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/
[Vimeo] The Fallen of World War II
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
Anybody playing in any games on or around D-Day? My FLGS is running Firestorm: Overlord but I must admit I'm not that familiar with it. Anyone ever played it before?
>>47419100
Oversaw one, played two airborne missions recently. The rules are pretty simple, but it takes a lot of effort for the Defenders to win with the constant recycling of attacking troops. If the Attacker knows what they're doing reasonable, they can easily score a 4-3.
>>47419100
Never played a FIrestorm campaign, but I have played a D-Day game themed around Juno Beach two years ago.
We'd set up the table on june 5th with three of us together, pooling our collections.
The two other guys played that day, resulting in a German win.
On the next day, I played another round against the German player.
In that game, some less-effective defensive placement allowed my AVsRE to move up fairly safely on one flank, breaching fortification after fortification and pushing into the hinterlands supported by infantry even though my Shermans were getting stuck on the soft sands of the beach.
The StuGs trying to reinforce made things a bit scary for a few turns, but the breach in the coastal defenses was already too big at that point.
It was a lot of fun, with some interesting mechanics and a very different feel compared to regular FoW games.
>>47419100
My mate and I usually do a Beach landing on/around June 6th, but he's had a death in the family so no-go this year as he'll be elsewhere.
>>47419100
I've played a few parachute landing missions in the past, but I've never played the beach landing missions.
The para-drop missions seemed a bit lopsided to me. I always won them a bit too easily. Perhaps my opponent wasn't a skilled enough player, or perhaps we were playing it wrong, but I always found the mission to be fairly easy for the paratroopers.
>>47422100
Depends, if you're British and you're doing a Coupe-De-Main, you're definitely in a good position to do a lot of damage first turn. Glider assaults are pretty easy to put directly onto target if you're good with a ruler and if the wind favours you.
However, other paratroopers have to deal with fucking Scattered reserves, so if you're like me and have literally never been lucky with them, you have your second, and most important infantry platoon turning up on the other side of the board to do sweet fuck all.
>>47422100
My buddies and I plan on doing a Crete style landing with gliders.
What do you suggest we do to make it more fair?
>>47422241
Well if they're playing the New Zealanders, they can't start on the board because of incompetent commanders failing to hold most important zone on the island.
>>47422241
I've never played a glider landing, so I can't offer any advice there. Sorry.
>>47422235
>paratroopers have to deal with fucking Scattered reserves, so if you're like me and have literally never been lucky with them, you have your second, and most important infantry platoon turning up on the other side of the board to do sweet fuck all.
I guess it was just incredibly lucky reserve rolls that won me those games.
Not everything showed up exactly where needed, but enough stuff showed up where it could still be useful.
SOON
>>47423054
Has there been a leak/preview?
>>47423101
Only hints back in December that both the British and the West Germans were coming soon to Team Yankee.
And the West Germans were officially announced a few days ago.
So possibly by the end of the year we might have British for Team Yankee.
I'm kinda interested in team yankee but i'm not quite sure to invest since all local wargamers in my aera are fucking gay.
>>47423622
Does it really matter who they choose to stick their dicks in, if you're only going to play tabletop games with them?
>>47423671
Clearly you've never played YMCA rules.
>>47423671
nah just asking what the game is like before i invest to see if it's worth it?
>>47423798
Nah, I prefer Odin rules, even if it is a bit expensive.
>>47419100
I'm running an event at our club on the 5th.
Two games, first round is 4 singles games - two beach landings, one paradrop, and one D+1 inland game for the two players who really, really wanted to bring armour. With the exception of the armour players - and even they are sticking to Normandy lists - these are historical matchups, with the 1st US ID taking on the 352. Inf Div; 3rd Canadian facing 716. Inf Div, and 6th Airborne facing elements of 716. and 21. Pz.
Round two is a 4vs4 on a large board - TBD whether this is 8'x6', 8'x9', or even 12'x8'.
For both rounds, I'm trying to make things a bit fun and varied. For Round 1, there's a Supreme Commander on each side, who will draw random "support powers", for want of a better term. These include Air Support, NGFS, extra reserves, weapon upgrades, extra fortifications, and Shore Batteries - obviously depending on faction.
For Round 2, it'll be based on the "Last day in combat" mission from Cassino, with random events, plus Tactical Edges from BG&G, and a Blind Domination element.
Should be great. Might possibly be terrible. Will report back in.
>>47423622
What would you like to know about Team Yankee?
>>47423798
>Clearly you've never played YMCA rules.
Are those the ones where you have to dress up as a cowboy, a cop, a construction worker, a biker, and an Indian?
>>47424250
What i would like to know is general flow of the game, mission stucture and how much of a simulation is it, does it feel like a wargame with more WAR or a really gamey version pushing miniatures around the table like all of the skirmish games that are around these days?
>>47424325
I'd say it feels a lot more 'real' than say, 40k, or any skirmish game that I know of. The armies feel realistic, and the general 'story' of each game tends to make sense.
>>47423189
Here's hoping; I'll probably pick up some of ArmiesArmy's british to get the infantry painted up ready... Tanks I can wait for in plastic, but the infantry are going to be metal either way and take forever to paint so I might as well get a head start. Goes well with my winter-themed soviet tanks, too.
So I just found out that the Nachtjager list for the 11th armored can get Wasps, which there was no way to get with the earlier Market Garden and Overlord versions. Which means there's now a way for me to field not-shit (ie: Pioneer) flamethrowers. Does anyone here have any experience using Wasps or other flametanks? Needing to get within assault range the turn before you flame seems pretty risky with a 0/0/0 vehicle.
And am I correct in assuming that the "upgrade a universal carrier with..." upgrade options don't apply when the UCs are replaced with Wasps? And if not, is there any reason to keep the little buggers around after they blow their load?
>>47424325
It's not a hyper-realistic simulation, but it feels more real than the other popular war games.
Real world strategy and tactics tend to translate well to the table top.
Maneuvering and lines of fire are highly important.
>>47424868
>Does anyone here have any experience using Wasps or other flametanks?
>Needing to get within assault range the turn before you flame seems pretty risky with a 0/0/0 vehicle.
I've used them some and they're an excellent tool when trying to set up an assault.
The nigh-guaranteed pin and removal of a bunch of defending teams makes it a lot easier to get stuck in.
The limited effective range is a lot less of an issue if you're moving them up in support of your assaulting elements, probably a Rifle Platoon or two.
Also try to move from cover to cover to get within striking range.
Something I haven't tried myself but dearly want to is to use them in a Night Attacking infantry force.
They're fast enough that you can probably catch up to the spearheading infantry for an assault while it's still dark.
Since flamers ignore most to-hit penalties, they're an even more reliable way to pin the enemy before your charge there.
>And am I correct in assuming that the "upgrade a universal carrier with..." upgrade options don't apply when the UCs are replaced with Wasps? And if not, is there any reason to keep the little buggers around after they blow their load?
I believe you can't upgrade them, since they're no longer Universal Carriers but Wasp Carriers.
Kinda sad, since many of them were actually equipped with an MG in addition to the flamer.
Still, you might want to keep em around and hide them to maintain your platoon count, assuming the enemy doesn't have something that can hunt them down easily.
