Because the SU-76M really puts the "su" in suchka.
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
>>48030141
holy crap anybody read that strawpoll lately about where players are from?
I'm pretty sure somebody is messing with us but they cant all be joke posting. I know there is a Hungary anon for example who posts in /hwg/ so I guess he's here too, but according to the poll we have 295 people from all over the globe in here at one time or another
>>48030141
I so want to do SU-76s, but the price....
>>48030427
Just do it! We need more anecdotal evidence that they work well (or don’t). And it sounds like it could be ages before anyone gets around to doing them in plastic.
>>48030427
What’s the total cost of the army you have in mind, especially if you go to cheaper sources for everything other than the SU-76s? Even the “Support BF” crowd won’t begrudge you for doing that after you spend thousands of GBP/dozens of dollars on SU-76s.
>>48030851
>thousands of GBP/dozens of dollars
Oh come on, the Pound isn't that weak.
>>48030851
*ahem*...
SU-76s are lower-vehicle cost blisters, meaning they're in the $13.00 per blister price bracket. Although some shops might still have older ones for $12, like mine did.
This means grand total, for 15x SU-76s, would be currently priced at $195 US dollarydoos.
>>48030936
No, it's not that ridiculous... Yet.
£1 = $1.34. (as I type this).
It's been hovering between $1.32 and $1.38.
>>48030937
Yeah...except 15x Panzer IVs or Shermans is almost an army. 15x SU-76 is...435 Pts.
>>48030937
Lower-vehicle cost blisters? A T-34 is also $13...
>>48030937
> $195 US dollarydoos.
Dammit BF...you make plastic Pershings and IS-2s when you should be giving the workers what they really need!
>>48030996
Hey now, it's a full 900 points in mid war.
>>48030937
It’s definitely a lot of money per points relative to other FoW armies. So start playing 40k, then come back and spend $200 on SU-76s as if it were nothing.
>>48031019
An IS-2 is $15.
>>48031444
It helped that I had come from playing Orks, where 145pts was $900... Exaggeration, but it was stupidly ridiculous how 3 bikes were 90 pts and costed $45, and I needed 12 of them.
>>48030937
>15 Su 76's
fucking casuals, real men run 21 with 12 zis 3's in support
>>48031939
Real men post photos of fully-painted models and not just the wishlist.
Do you really need ZIS-3s on top of the SU-76m's, or would something different cover more ground?
>>48032433
>do you really need zis 3's on top of the SU 76m's?
Because fuck you thats why.
And dont ask the guy who made a 12 su 152 list just because he could. Give me a couple months and Im sure I'll be heading down that road to madness in no time
>>48031939
Gotta have some broken-as-fuck SU-122s.
15 SU-76s
4 SU-122s
5 KV-8s
Fill the rest with whatever goddamned thing you feel like running. My vote is (usually) ALL the artillery. All of it. Because you can fucking afford it.
>>48032433
Having ZIS-3s on Wide Tracks, is actually super useful. Especially when you can drive up and volley fire HMGs with impunity.
>>48032638
I’ll be impressed if it went beyond list stage.
12 ISU-152s would be crazy, but a good crazy. They can kill everything, so it should work as long as you can keep the enemy at arm’s length. Just think how loud and hard the real-life booms would be.
Maybe I'll go ISU-152 heavy in TANKS.
>>48032843
ISU-152s are actually pretty overcosted in FoW (105 per tank). They're priced under v2, when Bunker Buster had no penalty while moving.
SU-152s are actually priced alright, coming out at 75pts per tank. And they are effectively a T-34-85 assault gun with a big ass cannon, and top armor 2. That means the ISU effectively pays 30pts for +2 front armor, +1 side.
>>48033265
this is balanced out by the fact that SU 152's are only available in companies of 3.
It really sucks, I would love companies of 4, that alone would be amazing. I dont get why theyre stuck at 3 when the ISU's can have up to 5 per unit yet cost way too much to do that.
>>48030373
Strawpoll got botted recently, it fucked up a bunch of different polls.
>>48033481
>>48030373
The poll's been like that for a while, though I'm not sure how much of that is repeats and how much is lurkers and once a month posters.
>>48033877
>http://strawpoll.me/4896764
i can remake and repost if you like....
>>48033265
>ISU-152s are actually pretty overcosted in FoW
>SU-152s are actually priced alright
I didn't even know they were different vehicles!
>>48034260
yep! ISU means its based on the IS2 hull. SU 152 is based on the KV hull.
>>48034260
>>48034470
They look very similar and have the same gun, so they are pretty easy to mix up.
>>48031361
Sadly I think you are stuck with 4 for most Eastern Front list, with maybe a max of 8 for a couple. Still a very cheap support option. If anyone at PSC or Battlefront is listening: Please make plastic shashkas!
>>48035405
we need a petition to be sent in to Battlefront with a crate full of mosins and vodka to persuade them
Well, the 25pdrs have hit the HW crew. Now they just need to add 66% to the current value in 5 days for us to get plastic sextons.
Fuck.
>>48035405
>shashka
that's a cossack's sword...did you mean Cyka or did i miss something?
>>48035603
this is BF, they'd just hang up the Moisins and likely mix the Vodkas with strawberry syrup and conservative's tears.
i did a little extra work today. too bad i can't post it.my own AP vs. armor calculations
>>48035812
>SpoilersAs in, statistics for AP vs varying armor, or for matching round penetration and armor thickness to FoW numbers?
Might as well post it. Added Tulips with this one, since nobody seemed to hate the uparmored cromwells/challengers or CDL changes. And because Lord Viruscide plopped down mostly-done rules for them after I posted the previous revision.
Tulips have been made so they're great against large objects (and gun teams, though that's just copying the sturmtiger rules), but shit against mobile units. I'm unsure about the points. On one hand, they're very potent against their intended targets. On the other, they're pretty much useless against everything else.
As always, feel free to comment on or mock my attempts at balancing or making rules.
>>48035909...... ...... ....... .... .... .... ...........my own project......... ...... ...... .....
>>48036232
whoa, i didn't know the tags did that....never stack spoilers, kids...
>>48027973
Fucking thanks you, it even have the grey wolf revised. Who ever was the anon that uploaded the gray wolf digital i love you.
>>48036372
All these beautiful lists in the Gray Wolf DLC
>Confident trained Panther Kompanie.
>Alway attack Grenadier Kompanie from Korsun pocket because why not?.
>All these HG kompanies, even that Panzerspahkompanie with the pak40 puma.
>Beutepanzerkompanie with french tanks in finland.
>SS skiing recce infantry in finland.
>All those extra finnish and hungarian lists.
Axis/10
Fuck you battlefront for made them digital exclusives.
How are the soviets ones? if they are as varied as these i am going to try to buy them
>>48037963
>>Confident trained Panther Kompanie.
With naval gunfire support.
>>48037963
Soviet lists are very generic and lack the special "snowflake" ones entirely (e.g. ##th Panzer Division, Big Red #, ##th Royal Guards Armor Company). This means there is *some* variety, in that the Soviets have rifle battalions (infantry), assault guns (self propelled artillery), tanks, motorized rifle, etc. But there are like 2 to 5 slightly different variations of them, and all are very generalized and exceedingly redundant.
