Flames of War SCANS database:
http://www.mediafire.com/?8ciamhs8husms
---Includes our Late War Leviathan rules!
Official Flames of War Free Briefings:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=108
Current /tg/ fan projects - Noob Guide &FAQ, and a Podcast
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eD3nkA51ddl3nmltKg0zsnfrOUhlWgcc4h5aqz-RFqw
Quick Guide on all present FOW Books:
http://www.wargames-romania.ro/wordpress/wargames/flames-of-war/flames-of-war-starting-player-guide-the-books/
Archive of all known Panzer Tracts PDFs: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/nyvobnlg12hoz/Panzer_Tracts
WWII Osprey's, Other Wargames, and Reference Books
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/z8a13ampzzs88/World_War_Two
and, for Vietnam.
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/z8i8t83bysdwz/Vietnam_War
--Guybrarian Notes:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eD3nkA51ddl3nmltKg0zsnfrOUhlWgcc4h5aqz-RFqw/edit?usp=sharing
http://www.400gb.com/u/1883935
Panzerfunk, the /fowg/ podcast.
http://panzerfunk.podbean.com/
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Briefings/CariusNarva.pdf
http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=1949 the Azul Division: no longer linkable off the main page
Which army do you play the most?
http://strawpoll.me/4631475
what actual country are you from?
http://strawpoll.me/4896764
First!
>>46194366
Listen, you're not bringing Von Der Heydte to negate Reich Devised. It's one of the reasons why you might bring him, but you're actually bringing him because of Rally Once More, and Panzerfaust Trap Teams. Panzerfaust Trap Teams are just fucking unpleasant. Literally the only place the enemy is safe from them, their own deployment zone. They can spring up almost anywhere, in bulletproof cover, are concealed while they shoot, or can just go straight to the assault. Imagine springing up behind Jagdtigers, or if there's a piece of terrain 4'/10cm away from the tanks in question, you get the Sneaking up on tanks rule, And to cap it all off, the little bastards count for exactly nothing. So even if you do winkle them out of their fucking holes, you just wasted time while the Fallschirmjäger on the other side of the table laugh at you.
>>46194479
Reich Divided, son of a bitch.
>>46194495
>>46194479
Thanks for the tip, man. How do the rules concerning the traps work? I might be interested in using them to shit on someone's all-tank list.
>>46194479
And with their low range and low radius in deploying near enemy teams, you can pretty much ensure that an enemy command tank is fucked. I've royally buggered a few Sherman and Soviet thrusts that way.
It's also worth mentioning that in the Market Garden lists where you can field multiple dirt cheap 88 platoons, his 2+ motivation makes them considerably more difficult to pin, if you stick him between them. His ability works on guns as well.
>>46195016
They're pretty basic. Basically, deploy them anywhere in no mands land or your deployment zone, provided they're more than 2 inches away from an enemy team. They're independent teams and may never join platoons or each other, and if they don't move, they count as dug in, GTG, and concealed at all times. They're otherwise FV Panzerfaust teams. They pass all motivation checks if they don't move.
>>46195108
Pretty rad. Also, how well do fortified lists work in combat? Do gun pits, static positions, trenches, minefields, roadblocks, etc. work well? I've always been under the assumption that a mobile list was a successful one.
>>46195016
It's worth mentioning that if you're the Infantry Aces guy, you're rather out of luck, no Characters allowed in Infantry Aces.
They're now in Bridge at Remagen with SS-Panzerbrigade Westfallen. However, those ones are Fearless Trained not Veteran.
>>46195186
Well, there's no real reason why you can't have some mobile choices in a fortified list. And being able to start with pretty much everything on the table is pretty great. They can be a bit finnicky in the implementation, though. Don't spend too much on fortifications. But the Mannerheim Line Strongpoint and the Cassino fortified lists tend to serve me pretty well.
Does someone have the Tank Platoon and HMG pages from the Banzai book?
>>46195494
Not the same guy but adding to this it really depends on the list. I've seen Japanese fortified lists get smashed over and over. I even arranged my own hohei chutai into a fort list to see if i got better results. I've seen finnish italian and french lists do well though.
Im primarily into EW though so maybe its different MW and LW
Bump
>>46196419
Nip fortified so far doesn't work well as their RS lists *need* to be hyperoffensive.
>From the last thread
>>46192228
>Is a LW tank only army a viable thing?
Not really. You need something that can assault enemy infantry, and the best thing for that is infantry of your own.
>>46192320
>I've literally won tournaments in every period with tank-only forces.
Care to explain how? Because from my experience you really need a balanced force, and that includes infantry.
>>46198741
Matilda spam soviets, maybe; those can handle infantry fairly comfortably.
>>46199193
I don't own a single Matilda.
As to how I win with tankovy:
Spam t-34s, know how to bait deployment and win the long range AT duel. Have su122s or flame tanks so you don't have to rely on assault, and balance being aggressive with not being stupid. I could literally talk for an hour about playing tankovy - I suggest you just do it, learning by doing is best.
How large are artillery templates meant to be?
>>46200757
The standard: 15x15cm (translate that into barbaric measurements, someone, please). The you can get in double and 2x2 as well.
>>46200849
6x6 Inches
Europoor but still got used to wargaming in Inches and feet
>>46200750
>breakthrough guns & flame
Ok, I can kinda see show that would work, but I still can't help but think that having some infantry of your own is still a good idea in most cases.
And most armies don't have access to as many breakthrough guns and flamethrowers as the Soviets.
>>46194472
Lookin' good.legacy captcha: 1946
>>46201068
Infantry is actually a bad idea, it costs you tanks, which dilutes your firepower, which costs you games. You need to 100% dominate the AT game asap, with as many tanks surviving as possible, otherwise you'll run out of time before you can fight onto an objective
>>46201068
Soviets actually don't, either. Flamethrowers are only available for certain briefings as an attachable platoon (45pts per stand), and flame tanks only show up in strelk, engineer sapper, heavy tank, and self propelled lists.
>>46200750
Spamming T-34s (or Matildas, or T-26s), is only going to catch ill-prepared armies off guard. There are hard counters to the T-34 mess in LW, and ways to stop them cold. You can even use armored cars to block shots and single out the command tank(s), forcing them to get their CiC over there to assign a new commander.
Also it's not really a "spam army" if you're taking a variety of things. If your 1750 list is two platoons of 8 T-34s, SU-122s, SU-100s, etc... Then you're not actually fielding spam. A spam tank list is the kind where you have 30 Matildas/Lees, and filled the excess points with SU-100s. Or you dumped 30 T-34-76s out on the table (and little else). Filling up your platoons to get the cheapest possible tanks, and fielding as much of those as you can before resorting to other things, is the Soviet tank spam. But 2 platoons of 6 or 8, with a well spread assortment of other options to cover your weaknesses, is just the usual tankovy, no spam.
>>46200849
>implying i use barbaric units
>>46201480
Infantry's only a bad idea if you're bad at using them. Razvedki are a good example of a solid infantry platoon that keeps up with tank forces, can provide a shit ton of MG (and .50cal) fire, has a flamethrower, and can often times assault into terrain better than tanks can. It is frequently better to have something like a Razvedki platoon assault some would-be defenders, especially AT guns, then trying to sit there with your tanks trying to get those 5s or 6s to hit.