Another thing to keep in mind is that you might want to save the shooting from one or two carriers for another turn, especially since it's not always possible to get all of them into range.
>>47424868
If you move the Wasps up with their support, you can probably makes sure that charging them will be a bad idea (the chargin platoon will get pinned, and be out of their foxholes, allowing you to pour in all the more fire before your own charge)
>>47427348
>They're fast enough that you can probably catch up to the spearheading infantry for an assault while it's still dark.
You do remember that nothing may move more than 20cm during night, right? (except possibly crazy japanese)
>>47427453
>You do remember that nothing may move more than 20cm during night, right? (except possibly crazy japanese)
Yup, but the infantry only move 15cm anyway.
Unless the enemy is miles away (in that case, what the hell are you doing?), you should generally be able to set up a turn-3 assault on a critical position, probably near or on an objective and then push on to win the game.
Man; I hope TY brits are soon. I've got some figures already and I could just play them as americans but I'm leary of basing them wrong.
>>47423054
Chieftans are such god damn gorgeous tanks
>>47427797
Well, if West Germans are June, July, August, then I'd assume the absolute earliest you'd see British might be September.
But I'd still say November or December is most likely.
>>47427348
>Kinda sad, since many of them were actually equipped with an MG in addition to the flamer.
I've only found a few pictures of ones with a MG, compared to pictures of MG-less Wasps. While I think they'll probably be enough to convince the local group to let me add some MGs, if you've got a good source for that I could probably strengthen my case.
>>47428701
The FoW website page talking about the Wasp even says "It also has a Hull MG to represent the additional Bren gun armed crewman in the back." http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=516
This is of course not backed up by the rules, but I'm pretty sure I can convince them with this.
>>47419100
>>47421289
>>47422100
>>47424102
Anyone else running a D-Day game?
>>47428122
>But I'd still say November or December is most likely.
Given BF's usual delays, I'd say December, maybe January is more realistic.
Anyone here play Italians? I was thinking of starting up a paracadutisti Mid-War/Late-War list for my Axis army.
is Naval gunfire support worth it? I'm thinking of using it for my marine company.
>>47434574
Well it got Nerfed, but consider that Naval Funfire was the Necron Fliers of Flames of War for a while there in that they were the most broken piece of shit there was allowed.
I started with a single painted rifle team about 20 days ago. Now I have nearly 1000 points of a Rifle Company painted and based. I think I'm losing control of my life.
>>47434554
midwar folgore paras are my shit. i play them in Bolt action too
they don't have huge numbers but they're pretty decent, and i have had some pretty fantastic victories with them. Its like running any other italian force but without 8million bayonets
>>47436052
Sounds like something I'll look into then. Where do you get your miniatures at? I noticed Battlefront makes them, but Eureka also has a pretty large line of folgore as well.
>>47436064
oh shit man i wanna return the HMG crew i got from battlefront. They're pulling all kinds of weird poses. It looks like they're all trying to do Yoga. Go Eureka as much as possible. Battlefront doesn't intend on recasting any of their non german/british/us/soviet forces any time soon too so generally you'll get huge mold lines and so on, in addition to awkward poses.
If you go for late war RSI paras they're okay too but honestly if you want a late war Italian list cyclists are the fucking best (every unit has recon abilities).
Its a shame Italy doesn't get as much love as they were easily the most fabulous looking army of the second world war.
>>47436052
Sorry for beeing off topic but I have to ask anon; which manufacturer of minis do you use for your BA Folgores, a Clubmate like to play some too?
>>47436335
Not that anon, but Warlord makes an entire line of Italian paratroopers for Bolt Action.
http://us-store.warlordgames.com/collections/italian-airborne
![IMG_20160525_190428[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WwymAj0.jpg "IMG_20160525_190428[1].jpg")
>>47436335
i use warlords. i think they're cast very well but i noticed one of the paras (out of a total of 22 in the box) had a really weird block of metal under his arms that was too big to but away easily or hide with a paintjob.
Pic is my command team. sorry for the shitty lightingand paint jobbut you get an idea of the quality you're looking at.
If you're really obsessed with history it might annoy you that these models are probably "nembo" division and their uniforms are ever so slightly different. but if you're a well adjusted person its fine for divisione folgore too
>>47436419
>was too big to but away easily or hide with a paintjob.
sorry, i meant too big to cut away or hide with a paint job
So, Armoured Cars, do you use them in your lists or even play an Armoured Car Squadron? Which ones do you like using? Which (if any) do you loathe facing?
>>47437163
They're good units. Cheap, the recce is vital, and they're great at harassing guns, exposed infantry, and mech units. 222s or 8 rads for me, although I've had some success with my Finns with various looted Soviet ACs.
>>47437163
Armoured cars are good as a recce addition but I've never seen a squadron do very well, usually they don't have the heavy hitting power to take out tanks or the RoF to take out infantry.
>>47438029
Though your point stands, my Inns of Court Daimler Is have actually earned something of a fierce reputation in my gaming group as tank killers, mainly because they seem to get all of my good rolls.
>>47437935
Do you rate them above infantry or scout car/Jeep recce options though? A lot of the people in my gaming group seem to prefer the cheaper Jeeps and scout cars or the harder to dislodge infantry, only taking armoured cars when there's no other option for the list.
>>47437163
I generally use either Universal Carriers or Stuarts because those are the models I have, but one of our local German players has done pretty well playing a Puma-based German list.
They can certainly be viable, as long as you remember to have appropriate support units to do the things they can't.
>>47438187
I've never liked infantry much. Too slow, too little firepower, too fragile to most of the other front liners.
Jeeps aren't bad. The US is well served by them, and the Brits get some nice ones, if they're not using Universal Carriers.
AC's are just flexible, cheap, and require just a bit more bother to kill than most people are capable of putting to them, at a given time.
>>47438148
Oh, for sure. They just seem to be one of the weaker list varieties.
>>47439979
Yeah, they require a bit of daring and a lot of luck to do well with. I wonder if that's something that could or even should be fixed within the rules of FoW though. After all, the fact that you're totally outmatched and trying to balance flying by the seat of your pants and methodical, cautious planning is half the appeal of a recce company.
>>47437163
I've included 8Rads and Pumas in my German lists. They're not bad.
I haven't tried Armored Cars with any other nation yet though.
As for the US, I like their Jeep-based recon options. Light, fast, and with enough 50cals to make infantry and light vehicles not want to get too close.
>>47441728
>I've included 8Rads and Pumas in my German lists.
Speaking of the gods of armored cars, are there any German lists that let you field them as your combat platoons with more than 2 Pumas per section? Or was that just not something the germans did?
So apparently the WWPD guys have rebranded and relaunched with a new podcast and a new crew refocused on Flames of War.
http://www.wwpd.net/2016/05/wwpd-why-we-fight-episode-1_25.html?m=1
>>47442986
Nah, pumas were used as recon in those small units only.
>>47443077
Damn. There goes another potential solution to my dream list of a heavy tank anvil and light tank hammer. Damn the brits for not using Chuchills and Cromwells together, and damn the germans for not using larger units of Pumas.
>>47444088
Have you considered Pershings + M4A3(late)s?
