/hwg/ - Historical Wargames General

File: Russian_Air_Force_MiG-25.jpg (368KB, 1023x681px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1023x681px

>Wargaming Compendium
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cghxf3475qy46aq/Wargaming+Compendium.pdf
>Saga
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/alj31go19tmpm/SAGA
>Black Powder
http://www.mediafire.com/download/o5x6blwoczojmfr/Black+Powder.pdf
>Bolt Action
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/n7jmdnlv1n0ju/Bolt_Action
>Hail Caesar
https://mega.nz/#F!XsVD0KgT!twB1NWiFE3aKXK_O1EZ4pA
>Warhammer Ancient battles 2.0
http://www.mediafire.com/download/uttov32riixm9b0/Warhammer+Ancient+Battles+2E.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ta7aj1erh7sap1t/Warhammer+Ancient+Battles+-+Armies+of+Antiquity+v2.pdf
>Warmaster Ancients
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cifld8bl3uy2i5g/Warmaster+Ancients.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/3emyvka11bnna1b/Warmaster+Ancient+Armies.pdf
>Advanced Squad Leader
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/d9x0dbxrpjg48/Advanced_Squad_Leader
>Impetus
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/28i9gevqws518/Impetus
>Battleground WWII
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/cb83cg7ays4l1/Battleground_WWII
>By Fire And Sword
https://mega.co.nz/#!jxgCWTYD!FCp52DAqIUc-EM-TsRsWv7fB92nJ3kkzKsNcD_urI5Q
>Modelling & painting guides
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/7b5027l7oaz05/Modelling_%26_Painting_Guides
>Twilight 2000/2013 RPG
https://mega.co.nz/#F!C9sQhbwb!NVnD4jvUn5inOrPJIAkBhA
>Phoenix Command RPG
https://mega.co.nz/#F!b5tgXRwa!mzelRNrKPjiT8gP7VrS-Jw
>Next War (GMT)
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/eupungrg93xgb/Next_War
>Battlegroup
https://mega.nz/#F!SolyxarJ!GUg6zWBStfznr6BvYedghQ
>Fleet Series
https://mega.nz/#F!i1N3xZxL!C6fQ3Z8o2U0gtk5kdXuVcQ

Desired scans :
Black Powder supplements
Rank and File supplements
Harpoon 3 & 4 supplements
Force on Force supplements
Hind Commander
At Close Quarters
War and Conquest

File: Meulener_Schlacht_bei_Nördlingen.jpg (737KB, 2265x1844px) Image search: [Google]

737KB, 2265x1844px

6th September in military history:

394 – Battle of the Frigidus: Roman Emperor Theodosius I defeats and kills the usurper Eugenius. His Frankish magister militum Arbogast escapes but commits suicide two days later
1634 – Thirty Years' War: In the Battle of Nördlingen the Catholic Imperial army defeats Protestant armies of Sweden and Germany.
1781 – The Battle of Groton Heights takes place, resulting in a British victory.
1861 – American Civil War: Forces under Union General Ulysses S. Grant bloodlessly capture Paducah, Kentucky, giving the Union control of the Tennessee River's mouth.
1939 – World War II: At the Battle of Barking Creek, Britain suffers its first fighter pilot casualty of the Second World War as a result of friendly fire.
1939 – World War II: South Africa declares war on Nazi Germany.
1944 – World War II: The city of Ypres, Belgium is liberated by Allied forces.
1944 – World War II: Soviet forces capture the city of Tartu, Estonia.
1965 – India retaliates following Pakistan's Operation Grand Slam which results in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 that ends in a stalemate and follows the signing of the Tashkent Declaration.
1972 – Munich massacre: Nine Israel athletes taken hostage at the Munich Olympic Games by the Palestinian "Black September" terrorist group die (as did a German policeman) at the hands of the kidnappers during a failed rescue attempt.
1976 – Cold War: Soviet Air Force pilot Lieutenant Viktor Belenko lands a Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 jet fighter at Hakodate on the island of Hokkaidō in Japan and requests political asylum in the United States; his request is granted.
1983 – The Soviet Union admits to shooting down Korean Air Lines Flight 007, stating that the pilots did not know it was a civilian aircraft when it violated Soviet airspace.
2007 – Israel executes an air strike, Operation Orchard, to destroy a nuclear reactor in Syria.