And then there's infantry like Spetsnaz, which drastically speed up your ability to engage defenders, while also providing you with a crack team of Veterans that are often times impossible to hit.
>>46201655
Spetznaz are the only 'infantry' I'd ever take in soviet tankovy.
And every single point you spend on infantry is a point not spent on tanks, which is like killing your own tanks before the game even starts
>>46201736
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that tanks are the primary focus of this game.
Infantry lists are quite good. Just look at the 2nd Infantry Division, Paratroopers from almost any nation, Armored Rifles, etc.
Those are all wonderful examples of how good infantry can be in Flames of War.
>>46201799
Well, see>>46198741
Was asking how I win with pure tank lists, so that's what I was talking about
I'm not saying infantry lists are bad. At all. Never said that. I get the distinct impression that there's some goalpost moving going on here.
>>46201881
More of a mis-reading than goalpost moving.
You were making it sound like you'd never take infantry ever.
>>46201941
I also play infantry armies, and have won EW with trackless (go japs!) and several strong finishes in LW, but the tournament format (time limits, penalized for losing platoons) greatly favors elite, durable armies with good movement potential.
can someone give me the kanji for 'Captured'? Painting some M3 Stuarts for my Japanese. Not trusting google translate that much.
>>46203198
ビーフブリトー
Google never mistranslates.
>>46203547
That would be the Hiragana, whitu piggu.
He's asking for the Kanji. IE, the single complicated moonrune that means Captured, rather than the half a dozen that make up the sounds of the word for captured/ female goat/compassion/balloon.
>>46203547
can confirm this is correct
A panzerfaust upgrade on a pioneer platoon isn't really necessary is it?
>>46204152
If you plan on getting close to the enemy then you may want to consider them
Fffffffffffffffffffff.
The picture on the front of PSC's cromwells box is wrong; the Cromwell hatches opened front and back, not to the sides.
>>46205043
Sounds about right for PSC.
>>46205043
The hatch can rotate. There's a few pics in Combat Camera I: Cromwell & Centaur by Ian Carter that show that the crews could turn it sideways. All the pics in it are from the Imperial War Museum's Photograph Archive. Very useful book if you're making cromwells.
>>46205335
Another, without a person making it a bit unclear.
As for the book, after a while searching I was able to find a PDF copy somewhere deep in the interwebs. Don't still have the link, sadly.
>>46205437
Most, of course, have it opening front and back.
>>46205496
Looks like I'll have it the other way around here, with most to the side... but thanks, that's very reassuring.
>>46203621
>>46203547
well, I went for '捕捉した', seemed right enough...
>>46203198
>>46205949
here's how it turned out, the tracks are still WIP.
>>46206284
Prolly should have asked in /hwg/ too. There's some nips on there.
>>46206284
those moon runes look sick man
>>46206500
google translated that as what I wanted it to say so I'm fairly confident I didn't write anything completely wrong (like 'beef bacon'). Nobody's going to read it anyways
>>46206526
thanks! my hands shake a considerable amount, so I'm always worried about fucking up my minis my attempting any kind of free hand painting.
>>46206744
>I'm fairly confident I didn't write anything completely wrong (like 'beef bacon').
It never hurts to double check. There are some pretty bad translation errors out there.
>>46206953
I don't see anything wrong with that label.
>>46205437
Wait, were the little flaps over the front and back wheels removable/applique/got broken off a lot?
Looking around through some of the army books, there are German lists that have access to captured Soviet tanks. Are there any German lists that have captured American tanks?
The Polish LW list with nothing but captured stuff is great.
>>46209216
Yes, In Atlantik Wall.
>>46209216
Atlantik Wall lets you take a Sherman V and a VC Firefly in place of a Panzer IV in the 21st Panzerdivision.
The Fallschirmjäger Panzer Platoon can have captured Armoured Cars or Shermans.
'Captured' tanks, could include 150. Panzerbrigade Kampfgruppe.
>>46209417
>>46209587
Cheers, thanks.
Hahahaha Beutepanzerkompanie, you can field French tanks in LW
This book is great
>>46209216
MW Germans in Eastern Front can take soviet T-34s
MW and LW Grenadiers can take a single KV-1e
Finns always have access to captured soviet tanks.
German 21 BeuteStug is like, frankensteined french gear.
Beutepanzer exists as well.
IIRC, there's a brit EW list that can be entirely capture Italian tanks.
What what what?? Strawpoll says other people in Japan?
Where my niggas at? Willing to travel for a game
>>46209216
All I want to know is, where is my Soviet panther list.
>polan, 1944
>>46212722
I thought there was a list in Red Bear that lets you field some captured German tanks.
Not many, but a few.
>>46213309
You can get a Captured Tanks platoon, that allows you to infiltrate a Tank Unit along with you, and has Enemy Disguises. However, it's not Recon, is hideously expensive and competes with the Spetnaz in the same slot.
>>46213309
Is there? I've been focusing on my Germans and Canucks for too much / too long then.
>>46213309
IIRC it lets you take up to 3 tanks, 2 of which can be panthers, 1 can be a tiger, and any can be pz4/StuGs
But the Tiger/Panther only get to be ROF 1, so it's a total slap in the face.
not worth it from a competitive perspective, spetznaz are better
The new Episode of Eagle's Nest is up.
http://panzerfunk.podbean.com/e/eagles-nest-episode-8/
In it Bartosz, Lord Viruscide, and I continue on our Star Wars kick and discuss Star Wars Gaming with a heavy focus on X-Wing Wave 8.
For those of you looking for new FoW-specific content, the new Panzerfunk episode will be recording this weekend, and will be online shortly afterward.Hopefully. I've been a busy man.
>>46208791
Removable, from what I can tell. You can see here that they're hinged.
>>46214154
AFAIK - those little mud flap things on all nation's tanks had a problem with getting gummed up/bent/torn off by foliage
>>46214138
hell yeah, motherfucker
>>46212999
>it'sjustbanterm8.jpg
So what's the best a single tank/stand has done for you in a game? I think I just had my best moment tonight.
>Move challenger into woods to control avenue of approach
>Enemy moves forward 3 tigers because I smoked where he was the previous turn
>Tigers miss
>Challenger has 3 shots to kill 3 FV Tigers at short range
>All three shots hit on 4+
>He fails all three saves
>I pass all three 3+ firepower tests
>Three burning tigers
Challenger stronk
>Actual physical book is $44.80 NZD (Minus shipping.)
>Ebook version is $35.99 NZD(?)
This doesn't seem fair.
bump(s)
>>46215732
What are you complaining about this time? What are those prices for?
>>46214368
They still do.
>>46215530
In my last game a single stand of SS held an objective for 3 turns before reinforcements came in
>>46220407
Knight's Crosses for everybody!
Afrikabump
Hey, thanks for helping out with my list a few threads ago, but i just found out the tournament (my first ever FoW) does a 1850 point limit. Any suggestions for changes?
