiculously random
>tfw you find the perfect range but they are 3mm too tall.
Is there anywhere to get those Wargames Factory WW2 kits? Specifically the GIs? I can't seem to find them on the Warlord store, and my BA infantry is all from Wargames Factory and I don't want any new ones to look out of place.
>>47629666
if you get lucky they might still be in stock in some stores or on ebay.
For example here:
https://www.fantasywelt.de/WWII-American-Infantry-28mm-30
(they also have the germans and russians in stock)
>>47628826
>black powder
>good
you could have prevented this.
>>47630235
Should I play Longstreet instead?
>>47630328
Not him, but from what I've heard, you'd be better off with Longstreet, yes.
>>47630328
In my opinion, yes.
Of course plenty of people enjoy Black Powder so if on the whole you are enjoying it don't let me stop you, but I think considering another ruleset might do you better.
>>47613565
there's three Chinese lists in the far east bolt action campaign book.
Brigade games has 28mm chinese that can be used as does copplestone (which are much bigger/chunkier than warlord)
Starting bolt action, I have one Commando box one blister pack of Commando Vickers K LMG teams and one blister pack of Airborne PIAT and Light Mortar teams, hows this list?
2nd Lieutenant SMG Veteran 78
+1 Infantry SMG
7 Commando Sections 98
7 Commando Sections 98
7 Commando Sections 123
Vickers K LMG
PIAT Anti-tank team Veteran 52
Light Mortar teams Veteran 46
Total: 495
>>47634150
>veteran light mortar
>regular troops
For what purpose? Better off getting a spotter than veteran mortar, then you can just hide the mortar away where it's lower morale and ease of being hit won't matter and save on points.
>>47634322
Having never played bolt action and also buying Brits (slowly) it's interesting to hear these rules nuggets. Is there a rule of thumb to go for, like "Don't do vets on XYZ, don't field ABC with HERP_DERP etc?"
>>47634546
>Implying this stuff isn't in the army/forces book I haven't read yet.
>>47634546
Not really. Veterans are very good and often worth buying, and I usually pair them with assault rifles to give my squads with more firepower more longevity. However, your list is 500pts so you're going to struggle to take many veterans.
I usually make my mortar inexperienced and grab a spotter, it's a net saving on points and it makes it more effective at shooting, and significantly reduces the likelihood that it will use its experience at all.
Don't bother making officers good, they're a useless points sink at the moment unless you're playing something like inexperienced spam horde Russians.
There are different schools of thought regarding experience and vehicles. I tend to keep mine regular, but before you make your decision make sure you read the errata, because that contains the rules for vehicle experience.
Also this is more powergaming than historical, but that seems to be what you're after. Certainly BA isn't the best system for true historical gaming.
>>47634644
Not my 500pt list but insightful response to the question I posed.
Bolt Action on an "accuracy/playability and fun" axis? Bit like the THWs discussion up thread if you follow me.
>>47627289
It's just me anon. Thanks for the offer but I do have a complete set. If there's something someone would like uploaded just mention it and it shall be done.
LAV-25
Is there any news yet on the Warlord ex-Pro Gloria plastic Landsknechte? How many fucking years has it been?
>>47634772
Bolt Action is an incredibly 'gamey' game. There's nods towards reality but at it's heart it's about toy soldiers on a table, not trying to simulate WW2 platoon level combat with any degree of accuracy. Literally toy soldiers on the table if you're looking at the line-of-sight rules, not toy soldiers representing real troops in a hypothetical/fictitious engagement.
>>47637866
Too bloody many years.
>>47634546
If you want to play min-maxing, then inexperienced mortars are good, but if you want to play a HISTORICAL game, then the experience level of your mortar should be the same as the rest of your army - ie. veteran in case of Commandos.
>>47637866
Coming next year when I asked them on FB.
>>47635826
Do you have them in physical form and you're going to scan them, or do you just need to upload them?
Osprey's got like hundreds of books that I'd love to read but not if it's a pain in the ass for you to upload them.
Also I love you by the way, I've been reading through the repertoire for a long time and bought a few titles before I knew you had them all.
>>47640932
I'm sorry to say I only have a few dead tree copies, a dozen or so of my favorites. But I have pdfs of every Battle Order, Campaign, Elite, Man-at-Arms and Warrior titles; almost all of the Combat, Duel and Raid ones, and it's easy to find any of the others when required - check out Avaxhome if you're keen: try searching "Osprey+(the title)". My Mediafires are pretty full but I can always upload anything on request, or at the very least can help find a link. And I love you too.