File: C1291.jpg (56KB, 800x590px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 800x590px

It is 77 years since the "Battle" of Barking Creek, a friendly fire incident which resulted in the first death of a British fighter pilot in the Second World War.

At 6.15am on 6 September 1939, unidentified aircraft were reported approaching from the east at high altitude over West Mersea, on the Essex coast. In response, six Hurricanes were ordered to be scrambled from 56 Squadron, based at North Weald Airfield in Essex. For some unknown reason, the Squadron’s CO, Group Captain Lucking, sent up his entire unit. In addition to these, and unbeknown to the rest of the pilots, two Pilot Officers took up a pair of reserve aircraft and followed at a distance, destined to be the targets of the mistaken attack.

Additionally, 151 Squadron’s Hurricanes (also from North Weald), and Spitfires from 54, 65, and 74 Squadrons based at Hornchurch Airfield scrambled. With the war only three days old, none of the Royal Air Force pilots had seen combat, and very few had ever seen a German plane. Communications between planes and command centres were poor. There was no identifying procedure for pilots to distinguish between enemy and friendly aircraft.

With everyone in the air expecting to see enemy aircraft, and no experience of having done so, the conditions readily lent themselves to misunderstanding. 'A' Flight of 74 Squadron saw what they believed were enemy planes and their commanding officer, Adolph "Sailor" Malan, allegedly gave a clear and definite order to engage. Two of the three, Flying Officer Vincent 'Paddy' Byrne and Pilot Officer John Freeborn, opened fire.

Malan later claimed to have given a last minute call of 'friendly aircraft – break away!' but, whether this actually happened or not, the call was not heard by the attacking pilots.

File: malan1.jpg (43KB, 350x489px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 350x489px

>>49180941
One Hurricane was piloted by Frank Rose, who was shot down but survived. Pilot Officer Montague Hulton-Harrop, however, did not survive. Fired upon by John Freeborn, he was hit in the back of the head; he was dead before his plane crashed at Manor Farm, Hintlesham, Suffolk, approximately five miles west of Ipswich. He was the first British pilot fatality of the war. His Hurricane was also the first plane shot down by a Spitfire. The entire air-raid warning turned out to be false.

Both Byrne and Freeborn were, along with Group Captain Lucking, placed under close arrest immediately after the incident. The ensuing court martial at Fighter Command's Bentley Priory headquarters was held in camera, and, as of 2016, the papers have not been released.

However, it is well known that Freeborn felt that his commanding Officer, Sailor Malan, tried to evade responsibility for the attack. Malan testified for the prosecution against his own pilots, stating that Freeborn had been irresponsible, impetuous, and had not taken proper heed of vital communications. During the trial, Freeborn's counsel, Sir Patrick Hastings, called Malan a bare-faced liar. Hastings's deputy in defending the pilots was Roger Bushell, later to be incarcerated with Paddy Byrne at Stalag Luft III and become the mastermind of the Great Escape.

The court completely exonerated both of the Spitfire pilots, ruling the case as an unfortunate accident.

One history summarises it thus: "This tragic shambles, hushed up at the time, was dubbed in the RAF ‘the Battle of Barking Creek’ – a place several miles from the shooting-down but one which, like Wigan Pier, was a standing joke in the music halls."

It has been suggested by RAF historians that the incident exposed the inadequacies of RAF radar and identification procedures, leading to them being greatly improved by the crucial period of the Battle of Britain.

File: raidhurri3.jpg (141KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 800x600px

>>49180955
Montague Hulton-Harrop is buried with a war grave headstone at St Andrew's Church in North Weald. Group Captain Lucking was removed from his post as Commanding Officer of 56 Squadron. Frank Rose was killed in action over Vitry-en-Artois, France, on 18 May 1940.