Infantry Company, from Market Garden, page 164
Compulsory Rifle Company HQ (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.165) - CinC Rifle, 2iC Rifle (30 pts)
Compulsory Rifle Platoon (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.165) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (190 pts)
- 2x LVT-4 Water Buffalo (25 pts)
Compulsory Rifle Platoon (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.165) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (190 pts)
- 2x LVT-4 Water Buffalo (25 pts)
Carrier Platoon (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.166) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (100 pts)
- Replace Command Universal Carrier with Command Wasp Carrier, Replace 2x Universal Carrier with 2x Wasp Carrier (30 pts)
Anti-tank Platoon (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.167) - Command Rifle, 4x OQF 6 pdr gun (late) (150 pts)
- Troop Carrier, Lloyd Carrier per gun (5 pts)
Mortar Platoon (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.168) - Command Rifle, Troop Carrier, 2x Observer Rifle, 4x ML 3” Mk II mortar (130 pts)
Canadian Armoured Recce Platoon (p.154) - Command Sherman V, Sherman V, 2x Firefly VC (455 pts)
Anti-tank Platoon (SP), RCA (Canadian Infantry Division) (p.180) - Command M10C 17pdr SP, M10C 17pdr SP (195 pts)
Rocket Battery, RCA (p.181) - Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 4x Land Mattress (245 pts)
1770 Points, 8 Platoons
>>46215530
I once had a single spetznaz stand assault and capture 4 bailed panthers. He then hid in the woods, and diligently made his last man standing test for the next 4 turns.
Finished my captured M3 platoon. The moonrunes on the left side of the tanks should read "captured".
>>46222094
nice mouse B)
>>46222094
Those look really good.
As a German player, what do I need to kill a 101st Airborne List? I'm on FJ's from Nachtjager. Anything helps.
>>46224228
Post up your army list and we'll make some suggestions.
>>46224228
what point size are you playing?
>>46224228
There are several tools for dealing with dug-in infantry.
Recce - Can make the target easier to hit. More hits can potentially transfer into more kills.
Flame - Flame tanks or flamethrowers can make short work of dug-in infantry.
Breakthrough Guns - Firepower 1+ is nasty.
Pin & Assault - The old fall back. It's less effective than some of the other options, but it can still work.
How good is improvised armor for shermans?
>>46225823
From playing against it in with my Udarny Company, it didn't really affect the way I played against it as it didn't change the top armor, but it pretty much made my AT Rifle Teams useless and my OT-34s useless from the front.
>>46201068
Different guy here, I also typically run track only armies though I can't claim to have won any tournaments I do well with them.
I do however play some stiff competition Inc former national level tournament winners and I think I give as good as I take, they typically run infantry and gun heavy lists.
I run Germans and have found that a vet pz3/4 plus skirts is a wonderful infantry killer. Backed up with a lot of recon and maybe flame tanks or stuhs I'm not overly concerned by most infantry.
I wouldn't recommend it to a beginner as it requires a very aggressive play style (almost as if you where a soviet commander who found himself on the other side) but at the same time you need to be very careful setting up the geometry of the desicive assault.
It works but it's not a newbie friendly approach.
>>46213990
You're recalling it right. It is indeed a rubbish option that eats up your recce slot, and competes with BA-64s and Spetsnaz. Either of which are better. If you want a FA 9 or 10 tank with a ROF 1 gun, you already have that in the form of the lackluster IS-2.
>>46201736
It sounds to me like you've never even bothered to try using something like Razvedki. I will opt for 255pts for 5 M3A1 scout cars, with an additional AA and a .50cal AA, and loaded up with 8 MG/Rifle stands and a Flamethrower; over 6x Confident Trained T-34-76s with cupolas (also 255pts). The added utility, bucket of .50cal dice, self defense AA which can lead to helping protect nearby tanks, and the ability to assault into ruins unimpeded without bog-checks and with a 4-die skill check to remove defenders and/or gun teams, makes Razvedki one of the best units I have ever fielded. And let's not forget the fact they are Fearless.
Spamming something in mass is, in short, the lazy way to do things with Soviets. It's uninteresting, dull, effective only if your opponent is unaware of it, and it results in massive excess casualties. Fielding a combined arms approach where you have *enough tanks, heavy mortars, razvedki, recon, tank killers and/or assault guns, requires a bit more thinking an planning. But it also gives you a stronger force with less hard-counter possibility, and allows you to have a toolbox of options instead of a single hatchet of tanks to try to solve every problem with. Having run almost much every list in Red Bear, Razvedki is IMO the strongest list in the book. Beyond that of any one of the Tankovies. They are so good, that I find room for a platoon of them in any list that can take them.
>>46226920
Different anon, never tried Razvedki before, so made this list thinking to try them, any tips?
>>46228273
Looks decent to me. I usually don't take SU-100s with them mostly because they're slow and can't hit worth shit when moving. And the Katys are a bit superfluous IMO, since you've got a full batter of heavy mortars. I've done well with some 76mm shermans instead of Valentines, but much of that is simply not having any Valentines. They seem like a decent little tanl for the cost, but Slow always kills me with Razvedki. They're quick, and seem to do best when you can rapidly change your angle of attack.
Give it a spin. Nothing looks bad about that list.
>>46226920
>spetznaz are the only infantry i'd take in TANKOVY
>it sounds like you've never never bothered to try Razvedki
Reading comprehension is hard.
>Spamming is lazy, uninteresting, dull
Disagree. We clearly have very different subjective evaluations of both soviets, and fun.
>effective only if your opponent is unaware of it
Untrue. Knowing it's a thing isn't the same as having a list that can handle the thing, which is different still from being in a mission, on a table, with a list that can handle the thing. Like GI-JOE taught us, knowing is only half the battle.
>results in massive excess casualties
Actually, no, it doesn't. Lanchester's Square Law sufficiently demonstrates that bringing massively overwhelming firepower actually minimizes your casualties, and, in FoW, gives you more time to achieve the mission objectives.
>Being well rounded gives you a stronger force
No it doesn't. It gives you a force that can do more *things* but not all *things* are equally useful, especially in a tournament setting.
>with less hard-counter possibility
And yet deprives you from being a hard-counter to any lists yourself. To win tournaments, you need to win 6-1, not 4-3, and you need to be able to do so within 2 hours while being slow-played by That Guy.
Razzies are fine, as a list, but I don't take them in Tankovy.
>>46228273
I avoid Katies like the plague. They're a trained, soft-skinned unit that leaves behind smoke trails, one mortar bombardment or machine gun burst away from being a dead platoon.
I try to get my Tank Killer platoons to 4-strong.
You don't really need BA-64s *and* spetznaz.
Other than the katies it looks alright though, just some fiddlin' in the margins I'd do.
>>46229133
Something like this...?
>>46229417
Yeah, sure, I'd run that.
So, in response to possible taking mortars, I was curious, can 6 light mortars do a barrage? I'm still in the process of learning the rules.
>>46230077
Technically even one Light Mortar can do a barrage if it's got a barrage profile. You won't hit nothing, but if you have six, you can do the double wide template or single template with rerolls.