A good example of this are the Tankovy lists... Red Bear revised has a grand total of 3 of them, and the only difference is one has Lees, Matildas, and T-34-85s mixed with T-34-76s; another has the ability to be Fearless and is all T-34-85s; and the third is all lend lease M4 shermans (both 75mm and 76mm), and had to be Fearless. Then there's the 2 Desperate Measures Tankovy lists, both of which are a composed of T-34-85s and T-34-76s, and have access to a few new upgrades and units (bedspring, IS-2 obr '43, 160mm mortars). The main differencr between the two lists is one is otherwise a normal tankovy setup, and the other features drastically smaller unit sizes for minimal gain (although it makes it somewhat easier to transition into running normal Soviets, if you can tolerate the curb-stompings).
Basicaply, expect some of the variety, but none of the flavor or detail spent on other armies. If you want lots of flavor and special rules detail, but not Germans, the look towards Americans. British are in a weird spot between Americans and Soviets. They have the variety of Germans and Americans, but none of the abundance for special rules the Americans enjoy.
>>48038302
Are those the digitals ones? Because i was asking if the russian digitals were interesting or at least a little better than the normal ones.
>>48037963
Most of those were available as free PDFs (Panzer Brigade, KG Kastner, Hungarian Infantry, etc.) they've just been added to the digital thing now. HG Eastern Front and the 20. Armee lists are new however....and have taken an age (literally years) to actually become available thanks to BF's dithering.
The HG Eastern Front lists are available on Forces now too...after being announced as "available" in October 2015....
> How are the soviets ones? if they are as varied as these i am going to try to buy them
>Soviet ones
> as varied as anyone else's
Do you even FOW bro?
>>48035812
Hah! That's what I get for trying to post right before bed.
>>48037963
>How are the soviets ones? if they are as varied as these i am going to try to buy them
Actually, related to the Soviet Whining, and Warthunder related Whining. Why don't the Soviet Ground attack aircraft have PTABs?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTAB_(bomb)
Something like a No HE, AT 6 FP:5+ weapon?
>>48039563
Well, but weren't they updated? The thing is since they are now the Grey Wolf digital esclusive for me they feel more "official" and cleaner.
Well i didn't knew about the HG Eastern Front and the 20.Armee ones and they are more than the half of the digital lists, maybe it is my fault since i never use Forces.
>>48040122
>Soviet ones
>as varied as anyone else's
I knew i was going to be naive but i wanted to believe.
>>48040156
I would bring an IL-2 in every list if it could carry Stalin's Sprinkles
>>48040156
Why? Because mathematically, there'd be no reason to use it since it'd be inferior to the AT6 FP3+ rockets they (almost) all have anyway. Unless it hit on, like, a 2+ or something.
the main FoW site did not update today.
WTF?
>>48040457
>Well, but weren't they updated?
No, no updates, even the same errors and spelling mistakes. Basically just a C&P job from the PDFs into a different format.
>>48040156
Bombs cover all that. No need for that level of detail.
>>48039004
No. The digital-only ones aren't any different. To continue with the LW example, the digital lend lease Hero Tank list is just the Hero T-34 Tank list from Desperate Measures, reskinned with shermans.
>>48039563
>>48040122
Go easy on him. He's new and mostly interested in Germans. Most of us started there, and none of us came into this game with the slightest bit of knowledge about how the briefings were.
>>48041445
My bad then that is why i get for living in a bubble, never visiting the Battlefront website and only sticking with Eastern Front, Gray Wolf and Red Bear in the FLGS. Now that i think about it nobody there ever cared about the online briefings, even nobody said a thing about russians being underpowered aside IS-2.
>>48042568
Well i play since 2012
>>48043313
In my experience, nobody honestly believe the Russians are underpowered in FoW. They can make some pretty mighty lists, that can feel like a demoralizing uphill battle to go against. The only time I've seen players complaining about how underpowered their Russians are, is if they're just starting and haven't gotten the grasp of Hen and Chicks, or if they're trying to run a Hero tank list. The former is an understandable hurdle all new Soviet players have to cross, the latter is just te problem with those lists.
The IS-2's main issue is that it's too expensive, and not very effective at anything other than assaulting. It is a testament as to why expensive ROF 1 tanks need some kind of perk, such as a conditional reroll to hit.
>>48043931
Under-powered? No, just lacking in some unit-specific briefings, that's all. Except for the IS-2...it could use a tweak, but good luck convincing Anyone @ Battlefront.
Soviets can build some very effective lists, I just hate how their most effective units/combinations are mostly unhistorical gimmicks, e.g. Lee is the best tank, SU122 is superbly good, you can mix Jan '44 equipment with Jan '45 equipment (SU100s), etc.
>>48044500
>e.g. Lee is the best tank
Yeah, Lee lists really characterised the Soviet meta. Oh wait.
>mixing Jan 44 and Jan 45
That's getting a bit exacting considering that FoW takes a generally related tone to that sort of pedantry, in favour of more choice.
>>48044749
Lee-based Tankovy is the most effective incarnation of the list. LL Shermans are next best. Notice neither are actual Soviet-made vehicles, which is part of FOW's Soviet problem.
> a bit exacting
Things a year apart in service date is not "a bit exacting", it is simply wrong when compared to the standards other nations are held to. Effective? Sure: historical? No.
>>48044943
>is the most effective
Opinions. Either way, a Lee based list isn't that common.
>exacting
Sure it is.
>standards of other nations
Hardly. They're as much of a dogs breakfast most of the time. Look at MW. Panthers next to StuG As if you're not careful.
>>48044500
I'm only an armchair historian, but it's painfully difficult to find detailed information about Soviet dispositions if you can't read Russian. You're often better off reading the German account to figure out what was involved in a particular attach. It's a little surprising given that Soviet forces were less ad hoc and more centralized.
How are late war Brits? Their infantry looks good, but I'm more interested in mechanized infantry or maybe tanks. Their motorized infantry look like they come in tiny platoons... that doesn't work, does it? Or if I wanted to go Cromwell heavy, would I be better off using Road to Rome or one of the Western Front books?
>>48046365
They're one of the largest factions. They've got everything.
The motorised platoons aren't particularly impressive, but they're decent value for their size. There's also motor rifles, which are very similar to regular infantry platoons.
Cromwell's are great. Market Garden has some excellent lists. There's also Nachtjager.
>>48046365
Brit motor has issues because of the small platoon size and lack of usable infantry AT. Cromwells are pretty good and it's fun to zip around the board with such fast tanks. Market Garden, Overlord, and Nachtjager are the books you want for them.
>>48046503
Their infantry AT isn't the problem, they've got plenty. Brits have never been hard up against tanks. It's the platoon size that fucks them, not the equipment.
>>48046526
I can't agree with that. One PIAT per platoon, when the Germans and US can have multiple Bazookas, Panzerfausts, and Panzerschrecks, just doesn't cut it.
>>48046503
And there was actually a review of the available Cromwell lists two threads ago:
>>47912268
>>47912333
When the archive on that dies I can repost it if people want me to.
>>48046526
>>48046593
Especially when the one PIAT is so much worse than the 10pt immortal Panzerfaust the germans get so easily. The PIAT's TA 4 is so much worse than TA 6 it's not even funny. Americans at least get multiple bazookas.
>>48046595
Thanks! I don't play FoW yet, just got excited after seeing a game of TANKS and decided I would want to eventually do more with the Cromwells that I will be getting.
>>48046628
Yeah, the Germans have incredibly good organic AT. Doesn't mean a tank platoon has an easy time of it with Brits.
>>48046593
If you're relying on your organic stuff to turn the tanks, you done goofed.