Sailor Malan went on to be one of the most successful Allied fighter pilots of the war, shooting down 27 Luftwaffe planes and rising to Group Captain. He received the Distinguished Service Order and bar and the Distinguished Flying Cross. On his return to South Africa he worked against the apartheid regime until his death in 1963.

Paddy Byrne was shot down and captured over France in 1940. He was detained at Stalag Luft III alongside his former defence lawyer Roger Bushell. In 1944 he was repatriated, having convinced the Germans and the repatriation board that he was mad. On his return to England he was reinstated into the RAF and given a ground position.

John Freeborn flew for the rest of the war and proved to be an outstanding airman. He flew more operational hours in the Battle of Britain than any other pilot. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross and bar and rose to Wing Commander. In 2009 Freeborn told an interviewer of his regret about Hulton-Harrop's death, saying, "I think about him nearly every day. I always have done... I've had a good life, and he should have had a good life too". Freeborn died on 28 August 2010.

'Friendly fire' is not something that is usually factored into wargames; there's less confusion and more time to think when gazing down on a tabletop then through a gunsight. But it is something that needs to be taken into account in rulesets where such events are possible.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/pi96hvy27y3f66g/Osprey+-+MAA+225+-+The+Royal+Air+Force+1939-45.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/1nkc01fcmqb06dk/Osprey+-+WAR+164+-+RAF+Fighter+Command+Pilot+1939-42.pdf

1/72 RCW when?

File: DSC08527.jpg (371KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1600x1200px

Reminder that the August-September /hwg/ community project is a 'Command Unit'.

File: STRM045a.jpg (24KB, 618x177px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 618x177px

>>49180998

Not a huge selection, but something to start with

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/PeriodList.aspx?period=43

File: image.png (1MB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 750x1334px

Would anyone know a good paint match for this uniform? It's the old pre-ww2 Norwegian Army color. They changed it later to a green, but I prefer the older color and want to paint my (eventual) army like this.

>>49182165
Vallejos Luftwaffe blue/grey colors maybe?

>>49182165
Vallejo Green Grey, That's used for Finnish Uniforms and the colours look reasonably similar.

>>49182177
>>49182187
Cool, thanks. I'll give it a look.

>>49180998
You can pretty much use almost any WW1 figures with some minor conversions.

>>49180998
Winter War Soviets could work for Reds as well http://www.stonewallfigures.co.uk/shop/index.php/page,shop.browse/category,Early+Russian+Army+pre+1941/category_id,3ecf4b7a0bd441ad042d777b41835d67?ps_session=47f6f85afdbf671a8f362cd10c0c1152

File: A110_Shanghai-in-Flame.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

for the anon who asked for it in last thread

ASL 110 Shanghai In Flames

File: claymore.jpg (120KB, 805x690px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 805x690px

Upcoming Claymore Castings Early HYW makes my nipples tingle in delight.

File: todolist.jpg (64KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x600px

>Sweet, a couple of days off and I can get some quality man doll painting time in.
>Mate rings up and asks for a hand for the week.
>Oh well, more money for future tiny men then!

>>49185268
That range look perfect for D&Dish character models. Not convinced by the other foot knights though, I think the Perry Miniatures plastics look better (if later).

>>49185950
>more money for future tiny men then!
And they'll do tiny fights too!

About the Perry knights, I prefer these to be honest. For me, the Early Hundred Years are THE medieval period, full plate made knights look boring. And yeah, I want to use this one as a fantasy skirmish character...

File: 155r.jpg (1MB, 4466x5948px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4466x5948px

>>49186005
>full plate made knights look boring
Shut your fucking whore mouth.

File: 14232663_1398209110208837_380320227751847722_n.jpg (75KB, 960x634px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 960x634px

>>49185950
>Not convinced by the other foot knights though
the one with the big spiked club is pretty good, as is this guy

>>49186005
>>49186135
You can still paint plate. May not stay on that well, but hey, if it's fantasy or just some flash bastard who hasn't been in a fight since he touched up the paint job...