>>46230077
What kind of light mortars are you thinking about? There is the kind of "Light Mortar Team" that's found as an integral part of many infantry platoons, and there is the kind that are separate platoons, usually with some kind of caliber (commonly roughly 80mm)
>>46229054
>Reading comprehension is hard.
For you, apparently.
Whether or not your opponent is aware of "spam all tonks" is irrelevant. It's whether or not they're aware of what they're going to be facing. If you go to a tournament, people have planned for it if they even have a shred of a clue that Soviets will be there. If you're playing in a club and running blind lists against each other, then Tonk-Spom only does best if the opposition wasn't planning on facing 15+ medium tanks.
>Muh Lanchester
Lanchester's Square Law doesn't account for Hen and Chicks, having finite maneuvering room, blocking your own shots through sheer number of hulls, choke-points, or Flames of War's rule set. In FoW, bringing massively overwhelming firepower is a quaint idea, but good luck with that when you need 7's to hit at close range due to moving, can't target defending gun-teams 3" in woods and behind defending infantry (but close enough to provide defensive fire), or simply have too many tanks that are bumblefucking around each other and can't bring their overwhelming firepower to bear.
>It gives you a force that can do more *things* but not all *things* are equally useful, especially in a tournament setting.
That is the most back-asswards logic I've ever heard, and the US' politics mess is full of it right now. A force that can do more things is objectively better in a competitive environment than a force that can do one thing well.
In a tournament, you have to plan on seeing a variety of things. If FoW has one thing going for it, it's a fairly diverse possible meta. The problem with FoW however, is you are correct in that you need to be winning 6:1 games in competitive environments. Which is one of the biggest problems with FoW, because it favors hard to hit, quality veterans, even above 30+ trained tanks. And the only thing tank-spam tankovy will hard-counter, are all infantry forces lacking AT assets (strelk-spam), and Tiger/Panther spam lists.
>>46229133
I have actually found that in a Razvedki list, taking both BA-64s and Spetsnaz is extremely useful. In fact, one of the strongest aspects to Razvedki is having access to more than 1 recce team. You can even take Motorcycle recon, which can double as MG teams when you need them to hold ground. Whether or not you need ALL THE RECON is questionable, but taking two separate recce units is definitely handy. I've had manu games where my little BA-64s have sealed a win by rushing back-field objectives, maurauding through vulnerable artillery stands and causing company cohesion rolls.
Is this list any good?
>>46231007
You're so wrong, on so many levels I can't be bothered.
Suffice it to say, if what I do wasn't effective, I wouldn't take first in half of the tournaments I go to. I'm more than content to let my results speak for themselves. I have no desire to "prove" anything to you, I've just been trying to enlighten inquiring and open minds about the nature of tankovy.
>>46232727
No, it isn't.
It's a Late-War, trained tank list with no AT higher than 10, and confused support choices.
Thoughts?
>>46230153
>>46230318
8Cm gw42 stummelwerfer. 1 platoon of 4 and 2 attached to command squad. I think they have the barrage ability but it says smoke in italics. Dunno if that's an ability or all it can do.
>>46231007
>A force that can do more things is objectively better in a competitive environment than a force that can do one thing well.
Agreed. A good list is like a tool box, it has a variety of useful tools that you can use in the right situations.
You need to be prepared for multiple possible situations in a tournament environment. You need to be ready to take on all comers. And that includes anything from dug-in veteran infantry, to always attacking tanks, to Tank Destroyers decloaking off your starboard bow.
You need to be ready for literally anything at a tournament, because some people do go full retard on some crazy nonsense.
So have your anti-tank forces, your anti-infantry forces, your recon, your artillery, etc so that you can deal with the spectrum of threats that you're likely to encounter.
>>46232727
>Is this list any good?
I have to second what >>46233673 said.
Your highest AT value is 10, and that's a bit lack-luster in Late War.
You'll want to find room for either some 76mm Shermans, or Maybe some Tank Destroyers.
The Stuarts, while fast, will almost certainly need to be getting flank shots whenever they shoot at something, their AT 7 is incredibly weak in Late War.
You also probably won't be needing the Improvised Armor or the Hedgerow Cutters.
I play some solitaire ASL but im looking to get into a tabletop WW2 game. From what ive seen of FoW people just spam lines of tanks side by side. How true is this, and could I make a viable army with very few or even no vehicles?
>>46234553
All good, except for the machine guns and lack of artillery support. You're going to need something that can fire smoke (be in Nebelwerfers, mortars, or cannons) to support your advances/blind the enemy. Also, at least in my experience, machine guns don't really offer much for what they're worth. Your infantry platoons will do better on objectives, really, and they're stronger. So you can get rid of those HMGs and use the points to try and get some mortars or something.
>>46234553
I'm ... very confused.
What, exactly, are you trying to *do* with this list?
What do you think you're going to fight?
Let me list off some issues you have:
1.) you're effectively spending 210pts on Panzerfauts. That's 11% of your army. That's too much faust.
2.) that 3rd small Fallschrim platoon isn't doing you any favors.
3.) while you managed to get 9 platoons, you shouldn't try doing that with FVs, especially not FV PzfstMG teams (literally the 2nd most expensive infantry in the game)
4.) You have 4 platoons that literally consist of 1 command team and 2 guns. That's a really easy-to-kill platoon.
5.) Your direct-fire AT is abysmal. You've got 2 Jagdpanthers, and 2 88s. that would be light for 1500pts, let alone 1900
6.) your only ability to smoke comes from 2 mortars, with a pathetic range.
I suggest you reevaluate.
>>46236174
Occasionally model scale vs ground scale cause tanks to get a little close together, but it's not a literal gunline of tanks.
As for no vehicles, you'll want some mobility in your force, even an infantry force.
But yes, you can chose to make an infantry army with AT rockets, AT guns, MGs, mortars, artillery, etc.
What kind of force are you looking to play? There are armies for *almost* any play style.
>>46236951
Well my general interest is obviously an infantry heavy list. Trucks/Half-tracks/AT Guns etc is fine I'm just not a huge fan of tanks and not a huge fan of what I've seen as tank-centric lists of the FoW I have actually seen irl.
As for nations, I'm pretty much interested in anything thats not british or german, nothing against them really but again I see a lot of those two in particular in any WW2 related game/topic and its made me grow bored of them overall
>Wojtek
>>46238367
go russian
>>46236951
>>46236951
>but it's not a literal gunline of tanks.
Motor platoons or lorried rifle infantry for British armored company? Or both?
Are the machine gun upgrades on halftracks useful?
>>46239024
Lorried, and if you can get them, armoured transports.
>>46238970
>>46236951
>>46239073
Looks like a jolly good time.
Just wait till more people are playing TY.
>>46239269
putting my vads/itvs together. going to make em as vads but leaving top plate detachable so i can swap them to ITV.
i'll end up getting more boxes later and then permanently attaching the tops.
