I've worded up the wife to get me Team Yankee for Christmas.
A few of the locals here in canberra are talking about playing it in 6mm. Not to sure if i'll jump on that band wagon or not. Thoughts?

>>44219533
hope the wife doesn't find the novel?

>>44219533
I've only played 2 small demo games of Team Yankee so far, and I am enjoying it.

As for scale, I prefer 15mm myself. I've always found 6mm to be incredibly tiny.

But I say to go with whatever option actually gets you playing the game.

Having opponents to play against is pretty important.

>>44219533
6mm sounds fun. And from what I briefly looked at, it does seem cheaper.

Reposted from the last thread

>>44214493
>Isn't the m113 "Gavin" a horrible deathtrap though?
The problem is, the M113 was a servicable vehicle. For the 1950s. It's what the bren carriers and half tracks of WWII should have been.

But it's nothing more than a battletaxi. APCs were never meant to do more than stop harrassing crew served weapons fire, which means incidental shell splinters (note: clear misses. Near misses are iffy) and long range MG fire as it gets into a position to ditch its infantry and then bug the hell out to somewhere safer.

For anything resembling a direct hit past .30-.50 cal? You're gonna have a fun time.

Once the battlefield started getting more accurate, the tempo of combat increasing, the possibility of the enemy getting behind you started getting higher, 122mm artillery turned into 152, organic infantry support platforms started getting more sophisticated and autocannons started proliferating... the M113's not keeping up with that.

Incidentally, this is also the reasoning behind the BTR and the Stryker. They're not meant to operate under direct fire. You put your soldiers down, somewhere, they retire and play long distance fire support. They're not a replacement for an IFV.

And Vietnam was simply filled with ambushes and nonlinear combat. A lack of a front line was a regularity, which means an ambush involving an RPG-2, landmines, or 106mm RCLs are a common occurrence. M113s don't have that safety buffer anymore.

tl;dr - If you act like the M113 is a Bradley, then yes, it's a death trap.

>>44219533
If you're playing in anything other than 15mm why not just use a more comprehensive Cold War rulesset like AFFoT or Cold War Commander?

>>44220681
this.

am i unique in that i'm still all Team Yankee/get some games in the week Star Wars 7 is out?

One of the few fringe benefits of living in New Zealand, We got to see Star Wars Seven last night.

>>44219556
I would actually be okay with that as well.
>>44221126
Same in Australia. I am now paying for it however. As a 12 hour shift on 3 hours sleep is never a good idea.

>>44221126
>>44221200
Motherfuckers I will murder you if you so much as hint to a spoiler.

>>44221383
I would not do that to a fellow fan.
>Kylo Ren is actually Yodas step nephew by marriage and kills luke skywalker at the start of the movie.
>the entire storyline if the movie is basically a buddy cop movie with 3PO and BB8 on the hunt for revenge for the murderer of R2D2, who is BB8 step father.
>every character including Han Solo, Chewbacca and Finn discover that they are all actually Skywalkers, but han and leia continue there incestuous relationship anyway.

>>44221383
Seconding this.

I see it Friday night after work with some members of my local fan club.

Say nothing.

So what is the general consensus on armies for Team Yankee? Soviets or Yanks?
Is anyone going to wait for Brits and Best/Worst Germans?

File: Classic Blunder.jpg (17 KB, 300x233) Image search: [Google]

17 KB, 300x233

>tfw an ebay posting hasn't been bid on for 4 days, then not even 10 minutes after you throw a bid on it someone else bids for it

Uh huh, yeah, that totally aint a puppet account buddy, especially how you answered a question I sent you RIGHT AFTER THE BET WAS POSTED.

Yeah, not suspicious at all. I bet Hitler never even had any Jewish blood in his family either.

>>44221670
If I had the patience I would wait to buy a Worst German army, but as it stands I will be building a Soviet force very soon.

>>44221746
God how I know your pain.

>>44221126
Did we really get it that early? Man, I've been wondering why /tv/ hasn't been utterly shitting itself yet.

>>44221790
I'll be building a soviet force first. I want to build some leaopds so i'll end up building a worst gemrnay army when its released.

Anyone else expecting Flames stuff for christmas?

>>44219556

While I was paging through I thought "Man, flavour text this edition is shitty", and then it gradually became obvious that it was book excerpts.

>>44219840
>Having opponents to play against is pretty important.

So for the love of god I hope the commies arrive soon...

>>44221670

I am waiting to do a best german force. Not sure how long I will have to wait but I have enough ww2 soviet stuff to occupy me until then. I figure there are enough guys at my flgs getting into the first wave and I don't want to make the financial/time commitment of doing soviets seeing as that's what I have going in FoW.

>>44224446
I was thinking best= west= the germans with Leopard 2s and not second tier soviet kit.

>>44224468
If we're going by the old meme "North Korea is Best Korea", then communist East Germany is Best Germany.

Hey guys I play french Goumiers and FEC (Free French Forces) and I was wondering whats a good list to fun for thm around 1420 to 1800 points will be fine

>>44224719
East Germany is Beast Germany, clearly.

West is Best.

>>44221670
>So what is the general consensus on armies for Team Yankee? Soviets or Yanks?

Americans. The Abrams, Cobra, and Thunderbolt II (Warthog) are all some of my favorite military hardware.

>Is anyone going to wait for Brits and Best/Worst Germans?

When they get released, probably a year from now, I could be tempted by West Germans. The Leopard 2 is a sexy tank.

>>44222224
>Anyone else expecting Flames stuff for christmas?

I already got myself the US starter box for TY. I wasn't going to wait for the 24th or 25th for that stuff. And certainly not until the 31st for my Birthday.

I'll most likely be getting a ton of Star Wars stuff from my mother and my brother. Including some Armada stuff.

I'm also almost certain I'll be betting a gift certificate to my FLGS.

Further TY realisation: Armour penetration is a compensator for firepower here.

Since units just take morale checks when they're "not in good spirits", which explicitly includes bailed vehicles, if you've penetrated, you've guaranteed a vehicle towards a morale check. Given a unit of Su-25s can average three hit tanks a turn, autopenning, I now see why they're so high a points cost; you can use them to scare basically any abrams unit off the board.

>>44225084
Ho large of a unit of SU-25s would you need to to that?

>>44225558
Basically everything US is hit on a 4+ by planes (no cover and they're guided, and if you're using a nonguided weapon then why not just put them closer?), so half your Su-25s hit. 2 hits with 4 or 3 with 6. Missiles are straight through on abrams front armour, so they're automatically bailed, and 2+ to kill which makes your job easier on subsequent turns.

Air power in TY looks very, very nasty.

>>44227181

Except AA looks to be extremely cheap.

>>44227216
Yeah, the one SPAA vehicle the entire US formation can take. Granted, it's cheap enough to drop in easily, but that's at most four SPAA guns, out to a max of 32" vs 28" range missiles, and presuming that most of the time you'll want them behind the line...

The US is actually pretty vulnerable to air power, basically (and ironically).

How is the US light tank company, Ghost Calvary? My fgls has an army box for them and it looks like a good way to get into the game with a ton of chafees.

>>44227877
Chaffes are like the bastard love-child of the Stuart and the Sherman.

They have the light armor and the speed of the Stuart, and the firepower of the standard 75mm Sherman.

That might not sound all that inpressive, but with your speed, you'll likely be getting to the flanks of the enemy tanks and shooting their sides with that AT 10 main gun. Which should be strong enough against all but the thickest Side Armor values.