>>49185268
>>49186005
Yeah I'd like to use them for Bretonnians as there's bugger all Early/Mid 14th Century stuff.

>>49185950
>>49186135
I think he's got you Uncle, I love the late C15th too but it's no giant nasal guard and great helms.

>tfw still no 28mm catarina armour, however ahistorical

>>49186172
I more meant O14.

>>49186206
Traitor. You play(ed) Bretonnians, I play(ed) Empire. That says it all really. I'm more of a 1415-1520s fella. I just love the idea of kniggets running around firing hand cannons at one another.

>>49186257
How the fuck did I miss https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/536771983/armoured-knights/description ?

File: 602fff3630d715ca76deed4c5383abe9_original.jpg (69KB, 680x508px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 680x508px

>>49186307
>How the fuck did I miss https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/536771983/armoured-knights/description ?
whoa

>the second figure shown is wearing a very decorative armour in the style of Landsknecht dress. He is in a very relaxed confident pose, his helmet is an early form of Burgonet and he has a serrated Zweihander.

>>49186307
Those minis are nice, but too expensive - especially their newer mounted ones, like 16GBP for a single one...for a couple pounds more you get an entire box of Perrys knights, or for half the price(!) you get a Foundry knight. As nice as they are, they are fucking expensive, a unit of 10 would cost 80GBP.

>>49186257
I mean, there's the Dark Souls board game when that comes out.

Probably be bigger than 28mm though.

>>49185950
your to do list is very messy.

>>49184598
Oh neat! Thanks for scanning that!

>>49185268
That knight looks totally badass.

I'm not into knights but i really consider picking up a few of these

>>49186364
>>49186307

Please tell me those renaissance knights are available for purchase somewhere

>>49186172
I love that someone has actually bothered to do fully armoured bods in something more than just walking poses. I'd not want a whole big block of dynamically posed troops but I'd love a few of these just for adding character to the front rank or skirmishing.

>>49187037
http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=87544.150 seems to hint that you could buy them outside the kickstarter. Might be worth contacting him directly? Let us know how you get on!

>>49185950
holy shit im buying all those miniatures and terrain this week.

Hey Black Powder ACW anon, how's the scanning going?

File: 14212115_1398209160208832_1166955933068356354_n.jpg (127KB, 619x928px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 619x928px

This one is my favorite out of the lot.

>>49188837
I swear this thread is slowly morphing into the 28mm FIW/AWI general

I'm not against that

>>49188837
Why would you want to do something other people are already doing? Unless youre nearby that anon and are playing with him

at least make some unique terrain

>>49189143
Heh yeah, while my AWI is more of aside project its weird to see the exact stuff i was planning on getting

>>49189188
First of all fuck you, second of all my project is a skirmish one and im using a unique/combined ruleset

>>49189188
>this post
I'm pretty sure it is common to see people get product for a popular conflict from a popular manufacturer. That's not weird at all. Why would you specifically not want to get something just because someone you don't know on the internet has it?

>>49189254
Because I am a special snowflake!

>>49189254
Because The Aristocrats!

>>49189254
It just seems stupid to have 5 people here making identical projects

>>49190000
getting quads doesn't make you right.

It's either coincidence or inspiration, and I'm not sure either of those is stupid. This general isn't designed to create a bunch of people making projects with no overlap.

>>49190000
WOW! some people like the same things! who knew! You're a fucking retard.

File: 22533caced95935ed87dc5e7a9734bc5_original.jpg (103KB, 679x474px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 679x474px

So that Renaissance Knights KS everyone was getting all hot and bothered about upthread?

Yeah, they're doing another one, this time for mounted units.

And 4chan is a twat and won't let me link it.

>>49190221
Aha, but I *CAN* link to the BoW article that then links to the kickstarter itself

http://www.beastsofwar.com/steel-fist-miniatures/mount-renaissance-knight-kickstarter/

>>49190166
I just dont see how if youre making the exact same thing as a bunch of other people how it can possibly have any personality to it

>>49190255
But people AREN'T making the same thing are they?