I'm having a really rough time playing americans. Russians seem to have every possible tool to defeat american tank companies with ease.
easly 2-3x the number of tanks. their apc's missles (bmp missles) can take out an m1. and m113's basically can do nothing.
bring a 7 or 8 tank unit down to 1 tank and watch it pass a good spirits test on 3+ .. meanwhile my 4 m1 platoon loses 3 tanks and my tank has a 50% chance of running off.
baka sure m1's hit a little harder but it really doesn't seem like it's worth it.
a-10's seem like a waste of points now. russians have a billion options for anti air. americans have 1 vads. and their short range means that rusisans can stay out of range of the vads and pick appart the mearican tanks with their hinds/fog foots. but if the american air shows up almost everyone gets to shoot them down.
shilka
gohpers (gods of anti-air)
even bmp missles vs cobras
us gets vads and m113's 50 cals. and you can avoid them easly.
i may just give up on ty untill americans get some kind of anti air that works.
>>46239468
Now you are living and breathing the shit Team Yankee felt.
Hopefully we getplasticbradleys.
>>46239073
one smoke and they can't do dick
>>46239468
>bring a 7 or 8 tank unit down to 1 tank and watch it pass a good spirits test on 3+ .. meanwhile my 4 m1 platoon loses 3 tanks and my tank has a 50% chance of running off.
But ít is the same withnormal FoW.
Destory 9 out of 10 T-34 and see them pass their Fearless test. Meanwhile 1 Panther destroyed two bailed out of a 3 tank Pantherplatoon and see them run because confident sucks.
>>46240582
Yeah, but that's the -minimum-. If you have 4 pz IV's, you need to kill three.
>>46240809
>using tanks
pleb
>>46239468
>Abrams vs T-72
Make sure you get the alpha strike and pick off most of one T-72 company befroe they get their chance to shoot.
You're paying for your superior mobility, so make sure you use it effectively.
>A-10 vs AA
Keep in mind that the AT missiles on the A-10 outrange the Shilka's AA fire, which means you could theoretically just take them out in a standoff strike.
If that's not an option, go Wild Weasel on those AA assets first before going for the other targets.
Also keep in mind that the ATGMs on BMPs can't shoot reactively; they can only shoot in their own shooting phase.
>>46235715
this is going again an infantry list only atm so is it any good for that?
>>46241574
It's kinda bad sportsmanship to tailor your lists like that.
Even against just infantry I'd drop the stump rifle platoon and the 3rd tank platoon, and pick up some 105mm Shermans, or at least some priests. Otherwise you're at a real risk of just bouncing off their dug in guys.
You're also not well equipped for anti tank work, you need at least some higher AT options.
>>46241742 its just me and my dad playing so we both know what were facing
>>46241825
I have a group of 5 friends that I play and we all specifically made a rule were we cant build a list to specifically counter the list that the other friends made. Its complicated and sounds weird but basically what its meant to do is make it so we build lists, not build a list specifically good at killing that list.
You feel me?
>>46238367
>infantry
>not British or German
US Armored Rifles are a strong choice if you don't mind having some halftracks.
And if you do mind, there are one or two dismounted versions of that list that let you keep all of their normal equipment, but not have to bring the tracks.
>>46242095
Yea I feel you, if my dad wasn't okay with it I wouldn't do it. He practically designed his SS to go vs mine
>>46238970
>picture from WWPD
I can't honestly tell if you're trolling or not.
>>46239269
>Just wait till more people are playing TY.
I'm still assembling most of my stuff. I have some Abrams, Cobras, VADS and ITVs assembled, but mostly I've got a massive pile of plastic and resin where my Americans should be.
>>46242132
Its works very well and we play very fun and balanced matches. Until my brother brough his KV-5 in.... that's the only time and last time a tank was thrown against a wall.
>>46241029
>You're paying for your superior mobility, so make sure you use it effectively.
the mobility doesn't mean shit when you're taking side shots on each other on turn 2 or 3.
russians turn 1 .. max speed bore into one side of the table.
russians turn 2. now he has 16 tanks shooting into the sides of 4 m1's. the other m1's.
he shoves up .. bails/kills 3 out of 4 tanks worst case scenario and he's lost max 8 tanks. you have 1/2 your formation in bad spirits (and probably gone) TURN FUCKING 3 AT WORST CASE FOR HIM)
that's at regular scale. Maybe manuver speeds mean jack shit at a smaller scale?
>>46241029
>>A-10 vs AA
>Keep in mind that the AT missiles on the A-10 outrange the Shilka's AA fire, which means you could theoretically just take them out in a standoff strike.
>If that's not an option, go Wild Weasel on those AA assets first before going for the other targets.
already ran the numbers.
4 gophers vs 4 a-10's.
4 gophers get to shoot first and down 1-2 of the a-10s. 2 down .. bad spirits.. test .. 50% chance they fly off.
if not at best they drop 2 gophers.
next turn a-10's are shot down. probably. or 1 survies. needles to say even with a 3+ save gohpers/shilkas put out enough dice to mincemeat a-10's and cobras.
20 points down the shitter.
>>46244192
I think you're overestimating his potential kills.
Keep in mind stuff like deployment, terrain, your own movement, etc are all factors to be considered.
Granted he has more hulls than you, but there are ways to minimize that.
And unless you deployed very poorly, I doubt that he could get 16 tanks with clear lines of sight to 4 of yours.
I could be wrong, but I just don't see it.
Early model of a BMP
>>46247337
Yeah, the Kangaroos were kinda a mid-way point between the Halftracks that dominated WWII, and the APCs that would come later.
>>46245378
I've been seeing a lot of guys arguing the other way around, i.e. "Abrams always win the tank fight" so if that's anything to go on its balanced because both sides think the other is too good.
My own experience with Abrams leads me to believe that you need to do two things to win the tank fight,
1) keep your distance
2) exploit the fact that it takes two T72s to match the firepower of one Abrams by using terrain to keep the engagement as close to 1:1 for as long as possible.
All in all it seems even to me.
>>46201881
You can make very good armies that are tank teams only. A good starter is a soviet Mixed Tankovy in midwar. It has three platoons (companies) of tanks, some recon cars and a plane. It can be a very strong contender. Another one is the German Panther company with 8 Panthers only. It will of course struggle in Fighting withdrawal but any other mission and you're set.
If you can paint two teams of infantry, then you can build plenty of American and Soviet companies in latewar. They usually need a team or two for the selfpropelled artillery.
>>46247337
Goddamn PIAT driveby mobiles.
>>46244192
Yeah, shit that never happens, for 200.
>>46242636
>KV-5 in.... that's the only time and last time a tank was thrown against a wall.
Well done. I hope it was destroyed and the inserted rectally into the ass (in all meanings of the word) that brought it. Seriously, that thing is an abomination.
>>46240395
>Hopefully we get plastic bradleys.
If not, the plastic Bradleys from Zvezda are still quite good. Significantly more detailed than their Abrams and their Paladins.
>>46249969
For sure, but they're not 80's Bradley vehicles.
>>46250223
They're not?
I wouldn't have guessed, but then again I'm not as familiar with Cold War/Modern tech as I am with WWII stuff.
>>46251399
Nah, Zvezda's Bradley is one of the newer versions.
Does someone has the digital exclusive nachtjäger list
German Grenadierkompanie
German Ausbildungskompanie
?
>>46252862
Nope sorry anon. And I'm not sure why i dont have the grenadier list desu. Nothing gets my ww2boner going like an new grenadier briefing.