>>48030673
so far, my unit of 4 has done absolutely bumfuck nothing. Their armor is made out of tissues so in 3 games they just got mauled before their first shots, and the 2 games in which they weren't they shot a couple of bases of inf and some armored cars, and then died.
If you want to force company morale, they are about the best you can do past playing a Militia list. Only thing that's more squish is Katyusha's, and those don't need direct LOS.
>>48035812
no, he means plastic cossacks please. There are currently no plastic cavalry in BF's assortment whatever.
>>48046628
PIAT is still better then the PTRD, which gives you a mighty tank assault 3! I've shot 9 PTRD teams at some panzergrens and one kfz died. Their AT+FP is so shit you literally only take them to bulk out Strelkovy for QoQ ever.
>>48046891
Tachankas, maybe? Horse-drawn machine gun carts?
>>48046830
I wouldn't expect four to do much. That's the problem, you need a swarm.
>>48046980
They do volley fire, however. So a (dirt cheap) company of them can produce a lot of hits. 81mm Mortars are my preferred for those small man-pack villey fire gun teams, even though they don't attach to companies.
>>48046980
The PTRD are essentially an EW weapon, so it's not really surprising they can't stand up to fausts or schrecks.
Oth they're dirt cheap, so I still like to take them.
>>48046830
Even in Razvedki or Foward Detachment lists, I've had a platoon of 5 earn it's worth time and again. Use them mostly as a throw away, or to hang out in cover in a spot. You have to be a little ballsy, or cautious with them, depending upon your opponent. Obviously you don't go sending a platoon of them straight at a rapid-firing Tiger. But a platoon of 5 can engage an 88 with extra crew from a tree line, and save you from losing a more valuable tank or 3.
Also if you're just going to grab a single company of Light SPA to add to a Tankovy, the SU-122 should probably be the first choice unless you really just want to use the SU-76s.
New player here. I'm confused as to what TANKS is. Is it a separate game with separate rules? Is there a pdf?
>>48047651
It is a separate game from Gale Force Nine using Battlefront's plastic tank minis.
It's basically an X-wing style game using tanks from WWII.
I think the rules are on the GF9 website.
>>48047651
Yes and yes. Officially (not sure why) it's by Gale Force 9, though the designers are from the BF design studio. It plays a little like X-Wing, and it uses all of the WWII tanks that come in plastic. Apparently it's partially based on Fury as well (the movie, based on a real tank and its crew).
Remember the Flames of Tanks rules? They were garbage. This actually looks like a fun game.
http://tanks.gf9games.com//Portals/0/all_images/TANKS/TANKS-Rulebook-ForDownload.pdf
>>48047721
>This actually looks like a fun game.
It not only looks fun, it IS fun (well, from my limited experience of 2 games).
>>48047721
So just the tanks from FoW are compatible with TANKS? Do they have to be plastic?
>>48047848
It's WW2. Noone has a copyright on shermans, you would be fine with any and all 15mm/1:100 scale tanks you can find.
The tanks officially released so far, however, correspond 1:1 with the tanks Battlefront have released in plastic, so these are the only ones with stats (though you could perhaps extrapolate suitable stats for others).
>>48047848
I think they will only sell plastic tanks because you often need modeling experience to deal with their resin/metal kits (their metal casting sucks). This is geared towards less experienced wargamers.
But yes, you can use any 15mm tanks you have. The difficulty is that you need a card for each tank you have, with its stats and a damage track (you can use dry erase markers on the official cards). The starter box comes with one card for every kind of tank that currently has rules (you can use them with tanks you already own), but if you need more, there’s no easy way to get them. They won’t sell cards by themselves; there’s no money in it for them.
And tanks that haven’t been released in plastic don’t have rules yet. It’s not hard to come up with initiative/attack/defense/damage points for them, but it’s a little tougher to come up with a fair points value.
>>48047848
You also get a small number of upgrade cards with each tank. They add a lot to the game, imo.
I've been interested into getting into FoW and/or another WW2 game with good rules (mind you I play 40k so I'm not setting the bar very hig) but I'm not sure there's a community near me. What do?
>>48047933
Any chance someone made a scan of all the cards?
>>48048110
The game's new, wait a bit. The price is pretty reasonably anyway, so there won't be as much impetus to get them scanned. And it's nice how you can actually draw on them and wipe them clean.
>>48048110
If I could find the damn things I was planning on buying one of each, sending the cards to someone with a scanner, and getting the whole setup to our database. Having a ready access to copies of the cards would allow anyone to play with ease. Why the hell these morons arent selling the cards is beyond me. Many people own all the tanks they need and would gladly buy the cards separately, myself especially.
The problem is I cant find the fucking things.
Also, I may be able to find a good scanner as I'm going to college this fall. Im not sure what photoscanfag uses but if its just an ordinary old scanner I could do it myself.
>>48048647
It’s only just starting to hit stores, and I think the British and Soviet expansions are at least a month away.
I can’t see the business case for selling cards separately, not with all the non-BF plastic tanks on the market.
I may be late to the game here, but all the prices for the Team Yankee stuff are on BF's online store.
Looks like the Leopard 2's and Marder's will be out in plastic, but the Leopard 1's will surprisingly be in resin, if price is any indication.
>>48048056
Dress up in an SS-Waffen uniform and wave a FoW sign on a street corner to attract new players.
Or try to get your local gaming store to push TANKS as a gateway game to FoW.
>>48048718
I know, but it annoys me that I own 10 StuG's, all I'll ever need, but in order to play this game I'd have to buy more StuG's that I would never be able to use.
I would gladly buy all the cards if they were available but with tanks I'm gonna have to do something weird like buy them then turn around and sell the models on sprue somewhere if I want all the legit cards I would need
>>48048919
I thought the starter set came with 2 shermans and a panther.
>>48048990
StuG is one of the expansions
I do own panthers though so my point stands
>>48048919
It's not a waste if you buy them and paint them completely differently - like black with a neon green outline!
But yeah, I get what you mean. They might eventually - BF always starts with a limited release in case a new system doesn't take off. Problem is, they're in the business of selling models, not being a rewards program.
As long as you're not playing in official events you can just copy the StuG card included in the starter set and use sleeves to mark damage points. Probably worth buying that set for the movement template and counters; I've tried playing games with home-printed counters before and they're too flat to be easy to pick up, or too time-consuming to add depth to.
>>48048990
The starter set also comes with one card for every tank currently in the game.
The StuG box also comes with a StuG card and a few others.
>>48048919
>>48048990
The starter does indeed provide cards for all the tanks that currently have rules.
Also, there's no requirement to actually use a card per tank.
In fact, the starter kit comes with damage markers for your tanks so you don't have to use a dry-erase marker.
>>48049235
Awesome, that settles it - buy the starter, use your own tanks. Go nuts on the paint schemes for the tanks that are forced upon you when you buy the game.
>>48049235
Oh, well nvm then, its all good.
>>48049277
I'm actually planning to buy some decal paper and put Saunders decals on my Shermans.
>>48049429
Nice. Paint the Panther pink like that team that the university team had beaten when they're first introduced in GuP: der Film!
(Or play it safe and get a Kuromorimine decal.)
>>48048056
Try the game that a lot of people play after they drop 40k, Bolt Action in your FLGS, then they will start to be interested in historical games.
>>48048770
Not unexpected.
The US and the USSR both got 1 plastic MBT, 1 plastic transport, and 1 plastic chopper.
For the Germans that means plastic Leopard 2s, plastic Marders, and plastic PAHs.