>>44228013
Do they die to a stiff breeze like their armor looks like?

>>44228075
Not with Veteran armor. Provided you play smart.

>>44228075
Not any more so than Shermans really. You gotta remember that almost everything shooting at you by this point is AT 12 and up, so it really doesn't make much difference if you're in a Sherman or a Chaffee. The important thing is that you're vets, which make you harder to hit.

As long as you don't run into a weird list like bartosz's 25 Puma recce company or a guy running a massive T34/76 swarm, you should be fine.

>>44228075
That's the downside. Their armor *IS* thin.

You'll need to make good use of concealment to be difficult for your opponent to shoot back at.

Or you could play Veteran tanks which are slightly harder for your opponent to shoot at in the first place. But you pay the points for that higher skill rating.

But playing them as Trained tanks can work if you support them with the correct units and play them very very carefully.

My Soviet box is here! But can't open because I'm at work.

File: KIMG0004.jpg (3 MB, 3264x1836) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 3264x1836

URAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

My first half of my painting challenged is pretty much finished. Can't find my Spackle or else I'd base them too. Closest base is an example of how they look finished.

Just another 15 bases to go and I'm ready to have some fun the next time I'm in an area with a 100% tanks meta

>>44228921
>44228921
And after seeing this massive fucking picture I realized I missed a couple spots.

Ah well, I'll touch em up here in a little while

>>44228599
If you're playing historical matchups, yeah. If you're playing tournaments, you'll be fighting other brits/americans which have AT 10 guns and soviets who might even have AT 9 still.

>>44221490
I would actually watch the shit out of that second one, on the condition that C3PO says mothfucker at least once.

>>44220681
It's easier to convince my friends to play a game they already know how to play and enjoy but in a different scale / period than it is to convince them to play "some autistic mess of spreadsheets".

>>44221383
Luke's son is the villain and he has to choose between killing him or nuking the republic

>>44219840
>Having opponents to play against is pretty important.
That's one of the advantages of 6mm; it's affordable and logistically feasible to provide both armies yourself.

>>44224968
ITT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZZwT5XJeR0

>>44228954
>If you're playing open tournaments,
FTFY. Theatre / time period / whatever specific tournaments are a fairly common thing.

Honestly, I don't think allies v axis is great for tournament balance. Campaigns, sure, but for tournaments, the axis is just too unvaried. Impenetrable heavies, AT 12+ everywhere, millions of tank assault guns. It's a fixed threat. The rest of the allies offer far more variety.

>>44231990
You'll find some variety in the Axis lists.

Ok, sure you'll get your fair share of the Big Kitties, but you're also likely to get things like Panzer IV or StuG based lists. Or Fallschirmjager and other infantry lists.

It's not always "ALL THE JAGDTIGERS!"

I've even seen Hungarians and Romanians in Late War tournaments and they've done decently.

Italians? I had one friend who played Italians in Mid-War(and Late War from an old PDF). He was constantly disappointed with them.

>>44234873
LW Italians from the recent Fortress Italy book are pretty damn solid, OTOH.

I accidentally glued my first T-72s turret into place.

Oops.

>>44234873
Yeah, but even Pz IVs and StuGs have AT12.

>>44235825
Crisis averted, managed to pry it up with only slight damage to the non-visible parts of the turret. Success!

>>44235879
No they don't, they have AT11 or AT10 in the case of the StuH. Plus, they don't have smoke so they actually fire at enemy tanks as opposed to Allied tanks who fire DFS and rely on 17 pounders / Easy Eights to do the actual killing.

File: stugIII_18.jpg (25 KB, 500x186) Image search: [Google]

25 KB, 500x186

>>44236384

Well, stuhs do have dfs but i get your point.

File: 1442527616771.png (2 MB, 1584x1057) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1584x1057

>>44221670
sadly (or should i really say, gladly) TY has me by the balls

>got USA the day before the release so i can run Warthog spam for Keks
>may get soviets and paint them in allahu snackbar colors with skytrex taliban figs for inf. or reg's from khurasan as Iraqis.
>will buy ALL West Germans. there is probably only a few things they have that doesn't give me a hard-on.
>will play Polish because i can cast summon T-55 at will.


last i was tied to a game this hard was Flames of War. in 2009, i owned fucking 11 armies...

>>44237596
>last i was tied to a game this hard was Flames of War.

But Bartosz my friend, Team Yankee *IS* Flames of War. :-P

>in 2009, i owned fucking 11 armies...

God damn... That's... That's some next level insanity right there.

And I thought I was bad for playing Team Yankee, Star Wars X-Wing, Star Wars Armada, and some boardgames all at the same time.

>will buy ALL West Germans. there is probably only a few things they have that doesn't give me a hard-on.

I want some Leopards of my own. The Leopard 2 is a sexy, sexy tank.

>>44221383

It was literally Episode 4 all over again.

File: DSCN5681.jpg (410 KB, 1000x562) Image search: [Google]

410 KB, 1000x562

>>44238392
to be honest, 2 of the armies could cross over, so i wasn't really at 11 FULL armies, but to be honest, i did buy specific support for armies that they kept with...i never ran Panzernebel with Panthers, ex.

>pic is for the Paint challenge
needs a dark green wash now....

>>44238592
I'll probably be doing grey A-10s myself.

List help requested

I'm putting together a 1500pts German Grenadier lightly fortified force, I'd like to keep it fortified for the purposes of flavour and setting.

Assuming that, what would you guys say to the following. It doesn't need to be super competitive, but I'd like it to stand a chance of winning:

Confident Trained Overlord Grenadiers

HQ
Panzershreck
3x snipers

2x Full platoons of Infantry with panzerfaust
5x minefield
4x HMG nests
4x 8cm Mortars
3x Pak40(s)
3x Stug G
4x Panzerwerfer 42 (Maultier) armoured rocket artillery

Viable? What would you shave, what would you supplement?

>>44243208

In my experience, Snipers tend to be a marginal choice. They can be useful for pinning infantry and (especially) artillery platoons, but rarely feel like game-winners to me.

Accordingly, I'd probably recommend dropping 2 of the 3, and picking up slightly more AT instead (depending on what you're expecting to face).

I want to play a CC soviet tank horde in EW, how fucked am i:

T34 HQ
2x T34
10x T60
8x T60
1x KV2
3x Quad Maksim truck
4x BM-13 w/ extra crew
1550, 6 platoons
T34s are there because i like them and i have to take them since it's a tankovy, they will be used to tank pakfronts while dismantling them and clearing the way for the T60 horde, T60 should be used mainly to assault infantry but they can hold their ground as light antitank vs other shit tanks like PzIs or Vickers Lights. KV2 is there for manliness and because an AT10 Fp1+ gun is nothing to sneeze at, it may even destroy some Matildas and Valentines.

For a giggle I looked at some of the minor nation lists, and...

How do you play these, exactly? 24" range, AT peaking at 10 if it's lucky, virtually (or literally) no smoke... These lists seem like a nightmare to play.

>>44243579
Which one are you looking at? And which era?

Mind you, before the mention of no smoke, I thought you were talking about EW british...

>>44243579
Depends on the period, AT10 could be either really fucking good or average shit

>>44243543

Some BT-7a's would be more useful than more T-60s. Otherwise looks pretty solid.

>>44243601
>>44243608
LW Hungary and Romania.