>>46252862
What's so different about the Nachtjaeger ones? Do they get fancy night vision on their halftracks or something?
Bought some new brushes, so I'm not struggling to paint my minis anymore. A 10/0 and 20/0 brush are absolutely amazing. Anybody know where I can pick up some barbed wire though? Gf9 makes a roll, but it seems to be out of stock everywhere, and I'm also pretty sure that's the reason why my battlefront order hasn't shipped yet so I assume it's out of stock there too even though I can still place it in my cart.
>>46254957
They're reluctant trained! Weeee!!! Everyone has panzerfausts too. I think the whipped cream is the 4 battery flak 39 (AT 17!)railway guns, for when you absolutely, positively have to murder every motherfucker on the board.
>>46256304
>4 battery flak 39 (AT 17!)railway guns
Finally got my grubby mitts on a copy of Team Yankee. Hardback too.
First Impressions: Holy, shit. This is a seriously well produced book. Like, not even Geedubs Codexes look and feel this good.
>>46256304
>>46256385
>>46256406
Yeah, the TY rulebook is really put together well.
Also, are GeeDubs books well put together? My older GW books were pretty poorly put together.
>>46256768
Well the later codexes are full of bright colour, lovely photos and how to paint stuff. But they're hellishly more expensive than Flames of War books.
But the lavish spreads of coloured maps with all this information. I love it. Love the Team Yankee book. And the rules have been so elegantly simplified.
>>46256768
I've been in the GW fanboy biz since 98. Ive only had maybe one or two older softcovers begin to fall apart. New hardcovers are primo quality imo. No issues with anything newer.
>>46256974
When I used to play 40K back during 3rd edition, I had several Codexes (codices?) that were ready to fall apart if you looked at them the wrong way.
>>46256633
>twin 8.8s
>4x twin 8.8s
>TWO PLATOONS OF 4 FLAKZWILLING 8.8s
>MFW
>>46257651
That and they're Railway Guns. Absolute bastards, because they've got the same basic can only shoot within short range rule as bunkers, and they also have Area Air Defence similar to the Volkssturm.
>>46257651
Yes, that's 16 8.8s with RoF 3 each. Stuck on immobile rail cars, but that's why they're cheap. Then you just dig in the panzerfaust teams around an objective, and dare any tank-centric army to try something.
>>46257651
>>46256633
THAT'S SIXTEEN 88 BARRELS WTF
>>46257788
>16 8.8s
>RoF 3 each
>potentially FORTY-EIGHT 8.8 cm rounds downrange in one turn
>mfw
>>46257831
Shit this outshoots Kampfgruppe von Swoboda, von Swoboda only puts out 36 round per turn.
>>46256304
Oops I should clarify I meant a 4 gun* battery. Briefing will let you take 2 batteries though. And both 37 an 39 can get an extra shot for some points.
>>46257958
I can't even having me entire armored force being wiped out by a single train in one turn
>>46257755
>an only shoot within short range rule as bunkers
Only until they shoot. so you really want that first salvo of yours to wipe the enemy off the table, because after that the rail guns die to, say, mortars very easily.
I'm incredibly new to Flames of War, but have been contemplating starting a Welsh infantry division in it. What would I be looking at/looking forward to on the tabletop? What sort of strengths would it have and what weaknesses? Is there anything specific I should look out for/get?
>>46258728
Generally, you should try to have a balanced, strong force. Infantry, artillery, and anti-tank are a must. Anti-aircraft, recon, and other add-ons are good to have if you have room for em.
>>46257831
Six more if you count the Tigers and the PaK43 as well.
>>46258991
As dumb a question as this may be, is there usually a heavy emphasis on historicity and recreating divisions/regiments/whatevers or is it more or less "Your Dudes"?
>>46259113
There's a pretty huge emphasis on historical accuracy. The books that they put out are based on specific locations, time periods, and battles, and the "lists" of units you can create reflect the equipment used by the units in the certain locations, time periods, etc.
>>46259164
Alright, thank you. I found a thing on their site about the 53rd Welsh Division, so I guess if anything I'll be going off of that and adding a bit of each of what you suggested since it seems kosher.
>>46259113
The way army books are set up tend to be focused on making things historically accurate, or at least historically plausible.
The books you use to make your army list are very specific to what was actually being used in the specific campaign the book covers.
You have options for your force based on what forces were involved in those battles.
But which options you chose from the list of stuff available to you is completely your choice.
For example, both Tanks and Anti-Tank guns might be available to your force. You can choose which you want to use, because both are historically plausible, but one might be what was really used, and the other was from forces that were operating nearby.
>>46259332
Yeah, you just add the bits you think match up. What I usually do is try and research a bit further than what Battlefront did so I can get the exact units, like what I did for this pdf, but you don't have to do that at all. It just makes me feel neato.
>>46259513
Alright. Looking over the 'Intelligence Briefing' I think I'll be covered as far as tanks, anti-tank and artillery go. Although, I have to ask, what the fuck are crocodiles and what is their purpose in the game?
There is the option to take Kangaroos for damn-near everything; is that something I should invest in?
>>46259748
Take a Churchill VII with a fuckload of armour. Enough to shrug off FlaK 36 rounds.
Then you attach a flamethrower, and put all the fuel in an armoured trailer to neutralise the normal flamethrower rules.
A tank that the Germans shot any of the crew of on sight.
>>46259580
The pdf on the Division I found seems to do a solid job, but yeah I catch you. Also, is a fine thing you put together, there. I'd probably want to do the same if I were remotely competent with the game.
>>46259834
Oh. Well. I take it I want some of those.
>>46260006
Flame tanks can certainly be a useful tool against enemy infantry.
>>46260129
Honestly I'll probably just focus on the infantry, some tanks, artillery and some anti-tank. Keep things relatively simple. A few questions on those, actually:
Is it best to go with the slightly more costly but veteran tanks? In what situations would I want to field Self-Propelled anti-tank guns over... "non-SP" anti-tank guns? Lastly, where (or when) would I want mortars and where would I want artillery guns?
>>46260335
Regular AT guns are cheaper, and can get a three plus save by going to ground while in concealment.
>>46256633
Not legal. You can't take two Marinesturmplatoons :^). One of them has to be MarineSchützenpaltoon
Due to poor-to-non-existant impulse control, I now own 3 Königstigers. Anyone have any good advice as to what I could do with them (such as lists, or at least briefings and general ideas) that tries to circumvent the major big cat problems?
noob here, pg. 240 in the Overlord book says i can replace AA MG with .50 cal AA MG, but where are the stats for those two weapons? i cant see them at the back of the book.
>>46262246
Strange, they seems to have missed the vehicle MGs for the americans in that book. The stats are the same as for the british (RoF 3 AT2 Fp6 for AAMG, ROF3, AT4, Fp5+ for .50cal)
>>46262277
Thank you! i was going blind looking for the rules.
Bonus question, what does improvised armor do? can i find those rules in the main rulebook?