I started uploading a few years ago when Planes 'n' Mercs was a thing, and somebody asked for some modern stuff. Things just snowballed from there.
>>47634150
List looks good! I'd leave the LMG out and get one more rifleman though. LMGs with current rules are shit.
you can build upon the list later on by adding some jeeps (imba as FUCK with the current rules)
>>47627370
Hey there! The mat is made out of fleece one uses to cover the floor when painting walls. smearing some colors on top, some flock and static grass and it's done. it's cheap, quick to make and looks great. it also can be rolled up for storage!
most of the foliage I've got from a model train garage sail for cheap. probably more foliage and trees and rocks than I'll ever need.
>>47641642
post more
>>47641754
>>47641953
>>47641994
>>47641953
>>47641994
>>47642005
I dont play 28mm but this is tight af
>>47642116
thank you!
>>47642200
enough image spam for today.
>>47642702
>>47642702
>tfw you recognize Hougoumont like an old friend
stop making me feel about my terrain
>>47642005
That vehicle looks a bit small.
>>47642789
BA is heroic scale you elitist faggot
>>47642838
Bolt Action is a ruleset.
The figures are heroic scale.you elitist faggot
>>47642844
If you dddont use warlorddd miniatures youre a faggot who shouldnt attendd tourneys
>>47642850
D-D-D==D-D=-ddddd
ttourney
>shitpost about a shitpost DESU
>>47642838
>you elitist faggot
I swear people throw out elitism in every online argument I see. I'm not even sure it has a meaning any more.
>>47642873
I have a condition where my fffingers are shaky why be a cunt about it
>>47642892
>>47642850
Shitposter-kun, you have become a parody of yourself
>>47642838
>elitism
What is wrong with you? Seriously, are you mentally ill?
'Heroic scale' is not a justification for infantry and vehicles being out of scale and I did not even notice which game they were playing.
>>47642910
Not him but heroic scale by its nature is out of scale. Heroic scale IS giant heads, giant hands, tiny vehicles
>>47642925
Used in that sense, I'd say calling your miniatures Heroic is just an excuse for not getting your proportions right.
>>47642929
Thats just what heroic scale is. I personally hate it because heroic scale is fucked
>>47642929
I don't play 28mm, but it's only like how many 6mm scale ranges have oversized heads, because they are distinctive and people focus on them
If it's done on purpose, as many Heroic ranges are, it's not and excuse it's a (questionable) art style.
>>47642947
>6mm
Because you wouldn't be able to paint figures properly if they were truescale in 6mm, plus they'd break from the gentle breeze of a cold summer morning.
>>47642958
>6mm
>break
28mm pleb detected.
I play 2mm 3mm and 6mm and none of them break unless you're actively trying to break them.
>>47642977
He said they'd break if they were *truescale* 6mm. Which basically no available ranges are.
>>47642977
See >>47642995 for what I meant. Never broke any of my 6mm minis.
>>47642958
I'm only really talking about the heads, but yes truescale 6mm isn't a thing for a reason.
That being said there's a HUGE difference between the heads of Adler/Baccus/H&R etc. Although Adler are really pushing the bounds of being 6mm at all.
>>47642789
because official BA minis are 28mm heroic while the official BA vehicles are true scale 1/56.
Happy D-Day, everybody.
>>47643927
I'm not sure if that's the right adjective, but okiedoke.
>>47643960
Whats not happy about the day we won the war?
>>47643987
>not the day the Germans surrender
>hard to argue that the Allies were losing before DDay, so it isn't a turning point
Probably the thousands of deaths?
>>47643987
>the day we won the war
The war was not over on D-Day, not everyone's from an Allied nation here, but other than that, yeh.
>>47643987
>we
who is we? WW2 was won on the eastern front anyway.
>>47644021
>>47644046
what? D-Day was the day ww2 ended wasnt it?
And i meant we as in us-who-are-not-nazi-germans
>>47644054
>>we
>who is we?
THIS
it annoys me when people say "we" about history
>>47644070
>>47644054
Im sorry I just assumed people wouldn't identify with the ww2 era germans. Im not a very smart man i just like toy soldiers
>>47644059
D-Day ended nothing. It was just one step closer to the victory, but not really needed since Allied troops already had landed in Italy one year earlier and the Soviets already rolled towards the Reich.
>us-who-are-not-nazi-germans
Yay, everybody won..
seriously?
Solemn, Commemorative D-Day, everbody.