>>44243639
BTs look a lot more fragile and being conscript doesn't help, i need some more protection, the higher AT is not really needed when i have T34s and point wise they cost a lot more than a T60 so i can't really build a big swarm of BTs. I think T60s have the right balance of everything: they are really cheap, they have decent armor and they have an acceptable gun

>>44243644
Both of which have access to smoke (mortars, 105mm artillery and, for the hungarians, nebels), Panzer IV, Stug and PaK40s, and the Hungarians can even have Panthers and Tigers.

Did you really look at the lists at all?

>>44243543

I would find some room for T-26s. Their gun is extremely powerful in EW. Also it is pretty much general consensus that the Unarmed Soviet sappers are overpowered for 85 points.

I also like the rocket armed Chaika for 90 points. I don't think your army is bad but in a tournament setting, the Maxims and the Katjushas are easy VPs. I haven't played the T-60, it doesn't look like it can win firefights with other tanks. It is fast and decently armored though.

>>44243669

They are, but they can dig up infantry quite well, and that's something you don't really have.

>>44243799
I thought about that and i found that 10 assaulting T-60 can grind up almost every kind of dug in infantry

>>44243799
I don't think an infantry force is going to a problem for that army, unless it has tons of tanks.

A Team Yankee question for /FoW/:

Do aircraft firing at tank teams use the targets orientation when figuring out what armor value to use?

This seems silly, but I remember in FoW Bombs/Rockets explicitly tested top armor (and I'm assuming Salvo weapons on planes do, in TY) and Cannons always compared to side armor.

I saw no mention of that in the TY rulebook and was hoping someone had a better grasp of the rules than I do at the moment.

>>44244286
Yeah, you use the armour facing like with any other team.

Aircraft work a lot more like all other teams in TY.

>>44244286
If there is nothing that says otherwise then they use the normal rules for shooting, i have to re-read the aircarft rules so don't trust too much on my words

>>44244325
>>44244326

Appreciate the answers, guys. Thanks.

It only really matters for the Warthog vs side armour on the T-72, though; missiles are straight through and the Su-25 can't pen Abrams side armour with cannon.

>>44244326
>I have to re-read the aircarft rules so don't trust too much on my words

I'm still on my first thorough read-through of the rule book myself, and I'm still finding things that have changed from the main FoW rules that I'm more familiar with.

It will take some effort for me to not confuse the two rule sets.

>>44243208
I wouldn't bother with StuGs in a Fortified list because they'll always start in reserve and you're unlikely to need the mobility as much. Could you get marders? More ATGs?

>>44247391
Oh, and never take more than one Sniper. Huge diminishing returns.

The first FAQ for Team Yankee is out.

Doesn't seem like too many issues, just a few clarifications.

http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/TeamYankee/FM101-FAQ.pdf

>>44247723
Are Aircraft Units subject to the normal rules for being In
Command and Out of Command?
Yes. They are Units, so all the Unit rules apply to them.
Can Aircraft use Movement Orders?
Yes they can.

This still confuses me.

Honestly I think aircraft are the most confusing bit of the rules in general.

>>44247858
What's confusing about them?

Helicopters are basically just other units with unlimited movement and some different LoS and targeting restrictions.
Strike aircraft are placed and removed from the table at certain times, but otherwise act pretty much like helicopters.

They're no longer tokens representing a larger number of craft, like in regular FoW.

>>44247858
I'd assume the Movement Orders for aircraft are mostly in there for the helicopters.

Imagine the Cobra using its Hunter Killer rule and then using Shoot and Scoot to move away.

>>44247943
Well, for one, why do you want a movement order on a craft that can move anywhere anyway?

More notably, how exactly does cohesion work? A unit that'd be out of command can either remain in place at no penalty, move somewhere else at +1 to hit, or dash to get back in command. So far, so good, and with tanks that's pretty obvious. With helicopters it's also semi-obvious but a bit weird; it implies you can alternate cohesive and noncohesive turns, beginning turn 1 in cohesion, going to turn 2 out of cohesion to gun two seperate targets, then "dashing to return to cohesion" on turn 3, etc.

For strike aircraft, I'm not even sure what "starting out of cohesion" means, since they're not on the board until you roll them in, then they get put anywhere; must they always fly in formation or can they just fly in formation never?

It's a bit confusing, is all.

https://facebook daht com/groups/535545699953954?view=permalink&id=547501942091663

Hey eagles, some guy's looking for NYC players.

>>44248063
>why do you want a movement order on a craft that can move anywhere anyway?
Blitz moving cobras to reposition them but still fire? Shoot and scoot tui reposition after firing before the enemy can shoot non dedicated AA at them?

>>44248486
I'll have to wait for approval to join that page, but I'll respond once I can.

Could someone give me a quick intro to what FoW is? I believe the opinion of the actual players about why it's good or bad is better than reading wikipedia.

>>44249031
It is a very good set of rules for company level WW2 combat that has been expanded to cover WW1, Vietnam, Arab isreali wars and a fiction Cold war gone Hot scenario set in the 1980s.
The rules allow for relativly balanced tournament style play whilst maintaining a level of historical accuracy.
The rules can be somewhat convoluted but they achieve everything i need in a game.
What i've to be the best aspect of the game is the community. Im a massive history nerd and the game attracts a lot of the same type. Not only are they happy to discuss the game but also the period it is based in and you will learn sone5hing new everygame.They are inclusive, helpful and friendly, even if they have a tendency to wear shirts with the symbols of german SS regiments on them in public.
The other thing that is great about the community is that is doesn't attract the Warhammerish element, which i consider to be the worst aspect of the gaming community. The game has an evolving meta, so there is no instawin list or a GW business model of having to buy an ultra expensive unit to instawin. We get the usual autists but they usuallly stick to the historical aspects of the game, and don't lose there shit when they lose.
TL:DR its the best rulest out there for what it does and generally has a great community.

File: YourOwn_ZRNYIII_ARMOREDASSAULTPANCAKE_2472013154834381_jpg.jpg (82 KB, 480x240) Image search: [Google]

82 KB, 480x240

>>44249031
It's a company level wargame set at 15mm scale. A soldier for example will be about a cm tall, a tank is the size of a matchbox car, etc.

The game focuses on combined arms and covers almost every force to fight in WWII (aside from the Pacific, but they're working on that) and its branching out to other periods.

The game is at its strongest when you have fellow history nerds to play against. The game allows you to build almost any historical force in WWII and its always interesting to see what drew a player to a certain army and learn the history of it. While not specifically designed for tourney play, it handles it pretty well thanks to the insane variety, making netlists rare unless something is super broken. And if it is, battlefront will work on solutions and often implement them very quickly, for example naval gunfire in overlord and the unholy rape machine that Matilda's in Early war used to be.

Just be warned, once you start flames its hard to stop. First you have one specific army that wanted, but then you realize "hey, all I need is 5 more panzer IV's and I can run a panzerkompanie!" And then you realize those vehicles can be used with other countries, so next thing you know you're collecting an ally, and before you know it you have 10,000 points split between 3 armies when all you wanted was an assault pancake zrinyi list.

>>44249031
Do you have any specific questions?

Many of us have been playing the game for a while. So we should be able to answer any questions you might have.

But more generally, Flames of War is a company-level wargame set in Wirld War II. There are also expansions for the game that allow you to play games set in World War I, the Vietnam War, and the Arab-Israeli Wars of the late 1960s.

Recently they also released a modified rule set designed to be used with an Alternate History 1985 Cold War turns Hot scenario.

In any of those versions you take command of a reinforced Company of soldiers or tanks fighting in one of those conflicts.