>>47444088
Pumas aren't light tanks though, and really shouldn't be used as such.
Sure their gun is AT 9, but you can't make use of their recon abilities if your firing their main gun.
>>47444128
I'll admit I had not, partially because I'm not fond of Americans in FoW and how they get pretty much everything (oh, the US fielded a one-off prototype tank and there's something some crews did once or twice? Here's a mountain of options to represent that. The british commonly had a backup Bren gun on their wasps and had over a hundred cromwells with thicker welded hulls? Too fucking bad). If I did get over my bitterness, I'd probably end up making it 2 Pershings and a minimum number of Jumbo/E8s with Chaffe platoons to do the majority of the flanking.
>>47444370
Yeah, if you're using them as recce added to a force then the gun is there to tempt you, not to do anything. When they make up the combat platoons of your force, you're going to be shooting with them at some point.
>>47444641
I completely understand.
But Chaffee/Pershing or Stuart/Pershing is probably your best bet for a Light/Heavy combo.
Or maybe Panzer III/Panther if there is a list that lets you take them together.
Not sure if there are good Soviet or British Light/Heavy combinations.
>>47435655
For basing - all you do is put some PVA down, then dunk in sand, then paint and add static grass?
>>47444943
I use Vallejo white pumice and paint it brown. But after that I just use PVA and static grass. I keep my basing pretty simple.
>>47434554
Fortress Italy LW Italians are great. There's an option for some Italian platoons to be included among some German companies (forgot which ones exactly), and they aren't even counted as Allied platoons. They have a high ROF and they're excellent at going 1 v 1 against other infantry platoons.
>>47445203
Thanks, Anon.
>>47446846
I use Rhinox Hide (Vallejo Burnt Umber would be the equivalent I think) for the dirt if youre curious. I find the darker brown contrasts nicely with the models.
>>47447266
Gotta get me some of that pumice!
Lets try this again
>https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1NiDdgaqJOSrTlVyik5IVJCaK2wUCdLSIvcPCoNY-IYw/viewform
If you want to submit Questions for Panzerfunk to be read on air, here you go. This way we can stop making up questions.
>>47449081
>If you want to submit Questions for Panzerfunk to be read on air, here you go.
Nice.
>This way we can stop making up questions.
One time. Once.
And it's not like we get fan mail anyway.
We just pull things we see here.
>>47449081
>>47449804
I'm really eager for you guys to do another episode. Just shot you off a question too.
>>47449081
Not saying anything, buuuuuuut
>>47444943
My prefered method:
First glue the figures to the base (but not guns or other stuff without bases), then add filler to get an even surface. Add PVA and sand for some surface texture, then another layer of watered down PVA to seal the sand (and soften the texture somewhat. Add guns and stuff that will be on top of the ground, as well as trees if I'm in the mood for that. Then, paint it all. Finally, static grass and foliage, followed by heavy sealing by varnish.
>>47450053
My real life situation has been so fucked up I haven't had a chance to organize any recording recently. It's been near-constant family medical crisises for the past month or so... It's been exhausting and depressing, and left me with almost no spare time. And is threatening to send me to the fucking hospital with a nervous fucking breakdown.
That being said, there is a slightly outdated episode of Eagles' Nest I need to upload.
And we're trying to schedule our next recording session for Panzerfunk.
Keep an eye on this thread for more info.
>>47452402
Take care Eagles, all the best mate and I hope things improve for you.
>>47452656
Thanks.
I don't mean to turn this into my blog or anything, but I needed to put that out there. I've been busy dealing with a lot of urgent time-consuming energy-sapping real world crap.
It's not that I don't want to do Panzerfunk. I do. I desperately do. Chatting with my fellow nerds reenergizes me.
I just haven't had the time.
Making my first TY Soviet list, 75 points:
T-72 HQ x1
T-72 x6
T-72 x5
ZSU Shilka x4
2S1 Gvozdika x3
SU-25 x2
Mi-24 Hind x2
Total 75 pts, any suggestions and comments?
>>47454686
>Gvozdika
People are still split on whether or not artillery is worth the points in Team Yankee, but other than that, I'd say it looks like a solid list.
>>47455272
I thought smoke bombardment can be useful, even if it it's once per game, and Gvozdika direct shot is pretty powerful...
>>47457318
True.
I say give it a try and see what works. They're only 5 points for the 3.
>>47452402
Be strong, sir! There are lots of faceless people pulling for you!
To the anon that suggested making a base and modular mounting for the immobile version of the Bofors using parts from the Bofors SP kit, thank you. The first of two has turned out well, and now I just need to make the second and a command team for the emplacement ones.
>>47460079
And of course I forgot my pic. Still need to get my hands on some magnets for it, so it'll stay together under something other than gravity.
>>47460112
noice
>>47460112
Noice indeed, those look a lot better than mine.
>>47460112
Looking pretty good. Simple but effective.
>>47459687
>Be strong, sir! There are lots of faceless people pulling for you!
Thanks. As odd as this sounds, comments like that help more than you'd think.
>>47460344
Mate. Sometimes I namefag. But that doesn't matter. Count me as one more person wishing you strength, and thinking of you.
FWIW, I lost my Grandfather this year. It was shit. We were actually pretty close, and I miss him a lot. Things are still shit. It's okay not to be okay though. And there are plenty of people here who are happy to talk to you and be here for you.
>>47460344
I feel you too; been one shitty year. Best of luck, Eagles.
Can anyone tell me what the "DD Tank" rule actually does?
>>47461905
Makes them able to be used in a Amphibious Assault mission.
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Scenarios/Amphibious-Assaults.pdf
>>47461905
They're amphibious tanks, although I might be forgetting some special conditions.
DD (aka Duplex Drive or Donald Duck) Shermans were modified with a skirt that could be raised, steerable screws and a rudder so they could sort-of sail in water that wasn't too rough.
Simply put, you can drive em across a river to support a crossing op or drive em off a landing craft near the short to support an amphibious landing.
>>47462159
They're actually not amphibious. I think it's because it takes time and special equipment to raise the screens, put the screws into position etc.
>>47465325
That isn't a BMP.
Got some sweet new japanese kits to build
>>47462159
I'm aware, I just wasn't sure what the DD Tank special rule that DD Shermans have was actually meant to do.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/dgum2nufhf5gqu2/Nachtjager.rar
here some Nachtjager digital for all of you peeps...
>>47468827
Thanks!
>>47468827
I shall have to look at that after work.
I'll get that added to our database tonight.
>>47468827
Thanks m8, good dice rolls for ye
just got unemployed....
and, it's not as bad, as i live in a thriving city with a severance package.
however, no new flames of war for me...
>sigh.
>>47471891
You'll find a new job eventually. Especially in a thriving city.
As for no new hobby stuff... Well, you still have your current stuff to play with.
It just means no new assembly or painting for a while.
>>47472018
.......that could really be a good thing.
though i do have boxes to assemble.
>>47468614
Boat army taking over the world when
>>47473784
is the folding arm for a mine sweeper?
>>47475945
I honestly don't know. It's just a picture I had of an M1.
>>47473784
that is the wierdest photoshop job i've ever seen.
all the shadows are...off
uncanny valley level off.
>>47471891
Don't feel too bad m8.