>>47644059
I smell bait.that's V-day
>>47644082
Hungarians were Hungarians in WW2 too. I'm Hungarian now. Axis wasn't solely consisted by Germans.
>>47644082
Why would people identify with anyone from the WW2 era? What the fuck?
Besides, there were more nations involved on the axies side than just the germans, just saying.
>>47644059
>what? D-Day was the day ww2 ended wasnt it?
???
Am I being memed?
VE day was the 7th of May.
If the war had ended on DDay thousands of lives would have been saved, so to claim that it all ended then is disrespectful to all the soldiers who died after dday, writing off their efforts as unimportant. It doesn't mean i identify with Nazi Germany.
>>47644092
I'm not sure if that's the right adjective, but okiedoke.
>>47644115
D-Day, everybody.
>>47644115
That'd be because it's actually two adjectives, one of which is incorrectly capitalised.
>>47644086
Well nazis and japanese lost and everyone else won so yeah.
And sorry i thought D-Day was the day it ended. Im apparently mistaken
>>47644101
I dont really understand why Im being yelled at for assuming that people wouldnt want to see themselves on the side of the bad guys. I don't really understand the issue.
>>47644093
>V-Day
that makes more sense
and as for the other thing im not really sure I get what you mean. Are you saying you resent the germans or losing or am I missing something? Sorry if I sound confused
>>47644104
Im sorry, I apparently got the wrong acronym or something. With how pretty mmuch anything I hear about ww2 is d-day i thought it'd be more important.
>>47644142
>Well nazis and japanese lost and everyone else won so yeah.
I somewhat doubt it, but in the case you are not trolling you might want to read up a bit on the history.
>>47644142
>Are you saying you resent the germans or losing or am I missing something?
I wasn't the anon who replied to the "we won the war" comment, but seeing how plenty of folks are from nations who were in the Axis camp, that "we" is a bit of a stretch. For Hungary, it meant a long Soviet occupation - which fucked up our economy, society, and this country is still shit because of it.
>>47644164
Oh I guess I just saw it as bad japan and germany versus good people. Sorry the russians were bad for you.
>>47644161
I guess so. Sorry
>The Eastern Front
I wish people would stop pretending every other front was somehow irrelevant.
The USSR would not have defeated the Germans on its own.
>>47644177
No probs, but if you walk into /hwg/, expect that you'll be called out if you don't know the facts.
>>47644164
Technically speaking Poland (for example) was in the winners camp, but if you look at how the country fared after the war under soviet/communist rule they totally lost. That is true for many "winners".
>>47644178
>The USSR would not have defeated the Germans on its own.
no, but the Free French Army could have!
>>47644197
Sorry
>>47644142
>Im sorry, I apparently got the wrong acronym or something. With how pretty mmuch anything I hear about ww2 is d-day i thought it'd be more important.
I'm pretty sure this has been a fun troll session for you, but if not you might want to find out the actual history of ww2. You might find it interesting.
>>47644201
Sacre bleu!
>>47644178
Just check the numbers. While it is true that the soviets would have struggled immensely without the L&L supplies from the western allies (maybe even lost), the war was decided in the east.
Only around 20% of the german troops were fighting on the western front. That alone should answer it.
>>47644234
Well, that's a point of view too, but when you face an army with a basically limitledd supply of men, you need to allocate tons of troops there. If you are fucked in the Arsch in the meanwhile, you gotta send some troops there too - but since most of your men are pretty much preoccupied stopping the Soviets, you can't send too much there. A lose-lose situation to be honest. If you send too much men to the West, Soviets will roll you, if you don't send enough, the Tommies and GIs will quickly get into Germany.
The bloodiest part was the Eastern front, nobody argues with that. But if you look at from the perspective that except for the Northern Desert and later in Italy Western Allies had little contact with the Germans compared to the Soviets on the Eastern Front, it's a bit different. The Eastern Front was important, but so was North Africa, Normandy, Italy, Norway and so on and so forth. If they were irrelevant, nobody would have fought there.
Stalingrad. 6th Army gone, Germany done.
>>47644291
>If they were irrelevant, nobody would have fought there.
I think most accept that the other fronts were important, not a lot claim that they were pointless. That doesn't stop the Eastern front being more important.
>>47644326
That sniper mini at top right is interesting, could you tell me the manufacturer?
>>47644326
thats equally stupid as "d-day won the war".
6th army was a severe loss, but even if the whole army had broken out of the pocket these 900k men extra would not have stopped the soviet assault in 1944.