What lists can get Trained King Tigers?
>>48050546
Perhaps Desperate Measures?
Has anyone every played against an armored train?
>>48050676
absolutely desperate measures, you'll want Panzer abteilung 500. Granted they're porsche King Tigers, but they're confident trained which is what you want.
>>48048647
>>48048110
I have the cards, I'm just morally conflicted about scanning them. That and Lazy.
>>48050846
Are they even any good also? They can move and shoot I know that and I think their artillery cars are pretty good.
>>48050846
No but the rules for them look absolutely ridiculous
>>48051373
I feel like they could be a lot of fun. Picture showing up to a tournament with an armored train division! I bet people would go nuts.
>>48051147
That's understandable.
>>48048919
>never use
wanna trade unusable plastic StuGs for some X-wing shit i bought over? i'm talking headhunters and Star Vipers, and a naked K-wing?
hit me up on e-mail.
>>48051560
I'd take the headhunters and vipers for sure as long as they have the cards and more importantly inserts yeah. I'll hit you up on email and we'll work something out
>>48051455
assuming your TO was awesome enough to allow support companies....
Anyone here play France or early war?
>>48051606
From what my understanding was is that they are not actually support companies
Brought to you by the makers of the Gustav Railway Gun - Krupp's back!
>>48049795
I don't think I'll drop 40k but I have also been looking at bolt action. Not sure how I'd like it but I might give it a go. I'll probably go to my FLGS, paint figures and see if anyone is interested
>>48046595
"Mind the roses, you louts!"
>>48053073
Bolt Action is basically if your focus is on infantry. Treadheads should look more at FoW.
>>48046595
Thanks!
>>48053575
So I'm guessing platoon on platoon engagements? If that's the case, there are still vehicle and armored vehicles in BA right? Just more of a support role
>>48053623
go check up the write up I did in /hwg/ comparing the two, its near the bottom right now in the thread.
Basically tanks in Bolt Action are very simple, which is great for two predominately infantry focused forces with a tank per side.
It breaks down real quick with armored focused battles due to how simplified the tanks are. Flames of War works much better for tanks as the rules distinguish between tanks better and you have more room to maneuver. In addition, flames works better for tanks because it was designed to accommodate entire armies of tanks, whereas bolt action only focuses on infantry and it shows.
BF says British tanks in France were a lighter shade of green than American olive drab, but scale modeler so and the people who repaint old tanks sometimes use one that looks darker, or relatively blue-green. What gives?
>>48050546
>>48050676
Also, Bridge at Reamgen
>>48032843
ISU-152s would be kinda bad since avoiding hits from them is trivial with the bunker buster thing. It'd annihilate infantry companies but tanks? Nah.
>>48045371
You're better off trying to translate it or digging up translations. German eastern front reporting was pretty awful.
>>48054936
My reading was that the two olive drabs were near-identical when they went on, but british faded lighter.
>>48056560
The british faded lighter, and also greener, than the US OD.
>>48054936
Tanks with their bow machine guns removed look sad. At least put a metal tube in there.
>>48056475
There was also the problem of misinformation because historians for so long only bothered with the German reports. An example of this, was the theory that the Soviets actually completed a battalion of T-43s and sent them into combat, when in reality the Germans mistook new T-34-85s for T-43s (since they had the same turret). There were other problems as well. Germany recorded any vehicle of theirs that was immobilized, but repairable, as still effective (not lost). The Soviets recorded any vehicle immobilized but repairable, as lost. This subtle difference in how the two nations recorded their armor made for a shit ton of inconsistencies for decades.
>>48056429
That's all insignificant in Tanks. In FoW, ISU-152s have to be used in an "overwatching" position when against a lot of armor. Otherwise you use them solely against defenders, or anything jn a building and let your other tanks deal with the armor. All that is null and void the minute the enemy bogs or has a bunch of vehicles bailed out. This is why ISU-152s should usually be the last unit you shoot with. If you advance them up the field, and then your T-34-85s manage bail out a pair of panthers, those ISUs are now free to liquidate the panthers with 1+ Firepower.
>>48056560
>>48056612
How dark was fresh olive drab? I've seen some models and museum tanks painted in what looks like a nearly-black green with a hint of blue.
Someone know if the PSC Pak 40 and RSO tractor let you build both RSO/PaK 40 and the normal Pak40 anti tank gun?
>>48059430
Pretty certain you only get the one GUN. But you get the tractor with and without the back, so you can make it as the transport, or as the actual SPG base.
Does anyone here have the PSC Stuarts and Battlefront M10s and mind measuring how wide and long they are? I'm trying to plan out the layout of my foam trays, but haven't gotten my M10s or Stuarts yet.
>>48059538
I have some PSC Stuart's at home. I can measure them once I get home from work.
>>48058482
Kinda; the Germans were aware the T-43 was under development, and when the new turret came onto the T-34 that matched reporting on the developing T-43 they assumed it was the new tank.
It's not as bad an intelligence failure pre-barbarossa when the KV-1 and T-34 were completely unknown. T-34 was a new tank, sure, but the KV had been used in the winter war for evaluation.
>>48058533
We're talking about an assault gun company here, which'd be quite toothless against tanks.
>>48058951
Super-dark green is probably the postwar bronze green parade colour, it gets confused a lot for a wartime tank colour because it tends to be on them.
>>48060585
Thank you, anon.
>>48060826
>postwar bronze green parade colour
I hadn't heard of it, but an internet search brings up a lot of information. Thanks!
It's a pity, because I like it a lot.
>>48054936
British tanks after April 1944 were SCC15, a green olive-drab like colour.
Correct colour is 1:1 mix of Vallejo Model Colour 888 Olive Grey and 924 Russian Uniform (h/t Mike Starmer).
AMMO by MiG does a good SCC15 version (for airbrush).
Another close out-of-the-bottle colour is GW Catachan Green/Vallejo Game Colour Cayman Green.
Bronze Green was painted post-war when you see it on WW2 vehicles.
> My reading was that the two olive drabs were near-identical when they went on, but british faded lighter.
Yes, I have read this as well.
>>48061308
>>48056612
>> My reading was that the two olive drabs were near-identical when they went on, but british faded lighter.
Forgot to add: Faded lighter, and greener.
>>48060787
I was too. Which is why if you run them, you make sure you have something that can engage other tanks and at least bail them before the ISUs fire. Combining them with ISU-122s, KV/IS-85s, or T-34-85s works for that.
Really the biggest problem to Bunker Buster, is how you generally have to be shot at first before you can fire. Made even worse by Stormtroop, and the German-Shuffle tactic.
>>48060771
>Kinda; the Germans were aware the T-43 was under development, and when the new turret came onto the T-34 that matched reporting on the developing T-43 they assumed it was the new tank.
That's the point. Yes the Germans knew the T-43 was in development, and the new turret matched the reports. So it was initially reported as the T-43. The problem, is that the T-43 didn't actually end up in combat at all, but because of those reports quite a few historians thought there was an "experimental battalion" of them manufactured and sent into combat.
>>48061471
Ah, gotcha. I misunderstood what you meant.
As an aside, there's unclear records that T-44 and IS-3 /were/ shipped out in an experimental capacity to fronts very late in the war, the IS-3 allegedly in the drive to Japan. If true, that must've been the most hilarious tank overkill to that point, perhaps ever unless some syrian rebel's trying to use a vickers to fight T-72s or something.