Infantry are about the size of a penny, and medium tanks(like the Sherman) are about the size of a matchbox car.

Armies are made up of several platoons of tanks or soldiers.

Most armies are balanced against each other in any given time period, but there are a few outliers that are more(or less) powerful than the average.

>>44250647
>>44249730
>>44249512

Sounds really interesting, unfortunatedly, I don't think I'll have access to the figures (If i understood well, you need to buy specific figures for each scenario, right? Or is it possible to play without specific figures?)

>>44251288
Define "for each scenario"? If you have, for example, a T-34-85 for a late war tankovy (standard soviet tank batallion), you can use that in any list that features T-34-85s (technically it doesn't need to be Battlefront's T-34-85; loads of people make historical figs and a T-34 is a T-34), even if the list is in a different era of the war, and any late war list is theoretically balanced with any other late war list (a couple of weird exceptions aside).

The only real divisions are the early, mid, and late war splits, but that's just because tanks which were impenetrable at the start of the war were very much not by the end of this and points change to reflect that.

>>44251288
Flames of War is primarily played as a tournament play style "Bring a list of X points [within the limitations of one of the three periods of Early, Mid or Late War] to have a game with my completely unrelated X points list from the same period" rather than as scenarios.

>>44251288
Most people choose one time period and stick with it. Buying an army for that time period and the figures for it.

An American Paratrooper Company in 1944 or '45 for example.

Or German tanks in North Africa in 1942.

Or Soviet tanks at Kursk.

World War II is the main game and has the most players in most cases.

The other eras have their fanbases as well.

For example a lot of people here, myself included, are getting into the Cold War version of Flames of War.

Because writing up the lessons learned from my weekly flames of war games is really helpful for me to getting better, here's what I learned this week:

Remember when you have protected ammo, do not forget it or your tanks WILL die to double-bail tests.
Dug in+gone to ground+veteran = you are not shooting the enemy infantry off that objective.
Veteran infantry die like bitches if you catch them moving in the open with a tank platoon.
Assaults with pinned enemies and strategic smoke placement are really good at shoving the enemy off the objective with minimal losses.
Recce is very damn useful, especially if you have a pile of MGs to use when the enemy is not gone to ground.
Fuck lists where all the germans get panzerfausts.
Fuck Tigers.

>>44251812

>fuck the lists where all german infantry get panzerfausts

Thats most late war. it's not that good since you have to pay 70 points for a full platoon and it all goes to hell when you are against infantry. It's really good when you can upgrade a bunch of them though. Like the sturmkompanie or ss panzergrenadier lists in greywolf.

>>44251458
And within WW2, you tend to find Late War is the most popular, then Early, then Mid. Dunno why Mid isn't so popular; I'd guess it doesn't have Early insanity like T-35s or Late insanity like KTs

File: trollfaust.png (184 KB, 211x466) Image search: [Google]

184 KB, 211x466

>>44251812
>>44252972
>Panzerfausts

You know, common consensus usually agrees that Panzerfausts on an entire platoon is useless, but the more I play the more I feel it's actually a sane investment.

Ok so I'm just gonna use a Sturm Platoon from the 78 Sturmkompanie list in Grey Wolf as my example here, but it easily can apply to a lot of later German lists as well.

So a base LMG equipped platoon of 6 MG stands and an SMG stand is a 180pts. Usually you'll see the command SMG Stand get upgraded to a panzerfaust, and perhaps a Panzershreck team added as well (which for a CV army is 25pts)

You have now invested 35pts into two stands to protect that platoon from tanks. That's a mere 2 swings back that have a realistic chance of killing a tank if it is assaulted. This platoon's total cost is 215pts. If you want to throw a CiC stand or a 2iC stand you can get another swing for somewhere around an investment of 250pts.

Now, let's take this same platoon, and instead take the panzerfaust upgrade for all stands. That would mean 10pts for the command team, and another 60pts to upgrade all 6 LMG teams. This makes the platoon cost 250pts. Huh, exact same investment as if you threw in a CiC and a Panzershreck team.

So now instead of a mere 3 possible swings back that can hurt tanks, now you have potentially up to 7, and all of those stands can fire defensive fire as well compared to the 3 of the other platoon. In addition, you don't have to worry about AT being out of place, because now EVERYONE has it. You can place the platoon however you want and it doesn't matter.

>continued next post.

File: 1413672665567.jpg (27 KB, 500x336) Image search: [Google]

27 KB, 500x336

>>44253428
>But anon, what's the point, you throw that many panzerfausts on a unit and no sane tank would ever attack them!

Ok. Awesome. Now they have to park at 16" and try to whittle away my CV infantry instead of just rolling in and potentially curbstomping them. Isn't the whole point of throwing infantry on an objective to keep the enemy off it? If my unit is scary enough that they won't even want to get into range for my guys to fight, I'd say that's an excellent investment. That also gives me opportunity to use air support even on defense, and let my armor deal with them on my terms, rather than knife fighting in my deployment zone.

Especially since I paid the same amount of points total on that unit as the other guy did if he threw his CiC or 2iC in with his platoon.

Granted, there are a couple of tradeoffs I take in this. Namely I don't get a morale reroll, and I have slightly less stands (he would have 9 total, I have 7)

Which is why I usually don't upgrade every single platoon in my Sturmkompanie to have them. My favorite setup is

>1st platoon
>All panzerfausts

>2nd platoon
>Panzerfaust command team, rest bare

>3rd platoon
>sturmpioneer upgrade, supply truck

I then take the weapons platoon pak 40's that can attach to a platoon, 3 panzershrecks, and of course, 1iC and 2iC with panzerfausts.

You can then go nuts based on what your opponent does and what mission you roll and tailor your deployment to that.

I definitely recommend trying it. If you're really trying to save on points you can even drop the panzershrecks since you don't really need them with all the panzerfausts laying around. But hey, that's just my experience, I am not a tourney level player so take what I say with a pinch of salt. I just don't buy the "it's expensive" argument because you're spending the same amount of points I am in the end if we're talking solely about that unit's performance.

>>44253548
All good points. But the sturmkompanie and ss panzergrenadiers can upgrade teams individually (min of 3 includin the command team) which is still scary but also points efficient.

>>44253952
Sturmkompanie cannot upgrade individually. It's an all or nothing deal.

>>44254235

Check again. They can upgrade in pairs. 2/4/6 kinda deal.

>>44253548
>Now they have to park at 16" and try to whittle away my CV infantry instead of just rolling in and potentially curbstomping them. Isn't the whole point of throwing infantry on an objective to keep the enemy off it? If my unit is scary enough that they won't even want to get into range for my guys to fight, I'd say that's an excellent investment.
>>44251812 here
This is exactly the problem I had facing them. I had a unit of cromwells going to quickly take the objective, but I had to keep them 10" away from the infantry teams or they would die. Ended up using my croms and arty to smoke and pin them before assaulting with a 9-team lorried rifle platoon, who managed to push them off the objective. Having 1-2 platoons of them to hold objectives from tanks and recce seems like a great investment.

>>44253428
Nobody thinks they're useless, it's just that there are diminishing returns the more that you take so 70pts for the full platoon is overpriced compared to 10pts for the platoon command team

I dunno; I see it. One panzerfaust is a risk you can manage. Tanks vs 6-9 panzerfausts is just certain death.

>>44255133
Tanks vs 4 Panzerfausts means it's probably suicide given how defensive fire works.

>>44254347
Do you have the revised book? Because I have the old version and in that one you can only have an all or nothing choice.