>>47644363
should be one of the soviet scouts by warlord games. Top row in the middle.
>>47644399
Nice, thanks; wasn't familiar with those guys
>>47642977
I have Scotia Grendel that arrived broken at the knees and GHQ is really bendy.
>>47643059
>Adler
Hey, manufacturer I have never seen before, let's google it... ARGH MY EYES
>>47644646
Well the minis themselves don't look too bad.
That web design though, jesus fuck.
>>47646231
My dick is so hard right now.
>>47611854
How in the hell was a Churchill Mk. 7? raped by a T-34/76?
>>47642705
What's a good trireme ruleset that has enough detail to represent different ship classes, crew skill, and maneuvers (oar swipes for instance) but isn't so autistic that it takes more than a couple hours to play?
>>47644336
I don't particularly like axis and allies but some of the newer editions manage to strike just the right balance of geographical limitations, unit capability, unit cost, and production capacity to create a very historically accurate situation.
When I played the WWI version over Christmas as the English and Frenchies I actually found myself launching pointless attacks on unimportant fronts just to try and draw manpower away from planned offensives of more significance
Also Russians and Austrians fought one big battle with mostly unsupported infantry that was such a bloodbath (15+ casualties per side) that no player ever launched an offensive like that again, even out of desperation
Of course the downside of all this is its almost impossible to avoid a historically accurate outcome (axis loses) if players have roughly equivalent skill
>>47646552
>T-34
did someone say T-34?
Perry neeews
>>47646824
I know some people like Corvus, which is in the OP. Haven't tried any ancients though, so no idea how it actually plays. Looking is free though, so give a peek.
>>47646231
Kowloon?
>>47646552
It was a Churchill Mk.IV and it was raped by 2 T-34s at point blank range firing at its sides (and a T-70 firing at point blank range from behind)
But yeah heavy tanks need some re-balancing, especially now that all infantry rocket launchers effectively ignore armor completely (HEAT, baby)
I'm sure we all agree that WW2 was a team effort. If it wasn't for the massive 2 fronts against the Wehrmacht, they wouldn't have been defeated as badly, perhaps ending up like WW1 where everyone just gives up and lets them have Germany. Green US troops would have been annihilated on the west front if the Wehrmacht had been able to focus all their forces there. Russia is always a lost cause, and unfortunately for the Wehrmacht the invasion of Russia taught the Russian army how to fight properly, and by the time Hitler had sabotaged the invasion, the Russians knew exactly what they were doing and were able to use encirclement and blitz tactics against the Wehrmacht forces.
Bump. can you name the vehicle?
>>47654618
That's a WW1 US tanker in his FT-17
>>47643987
>D-day happens in 1944
>war ends in 1945
honestly this is why people hate americans.
to all the retards out there that don't understand how to commemorate ww2 related things, the term you use is "never forget"
>>47654769
>>47654799
Dude the horse is dead, you can stop now.
>>47654808
Unlike a cow, you can milk it for over 70 years.
Now. WW2 - BA is gamey. How far back along the simulationist axis can I travel?
>muh accuracy
>>47642929
Hey, it can also be an excuse for making "28mm" figures which are well over 28mm tall
>>47646231
That is a stunning setpiece. Good work anon.
>>47644142
The Nazis and the Japanese didn't even lose on the same day. Why even play historical wargames if you don't have any historical understanding of one of the most pivotal wars in recent history.
>>47654998
WW2 games in some "game - simulation" scale.
I'm just guessing this having looked at most of the rulesets, feel free to add to or correct
>Gamey
Lionel Tarr's WW2 wargame rules
Bolt Action
Crossfire
Rapid Fire
Ostfront
Flames of war
Chain of Command
Squad Leader
Advanced Squad Leader
>Simulationist
I dont know where Battlegroup fits on that list, probably somewhere mid-top
>>47655966
I recognise the names and things are starting to makes sense. Thanks.
>>47592922
I love fictional not-earth settings.
You get all the fleshed out technology and understanding of things work without any of the political shitflinging the may or may not happen.
>>47641133
>mfw I was in planes and mercs
>mfw i just stopped logging in because it took literal years for missions to complete
>mfw i logged in a few months back to see if anything had happened and almost everyone else my squadron had already left from inactivity before me
feelsbadman
It was a blast when I started though.
>>47655929
Because I cant get into scifi soldiers an I just like playing with guys with guns and painting them. Why be an asshole when I already said sorry?
>>47641133
Cheers! I'm working through avax right now, never knew it existed.
Thanks!