Is anyone looking at the PSC 25 pdr kickstarter? I says that the 15mm and 1/72nd metal Battery HQ (set of 4 figures) have been unlocked. Does this mean they will be in the 25pdr kit or will they needed to be ordered seperately like the 15mm CMP 15 cwt truck?
my initial thought is that they're included with the 25pdr kit, as it does not say you can add them to your pledge.
>>48062490
The worst is that the most of the japanese units in manchuria were understrength and with even most obsolete and limited armament than the rest of the army, since their best units and equipement were transferred to the pacific islands to fight the american forces.
>>48062944
I was gonna put some money down, but I got all the 25pdrs and Quads I need. And those 15 cwt trucks are too small for my needs. I already got MWDs as my supply and towing trucks, but I need something that can transport a dozen or so dudes.
>>48060862
>>48060585
Okay, dimensions for the PSC M5 Stuart:
Length - 2 1/2 inches (5.5 cm)
Width - 15/16ths of an inch (2.3 cm)
Height to the top of the MG - 1 1/4 inches (3.2 cm)
>>48061471
To top it off, the T-43 looked an awful lot like the T-34/85. You'd have to be a grognard to tell the difference.
>>48063030
The best were actually being kept in the Home Islands to fight the American invasion (they had a slim chance of making it anywhere without being sunk anyway). That's why the Chi-Nu never saw combat.
>>48066437
oh god i really want a lot of those shits.
>>48066849
Honestly, you won't be able to field too many of them. At 11 points each, a Leopard 2 company will be tiny at 100 points.
Assuming you buy the starter set, and 1 additional box of Leopard 2s, that will give you 10 of them. 1 HQ tank, and 3 zugs of 3 tanks each. And that'll be 110 points. And that's without trying to fit in any support units like Marders, Geppards, Luchs, or Leopard 1s.
>>48063683
Is the inch measurements or the cm measurement correct? Because 2 1/2 in is 6.35cm. I'd heard they were big, but that's huge.
>>48066971
I know, but i want a lots of Leopards 2 just for the sake of collecting and painting them
It is the same with my Panthers, the first time i bought something for FoW i bought 23 of them and never used more than 3 of them. Maybe one day i will try the FHH Panzerkompanie.
>>48067671
>23 panthers
>23
>panthers
>mfw I still have flashbacks to trying to build just two metal and resin ones
>>48067197
My bad. 2 1/4, not 2 1/2.
The cm is correct.
>>48067991
>23 panthers
ever played the BGG RT list at 2000 pts, good sir?
you are made.
>>48069116
Thanks. Still big, but not as absurd.
try this out.
because this is a raw recipe for fun....
so I'm new to FOW. Been collecting for six months now, but only played 4 games. My dad loves my figures so he asked me to get him a Russian army to start. I picked up Vasily's Hammer, which is
10 x T34/85s
3 x Su-100s
My own army is the 352nd Fusilier Kompanie, so mostly MG squads, Pak 40s, Marder III M's and StuG Gs.
What would you recommend my dad expands toward if he asks me? I've got the Red Bear, Berlin, & Desparate Measures books just in case.
>>48070606
Is this a real thing?
>>48071313
In Short: No
In Long: Yes.
Bartosz is building a Support Company from the Total War rules. You pick a platoon from the support choices of a conventional company, those become your combat choices, and you can use the weapon platoons from the original company.
So you can build Artillery Battery Army, Sturmtigers Army, Tiger Ace Hetzers Army, Churchill Crocodiles Army, Engineer Combat Group Army.
Invasion of Hokkaido
>>48071980
No type 74 miniature right?
>>48069296
It seems pretty good, 11 panthers and 3 mg151 SdKfz 251 for 1500 points, no smoke tough
Which of these am I better off with?
British Armoured Recce (Guards Armoured Division)
Tank Company, from Market Garden, page 112
Compulsory Armoured Recce Squadron HQ (Guards Armoured Division) (p.113) - CinC Cromwell IV, 2iC Cromwell IV (200 pts)
Compulsory Armoured Recce Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (350 pts)
Compulsory Armoured Recce Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (350 pts)
Lorried Rifle Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.123) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (190 pts)
- 2x 3-ton lorry (5 pts)
Scout Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.120) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (100 pts)
Heavy Mortar Platoon (p.135) - Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, 4x ML 4.2” mortar (155 pts)
Light Anti-aircraft Platoon, Royal Artillery (p.140) - Command Rifle, 2x Bofors 40mm gun (60 pts)
1410 Points, 6 Platoons
>>48072919
Second list
British Armoured Recce (Guards Armoured Division)
Tank Company, from Market Garden, page 112
Compulsory Armoured Recce Squadron HQ (Guards Armoured Division) (p.113) - CinC Cromwell IV, 2iC Cromwell IV (200 pts)
Compulsory Armoured Recce Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (350 pts)
Compulsory Armoured Recce Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (350 pts)
Lorried Rifle Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.123) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (190 pts)
- 2x 3-ton lorry (5 pts)
Scout Platoon (Guards Armoured Division) (p.120) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (100 pts)
Field Battery, Royal Artillery (p.138) - Command Rifle, Staff, Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr gun (185 pts)
Air Observation Post (p.141) - Auster AOP (25 pts)
1405 Points, 5 Platoons
>>48070844
Some artillery or breakthrough guns would be a good place to start adding on, as your dad will need a way to pin or dig up infantry. For artillery, I'd recommend the heavy mortars, but your old man may have more of an appreciation for Katayusha's if he is really into the models.
Some tank escorts might also be a nice addition to help with assaulting. I am going to be modifying some PSC soviet infantry into tank escorts pretty soon.
>>48070540
It's only 2 1/4 if you add the storage bin on the back.
Without that its pretty much exactly 2 inches.
>>48072948
>>48072919
1420 is rough for the guards list. I'd say grab a Column Platoon instead of the Scout Platoon, since with just one, unupgraded, scout platoon you miss out on exactly nothing and gain a ton of flexibility. If you don't have alll tge the models it's fine, just always choose the recce until you get the 6pdrs for tank spam (the mortars aren't as commonly useful.)
And even though I love the AOP and 25pdr combination, if you're going for a tourney then you're going to want that even platoon count. The mortars can still provide smoke and kill infantry, and a cheap AA platoon isn't bad. I would recommend trying to get some transports for your AA and mortars, but I know how absurdly expensive that can get.
>>48033265
So if I where too build a heavy assault gun list, I'd be better just spamming su's?
>>48074019
I do, in fact, have the 6pdrs, just recce is usually so essential.
>>48069296
I still feel bad for that German who had his basement panther taken by the government. Hope they at least put it in a museum or something
>>48074657
Yeah. Nice thing about the column platoon is that when there's an army where recce isn't essential, you've got those 6pdrs. The rest of the time, it's 100% identical to your basic 3-carrier Scout platoon. It's an amazingly versatile platoon, and I wish I had access to it with the 15th/19th.
>>48074019
Are the nachtjaeger 11th armoured CV, actually? My main concern was getting the vets in since I've seen trained armour and would really like the 4+ base.
>>48075265
All brits in Nachtjäger (means Night Hunter) is CV (except SAS and Commandos, who are FV)
Escalation league coming aup at FLGS and its gonna be tanks aces. The rules so far have been no super heavy tanks meaning my tigers are a no go. How do Panther A's and Panzer IV's stack up against other nations? Also should it be worth running anything else? Like Stugs or IV/70's?
Also most people are playing Soviets so someone that can counter a fuckton of T34's would be veeeeery nice
>>48075291
>>48075291
Nice, are they cheaper than Guards?