One lad has the 46th Devonshire for F&IW/AWI one appears to have a lot of Indians.

I have Compagnies Franche de la Marine and Indians for F&IW and 1st and 2nd Rhode Island for AWI.

The projects are different focusing on different sides in different theatres of the similar conflicts.

Fuck off.

>>49190255
This doesn't make any sense. Hundreds to thousands of people have made armies before for most periods, how can it be possible to make a worthwhile project for any of them in your logic?

>>49190339
>>49190330
>same figures
>same period
>same colours
>same terrain pieces

Its unimaginative and devoid of life

I think we might be getting le trolled lads

>same colours
reminder that painting your soldiers in appropriate uniforms is unimaginative and devoid of life!

All in favour of ignoring shit post Johnny here say AYE.

>>49190437
>>49190440
I more meant for the native americans, appropriate uniforms is fine. I just dont see the point of browsing this thread. seeing someones project and opting to copy it.

>>49190490
What do you suggest for the native americans though? They had a certain skin colour, preferred dyes for their clothes and common colours for warpaint, theres only so "unique" you can be.

As >>49190330 says they aren't identical copy projects.
I have pure Indians, and the other guys have British and French with [appropriate!] allied Indians. However you try to spin it, they aren't identical and they aren't copies.

>>49190572
Mate, I wouldn't bother. He's either a retard or pretending to be a retard.

>>49190816
Im sorry that I dont see the appeal of having identical projects to others.

>>49190572
Still feels all very similar, like everyone playing space marines in 40k

>>49190572
>>49190490
Well again mr asshole, these others are doing full conflicts either FIW or AWI which are different whereas mine is close to that tv show TURN. Just because we use warlord figures doesnt mean shit

>>49190867
>Im sorry that I dont see the appeal of having identical projects to others.
You are confusing appeal with not being a deterrent.

The APPEAL isn't that other people are doing the project, the appeal (for me at least) is the history surrounding it, the painting of things I enjoy painting and liking the look of the rules I plan to use. The fact that other people like the same time period and maybe even the same rules is not a deterrent to the above appeals.

>>49190924
>>49190901
>>49190572
Honestly the only bad thing about seeing other people with similar projects is seeing how much better painters they are than me, otherwise it feels like a community of similar experiences and challenges with differing rulesets/army comps.

File: Falls Clyde bowsprit.jpg (506KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 1280x960px

>>49190867
>I dont see the appeal of having identical projects to others.
None of them have identical projects, just similar starting points. One of my favorite types of competition is when you hand a group of people identical sacks of materials.Seeing how they take their tools, skills, and knowledge (not to mention research skills, in the case of /hwg/ and re-enactments) - and watching how each solves "problems" that might not even exist for others - is always a fascinating process.

The local Flames of War scene, for example, has at least five different Mid-war Soviet armor groups. All have very similar composition, using identical miniatures, yet each player has put different flair into the force and slightly tweaked it to his/her own tastes. Stowage, terrain and basing choices, modeled tank riders, &c. all make each one unique.

So when >>49188837 goes "hey I'm buying the same stuff" I can guaran-fucking-tee that they'll have two completely different-looking forces by the time they're done regardless of hte starting point.

Sit back, shut the fuck up, and watch someone enjoy the process for a bit before you start waving your wrinkly pud around trying to squeeze its last drop of piss out on someone else after having had your morning drink.

File: The Triumphs of Maximilian - Turnierbuch.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Something a little unusual but maybe interesting. I have here the Turnierbuch, part of the famous 'Triumphs of Maximilian I'

This is a collection of copies of preparatory drawings by Hans Burgkmair the Elder, most likely made by his son. It's some good eye candy and a useful reference for anyone who wants to paint Renaissance knights.

>>49184598
dont thank me. thank my club. they were the ones that stepped up and got it done for you!