>>44255255
If he does, he's misreading it, because it's still an all or nothing choice. "May upgrade all" is the wording.

I think the confusion is that it lists the cost per squad - that, however, is only there to account for undersize platoons.

File: KIMG0009.jpg (2 MB, 1836x3264) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1836x3264

>>44255255
My proof. This is how its written in my book.

Is there a non-hero all-IS-2 1944 list?

>>44255347
Yep, you're misunderstanding it. "May replace all remaining" is an all-or nothing.

It gives the points value per squad because you could have 2 or 3 squads in the platoon, and it's more concise to word it that way.

>>44255416
Sorry this >>44255347 is >>44255255 I was posting that as my book, which is the older one.

I've never seen a Grey Wolf Revised book in person so I have no idea what's different in it. Especially since Easy Army obviously never updated it.

>>44255504
It's worded identically in GW revised, i'm looking at it right now.

Amusingly enough, the typos in the StuG Batterie entry a few pages over are identical, too.

>>44255558
Is there a list anywhere that mentions what was changed?

Particularly Hungarian stuff. I've been going nuts because I have no idea what's changed in the newer version. When Red Bear got revised we got a fucking massive article on it but Grey Wolf got no "patch notes" that I can find, so I have no idea if I even need the newer book or not.

>>44255630
Honestly, not much shifted. They updated a few rules wordings to match V3 and so on; not much that actually changes what everyone was already doing.

Honestly, the only real change that actually mattered was their updating of German Armoured Cars to the newer-style organisation. They didn't even bother fixing all the typos in the book.

>>44253268
>And within WW2, you tend to find Late War is the most popular, then Early, then Mid

Indeed.

Although I attribute the boost in Early War popularity to the release of both Rising Sun with the Japanese, and Blitzkreig with Kursk-era Soviets.

>>44255409
no.

enjoy bedspring armor!

>>44257404
>Blitzkreig with Kursk-era Soviets.
You had ONE job Eagles.

>>44253428

Except you still have to pay for the 1 and 2ICs, and you were probably going to take Panzerschrek anyway. Even on the tiny platoons, you're not gaining that much, particularly considering half the time those Panzerfaust will never see use. Command, 1/2IC, and Pshrek firmly put the platoon into 'fuck that' territory for armoured charges.

>>44258730
Is that not correct?

I will openly admit to not being very knowledgeable about the Eastern Front...

>>44258897
Hint: Kursk was in 1943.

>>44258950
Then what was the big East Front battle am I thinking of?

Some other major tank battle on the East Front in the correct time period.

File: Red Square.webm (3 MB, 640x360) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 640x360

>>44259004
operation Barbarosa..a whole campaign

also, name of book

>>44259004

Blitzkrieg is for Barbarossa. Eastern Front is explicitly for Kursk. That's why the Panther D, the tank that Kursk was delayed for, appears in MW, and not EW.

Kharkov was a big battle (happened a few times, IIRC) in the Barbarossa period. There was also a few massive encirclements.

>>44259061
I'm not THAT dense.

I just could have sworn there was a singe defining battle I was thinking of, right on the borderline of Early and Mid War.

Much like how Kursk borders on the edge of Mid War and Late War.

Although it's entirely possible that I'm completely mistaken.

File: pz348.jpg (41 KB, 500x339) Image search: [Google]

41 KB, 500x339

>>44258756
That's the thing though, as a tank player, I feel like I can brave 2 or 3 AT5-6 attacks back. Do enough damage on the run in and you should be able to survive a couple swings back.

5-7 though? Fuck that. I'd be hesitant to attack that even with a full platoon of KV 8's.

Although you are right, I am usually buy the panzershrecks and command panzerfausts anyways. Depending on the opponent, I either throw them in with the barebones platoon (aka how you would normally run them.) Or I throw them on the pioneer or panzerfaust platoon, slap em on an objective, and dare my opponent's tanks to come at me.

I have used German infantry a lot, and I've rarely seen a couple panzerfaust stands do anything noteworth, especially not deter tanks from charging. 7 stands of panzerfausts though will make anybody pause, even a reluctant platoon, because if they swing back you're gonna lose a lot of tanks.

Keep in mind though, I have played in EXTREMELY tank heavy metas, to the point where I wonder why I even bother with MG's in my platoons. Around here I know that 95% of the time, those fausts will either be used, or be enough of a deterrent that they were a worthwhile investment.

>>44259218
As an Infantry player, I'd WANT the tank player to feel as if they can brave a few of those attacks. Because they can't. You maybe fail the assault with defensive fire, and every counterattack after that, you'll probably lose a few more. And that's on top of the usual attacks from the meat of the unit. Admittedly I tend to run veteran infantry, and with a 1iC you tend to be able to rely on counterattacking.

7 stands are nice, but it's also very pricey, particularly if you do it everywhere. And that's for the little German platoons, if you're running FJ that's 100 points a platoon for Pfausts.
>tank heavy meta
Yeah, that makes the investment a lot sounder.

>>44259074
>>Blitzkrieg is for Barbarossa
Uh, nope, Barbarossa is for Barbarossa.

Blitzkrieg is France and Poland.

>>44259520
Two defensive fire shots that aren't even statistically likely to hit, let alone penetrate? They're going to win that assault and then when they consolidate the infantry are gonna get blitzed.

>>44259218
I wonder where all these non-tank-heavy metas are. The lowest I've seen people go here are mech lists. I think I'm making the first infantry company at the store.

>>44262075
3, or possible 4 shots, in fact. And a 4+ is a hell of a risk considering most of the time Pfausts and Schreks are auto-penning. And the infantry have similar parameters for counterattacking. Any hits with the TA5 or 6 weapons are very likely to kill as well.

2 fausts and a schrek make any small unit assault a bad bet, and a big unit assault a casualty sustaining one, at best.

>>44262407

Anywhere other than clapistan.

>>44262527
Bong, actually.

>>44262539

Whereabouts? I'm in the West Country, and although we see a lot of tanks, the top two lists at our recent Tanksgiving event were Mech and Inf respectively, and overall there's a decent range of armies played.

>>44262516
>Not covering assault with smoke
>Not pinning first

>>44262575
Over sussex; I see Panzergrens sometimes, and sometimes those armour-car lists that come under mech, but rarely anything infantry-heavy.

>>44262586

Not always an option. And even if it was, worse case scenario for the defenders, it's still risky with the AT of Pfausts and Schreks.

>>44262407

Australia's never been very tank focused. Or period forcused, for that matter. Everything flies down here. Except maybe heavy tanks, but even then. Bloody Jtigers.

>>44262609
Sure, but the point is the original post claimed it was some kind of daring trap that's always going to muller the tank crew. It's not; it's a gamble that might pay off, unlike 7 panzerfausts, which is going to wreck anything that tries to drive over them.

>>44262667

Hardly a daring trap, but you'd have to be pretty desperate to charge into it, and with tanks, you don't get a second chance with that sort of thing.
7 panzerfausts are basically a big 'fuck you' sign, sure, but considering that in a huge amount of games, a given platoon won't get a shot off with them, it's overkill. Particularly when you can get to the 'ehhh, that's a big risk' stage with so much less. I could take 2 FJ platoons with Pfausts, or I could take just the commander, and take some PaK 40s.

Obviously in a lot of LLW German lists it's academic, but my LW Finns have never had much of an issue with close up tanks with just the minimum of fausts and schreks.