You could have been cleaning your room and just realized you threw away two brand new king Tigers. The garbage truck just left.
And you're unemployed
And you have a terrible neck spasm.
https://www.nyaa.se/?page=view&tid=815226&showfiles=1
The raw for the GuP movie is out, if anyone wants to watch it.
>>47477788
As far as I'm aware that's an actual real photograph.
How do the shadows look "off"?
>>47479272
k,
the gear has a different shadow-tone and overall saturation level than the stuff next to it, and the hill has a different level of light intensity and saturation that the tank in front of it.
the tank should have the same universal level of shadow and the saturation of the tank should realistically match the background.
When you've got both a CiC and a 2iC, which one do you want to hide and which one do you want to use aggressively?
>>47480602
Usually I split them out, putting one each with two of my combat platoons.
>>47480602
are you Polish?
if not, only your CiC can give you combat motivation re-rolls, and only your CiC can pass company morale checks
...if you feel brave, you risk your CiC. but some players see the situation and choose to have them command from the rear/middle instead.
in a tank list, the 2iC can join up and essentially be +1 tank to that unit (russians w Dedov get 11 strong units of tanks.....)
>>47481741
>and only your CiC can pass company morale checks
Uh, page 175. CiC OR 2iC can do the company morale test. Seems like you'd have the CiC lead to get the possible re-rolls and have the 2iC stay in the back in case the CiC dies leading heroically from the front.
>>47481810
i stand corrected
>>47481810
Plus a 2IC can lead the platoon making your Platoon Commander into a disposable team if the need occurs.
>>47481810
>Seems like you'd have the CiC lead to get the possible re-rolls and have the 2iC stay in the back in case the CiC dies leading heroically from the front.
Perfectly historical.
Tomorrow I take a Panzer Ausbildungs Verband from Desperate Measures into battle against Britbongs, probably one full of Cromwells and Challengers. A welcome challenge after my usual fare of FJ and Heer Panzers.
Panzer Ausbildung Verband
HQ: 2 Panzer IV
Zug 1: 4 Panzer IV
Zug 2: 4 Panzer IV
Zug 3: 3 Panther
Zug 4: 3 StuG
Artillery Battery
All Panzer IV and StuG vehicles have Schurtzen
Picture unrelated.
Berlin digital lists for all the fellows here...
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ha0c3v33isb5arr/Berlin.rar
End that war in Europe already...
>>47485803
as a soviet player...
Thanks dude, these digital lists are looking great.
>>47485803
Бoльшóe cпacи́бo!
>>47485803
You sir, are a prince among men. Many thanks.
Pls Hermann Goring digital if you have them.
>>47485255
its okay if you are only expecting sparse terrain and only tank v tank. even so, take some recce where possible. i dunno what that list selection has it it sorry
>>47487166
Nothing I've got miniatures for, sadly.
>>47485803
You deserve a damned knight's cross in diamond swords
If you have arab israelí exclusivos, could you post them?
British Tank
Tank Company, 2nd Army Tank Brigade, Support from 15th (Scottish) Division, from Overlord, page 124
Compulsory Tank Squadron HQ (p.125) - CinC Churchill V CS, 2iC Churchill V CS (100 pts)
- 2x Add applique armour to Churchill V CS or Churchill VI increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Compulsory Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VII, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (285 pts)
- 2x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Compulsory Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VII, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (285 pts)
- 2x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VII, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (285 pts)
- 2x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Corps Anti-tank Platoon (SP), Royal Artillery (p.158) - Command M10 3in GMC, M10 3in GMC (115 pts)
Rifle Platoon (p.144) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (140 pts)
Carrier Platoon (p.145) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (70 pts)
Infantry Field Battery, Royal Artillery (p.156) - 2x Command Rifle, Staff, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr gun (140 pts)
1500 Points, 7 Platoons
Thoughts on this?
Odd platoons, but it's three in reserve and I'm not sure what I could swap out to get more; I'm already uneasy with only 3in wolverines instead of the 17pdr achilles.
>>47488409
How is it three in reserve? You must have AT LEAST half your platoons in reserve, so 3.5 platoons. You can't have half a platoon in reserve, so you must place 4.
I would say scrap the infantry, the churchills can fulfill most of the duties for infantry, and then upgrade those M10s to 4 M10Cs
>>47488454
An odd number of platoons, but (the on-table platoons amount to) three (when) reserves (are in play). Apologies for unclarity.
I'd be a bit cautious about removing the infantry, because you only need two effective hits on tanks and even with side seven that's not going to be unlikely with fuck-tanks panzerfaust platoons or five-bazooka americans.
>>47488409
Irrelevant to your list but it pisses me off how totally useless the CS churchills are. For a smoke bombardment you're never going to use, you lose even marginal antitank from the 75mm, and gain a vulnerability to guntanking. Whee.
>>47488768
Agreed, and it doesn't even have Breakthrough Gun (which would have made it worth it, to some degree)
>>47488768
>>47488838
Yeah, the Cromwell CS tanks have the same problem. BF decided their line in the sand is 100mm for Breakthrough, so the 95mm is gimped. They should, at the very least, get a version of Team Yankee's "Brutal" rule (units that aren't armored vehicles re-roll successful saves)
>>47488409
I'd prefer Veteran Recce and Infantry DESU, and also 4x M10C:
British Tank
Tank Company, 2nd Army Tank Brigade, Support from 50th (Northumbrian) Division, from Overlord, page 124
Compulsory Tank Squadron HQ (p.125) - CinC Churchill V CS, 2iC Churchill V CS (100 pts)
- 2x Add applique armour to Churchill V CS or Churchill VI increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Compulsory Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VII, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (285 pts)
- 2x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Compulsory Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VII, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (285 pts)
- 2x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (20 pts)
Corps Anti-tank Platoon (SP), Royal Artillery (p.158) - Command M10C 17pdr SP, 3x M10C 17pdr SP (265 pts)
Rifle Platoon (p.144) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (180 pts)
Carrier Platoon (p.145) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (90 pts)
- Equip with PIAT (5 pts)
- Equip with additional hull mounted .50cal MG (10 pts)
- Equip with additional hull mounted .50cal MG (10 pts)
Infantry Field Battery, Royal Artillery (p.156) - 2x Command Rifle, Staff, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr gun (185 pts)
Air Observation Post (p.161) - Auster AOP (25 pts)
1500 Points, 6 Platoons
>>47489026
Feels a little low on the core tanks to me, but that might be paranoia more than sense.
>>47489007
Even 2+ FP would be something, but that's also for 100mm+.
Also I think it's 105mm+ for breakthrough; the SU-100/BS-3 100mm don't have it.
First 2 Ka-Mi's and the Zero finished. The Ka-Mi's are fairly boring to paint to be honest, it's pretty monotonous. And the finish on the zero ended up being a little too thick, but painting white is a pain in the ass. Decided to paint the Zero in white instead of green because I feel like white colour scheme was more recognizeable. 13 more Ka-Mi's left to paint.
>>47489443
Those 100mm guns Romania and Italy uses have breakthrough.
>>47485803
I shall add that to our database as well when I get the opportunity.