>>46262391
Page 118. Against weapons with Fp5+ or 6, you get an additional 5+ save (if it's not a flame thrower, artillery or aircraft)
>>46262206
The Remagen list (510. Schwere Panzerkompanie) lets you take a solid number of Always Defends Reluctant Trained KTs. You can get 6 for reasonable points, leaving you some over for Volkssturm and guns. Volkssturm are particularly fun, because although Reluctant Potato in ability, they don't count as a platoon for half-on, half-off scenarios, so you can bubble-wrap your KTs effectively.
My list for 1750 is:
HQ: 2 KTs
Platoon of 2 KTs
Platoon of 2 KTs
Platoon of Volkssturm, 9 stands, with LMG
Platoon of Volkssturm, 7 stands, with LMG
6 105mm Howitzers
4 2cm Flakvierling
Total 1740pts. It's also totally playable at lower points, with the artillery the first thing to reduce.
>>46262475
>not taking SS-Ausblidungspanzer for shooting up light vehicles, dug in Infantry and countercharges
>not taking SS-Ersatz-Aufklärungplatoon for holding to a Objective till the bitter end
>not taking 6 Pak40 for shooting soviet zerg tanklists
>>46262586
What list are you looking at? Because there aren't PaK 40s in the 510. sPzKo that I'm looking at.
>>46262632
Okay, disregard, they're under FK40 and I'm a moron.
But - as good as your choices all sound - what would you drop to afford them instead?
>>46262652
I would go with that list (you seem to play with 1750 points):
German Schwere Panzer (510. Schwere Panzer Abteilung)
Tank Company, from Bridge at Remagen, page 60
Compulsory Schwere Panzerkompanie HQ (p.61) - CinC Konigstiger (Henschel), 2iC Konigstiger (Henschel) (430 pts)
Compulsory Schwere Panzer Platoon (p.61) - Command Konigstiger (Henschel), Konigstiger (Henschel) (430 pts)
Schwere Panzer Platoon (p.61) - Command Konigstiger (Henschel) (215 pts)
Ersatz SS-Panzer Platoon (p.69) - Command Panzer III L or M, 2x Panzer III L or M (150 pts)
- Replace Panzer III L or M with Panzer III N (0 pts)
Ersatz SS-Aufklarungs Platoon (p.67) - Command Panzerfaust Rifle/MG, 6x Panzerfaust Rifle/MG (200 pts)
- Replace Command Panzerfaust Rifle/MG with Command Panzerfaust SMG (0 pts)
Volkssturm Platoon (p.74) - Command Panzerfaust Rifle, 8x Panzerfaust Rifle (105 pts)
- Replace one Panzerfaust Rifle with MG08/15 LMG (-5 pts)
Trained Volks Light Artillery Battery (p.75) - Command SMG, Staff, 2x Observer Rifle, 6x 7.5cm FK40 (PaK40) gun (225 pts)
1750 Points, 6 Platoons
>>46263587
That's nice, to be sure, but will suffer slightly in missions with Reserves - where mine can take four platoons on the board, albeit perhaps not as strong as your platoons, yours can only have three.
But it definitely looks viable and I will give it a try.
>>46263616
That's true I also thiught about that, and the solution might be kicking another Köti. But since the theme is a lot of Köti I would make a go ith this list.
Tbh I think the 506. is a better list. It will be probably be my next tournament list. Or maybe Westfalen or maybe Berlin. Fuck I have to work on those miniture mountains that are piling up. Marine Division is another project I would like to do. But only wiht two railway twinflaks.
>>46261955
You are correct, which means there's 35 points floating.
Are their any SS tank lists that always defend?
>>46262206
This list, and variants of it pop up frequently at Nationals and regional tournaments around here.
I love playing against it with my Red Banner Strelkovy :^)
>>46260335
There's a fairly complex set of factors that you need to take into account for composing your force like that. Probably easier to just play some games or proxy some figures to see how it all comes out, but a quick answer to your questions could be:
Veterans cost more, but they tend to be more survivable. Depending on the tank, you might rely more on weight of fire, numbers, or sheer armour though, so veterans are a selectively useful trait. Fragile sniping tanks like SPAT guns, like Marders, benefit a lot from it, particularly as skill affects stormtrooper. Self propelled guns are a lot easier to relocate on the hop, and they're also mostly bulletproof, which in practise means that you can switch flanks, chase after and harass infantry, etc, with far more impunity than otherwise. They tend to be a good deal more expensive for the equivalent leg guns though. Mortars tend to be very cheap and good value. The lighter ones tend to be more or less useless against tanks, and can't kill dug in infantry worth a damn, but they CAN pin them, they can inflict just as much if not more damage against exposed infantry as artillery, and they tend to have smoke rounds. That, and the tend to be very cheap compared to everything else. Heavy mortars are a pleasing blend between them.
Arty can heavily vary between armies. Artillery gives you, like mortars, a way of pinning and smoking enemy targets. Unlike light mortars, artillery tends to have a decent, if somewhat unreliable chance against tanks and dug in infantry. The brits get some very nice arty rules that make even their lighter guns like the 25 pounder reliable, and not bad at all against even dug in infantry. They're also capable of effective direct fire. Depends on the gun and the period, but 25 pounders are actually pretty excellent ATGs in early and mid war. LW, they're very cheap, although their anaemic firepower ratings mean that they often have difficulty properly finishing things off.
>>46264709
Tank lists don't usually auto-defend, and there isn't a whole lot of SS-Tank lists to begin with.
There's a couple SS Infantry lists that can be fortified.
The only always-defend German Tank Lists I'm aware of are the ones in Bridge At Remigan, none of which are SS.
why do you specifically want an SS-Tank List that defends? There's only 1 good SS-Tank list (Wiking) anyway, paying for Fearless on non-assault-focused tanks (that often have Protected Ammo) isn't really worth it.
>>46264995
>The only always-defend German Tank Lists I'm aware of are the ones in Bridge At Remigan, none of which are SS.
>what is SS Brigade Westfalen?
>>46264709
Typically tank lists attack. And there are a few that are Always Attacks.
As for Always Defends, I think there is an Always Defends Jagdtiger or Jagdpanther list.
And I'm not sure if that is SS or Heer.
>>46265093
>What is tank list
>>46263023
New stuff from Zvezda?
Not bad.
>>46259834
>A tank that the Germans shot any of the crew of on sight.
Never really understood this sort of thing, it's not like they volunteered to be flamethrower dudes.
>>46244223
dude, do you play the game?
if they fail a save they need to firepower....
>>46268255
>if they fail a save they need to firepower....
sa-13 gopher x4 4 pts
rof 2 firepower 4 front 1 side 1 top 1
Shilka aa platoon (x4) 4 pts
rof 6 move 4 at 6 firepower 5 armor 1 all round
vs
a-10 x4 20 pts
gau8 gun rof 4 anti tank 11 firpower 5
maverick rof 1 anti tank 27 firepower 2+
clusterbombs (lol)
A-10s rolls in
shilkas open fire
24 dice hitting on 4's
12 hits
3+ save
4 hits
firepower 5+
1 dead
gophers open up
8 dice
4 hit
1 fails
probably 1 dead.