File: IMG_4916.jpg (339KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 1600x1200px

>>49192420
Nice, I've only had bits of this in un-postable xboxheug sized .jpgs previously.

>>49192420

Gorgeous, thanks anon.

>>49190440
This. Keep /hwg/ comfy, don't respond to bait/morons

>>49192814
>>49192842
For those interested there's also the Book of Armaments which is basically the same thing but for cannons.

It's 560 pages long and a pretty huge file though, so you can get that one yourselves if you want it

https://www.wdl.org/en/item/8971/

>>49192420
>>49192880
Thank you immensely. Gonna add these to the end of the Drill Treatise pastebin tonight. I'll be keeping an eye out for more early books on cannon and firearms fabrication as well, it's a particular hobby of mine but I've been busy doing up 6mm modern/SF/PA terrain and household maintenance of late.

File: Horses_with_curtains_on.png (920KB, 609x901px) Image search: [Google]

920KB, 609x901px

>>49192420
This is easily my favourite page.

>>49192942
That website also has a tasty selection of armorials and other manuscripts.

File: 8524ff50565ee02aaa366d7fb97f7456_original.jpg (94KB, 680x508px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 680x508px

>>49186307
>>49186364
>https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/536771983/mounted-rennaisance-knights?
Mounted sculpts. A bit pricey compared to Perrys.

File: tumblr_nkssmoTEle1s83h8do1_1280.jpg (428KB, 1280x770px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 1280x770px

>>49193520
Eh, it's not too bad for command models or line-stiffeners. There's only seven basic models, after all. Granted, that 16# for three models will also get you just this side of six Perry metal Kinghts in-the-white, but they're in outdated/trashy armor for the late Renaissance.

Of course, you could also hawk up the 30# for the set of sixteen heads and plumes, get a free mini into the bargain, and tack them onto a Perry Plastics box for some character - let's be honest, some of the heads in there suck ass. I'll probably drop some dosh into this with my birthday money.

>>49193142
I saw, and the calligrapher in me is pissing himself with glee at the missals and Books of Hours in there. I've got to leave for work in a few, though, so I've pretty much spent my hobby time for the day.

LAV-75

>>49190440
AYE

File: The first 70 bases.png (886KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

886KB, 1546x1159px

>>49198484
LCVP Higgins

Well /tg/ I've begun the epic journey of painting and basing all my 1/72 WW2 minis. No more will cardboard be my base. Starting with 70 bases, but I have probably 200 in total to do... Entire Soviet, US, Wehrmacht, British, Royal Italian and Imperial Japanese Infantry Battalions (something like 20+ platoons for each faction) I've been putting it off for 5 or 6 years, so high time I committed.

Also going to do up some Japanese MG nests (the 1" X 1" squares) so that should be fun - essentially a small built up grassy area with an MG poking out.

>>49200081
About time as well.

Looks like you could stand to paint them and get proper storage too.

>>49200081
thank god your minis have been ass. Welcome to the glory zone

>>49200306
Why play on a curved table? is it so you can reach everything, but then why not just a normal rectangle. Im confused

>>49200464
It's a panoramic picture anon, the table's not curved.

File: DSC_0411.jpg (356KB, 1600x1195px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1600x1195px

>>49200464

It's not curved though, it's a panoramic shot

>>49200511
>>49200515
im a retard

>>49200542
Probably a little bit yeah.

>>49200568
faggot

>>49192420
fucking libraries stamping the shit out of old manuscripts

File: queenie.jpg (72KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 960x540px

>>49195751
can´t stop immagining Elizabeth like Queenie, blackadder ruined me

File: tag2.jpg (43KB, 550x263px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 550x263px

>>49200610

As it happens that same company (TAG Miniatures) do a set based on Blackadder S2, called "The Cunning Courtier".

>>49200081
Glad to see that your minis finally get some more love.

They deserve it Anon! Take your time and keep us informed. I always like to see your stuff.

What material are the new bases made from? Mdf?