>>48075347
what counts as super heavy? Do they have an armor or gun value limit or are they just going by what the guys who used them classified them as? For example, to the Germans, a panther is a medium tank, but any other country would classify that as a heavy tank.
As for what would be a good choice, I would vote the humble StuG. Better armor, lower profile, access to tank riders and breakthrough guns in some platoons, and have a solid weapon.
Especially if youre not having to worry about heavies, StuG's should be able to handle anything you run into with decent numbers for Germans.
Your other choices fall short one way or another. Panthers and other heavy hitters like IV/70's cost too much, and Panzer IV's and Hetzers have more glaring weaknesses than the StuG does. StuG is the all around most solid option, the Germans built more of them than any other AFV for a reasonyes I know the real reason was they had all those panzer III tank factories lying around dont judge me
>>48075475
By super heavy the FLGS just meant no IS-2's, Tigers, elefants and other tanks with side armpit higher than 6 I believe. So should I just build a Stug Batterie list then and hope for the best? Since they're will be no infantry I guess I won't need to use tank riders. Wouldn't some tank hunters be a good choice though?
>>48075601
Armor*
>>48075465
Assuming the same equipment and organisation (which they don't have, Cromwells and Challengers are grouped in separate platoons), they would be 10 points cheaper.
>>48075601
>side armpit higher than 6
>Laughing americans
>>48075723
Lmao sorry m8. Autocorrect on the iPhone is really as bad as memes make it out to be desu
>>48075950
It's not your spelling. It's the fact that a fucking Super Pershing would not be a heavy tank by that definition, since it has a side armor of 6 (as does regular Pershings), while toting a front of 13, and a gun with Anti-tank 16
>>48075997
They'll probably nerf it if someone comes in with one
>>48075601
yeah if youve got option for some marders or something go for it, theyre just more mobile PaK 40's.
What books do you have/want to use?
Desperate Measures and Grey Wolf have very flexible tank lists that would work for this
>>48075465
They're a bit cheaper because they don't pay an extra 10 pts per platoon for the Guards re-roll. Here's an example list for them:
>Compulsory B Squadron HQ (p.11) - CinC Cromwell IV, 2iC Cromwell VI CS, Cromwell VI CS (245 pts)
>Compulsory Challenger Platoon (p.11) - Command Challenger, Challenger (285 pts)
>Compulsory Cromwell Platoon (p.12) - Command Cromwell IV, 3x Cromwell IV (380 pts)
>Lorried Rifle Platoon (p.13) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (180 pts)
>Scout Platoon (p.15) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (90 pts)
>Field Battery, Royal Artillery (p.32) - Command Rifle, Staff, Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr gun (185 pts)
>Air Observation Post (p.30) - Auster AOP (25 pts)
1390 Points, 6 Platoons
Still have 30 points left over for transports, a Sherman ARV, and/or some extra MGs on the carriers. You can also replace the Scout platoon with a platoon of Humber or Dingo scout cars for the same points, which are faster and have slightly better front armor but no upgrade options (though you can take a 4th one and fill your points perfectly). The 2iC is always a CS tank, and adding the second CS tank makes the 2iC and that tank into a platoon (plus it gives you another smoke bombardment, even if it can't use the arty's observer team or the AOP.)
Net, you lose one Cromwell IV and gain two Cromwell CS tanks, plus some spare points for upgrades. Downsides, your Challengers are no longer protected by ablative Cromwells, and you lose the re-rolls on platoon and company morale.
>>48076385
Grey wolf and maybe Bridge by bridge. GW has lots of tank lists that I like desu and FoW honestly isn't as financially back breaking as WH so I can afford to do a fighting chance. Bridge by Bridge has a list for cheap tigers that I might switch to late in the league.
Hetzers or StuGs?
>>48076870
Depends on the list: generally StuGs are better, since they're not Overloaded (i.e. they don't bog-down in puddles) and also have Shurzen to help beat Bazooka shots on the flanks. However, they do also cost more as a result. As long as you don't rive into difficult terrain or assault with them, Hetzers are abut the same: same Frontal Armour, same gun.
>>48072919
Needs Moar Tonks:
British Armoured Recce (11th Armoured Division)
Tank Company, from Market Garden, page 112
Compulsory Armoured Recce Squadron HQ (11th Armoured Division) (p.113) - CinC Cromwell IV, 2iC Cromwell IV (145 pts)
Compulsory Armoured Recce Platoon (11th Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, 2x Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (335 pts)
Compulsory Armoured Recce Platoon (11th Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, 2x Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (335 pts)
Armoured Recce Platoon (11th Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Cromwell IV, 2x Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (335 pts)
Scout Car Platoon (11th Armoured Division) (p.114) - Command Daimler Dingo, 2x Daimler Dingo (70 pts)
Scout Platoon (11th Armoured Division) (p.120) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (90 pts)
Field Battery, Royal Artillery (p.138) - Command Rifle, Staff, Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 2x OQF 25 pdr gun (105 pts)
- Jeep, 2x 15-cwt truck, Quad tractor per OQF 25 pdr gun (2 or 4 OQF 25 pdr guns) (5 pts)
1420 Points, 6 Platoons
>>48076870
StuG's are the ultimate jack of all trades tonk, being able to do just about anything except slug it out with enemy heavies. They can assault, fight mediums, be kitted out to dig up infantry, have schurzen, and access to breakthrough guns.
Hetzers are cheaper and used more as a traditional tank destroyer would be, ambushing enemy units and sticking to cover.
So the answer is depends. StuG's are more common and can be found in almost all LW lists and most MW lists, whereas hetzers are more limited in availability and Hetzer companies are very rare comparatively.
Are the turrets on tank models supposed to be able to rotate in Flames of War? I usually just glue them in, but I wasn't sure if there's some mechanically reason as to why you might want them to be able to rotate.
>>48079069
Yes, you can have the turret and the hull facing different directions. Rotating the hull more than 180 counts as moving, the turret has no such limitation.
>>48079069
when a tank shoots, the gun needs to point at its intended target. Believe it or not, this does matter rules wise.
Because lets say your turret is exactly 180* opposite your hull's facing. When you shoot at a tank, if you are in front of one line (say you are in front of the turret) but behind the hull, you have to roll to see where you hit. Just like the hull, the turret will have weaker armor on the side or rear. So if you are in front of the hull but behind the turret, you still might hit the turret and hit the tank at it's weaker side armor rating.
This rarely comes up, but can be a big deal for big cats like a king tiger or panther, where you go from long odds to pen to almost autopen.
The other issue is slow traverse turrets. That causes you to have a penalty to hit I believe if you turn your turret too far, but I cant remember off the top of my head
>>48077436
They're CT though, CT isn't great.
>>48079166
CT with CV infantry/arty support, which works. Especially at 1420, where you actually have to think about grabbing vets.
>>48079087
Looks like I fucked up a box of Sherman Vs then. I did manage to salvage the Firefly at least.
>>48079678
Yea, you actually are required by the rules to turn the turret.
>>48079130
>>48079069
There is also the limited vision rule which forces your turret to face forward while moving, and makes it harder to hit targets when you have to rotate your turret.
>>48080318
true, something to keep in mind mainly with soviet tonks
if you're on the offense it won't come up a lot, but if you have to react to somebody on the side, you're double fucked
>>48080442
lots of german tanks had it too. For example you never notice people remembering their Panzer IV J's and Tigers have slow traverse, how many have unreliable, etc. etc.