As with most things, it's a needed/would like to have sort of dilema, army list wise. I'd really like to have all Pfausts, but I only really need a few.

Best-worst tank list:

Heavy Tankovy, 1500pts
1495 spent, 4 platoons

Company Command T-35 (135)

Compulsory Heavy Tankovy Company, 3x T-35 (405)

Compulsory Heavy Tankovy Company, 3x T-35 (405)

Compulsory Heavy Tankovy Company, 2x T-35 (270)


Sapper Platoons, Command Pioneer Komissar, 20x Pioneer Rifle Teams, Pioneer Supply Wagon (280)

>>44262722
The reason you take seven is to make certain they won't shoot with them, because nobody's going to tank-assault them. They're a deterrent weapon.

>>44262750

A deterrant against some armies. An inconvinience against others with anti-infantry weapons. A total irrelevance against other armies. And always a cost.

>>44262828
Yeah, and HMGs don't do much against tanks, and also have points costs. What's your point?

>>44262864

Many infantry lists don't take HMGs for just that reason. The same ideas apply. I -do- take them for my Rifle wielding Finns, in the same way as I take some Pfausts for my FJ. It elevates my Finns ability to deter assaults from 'sweet fuck all' to 'reasonably nasty'. In the same way as adding a few Pfausts changes my chances against tanks to slim, to decent.

Other lists include no HMGs because everyone's already got SMGs, or Rifle/Mgs, or Assault Rifles, or tanks, etc.

>>44257404
>>44258897

Holy shit eagles you should atleast read the wikipedia article on the eastern front. This is really gulag worthy.

>>44263367

He is American. It is to be expected. Pity him.

>>44263367
I slipped up and said Blitzkreig instead of Barbarosa.

And then I misplaced Kursk on the timeline.

Two major flubs in one post. I get it.

My head was elsewhere. Still trying to process a certain Space Fantasy Sequel that I had just seen.

>>44263396
>Two major flubs in one post. I get it.

It's okay. Everybody fucks up sometimes.

You just do it publicly where more people can call you out on it.

>My head was elsewhere. Still trying to process a certain Space Fantasy Sequel that I had just seen.

I'm curious to hear what you thought of it.

>>44263396
Ben Solo: is a whiny bitch or a ragelord badass?

also, stat the characters in Flames of War!

Is the 30mm gun on the bmp-2 supposed to be able to kill Abrams on side? It probably won't occur, but was it really able to do that?

>>44265556
Dude. Spoilers.

But yeah, whiny bitch with anger management problems and daddy/granddaddy issues.

>>44265787
...whoa.

good eye, anon. that's a valid point you bring up....

>>44262727
No matter how much i look at them, those T-35 give me the impression they will die in seconds at their first tank engagement, too thin armor on a too big tank and being Conscript is basically their death sentence. It's a pretty manly list though, i have to give you that.

File: DSCN5682.jpg (585 KB, 1000x705) Image search: [Google]

585 KB, 1000x705

my bump is usefull....

i think i should just call it. my paint challenge items are just fucked up....game-figs and nothing more

i will get 4 more A-10's, from a better manufacturer, get better paints for them, and let THOSE be my final warthog swarm...

i feel off key. gonna go get some games this saturday instead.

>>44268250
Dare I ask what company you got those from?

Those obviously aren't Battlefront.

File: 45 mm obr 1937.jpg (250 KB, 964x573) Image search: [Google]

250 KB, 964x573

Here is my PAINTPOCALYPSE update:
Guns all done.
Marders built but need painting.

I was considering getting some rockets for my Germans the other day, but I'm not sure they'd be werf it.

>>44270207
They're definitely werf it.

>>44270309
Unfortunately, I'd beute the shipping on them is marder.

Is there an army builder for FoW? I tried battlescribe but it did not have the book I am using. I am using Bridge At Remagen and bought the Grimballs Beasts box to start this game. I have also bought 2 Sherman Jumbos and 4 additional m4a3s. What would you all recommend to add to this force?

Would I be better off running the huge infantry blob as 2 smaller mobs? I lose the machine guns but then have 2 units instead of just 1. Last game I played I was handicapped due to low unit count.

>>44270527
Try Flames of war lists for some of them, it's a blogspot link unfortunately.

>>44270527
Take minimal sized infantry, get minimal results. If your infantry platoon is any less than, say, 10 stands then you should consider taking it up to full strength.

>Last game I played I was handicapped due to low unit count

In what way?

>>44271420
Mission was a defense one. I could only start with half my units rounded down. 3 units meant only 1 and command squad. Rest had to drive on.

>>44271881
You must be playing a pretty low points limit to end up like that.

>>44272447
It was about 1400. I as just using the Beasts starter box.

Well, looks like post-christmas on the TY box now. This delay really managed to come at a rotten time.

>>44272823
LW is about 1500 minimum these days. For less than that you really need to cut down on the fancy toys like 76mm guns and so on.

>>44275979
That's supposed to be changing soon. At least according to WWPD.

LW tournament points are supposedly dropping to 1420 pts in 2016.

1420! You can't fit anything into your list at 1420!

>>44277370
>1420

I'll believe it when I see it.

THE TIME OF INFANTRY IS NOW COMRADES

File: WP_20151219_002.jpg (391 KB, 1632x918) Image search: [Google]

391 KB, 1632x918

Paintpocalypse update. Only 15 stands to go!

>>44277370
>1420! You can't fit anything into your list at 1420!
Not as Veteran Tanks with all the toys, no. Doesn't mean other lists won't have more than enough to have fun.

>>44278753

Command StuG with Riders
2 Stug, 1 StuH, Riders
2 Stug, 1 StuH, Riders
1 KT
3 Panzerwerfer with extra crew
3 Bike Recon.
/1415

On the topic of StuGs, I would like to play a StuG list but most of the ones I can find only bring 3-tank platoons. Is there a solid StuG list that would let me bring 2 platoons of 4, plus command? Even better would be 4 StuG and 4 StuH plus command.

>>44278900
CT
2 Command Shermans
4 76mm Shermans
4 M4A1 Shermans
6 105 Shermans
Cav Recon Patrol
3 Priests
AOP

Probably could make something nicer with BGG armoured.

>>44278922

Standard Panzerkompanie from Grey Wolf has 5 StuG platoons. No StuHs, but they get Brumbarrs.

>>44278900
>1415
That's a pretty tight point limit for LW, i always see people playing in the 1750-1900 range

>>44278753
It'll be pretty brutal for soviets who need big units.

>>44279147
Apparently it's gonna drop down to 1420 for official tournaments in 2016.

Personally, I can't help but think that's really low. It'll force a lot of the big shiny Late War toys off the table and really put a limit on the support options for a lot of forces.

Sure, you can probably still take trained infantry in decent numbers, but mechanized infantry and tank forces, as well as Veteran infantry forces are going to really feel the smaller points limit.

>>44278922
Desperate Measures gives you 4 stugs per platoon with access to tank riders.

>>44278922
HG Panzerkompanie from Italy has at least one platoon of 4 StuHs. You need to take Panzer IVs (or IIIs, I guess) as combat platoons though. Or, there are various lists that let you get 4-5 tank StuG platoons but those generally don't have StuHs.

It's pretty much a pick 2 out of:
>StuHs
>StuGs as combat platoons
>decent sized combat platoons

So, what's everyone working on right now?