>>47490962
hope life perks up for you Screaming. Was telling a friend about your podcast the other day. We're both VERY new to FOW and your advice (along with other anons) has been inspirational
>>47490036
why would Japanese tanks use roman numerals?
>>47486817
This nice anon gets his Grey Wolf Digital lists, along with GW revised
http://www.mediafire.com/download/4k5oznoql2hf6si/Grey_Wolf.rar
>>47487776
And this fine gentleanon gets his FotN in full color...
http://www.mediafire.com/download/sdc68k08t8ffq40/Fate_of_a_Nation.rar
>>47491439
Those are Arabic numerals actually. Also the Japanese had been using those types of numbers for decades as they were easier to write than traditional Japanese numbers.
What sort of things did the british do/field that aren't represented well or at all in FoW? I've been fiddling with a set of modest balance tweaks and rules for stuff BF forgot or implemented poorly.
>>47491599
well I'm an idiot,
thanks man, now I know the truth.
And yeah arabic, not roman, not sure what I was thinking there.
>>47491920
Brainfart, happens to all of us
Getting into FW and really like Germans, thinking of buying the Open fire and splitting it with a friend. What do I do after that though? Is there any good lists I could go for or books that I should buy? I'm looking to play with 9 or so people at my store and they play Brit bongs and soviettank.meme, what should I do?
>>47491578
Would kiss you right now, no homo
>>47492185
German infantry forces are a solid choice and there is a massive variety of briefings you can use those minis with.
To get started, you should just pick a theatre you're interested in and play a Confident Veteran Grenadierkompanie for that.
You've got some solid assets with 2 Grenadier platoons, PaK40s and StuGs, so I'd start by adding some 8cm mortars or 15cm Nebelwerfers to provide some artillery support.
In addition, maybe get a third Grenadier platoon (a Panzergrenadier Platoon box would work well for this, since it also gets you some half-tracks for if you event want to play a mechanized force) to get some more boots on the ground.
If you'd like to expand your StuGs, get one of the Open Fire two-packs so you can field a platoon of five.
>>47491578
>>47485803
>>47468827
>All this digital content...
Are you a god?
>>47491428
>hope life perks up for you Screaming.
Thanks. And call me Eagles. Screaming makes me sound like a madman. :-P
>Was telling a friend about your podcast the other day. We're both VERY new to FOW and your advice (along with other anons) has been inspirational
Again, thanks. We do our best. Most of the Panzerfunk Funkmeisters have been playing Flames of War long enough to know what we're talking about most of the time.
That being said, the best way to really get to know the game is to play it, and to read through the rule book.
And then ask experienced players when stuff still doesn't make sense.
>>47492427
>Are you a god?
And of course I forget my image...
>>47492427
No Gods, or Kings - just Men :)
quotes from video games aside (and we're not on /v anyway), a friend of a friend managed to "obtain" shitload of digital lists and books, so I'll link them as soon as I have time... ask if you or anyone else need anything in particular.
Hope things turn better for you Eagles soon...
>>47491578
Thank you so much!
Visiting parents today andhad the chance to visit their LGS, bought stuff I don't see near me. Books Grey Wolf and Nachtjager, infra red UHUs, Forged in Battle king tigers and some Russian bits. My local store has been cutting back their FoW stock. Need to organise a game in the next week to get better at the rules.
>>47492638
>Hope things turn better for you Eagles soon...
Thanks.
But let me make one thing clear. I'm NOT dying here. Nobody's dying.
Long story short is that my mother is in the middle of "Medical Problem Whack-A-Mole"(or perhaps the domino-effect is a better analogy) and I'm stuck playing "responsible adult" in the meantime.
And I am so fucking done with adulting right now...
>a friend of a friend managed to "obtain" shitload of digital lists and books, so I'll link them as soon as I have time... ask if you or anyone else need anything in particular.
Ah... Okay.
I don't have any requests myself, but I'm sure others will chime in with things they are looking for.
>>47492896
>Need to organise a game in the next week to get better at the rules.
D-Day is a little more than a week away.
Not saying you have to play a beach landing scenario, but it's the perfect excuse to organize a game of Flames of War or Bolt Action.
>>47491729
We can add close support mortars to the list, at least.
>>47490080
>SU-100
>100mm D10Sgun... Hull mounted, Cat killer.
>100mm BS-3 gun... Gun shield, volley fire.
Battlefront really don't give a shit about soviets, do they.
>>47493672
And I checked, other 100mm guns have Breakthrough.
I would LOVE to get into FoW and have seriously considered buying the open fire and going Germans. I read a few books on army lists but what's the best one to use? The guys at my store are either running Brits or soviettanks.meme but I really wanna play with infantry. Any good anti tank lists folks? Or should I just leave germs all together?
God - my late war list is such a slog. And i need to learn how to deploy - my 88s didn't shoot for 1/2 the turns due to low skill, and my CiC was too far away to permit rerolls.
>>47493801
Depends on the period you want to play (although armies tend to overlap, and most people don't just play one period), and what side you want to play as.
Most lists can deal with tanks. But you can't just build a list to deal solely with tanks, because it's just as likely to bounce right off infantry, or get steamrolled by mech.
As far as Germans are concerned, Barbarossa for Early War, either Eastern Front or North Africa for Mid War, and one of a million different books for LW, depending on the specifics. Seriously, they don't vary hugely, but they do vary, so find a battle you like and get the book that deals with it. Berlin has very broad selections, if you're really stuck.'
Did you want to run a tank list, a mechanised list, or an infantry list?
>>47493801
Grey Wolf Revised for lots of infantry lists.
>>47493871
>Failing to shoot because of low skill
You mean you got them pinned and failed to unpin?
Cause your CiC can't allow you to re-roll Skill tests and you'd probably only need to roll those if you tried moving them through terrain and got bogged down.
You can still shoot while pinned, just at halved RoF.
>>47493672
>A bloo bloo bloo bloo
>>47493801
There's a lot of diversity in playable lists, fortunately. German infantry can be a pretty good all-comers list, but I'd look to german panzergrenadiers, i.e. mechanised infantry as well. German AT is generally excellent, with various PaKs and the option of things like StuGs or Tigers in support.
>>47493907
Yeah - It was half RoF. What does the CiC give skill check rerolls for?
>>47493941
Nothing. Only motivation re-rolls.
>>47493908
Okay, sure, I'm a whiny soviet player. What clear and obvious reason have I missed that soviets don't get breakthrough on their 100mm guns? Because let's face it, this is just memeing at this stage.
>>47493891
Mechanised
>>47493956
And I passively cheat again! :D
trying to set up a boat company list, how's it looking? I wonder if I should double the amount of artillery for extra smoke, but that would be at the cost of the other infantry platoon which would possibly make it more difficult for me to deal with armour.
>>47493968
Because they're already ass deep in HBGs? Poland and Romania get them on their big howitzers.
Beyond that, same reason the 95mm CS Cromwell doesn't get it. Or the 88 doesn't get it. They're not going to cut Romania, Hungary, and Poland out of having any HBGs because their gun's a few mm short. That's just shitty game design. On the other hand the Soviets have never been hard up for HBGs. They have the firkin SU-122, for petes sake. And assloads of bigger SPGs.