>>48081180
Admittedly, almost nobody actually moves ATD, so unreliable is almost fluff text. But yeah, slow traverse is often forgotten.
>>48080318
Most people just take cupolas anyway.
With PSC doing a british paras box, I'm tempted to put together a slightly silly list I've been considering for a while.
British Airborne Field Company Royal Engineers
Infantry Company, from Market Garden, page 52
Compulsory Airborne Field Company, Royal Engineers HQ (p.53) - CinC Pioneer SMG, 2iC Pioneer SMG (65 pts)
Compulsory Airborne Field Platoon, Royal Engineers (p.53) - Command Pioneer Rifle/MG, PIAT, 12x Pioneer Rifle/MG (425 pts)
Compulsory Airborne Field Platoon, Royal Engineers (p.53) - Command Pioneer Rifle/MG, PIAT, 12x Pioneer Rifle/MG (425 pts)
Airborne Field Platoon, Royal Engineers (p.53) - Command Pioneer Rifle/MG, PIAT, 9x Pioneer Rifle/MG (335 pts)
Airborne Reconnaissance Platoon (p.49) - Command Recce Jeep, 3x Recce Jeep (150 pts)
Airlanding Anti-tank Platoon (p.41) - Command Rifle, 4x OQF 6 pdr gun (late) (160 pts)
Airlanding Light Battery, Royal Artillery (p.55) - Command Rifle, Staff, Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, 4x M1A1 75mm pack howitzer (150 pts)
- Medium Artillery Support (only if 2x or 4x pack howitzer) (30 pts)
1740 Points, 6 Platoons
The basic gist of it is that enemy infantry and even softskins are everloving fucked against 14 stands of FV british bulldog paras. For armour, I'm putting a lot of hope on the 6pdrs and pioneer-rated FV squads. For heavy armour... Bombard and hope the PIAT does something, I guess. I just want to throw 14 stands of FV in someone's face.
>>48081596
Oh, and potential flammenwerfer substitutions to doubly fuck infantry.
>>48081596
Seems a bit weak if it has to defend against infantry... but against that, you have Night Attack.
>>48081473
In mid war, it can get pricy at 5 points per tank, so I only put cupolas on half of my force. I try to use the ones with cupolas as the flanking force, and use the other force to engage the enemy head on.
>>48080318
Limited Vision is only a problen for T-34-76s, that haven't paid for cupolas. The -85s are exempt, because they all pretty much had cupolas.
Overall Limited Vision is just Slow Traverse, with the requirement that the turrets return to facing forward after moving (so rarely an issue), and that it can be nullified by purchasing cupolas for the company. In LW, it's a 10pt expenditure for the entire company, and never not worth it. In MW, it's only worth not taking if you're positively trying to cram every last T-34 into your list.
>>48079751
Good news lads. I was able to salvage four of five of the tanks and make their turrents rotate. Last one didn't go so well but I salvaged the commander out of it at least.
>>48082126
Nice! How did you glue them and how did you get them unstuck? What broke on the 5th one?
>>48082162
I just put a small flathead screwdriver under the turret and they popped right off. Scraped some of the glue off and then used the Tamiya Extra Thin Cement I just bought to put the little pegs that come in the Sherman V kit on the bottom of the turrets.
On the last one, I think I had actually glued the peg into the hole and therefore I wasn't able to pop it off. I actually ended up gouging the plastic on the tank so it's not really serviceable anymore. I tossed it in my bits box.
It's not a big deal, as I have like eight unassembled plastic Sherman Vs/Fireflies from the newest Open Fire box I bought off a guy for $40. I don't run Armoured lists so I think I'll be able to make do with 12 Shermans.
>>48074752
is that from the manga about the panzer companie and his eye patched commander?
>>48075347
Stugs with some Panthers as support. But just in the late games, because since they said no heavies you are mostly going to face medium tank hordes and you will want those extra shoots. Try to get a pdf or the book of Desperate Measures if you want a german list with a good amount of tanks.
A list that i always wanted to try in a tank ace campaign is one with some beutepanzers T-34s.
>>48048110
>Any chance someone made a scan of all the cards?
i flipped through the book today. interesting stuff. i may sell off my entire us force for a more reliable german force.
only thing that could change my mind right now is if they gave US some real AA capability and fixed their running off the table 50% of the goddamn time.
infantry for germans comes in 2 flavors
3 mg stands (law rocket equivalent)
2 marder (tows basically)
3 marders
7 points
Redeye teams come as attachments to the 2 aa units.
you have to take 1 for 1.
i'm trying to remeber more..
feel free to ask questions i only flipped through it for a few minutes but i saw pretty much everything.
germany will stomp the shit out of everyone's air
>>48084137
I am pretty sure he was talking about the tank skirmish game.
>i flipped through the book today. interesting stuff. i may sell off my entire us force for a more reliable german force.
So then "Leopard" book is pretty good?
>>48084137
Do the Luchs look worth taking? I wonder if they would be a good option to push the flank and threaten enemy AA so you can best use the tornados.
>>48084530
>I am pretty sure he was talking about the tank skirmish game.
>
>>i flipped through the book today. interesting stuff. i may sell off my entire us force for a more reliable german force.
>So then "Leopard" book is pretty good?
it's pretty awsome.
lepoard 1's are really fragile but may be the answer to the bmp horde.
leopard 2's at 11 pts are very much worth the price. they will shit on russian tanks and have the morale to stick arround as casualties mount.
their air is cheap AND better missles than americans
>>48084563
>Do the Luchs look worth taking? I wonder if they would be a good option to push the flank and threaten enemy AA so you can best use the tornados.
i think they will be great for putting numbers of units on the table to pad out your unit count for missions with reserves.
i don't like the smalller infantry units (earlier one i posted was for the main company the other version of the infantry has 1 less of each.but at like 4 points)
you still sacrafice the stand of infantry with milans to mount them on the marders. BUT goddamn milans are fucking good
by the way if you can counter enemy AA assets fast the tornados will shit on all the tanks. (while they have to get in close they use the larger template and hit top armor with anti tank rating of 8 and firepower 2+ (might of been 3) and a flight of 4 costs 8 fucking points with morale/courage of 3
>>48084563
>>48084530
i forgot to mention panzersrhecks (carried by mg infantry) are anti tank 16 (far better than law rockets)
and milans are at 23
>>48084612
>they will shit on russian tanks
That's not exactly tough to do... If I was massochistic enough to run Soviets in Team-Cheeseburger, I would probably go BMP horde, or pretend like the cannon-fodder I had in an afgan list were "veterans" of one of the world's worst tarpit nations to get stuck in.
>>48084722
german lists will shit all over that
The only bad things i saw.
their 109 arty tank is worthless. no submunitions and only comes in an option of 3
however the rocket arty tank will be fucking awsome and it's cheap skill 3 and for 1 point the entire unit gets minefield
>>48084771
>german lists will shit all over that
I did say I would only do it if I was massochistic enough... My current plans have no room for starting an army for the Western-Wankfest that is TY. I'd rather paint spesships for spess dogfighting.
>>48084905
i am worried a bit that they are turning into a bit of gw's codex escalation. yes the points costs are higher on the main tanks. infantry are only 1 more point but far better quality.
people who held off hoping for other factions will be well rewarded.
iv'e been playing americans since release and i regret it very much now. the 4+ morale really pisses me off due to the insane costs for their basic tank killing units.