Personally, I'm mostly taking a small break from realistic minis while waiting for more of my TY stuff; with the Shilkas, 2S1s, T-55s and T-72s I've done in recent weeks, I need to shake things up a bit.
Still working on a single Hind for the local store's demo kit, though. That kit is pretty nice to paint, although the flat surfaces are a bit annoying without an airbrush.

Doing some Battletech instead at home, and then maybe some boardgame pieces.

>>44282943
I just received over $300 worth of nazi spess magic in the mail that I plan to start on Monday when I get back to my apartment. Trying to get my Germans built up a bit so I can run demos for Slavs vs Krauts with all the cool stuff available for both sides to try.

the other $150 is on backorder at the warstore. So who knows when it'll show up

>>44282943
>So, what's everyone working on right now?

The Team Yankee demo kit for my FLGS.

My own set of Bannon's Boys for Team Yankee.

Editing the December episode of Panzerfunk.

Posting on both the official and unofficial Team Yankee Facebook pages.

>>44282943
VADS and ITVs. VADS is a ton of fun and looks great, ITV is not as great and so top heavy it doesn't actually balance on the hull at all. Gonna have to blu tack or something, dunno if it'll magnetise.

The M113 box seems garbage though? Same price as the ITV / VADS box but instead of the weapon systems you get like 8 resin figures for commanders and mortar crew? I guess to be able to use more than just one box of ITV / VADS you need two boxes worth made up as transports, but still. Doesn't seem great value.

>>44283503
Charles?

>>44285449
No.

Daniel

File: image.jpg (140 KB, 1200x803) Image search: [Google]

140 KB, 1200x803

BMP-ing

File: 2015-12-21 02.41.14.jpg (346 KB, 1440x1080) Image search: [Google]

346 KB, 1440x1080

>>44282943

>So, what's everyone working on right now?

I was so pumped up while I was painting these I kinda started singing panzerlied. Really loudly. I think I need to take a break.

>>44268689
Dragon.

they're shit.

Academy A-10 is better

>tfw you accidentally won a fuckhuge box of terrain because you though surely to God someone else would bid

http://www.ebay.com/itm/331732253709?redirect=mobile

Time to make a Stalingrad board I guess

>>44282943
Cromwells. I've got 5 PSC ones in front of me that I need to clean up the mold lines and sprue from, then another box of 5 coming in tuesday, then another 5+2 Challengers on christmas.

>>44291560
At least it seems like a nice terrain set, and a nice amount of stuff.

>>44231990
>Axis are unvaried
What? Italians play so utterly different from everything else in the game. They have no impenetrable tanks, unless you're boring and take German tanks.

If all you play as/against is German armor then yeah I can see that getting a bit boring fast.

File: 1359335522994.jpg (166 KB, 602x468) Image search: [Google]

166 KB, 602x468

>>44289845
Those look awesome, kudos.

I've been hunting for a Hungarian lot on Ebay and Bartertown for a long while now, but people seem to be hoarding the things. I want to paint some up something fierce.

>>44231990

You only play LW in a very specific sort of meta, got it.

File: girls-and-their-panzers.jpg (205 KB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

205 KB, 1280x720

here have a leaked anime tank battle with anime girls...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Am_aHKUh-uc

>japanese being japanese
>we will make you dumbasses practice tactics
>massive clusterfuck
>privet, tankovy ni rodina!
>hey, speak japanese!
>retards beign retarded.

and then at the end:
>who the fuck is that man? a fanboy?
> seriously, spoiler Sanders gets PERSHINGS

>>44296749
Well clearly physics can be safely discarded.

>>44296749
Disgusting/10

>>44280844
Yeah, seems pretty limiting, especially it limits a lot every CV or FV tank force. Anyway i'm curious to see what would happen so i'm thinking about trying a couple games with this point value and see how it plays.

>>44280844
But who goes to official tournaments? There is one in Yankieestan and maybe one in new Zeeland. I have played flames of war since 2012 and participated in 6+ tournaments a year never once playing these "official" sums. Located in Sweden btw.

>>44298542

Almost none of the tornaments I've been to haven't been the official numbers, even if they're not official tornaments as such. I mean, they exist, but they're mostly the very small, local ones. The GT's all have huge turnouts, and there's MOAB, Leviathan, and the various Cancon and Interclub Challenge events. Anyway, 1500 isn't out of the question, and that's not that far off.

It's a good system. Keeps the lists variable.

>>44298542
The players in my area seem to only play tournaments.

Either their traveling to a tournament, or practicing for the next tournament.

So the people who play are only playing at the official points level.

I've been doing my best to set up a casual play group, and that seems to be going pretty well now that Team Yankee is out.

The Soviet delay is unfortunate, but considering it's the Holiday season, people don't really have time to play or build stuff anyway.

>>44299374
>playing in official tournaments
>playing casually
False dichotomy. For example, I can tell you that close to 100% of LW tournaments in Scotland next year will be between 1500-1700 points, with none of this 1420 pish.

>>44299462
Yeah, those 80 points really must rock the meta.

>>44299462
'Murrica... What can I tell you? *shrug*

The dichotomy is a lot more true in my local group.

And the tournament players religiously follow the official Battlefront point values.

I prefer casual play. And I tend to prefer the 1750ish points level for Late War, although I can shrink it down when I need to. I just like the experience of larger battles.

>>44299462

Australia's playing 1420 for LW, unless it's a really casual game or something. Might as well get some practise in with a different period and points level. 1750 just seems too indulgent for me.

>>44299618
It makes little practical difference, but when even the people who want low points values are suggesting 1500 or 1550 that represents a difference in philosophy from "Tournaments always use the official points values".

>>44299618
They won't because almost nobody who arranges events use "official" sums.

>>44299923

That cuts both ways though. We play a lot of casual games here that happen to be at whatever tornament GT value's been set by BF.

>>44299942
>almost nobody
>liesontheinternet.jpg

>>44299374
Hah, joke's on you, I don't have a holiday!

Wait shit.

How much recce is too much recce? Speaking as a brit player here, noticing I can get a lot of UCs for fairly cheap.

>>44300386
1 platoon is usually enough. They're too much bother to kill most of the time, particularly considering cautious movement, withdrawal, and typically, a host of other targets to engage, particularly if you're running armoured. Beyond that, most recon tends to be pretty lacklustre fighting wise (big surprise), so they're more for opportunistic mech/exposed infantry attacking, if you don't need to lift GtG.

>>44300499
Not much worth to loading them with .50cal or PIAT then?

>>44296749
rip those chicks

>>44301362
122mm to the face is not good for anyone

those are practice shells in a wargames sport, BTW

>>44300642
I usually run 1-2 Patrols in late war, depends on the list and points limit, etc.

Armament...that depends. I almost always add a PIAT if I have a spare 5 Pts, just because it offers a threat. And I talk about that threat so it is taken to be far more dangerous than it actually is. The PIAT seldom kills anything, but it has done OK taking out a few 8-Rads or similar trying to abuse my poor UCs. I did once KO a Trained Panther with a flank-shot: the opposing player is now obsessed with PIAT-carrying UCs which works well to my advantage!

.50 cals are also very nice, though I usually can't find the points. However, if I have a few spare points I will add upgrades, PIAT first in LW, then extra MGs, .50 cals if I can. .50 cals in MW are however a bit too pricey at 15 Pts per upgrade.

Generally, I want UCs do do Recce stuff, but they can nip at the flanks of units where the return fire is no too bad and occasionally get off good assaults. The trick is not to bite off more than you can chew as they do die quite easily.