Or if you're after a technical reason, the SU100's HE round was ass. That HV a gun and HE rounds didn't mix well. 2+ firepower it's earned, which is a strong indicator that 100mm of HE still counts, but a 105mm HE round from a primarily HE gun it isn't.
>>47494001
What period do you like? Poland-Barbarossa, Late Barbarossa-Kursk, or Bagration/Anzio/D-Day - Berlin?
>>47492638
Any chance of Barbarossa stuff?
>>47494216
Don't we already have that, courtesy of photoscanfag some time ago?
>>47493672
Yeah, brits and soviets get the shaft on a lot of stuff they should have, but BF either forgot (Their own website says wasps had MGs, but that's not in any of the books) or didn't stat right (Later IS-2s having thinner armor than they should, based off RL thickness and sloping).
>>47494150
>Beyond that, same reason the 95mm CS Cromwell doesn't get it. Or the 88 doesn't get it. They're not going to cut Romania, Hungary, and Poland out of having any HBGs because their gun's a few mm short. That's just shitty game design.
If your argument is that they're there entirely to make sure each faction has reasonable access to them, please point to the mountain of breakthrough guns available to the LW British that I have apparently missed. Oh wait, they don't exist, because BF drew an arbitrary line in the sand at 100mm.
>>47494345
My argument is that those minor nation guns that get HBGs had fantastic HE rounds. Not surprising, given that they were in fact big ass artillery pieces. The SU-100 can't make that claim. It uses an high-velocity ATG, it wasn't an infantry digging up tool.
As for the British, you can't give it to them when they didn't use it. But they get the guns in the same way the Romanians do. IE, primarily on their big artillery peices.
>>47494171
Probably Afrika, market garden and Berlin
>>47494345
Well, there's the 5.5" gun!
And, um...
...hm, give me a minute...
>>47494345
>>47493968
>>47493672
WoT devs plz go.
>>47494442
Exactly. Same as the other guys. Heavy artillery gets it, the specific mms was after that point. Meanwhile, the Soviets, who used a lot of huge assault guns, is liberally covered in HBG options, more than just about everyone.
>>47494435
Ah, well, North Africa covers you for MW, Hellfire and Back! gives you Early War Africa Korps, Bridge By Bridge gives you Market Garden, and Berlin gives you Berlin.
>>47494442
AVREs! How could I forget. So, you can direct fire with your heavy artillery, or you can get within 4" of people with one tank.
Yeah, Brits definitely suffer compared to the other three factions; there's the 105s in American lists, the StuH and stuff like the Brummbar in German lists, and the various big gun tanks in the soviet lists.
>>47492638
Don't suppose you've got Gung-ho/Banzai there?
>>47494497
It's the way the war went, unfortunately. Same reason 25 pounders have such atrocious FP.
>>47494530
those are in the mediafire library
>>47494530
Would be impressive; they're not out yet.
>>47494237
So they are! They're not in the FoW Digital folder, so I assumed we didn't have them.
>>47494423
>As for the British, you can't give it to them when they didn't use it.
>>47494532
>It's the way the war went, unfortunately. Same reason 25 pounders have such atrocious FP.
Could you give a source on the birt guns having shit HE or not using their HE? Because I've only seen stuff saying the opposite.
>>47494423
"Gun that slings lots of HE at things" is a close support gun, dude.
Goddamn I didn't realize how good Battlefront's plastics were until I finally got around to priming some.
Man these things are great, they've got super sharp detail that puts the resin and metal models to shame.
>>47494143
bump
>>47494593
Well, their guns somewhat notoriously had no HE rounds to the start of the conflict. Certainly by the time the american 75mm was in service most guns were using HE (indeed the same amount as the americans).
>>47494593
>>47494836
The "No HE" stuff later in the war (mostly on the 17 pdr) was a consequence of that thing having such a piss-poor HE round that many crews carried few to none of them into battle.
That one was mostly because the OQF 17 pdr was such a high-velocity gun that a shell sturdy enough to withstand the force of firing simply didn't leave much room for explosives inside.
>>47494593
not that guy but British tank design tended to be split into two categories, infantry support and anti tank tanks. These were "support" and "cruiser" if I remember right. I remember that their adherence to "some tanks fight tanks, others fight infantry" doctrine puts the Americans to shame in a bad way.
2pdr, 6pdr, and 17pdr in particular were the most notorious of the bunch, for a variety of reasons. 2pdr just couldnt fit enough explosives to have any effective as an HE round, 6pdr was a weird combination of size and velocity, and the 17pdr was due to such high muzzle velocity that as >>47494922 says there, any shell that could survive being fired wouldn't be very effective.
Plus, with the massive amount of American 75mm guns being supplied on Shermans and Lees/Grants, Brits didn't really need to worry too much about designing a good gun, since they could just use the American tanks. They even used American 75mm guns on some of their own designs, like the cromwell
>>47494836
>>47494922
>>47495305
Was mainly talking about the 25pdr and other guns designed to engage soft targets, which is what the discussion was about. I know their tank guns had issues with usable HE.
>>47495394
Ah. Well, that data's a bit hard to check up; in terms of direct-fire capabilities, the 25pdr wasn't really rated. The intent was primarily to use it as an artillery piece, which is where the comparisons come in.
The 105mm was considered to have an effective blast radius of about 1.5 times the 25pdr's by the british's own estimation, but the burst fire rate of the 25pdr and it's dispersion were better than the american 105mm's. The truth of the matter is, though, artillery in FoW is fucked six ways from sunday. Nothing about it makes a ton of sense: Artillery was brutal and slaughtered people caught in it, and here it'll just mildly tickle them. Artillery was also miles away from fighting, and here it's within breathing distance of infantry. In practise you're just going to accept all artillery is stuck on battlefront's wild ride.
>>47495305
>"some tanks fight tanks, others fight infantry" doctrine puts the Americans to shame in a bad way.
If you're talking about Tank Destroyer doctrine, I'm going to call you an uneducated retard. Americans expected their M4s to fight other tanks. There's a reason it was arguably the best tank in the world at the time it was made.
Hey flamesbros, just got the starter set. What is recomended to buy next?
Also what books have the full army lists for the two companies included?
>>47495849
Which army were you wanting to stick with? The starter set covers market garden, meaning you would need both bridge by bridge (Germans) and market garden (allies)
The German army is a classic grenadierkompanie that is more or less present in every single book set from 1942 onwards. Keep in mind mid war won't have panzerfausts/shrecks usually but I believe the new Open fire comes with panzerknackers (the tank busting grenadr). You can pretty much pick a theatre and be set. Good purchases are 15cm nebelwerfers, another grenadier platoon, and or more armor like some more StuGs.
Not as familiar with the allies. The tanks are British and the infantry are American paratroopers. You can either just make a market garden list, or start an American paratroopers list and a British tank list from sesperate books.
>>47494143
Take this with a few grains of salt since I'm still trying to figure out the Japanese myself...
I think the infantry is the better choice here. Especially if you have niku haku teams in there.
The other thing that makes a difference is if you're only using this against USMC, or if you're going to try to play it against other LW lists.
Because in that case you're definitely lacking in high AT.