ITV's need 6's to be hit but when you're spamming 29 bmps you've got buckets of dice to kill 8 of em with ease. and only only really need to kill 1 out of 2 of each pack Hell you don't have to kill them you just need to bail it out and they can run off.
yea i think i'm sellign my fully painted american army with 99% of all the options you can field (only 3 arty and 0 a-10s.. (in my meta a-10's are worthless because russian anti air gluts the table and if there are no air asses they put them in reserver only losing about 10 points of their army in board presence...
I just haven't seen the dominance of the BMP horde in my group that others seem to be reporting in this thread despite 4 of the 6 soviet players in my group running some form of it.
Most of the US players are running Mech or a 2 formation list and this works well against it.
US should always try for a night game when ever possible.
Results have been fairly even in our league so far.
I also run full A10s and Cobras and have had good luck with them even with soviet players running max AA. But most other US players in my group are opting for M109s with copperheads instead.
Just got this message from Bartosz. Apparently his internet is down
>I HAVE SCANS. stop. NET IS DOWN. stop. ALERT S.EAGLES WILL SEND FROM ALT NET HUB IN A.M. stop. THANK YOU GREATLY . stop.
so yeah apparently if he can fix his net he's got delicious scans
>>48085336
>US should always try for a night game when ever possible.
lol good luck getting your russian opponent to agree to that.
as for using the scenarios in the pdf download and chart.. it's ja 1 in 6 chance.
so yea rare as fuck to fight at night.
also any mission that puts americans on delayed reserve is just a fuck you to them.
>>48085336
>M109s with copperheads instead.
honestly the copperheads are ok.
The mine fiend is fucking baller so are bomblets.
most bmp spam are the large infantry horde list and those bomblets rape infantry that are not dug in.
you can really screw with tanks and infantry.
drop mines on top of their 1ic and they won't budge an inch for the rest of the game.
On the 25pdr KS Comments page:
>"my design elves have been quietly working on carrier conversion kit in the background with mortar. OP, wasp etc. Then as soon as this 1/72nd conversion kit is out, we will do a 15mm carrier kit with all these options on the sprue too. After all this 25 pdr and related loveliness is out the way, carrier conversions are likely to be next"
Bong Carriers sooner rather than later, it seems.
>>48087395
Right after I finish my wasps. Figures.
>>48085336
>US should always try for a night game when ever possible.
Night is outright broken at present, so I'm not surprised the USA is doing amazingly if the yanks are getting night all the time.
>>48087395
It is a damn good time to be starting brits.
>>48087395
Just give me Loyd carriers without 6pdrs, you fucks!
Speaking of TY stuff, look what Beats of War previewed on their Weekender XLBS show:
They also had an assembled mini, but I couldn't get a good-looking screenshot of that.
>>48088037
Oh my fuck yes. What was the gap between TY/germany previews and their release months?
>>48088089
Phil stated in the interview that the Brits should release later in the year.
Presumably holiday season, since we know we'll be getting the Battle of the Bulge compilations after Leopard.
They also have a bit of a chat with Phil about his history as a wargamer and games developer, including the fact that he's never actually played 40k. Fantasy only in multiplayer battles set up by other people in his gaming group.
>>48088037
Everyone loves Chieftains. Probably more broken than Leopards~!
>>48088089
At this point I don't care too much about more Allied Powers, we need more Soviet Stuff. Or East German, or Polish, and Czech.
>>48088124
>Everyone loves Chieftains. Probably more broken than Leopards~!
No way, Leopards are Abrams with better stats. Germany's really looking like America: Buff Patch Edition.
>At this point I don't care too much about more Allied Powers, we need more Soviet Stuff. Or East German, or Polish, and Czech.
I don't disagree, but if I was getting any allied army it'd be Brits. It's good for me, bad for the game as a whole.
So is anyone playing Tanks?
Simply mechanics and cheap buy in has made fairly popular in my local area
>>48088477
I'm trying to get it started in the local region.
about how many points is a normal game
1000 ish?
>>48088605
About around 1500.
>>48088702
Is pure tanks viable in flames?
>>48085384
Awesome.
If you can, find out if one of them is Leopard.
I have access to the book myself, but if he's already scanned it, I don't want to do duplicate work.
If he doesn't have a Leopard scan, I'll work on that myself over the next few days.
>>48088723
>Is pure tanks viable in flames?
Pure tanks? Not really. Combined arms is the name of the game. Tanks, infantry, artillery, etc all working together.
Although you can easily go with mostly tanks/vehicles.
What nation are you interested in playing?
Perhaps we could offer some advice.
>>48088807
Russians or Germans.
Say i wanted a core of Assault guns what should i take?
>>48088925
The Russians have multiple kinds of Self-Propelled Artillery lists (Assault guns of varying sizes) in Red Bear and Desperate Measures.
Germans have some kind of StuG Batterie in most books, as well as Panzerjäger lists consisting of Hetzers or PzIV/70s in the eastern front books; Desperate measures & Grey Wolf.
Broadly speaking they're generally solid to great depending on the list, though there's a few notable horror lists that you should never touch, like the Hero Medium SPA list. one of the worst lists in the game, that.
>>48089009
>Desperate Measures
Is this any good?
Tank Company, from Desperate Measures
Points:1490 Platoons:4
Headquarters
Compulsory Sredniy Samokhodno-Artillyeriyskiy Polk HQ (Regular) (p.21)
>CinC T-34/85 obr 1944 CT 70
>SMG Tank Escort SMG Tank Escort 10
Combat
Compulsory Medium Assault Gun Company (Regular) (p.21)
>Command SU-100, 3x SU-100 CT 310 1
Compulsory Medium Assault Gun Company (Regular) (p.21)
>Command SU-100, 3x SU-100 CT 310 1
Support
Guards Heavy Tank Company (p.24)
>Command IS-2 obr 1944, 3x IS-2 obr 1944 FT 585 1
>.50 Cal AA MG 3x .50 Cal AA MG for IS-2 15
Motostrelkovy Company (Regular) (p.13)
>Command SMG, 7x SMG CT 130 1
>HMG 2x Maksim HMG 50
>Panzerfaust Replace SMG with Panzerfaust SMG 10
>>48089123
No Recon, no Artillery/pinning, only IS-2s and a tiny motostrelk company for anti-infantry...
It's really not good, no.
It's hard to build a list around SU-100s since they're so hilariously single-purpose. You generally don't want more than 1 company of them in the first place. If you insist on the MSPA list, go SU-85s or SU-85Ms, and drop the stupidly overcosted IS-2s that are wasting most of your points to get a Recon platoon, bulk out your Motostrelk, and grab some barebones Katyushas with extra crew.
Though, if you insist on going all-vehicle, one of the heavy SPA lists in Red Bear might be more your speed; you have so many more options and you can satisfy any desire you might have for BIG GUNS better with ISU-122s or SU-152s.
>>48072776
not the FHH, the RT panzer kompanie 1-2 HQ, 3-4 panzers, 3 platoons for max 14, plus better support vehicles.
>>48085384
bartosz here. let's see about a leopard scan...
>>48088215
>no way, Leopards
Chieftans are pretty fucking good.
then again, he didn't say Challenger. Leopard 2a1 has nothing on a Challenger....
>>48089353
Thank you based bartosz. I think I have finally decided to jump the rails and build the Panzeraufklärungs company now that I know I can bring Leopard 2's as support.
>>48089353
Very nice.
I'll still try to do the full book at some point, but this seems to be all the essential information.
Thanks!