2 a-10's remain (maybe if you are lucky 3)
they need 4's to hit aa in the woods.
if you go missile you kill 1 MAYBE 2
4+ hit 50/50 hits/miss
if you go guns
8 dice
4 hits
2 or 3 kills. (best case 3) let's say gophers AND THAT IS IF 2 A-10'S SURVIVE.
next turn a-10's come in
1 gopher opens up
1 hit
1 possible down (if so testing bad spirits 4+ 50/50 it leaves)
shikilas open up
3rd a-10 dies. maybe 4th. even if he doesn't kill the 4th it tests 50/50 it runs off every turn. and will die next pass he makes.
that's a whopping 8 points of anti air vs 20 points air to ground.
net result waste of points.
care to tell me again how i don't play this game? i see this happen all the fucking time because the m1's are too buisy getting skullfucked by 3-4 x the number of russian tanks AND their bmps can carry missles that can kill them .. and russian air can stand out of range of vads LOL and pick off tanks.
Calling all Funkmeisters!
Panzerfunk recording is waiting to begin!
>>46268553
If the AA's in the woods, then that would affect them as well. They'd be even less accurate. Plus that assumings that the allied player didn't kill any of the very fragile AA units, and that they were chosen to be on the board, and that they were close enough to respond.
Way to white room it.
>tell me again how I don't play this game
You don't. You read the rules, maybe, but either your USA players suck in new an intriguing ways, or you're the same rash of moron that was complaining about BMP spam being a problem.
Not that earlier anon, but git gud, scrub.
>>46259834
>>46270350
>>46269124
Reminds me a lot of War Thunder players yelling "Russian bais!!! Tigers should be wrecking T-34s!!" ... No one who plays tigers in WT plays then right. You are not meant to rush in the middle of a city.
Same thing here. Play the Americans right. You won't have a problem then.
>>46271275
Pity most WT maps tend to require close up brawling.
>play them right
When I've seen them work, it's been a question of SEAD first, and then the A-10s just eat everything for breakfast. Unless they're T-72s they're dogmeat. Apaches as well. Very dangerous once the AA umbrella's been reduced. You get what you pay for.
>>46271344
I guess the words "play them right" are bad to use in this way. Its more or less like understand yourself then you can understand the enemy type deal. In my opinion, some of the basics of learning this game.
>>46271565
Know thyself, and know thy enemy.
funny, the Warthunder /v/ in here....
>>46267936
The same worked in the reverse, even though German flamethrowers were exponentially uncommon as the war progressed. It's seen as an incredibly inhumane way to kill someone, I guess.
See >>46212999 for more details
I feel like German Heavy Panzer lists are generally just plain bad and people who consistently win with them are just exceptionally skilled and their opponents are mediocre or worse. Am I wrong?
>>46275308
They have a relative skill curve. The list gets better the better the player is, essentially.
Also the lists themselves tend to need to be constructed carefully to maximise viability which also requires a degree of experience.
>>46275308
They can work, but every small fuckup can cost you critical (and horribly expensive) assets, so even experienced players can have trouble with them.
>>46270350
>>46270592
A Churchill Crocodile. I always liked the looks of the Churchill tanks. Why is it lacking the track covers though?
Ok post your wip or what's on your bench.
i'm working on a list now. i need to swap that tiger e for a king tiger and fix up the 2 unpainted unbased stands to panzershrek teams. and add 1 stuka (rudel)
thoughts? should i keep going like this? i know i still need to detail out the tanks/troop carriers. i am debating painting them a bit more into camo for eastern front but the way they are now i could say they are north africa / early eastern front.
Thoughts?
Assuming both tanks have the same base stats and are appropriately costed, would you prefer Veteran or Trained tanks?
>>46275607
Wouldn't that same player with the same skill win more with a combined arms list?
>>46277997
Depends on the context. A heavy tank list, played and built well, can seriously mess up a hreat many all-comers lists; other tank lists especially. A situation that would be much more even with two balanced lists going at it.
Of course, a less skilled player running heavies would get his ass munched by the all-comers list so yeah.
>>46277629
There is no easy answer to that.
For some lightly armored tanks, Veterancy *is* their armor. They take fewer hits which keeps them alive longer.
For heavily armored tanks, their armor is their armor. So they can be expected to shrug off any additional hits they take because they're Trained instead of Veteran.
>>46282361
Late war, what would you say is the dividing point on armor for that?
>>46282706
Generally speaking 9. Trained-Conscript Tigers can work. Panthers, King Tigers and Jagdtigers hella so.
Trained-Conscript Shermans on the other hand. Dead in the water unless they're really bringing the numbers.
LW American infantry lists, not armoured rifles, what are some must-haves?
>>46287470
Mortars. Pin down the dug in German infantry
>>46287470
Artillery. Bazookas. Some kind of mobile anti-tank (Tank Destroyers or M4Ax(76)/Easy Eights)
>>46287508
Any particular mortars? And are infantry mortars worth bringing?
>>46287555
Already got a lot of bazookas. What artillery do you recommend?
>>46287470
Artillery, AOP. Ideally some armour, either Shermans or TDs. Recon's very cheap and worth it.
>>46287616
You want at least one source of smoke. If you have artillery, mortars aren't as needed.
>artillery recommendation
105s and 155s. It's all good, really, but 105s are disgustingly undercosted.
>>46287923
Figured as much about the artillery, but I wasn't entirely sure if 155mm was significantly better than 105mm.
For recon, are Stuarts worth it, or should I use something else?
>>46288054
Stuarts are decent, although divisional cavalry recon (the ones in the jeeps and armour cars) are decent, as is the regular ones with just jeeps. They're cheap and too much bother to finish off, in essence. Stuarts are pretty nasty against exposed infantry, and can threaten mech platoons and guns, at least.
155s are slightly better, at a slightly higher cost. The 5/2+ rating means they're a real threat to tanks of all sorts, dug in infantry, and if you manage to get a time of target bombardment, very reliably lethal. Real tank killers. 105mms are a very good value choice though, so no loss there.
>>46288054
Staurts are good recon light tanks. I would recommend greyhounds instead mostly because I personally like them more. They are less armored but they move fast on roads and they have the same gun.
>>46288054
>>46288089
>>46288105
From what I remember, not all US stuarts are actually recon, so you might want to keep an eye on that.
>>46288054
>>46288105
Do you HAVE the option of recon stuarts? That's not a common thing for US Stuarts to have...
>>46288136
>>46288130
Oh shit, you're right. Had just gotten used to Stuarts being recon from my friend's lists.
>>46277323
Wew lad
R8 my Stuart's /tg/
>>46289133
Give those sandbags a wash, and they'll look good enough. COuld really do with some decals though...
>>46289133
>>46289258
Decals almost make everything on tanks and planes...
>>46289133
Perhaps it's the photo quality, but I honestly can't tell if those are painted Olive Drab, or still bare resin.
>>46289855
looks dark greenish to my keen elvish eyes.
>>46289855
yea it was taken with an iPhone camera so its a pretty shitty pic
>>46289133
What's with the yoghurt covered raisins?
>>46292144
Sacks of potatoes that deflected HEAT rounds. Its common WW2 knowledge bro.