Just a reminder, if you want your questions answered on this coming episode of Panzerfunk, you have less than 12 hours remaining to turn them in at this form:
>https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1NiDdgaqJOSrTlVyik5IVJCaK2wUCdLSIvcPCoNY-IYw/viewform
Anyone want to critique my list for Firestorm: Overlord? The 1000 point version is the same minus the Independent Armoured Platoon. I only have 2 6 pdrs so I'm considering dropping them entirely and upgrading to a CV Armoured Platoon instead.
>>47494614
There are degrees.
So I had my first game against a friend yesterday where we tried to use a few of the more in-depth rules. It was my 352nd Infantrie Division vs Grimball's Beasts:
GERMANS
1 HQ + 1 2IC with SMG + Panzerknacker
2 Platoons of Grenadiers with 6 MG squads each, lead by a Panzerknacker SMG Lieutenant
2 Platoons of 3 x StuG G
1 x Platoon of 4 Mortars
1 x Weapon Squad of 2 x 15cm sIG
AMERICANS
2 x HQ Sherman M4A3s
3 x M26 Pershings
3 x Uparmoured M4A3 76mm Shermans
I had about a 100 point advantage but this was just casual play. The idea was the two forces had met around a Ball bearing factory, and we played the first mission with objectives in each other's battlefields.
The StuGs surged around the flank but were massively outgunned by the armour 8 Shermans who rushed to occupy the middle wood.
The Pershings rolled down the central road, only to be hit by smoke bombardments and assaulted through the town by a platoon of grenadiers. The tanks laughed off the assault and machine gunned the guys into a pinned position.
The 2 StuG platoons were annihilated, scoring only 1 pershing and 1 76mm sherman in return. Trying to steal something back, my infantry rushed ahead through the town to grab a final objective, but were denied when the pershings doubled back and machine gunned them into withdrawing.
Finally, the M4A3s ignored the sIGs pounding at them to race up ahead and capture the central objective. A good fun game. I might drop 3 StuGs for 3 Marder IIIs though, and try to rely more on ambushes.
So the things I learned were
1) German Infantry should never assault tanks... even with smoke cover
2) ROF 3 flak 88s are essential
3) Flames of War is awesome fun
My questions are....
1) Do spotters also get the free recce move?
2) Can I storm trooper after firing?
3) How do infantry deal with tanks?
4) Did we have enough terrain? Sorry for the poor photo
5) Do Shermans get the top Cupola machine gun for free? And buy a 2nd one as an upgrade?
>>47502583
Strange that the infantry only had Panzerknackers and not Pfausts. That can make a difference. Is that a 352 specific limitation?
>Driven back
If your guys were veterans, then you had a decent chance of getting in. Keep that in mind. However, supporting fire might have helped. As far as German infantry assaulting tanks, remember that Pioneers are very good at it. If you'd made it into close combat, those Pershings may well have been in trouble.
Those forces strongly favoured your opponent, as well. He can stick his Pershings where your StuGs are and effectively hard counter them, and he's got enough tanks to keep your infantry back if he's halfway competent. Your mortars can't do much against armour, and the IG's are great against infantry and as a backup ATG, but not as a primary one. Heavy tanks like Pershings also skew things a bit. But imagine if he had to assault into buildings/forests to dig your infantry up? Bad for him. Scenarios are a part of that. Infantry are far more likely to be the defenders, and defenders tend to get nasty stuff like Ambushes, and winning by default.
Spotters aren't recce teams, so no.
You CAN storm trooper after firing. It's sometimes called the Stormtrooper Shuffle. Particularly with lighter tanks, you pop into LoS, shoot, and then stormtrooper back.
>terrain
Looks solid enough.
>how do infantry deal with tanks
By being the defender. They dig in on top of the objectives, and the tanks bounce right off them. Infantry are cheap, numerous, and typically can outlast tanks, particularly if the tank has to go through a storm of Panzerfausts, Panzerschrek or ATGs to get into CC. Infantry also tend to be cheaper. On the counter attack, you have your own tanks, smoke, artillery, SPGs, and pioneers.
>Shermans MGs
They have a Hull MG, a CoAx MG, and then they can typically purchase a 50 cal cupola MG. Check the profiles at the back of the army book.
>>47502583
It's one game: don't draw too many conclusions.
Infantry generally need some supporting fire to help them assault armour, e.g. some direct fire AT shots to cause kills and bails, then assault. Assaulting a full tank unit, even with smoke, generally does not work out.
> 1) Do spotters also get the free recce move?
No, just Cautious Movement.
>2) Can I storm trooper after firing?
Yes, except for Gun Teams that fired.
> 3) How do infantry deal with tanks?
A combined-arms approach: as I said above, you need some AT fire from ATGs or your tanks, or artillery, to first weaken the tank unit with some kills and/or bails: then you can assault. Just compare points values: you cannot expect 165pts of Grenadier to simply destroy 350 Pts of Sherman or whatever. They need help: so you fire some shots, those 4 tanks become 1 dead, 1-2 bailed, etc... suddenly your infantry are facing 5-10 shots and if they get through DF, they can win
Also, 352. is not the best list since it lacks Panzerfausts which help Germans immeasurably. You're forces are a little mis-matched since his is 8+ months ahead in technology compared to yours. hat doesn't mean you can't win, but he has a lot of much better kit than a typical US force. Also, don't just play Free for All as this will favour the Tank or Mech armies.
> 4) Did we have enough terrain?
The table looks pretty decent. A few crop fields around the houses to the right would add a lot. Otherwise it is a decent table.
>5) Do Shermans get the top Cupola machine gun for free? And buy a 2nd one as an upgrade?
They get the .50 call AAMG included in their cost, and in some books (mostly Bridge at Remagen) can add an additional AAMG...so, lot of MGs, not good for infantry. Bring more AT pew pew.
Also, remember if the fire the AAMG they "pop the hatch", and would count as Top Armour 0 if you assault them. Of course, they put out more shots this way and are harder to assault, so it's the classic "risk vs. reward" situation.
>>47502680
>>47502735
thank you Anons. The help is really appreciated. Oh one last question. Can you fire smoke on your own troops to cover their advance, or just enemy units?
>>47502874
Only on enemy units, though it's not a problem if part of the smoke template is over your unit(s)
>>47497482
Thanks buddy
>>47497482
>I believe the new Open fire comes with panzerknackers
this is false, the only thing that changed was the tanks
>>47498407
yeah I think going for 2 full infantry platoons is the better choice, besides, the light mortars can shoot smoke rounds if they absolutely need to. The list is for Late War, not Pacifc.
>>47506590
>The list is for Late War, not Pacifc.
In that case you might be a little undergunned compared to the rest of the late war arsenal.
>>47506813
desu japs don't really have any guns capable of taking down heavier late war tanks, nikuhaku teams are the best for the task with their tank assault 5 and special rules. 6 nikuhaku teams should be fine, but if I'd need more I can replace the other hohei platoon with an engineer one which can take a total of 8 nikuhaku teams instead of the 3 a normal infantry platoon can get
>>47507438
Fair enough.
I just figured I'd mention that in case you didn't think of it. But clearly you have.
general annoncement: it's almost funk time....
>>47508425
I play the japs, I know their equipment is pretty shit.