>>44301468
122mm worth of gunpowder converted to explosive force to the face don't care if it's practice rounds

I am not familiar with the show beyond someone posting videos here. Do lots of characters die? Or is it hand-waved?

>>44300642
I like fiddies on my UCs. It's more than double output of damage, roughly.

PIATs are garbage though. Can't fire at the same time as the MG and ROF 1 with 5+FP means it'll never actually kill anything much. 50cals let you engage light vehicles and soft targets more effectively ; PIATs give you a very ineffective method of attempting to engage tanks.

>>44301578
It's indeded to be a fairly safe sport in-universe.
They use special rounds intended to give some show but not the full force of proper AT rounds.
All vehicles also have a special coating on the inside to prevent accidental penetrations.
They have sensors in the armour which will trigger the KO-flag if something that would be a significant hit is detected.

Still, there do seem to be some risks; some characters still do things like sticking their heads out of the cupola for better vision while under fire, which is noted to be dangerous.
There's also the bit of backstory with a tank accidentally sliding into a river.

>>44301578
The sport's a very safe one. It's presented in a lot of respects as being a martial art. Although as anon said, the backstory of the MC has her saving a crew of a tank that slipped into a river after a mountain pass collapsed mid-bout.

>>44300642

Oh hell yes, those are great additions. The 50 cals mean they can threaten halftracks, bulletproof cover teams, and other recon quite effectively. PIAT much the same, except they can threaten a flank shot against a great number of tanks. They're cheap upgrades as well.

1420 is fine for late war

Having hard choices to make about what's in your force and an uncrowded table make for a better game.

Allright fellow FOWers. The Hub to Hub Debate. What is the best way to justify it? I know Phil Yates made a great clip explain his thought about ranges in flames of war. I can't find it anywhere though. Trying to make my mates jump into fow but he's been spending some time at TMP it seems.

>>44303762

The what debate?

>>44303902

Flames often lends itself to the "parking lot" appearance, where vehicles are positioned literally touching, despite the fact that in the real world there'd be metres, if not tens of metres, between each one.

This has been justified (for some people) by the invocation of 'sliding ground scale', but for others it's an unforgivable aesthetic blunder.

>>44303762

It doesn't need justification. It's a scale representation issue, and nobody should give too many fucks about that. The average tank in FoW doesn't sped much time hub to hub, and considering a mere 8 inches is 200-400 meters or so, spacing out the tanks any more is pretty insane. The game has a sliding scale, and I have absolute faith in the idea that there were many times in WW2 where tanks operated within 50 meters of each other. Which is about 2-4 inches, FoW wise.

>>44303980
>but for others it's an unforgivable aesthetic blunder.
What would they expect? If you're using actual figures rather than tokens, then truescale would require vast table sizes, or miniscule figures.

>>44304211

Hey, I'm right there with you, man - completely agree. Just reporting both sides.

File: 1378437107430.jpg (57 KB, 500x321) Image search: [Google]

57 KB, 500x321

Bumping

File: 1448590201218.jpg (576 KB, 2999x1475) Image search: [Google]

576 KB, 2999x1475

lol

File: 2015-12-21 21.49.19.jpg (376 KB, 1440x1080) Image search: [Google]

376 KB, 1440x1080

>>44306104

File: 2015-12-21 21.50.06.jpg (353 KB, 1440x1080) Image search: [Google]

353 KB, 1440x1080

>>44307376

All in a days work. Used revell micro wings fw190 decals instead of stock shitty battlefront ones. Much much better.

>>44303762
Play in 6mm on 1" bases, and the closest your tanks can get is ~7.5 metres in model scale from centre to centre. Having a gap that's going to be at least two tank widths helps with the visuals, I find.

Otherwise, the game mechanics encourage driving your tanks so close together so it's an unfortunate consequence of the game.

>>44303988
> considering a mere 8 inches is 200-400 meters or so
Are you sure? That'd put 16" rifle ranges at 800-1600m, which seems far. I'd have guessed more like 100-200m for 8".

>>44307491
The ground scale in FoW and TY is kinda telescopic.

It zooms in and zooms out based on how close the action is.

1 inch at assault range is a significantly shorter distance than 1 inch at artillery range.

>>44303730
No it doesn't. It makes for a boring game because both armies are anemic and you can't afford take anything interesting.

>>44310777
Trained infantry companies can still take a lot.

Oh the humanity, people may have to make an actual choice on ratings now.

cabbage

>>44310777
Only if you restrict yourself to veteran-only armor lists. Try something else for a change, scrubnut.

>>44307391
Looks good anon

>>44304211

I think what people are arguing is somewhere in the middle.

They are looking for the ground scale and the miniatures scale to be the same thing.

File: art-leopard-2-leopard-2.jpg (110 KB, 596x380) Image search: [Google]

110 KB, 596x380

>>44310777

I can tell from your post that you probably only thing big dumb shit like IS-2's and KT's are interesting. Expand your horizon and use some stuff that you would never take because all those points got soaked by the big dumb shit like IS-2's or KT's. Armored cars? Why not! Light Tanks? I think i will!

>>44303902

Its just Extreme Autism vs Normal people

As far as I know the only systems that force you to never have your tanks touching are the ones that require vehicles to be based. Its just that those are systems that are played by old school grogs who want to simulate how their forces would have done things historically on their table. FoW is usually played by people who don't give a shit.

So the Grogs bitch about HUB TO HUB and other shit and refuse to play FoW because it doesn't reward their autism.

I've never seen tank parking lots outside of deployment or at choke points due to the existence of Artillery and Air Power or fun games where people are throwing down 3000 points a side or something.

>>44315979
Wow, you have one hell of a chip on your shoulder. Did poor diddums get raped by a competent player in a high points game a few too many times?

Still you did get one thing right. The IS-2 *is* dumb shit in any and all circumstances.

Holy crap Battlefront's plastic StuG's are a fucking blessing from god.

They're so crisp, so easy to magnetize, so many options, it's just ashd;fasdf;lashdfahsdfas

I'm just pissed my begleit riders probably won't be in for another 2 months so I'm not gonna be able to paint em for a while.

>>44308408
I don't have the 2E rulebook handy but I do recall that 16" was four times the distance of 8", so if 8" is 200-400m that'd make 16" 800-1600m which doesn't seem right.

>>44319475
Read what he said. The scale is telescopic.
4 inches is about 50 meters. 8 inches is about 300 meters. 16 inches is less than 1km. 24 is about 1km, 32 is up to 2km or so.

Think about what has what range. Obviously an assault rifle has a far longer effective range than 70-100 meters. But in game, they only have twice the range of an SMG. The scale isn't constant.

>>44315979
>FoW is usually played by people who don't give a shit.
I'd dispute that strongly. I'd say FoW is played by people that care about it, but not at the expense of balance or efficient game design.

>>44320662
Yeah, the playability of the game tends to be the most important thing.

You want rules that make sense from a game play perspective as much as you want rules that make sense from the perspective of historical accuracy.

And sometimes the one overrules the other.

>>44317004

lol, somebody mad.

File: 1436115400809.png (165 KB, 374x297) Image search: [Google]

165 KB, 374x297

>>44322610
congrats, you idenified teh trowlz!

seriously McFagballs, get off this thread!

>>44303762
>game pieces touching each other
oh no, we better complain about stacking chits while we're at it

Like >>44303988 said, who cares.

For team Yankee I don't quite understand how to make an army list. I want small list focused on hinds and limit tanks. Can I take a small rifle group and then 4 hind transports w. Troops and a second hind group for attacks?