British Armoured Squadron (Market Garden)
>Guards Armoured Division
>Armoured Squadron HQ
2 Sherman V, .50 Cal AA MG
>Armoured Platoon
3 Sherman V and 1 Firefly VC
>Armoured Platoon
3 Sherman V and 1 Firefly VC
>Armoured Platoon
2 Sherman V and 1 Firefly VC
Limited Air Support
>Typhoon
1420
Casual List for tanks out the ass.
Do any of you German players ever bother making Kampgruppers? What sort of situations ar ethey good for?
>>47509427
For boosting your platoon count by one when you need it. Say when you have seven platoons in your army and can't afford a eighth.
>>47509427
Three main situations:
1. If you start with an odd number of platoons and want to make it up to even.
2. If you want to do some "clever" unit splitting, e.g. 6 tubes of mortars into two platoons of 3
3. To make a monster assault unit if you have three primary combat platoons. Half of each of those, blobbed together, is 150% of the size of a 'standard' platoon.
>>47509476
Danke, Herr General *salutes*
I need help making a decision. I am soon to put color to a jeep, specifically a jeep mainly intended for british observers and anti-tank platoon commanders in the desert. Should this jeep be painted yellow (as most all british equipment), or still left in the OD it was delivered in? Or perhaps even yellow on the outer panels, OD on the "inside"?
>>47509765
Probably re-painted entirely, though OD is possible.
>>47505717
Really? could've sworn they updated the sprues.
>>47511103
nah the sprues have both grenadiers and airborne, not the newer grenadier company box sprues, so would be difficult to add in the options and keep the same number of models.
nearly half-way done with my steamboat tanks... tedious figures to paint desu
>>47511592
very nice
Is combined arms or a pure focused list better?
>>47512710
combined arms 99% of the time.
There's a couple of full retard lists that can win, but most of the time you're far better served by combined arms.
Given Pacific's out, we probably need some LWL additions for Japan's attempts at derptanks.
If nothing else doing the chi-nu would give an option for Operation Olympic games, given they existed but never saw combat.
>>47508517
So what did the funk go over? Or can you not tell us plebs?
>>47515737
It was listener questions, D-day gaming, and Leopard.
Hopefully it'll be out before D-day.
>>47516066
Ooh, neat. Can you tell us the questions? And if you can't, could you at least list them? I'm curious as to what people here are curious about.
>>47516066
Damn I wish I could've joined in. I had to pack for the move and get my car prepped for the journey that is driving home for my grandma's funeral and visiting with family for a few weeks.
Looking forward to hearing the episode. Know I would appreciate it for the drive but there's no way it'll be out by tomorrow.
>>47516638
>Can you tell us the questions?
Off the top of my head it was:
- Italians, and Italian Paratroopers
- recce and armored cars
- horse cavalry
- operations and equipment not in FoW that we'd like to see covered
>>47516904
>Looking forward to hearing the episode. Know I would appreciate it for the drive but there's no way it'll be out by tomorrow.
Most likely I'll be aiming to have it ready by D-Day, June 6th.
As far as things being ready tomorrow... Possibly a long overdue episode of Eagles' Nest.
>>47517227
>- Italians, and Italian Paratroopers
>- recce and armored cars
>- horse cavalry
>- operations and equipment not in FoW that we'd like to see covered
I am interested in 4 out of 4 of these things. I am REALLY looking forward to this episode.
>>47517352
I had a lot of fun recording it. My soul is eternally damned from some of the conversation, but that was like 95% done before today.
>>47511592
These things are the cutest tanks in FoW, prove me wrong.
>>47521664
Sauce? Looks like a 503. Porsche KT in Normandy?
>>47521797
Afraid I don't know the source - it's from my folder of interesting WW2 pictures which I use to help bump the thread from time to time.
I definitely agree that it's probably Normandy, based on the early turret and the presence of the Carrier. And based on the combat history of the 503rd, that means this was one of only two vehicles knocked out in combat.
>>47521797
>>47522379
Google Image Search confirms 1/503., near Vimoutiers (Falaise Pocket) in August 1944. It had been abandoned and burnt by its crew. If you look in the trees ahead of it you can almost make out a Bergepanzer that must have been towing it, and was abandoned at the same time.
>>47513505
Front armour is 50mm at a 20-30* slope, so around 55mm effective, which probably rates it as FA 5-6. Sides are 20mm with some parts at a mild slope, almost certainly ATR penetrable so probably side 2, or 3 at most. No pressing reason to give it top 2. Speed is almost identical to the chi-ha, and it has slightly better power-to-weight. It's relatively light but has no particularly notable suspension or track width, and it's not a christie, so no need for any movement special rules (envelopement excepted).
Gunwise, it's got the type 3 75mm, which is also on the Ho-Ni; I think AT 10 is a little generous for it, but it's the same thing, so it keeps the profile, albiet probably without the bombardment since I doubt they'd have seen use that way.
Overall:
Type 3 Chi-nu: Standard Tank/Front 5/Side 2/Top 1, Hull MG
Type 3 75mm Gun: Range 32"/RoF 2/AT 10/FP 3+, Smoke
>>47516904
>>47517286
>As far as things being ready tomorrow... Possibly a long overdue episode of Eagles' Nest.
Hopefully I posted this before you left Hungariboo.
The long-overdue 9th Episode of Eagles Nest is finally released!
In this Episode Bartosz, Lord Viruscide and myself discuss:
- Recent Hobby Activities - Including X-Wing and Mordheim.
- Recent Pop-culture - Including the Ghostbusters Reboot Trailer, Deadpool, Batman Vs Superman, Better Call Saul, and the end of Mythbusters.
- Why People Quit Gaming.
- What makes a Bad Gaming Environment?
- What makes a Good Gaming Environment?
http://panzerfunk.podbean.com/e/eagles-nest-episode-9/
I shall also work towards having the next episode of Panzerfunk uploaded by D-Day.
Lets see how well I do.
>>47523912
I got curious about the Chi-to, too, so.
The first thing is the somewhat unique gun: the Type 5 75mm fortunately provides it's statistics for muzzle velocity, and it's about the same length as the wet sherman; net result is it's probably functionally the same. AT 12 works. Checking the penetration calculator, it has a similar 500m penetration to the APBC round.
The vehicle has a slightly higher top speed and marginally better power/weight, so it's also going to be standard tank. Tracks are wider but it's also the same weight as the sherman, so no special rules.
Front armour is predominantly 75mm, at an angle, potentially worthy of FA 7, even. Sides are at 35mm, pretty equivalent to early shermans, so side 4 seems fair. Again, not a heavy tank, top 1 is fine.
Type 4 Chi-to: Standard Tank, Front 7/Side 4/Top 1, Hull MG
Type 5 75mm Gun: Range 32", RoF 2/AT 12/FP 3+
>>47524171
It's kind of sad the absolute best the IJA did was a 76mm sherman.
>>47523912
>Front armour is 50mm at a 20-30* slope, so around 55mm effective, which probably rates it as FA 5-6
Definitely FA 5, maybe FA 4, since the Cromwell is 76mm hull and turret and is FA 6.
>>47524171
>Front armour is predominantly 75mm, at an angle, potentially worthy of FA 7, even.
A very slight angle. FA 6.