>>49200081
Glad to hear. Make sure you get some plastidip to prevent chipping on soft plastic. And post progress, 1:72 warms my heart <3

File: 0029Big2.jpg (96KB, 936x596px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 936x596px

>>49201027
Balsa wood. Nice and easy to work with, had them all cut and beveled within about 30 min.

Holy shit we just playtested an Okinawa type scenario - U.S. Force outnumbering a heavily dug in Japanese force. one of the most heart-breaking games I've ever played - U.S. infantry fight their way through the forest, dislodging MG nests, and finally make it to the objective hill, running out of the forest directly into a kill zone of bunker systems... 7 platoons all dead.
Gonna have to up the points for the allies in that scenario: from 150% the points value of the Japanese force to 200%. Bunkers are brutal, but me and my buddy devised a way to deal with the situation: send in Sherman flame tanks first, get mortars to lay smoke, and send the infantry in at the very last minute, once the infantry in the bunkers had been thinned out a bit.
Bunkers may be brutal, but Flame tanks are equally brutal.

>>49201126
Plastidip, where would you get that in Europe ? Also, spray or the can to actually dip the mini in or paint it on ? (Not the anon you recommended it to btw)

>>49201429
Check if your country has a distributor, mine has, I order directly from them. Get the transparent spray, that's what you need.

>>49201429
>Plastidip

Never heard of that stuff, but literally the first result in google for me:

http://www.plastidip-shop.de

2nd:

https://en.plastidip.eu

File: slava.jpg (85KB, 764x960px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 764x960px

Anyone knows a thing about next edition of Ambush Alley?

>>49201640
Less focus on vehicles, supposedly reworking reactions to some degree, giving the book a not shit layout. There's bits and pieces posted on the AAG forums.

>>49201805
Since I didn't/couldn't get Force on Force, I think I should get this...even tho it's scenario based, fingers crossed for a points system.

But on a slightly related note, Ironfist said they are working on a Cold War version for their own system too, so I might just leave AA/FoF where it is.

>>49201835
There is a points system in the new AA.

>>49201853
Oh, glad to hear, thanks.

>>49201805
Will they keep doing it with Osprey?

And when it's 'bout to be out?

>>49201990
Don't know if they're doing it with Osprey.

Was supposed to be out by the end of the year, but the author's father died of cancer in the spring so possibly moved back.

Thanks.

File: HQ unit.jpg (2MB, 2549x2278px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2549x2278px

Pic related is my status on the HQ unit for our group build.

>>49202878
Skin seems a bit rough - will you go back for those, or are they done?

>>49200542
don't worry, a lot of people occasionally play on L-shaped tables! They're all kinds of fun.

>>49203750
I gave the skin a wash right before taking the pic. It doesn't looked as bad on the real thing but i see what you mean.
I want to give the field grey and the metal some highlights and probably touch up the faces too.

And the bases obvioulsy.

>>49205585
>I gave the skin a wash right before taking the pic.
I think (on the picture at least) that the transition is too harsh. If you look at the top right and bottom left where it is clearest it looks like dark purple necks with and the back of the face in front of the ear on top right. The skin itself is very pale (especially imposed right on top of the dark purple). It almost looks like top right is wearing another persons flesh as a mask on top of his dark purple skin.

I think the build up should be more gradual and your current main fleshtone should be the final highlight.

Keep on going friend they will look good when they are done.

So uhh new guy getting into Konflikt 47 and Bolt Action.

I've got my Grenadiers started and was told to have 75% Rifles with 25% specalist weapons.

I've got one LMG with Ammo porter built. And a couple that I mistakenly built with what appear to be Assault Rifles. What's getting my goat is that I can't for the life of me build 2 soldiers out of the 6 with rifles easily. I've had to resort to weird poses and one handed rifles being held.

How badly will I get creamed if I just decide to go with rule of cool and go ham with SMGs and Assault Rifles? They seem to be easier of the two to build and they seem to have more special weapons on the sprue than standard rifles.

Also I need to read up on my WWII shit because I am looking like a damned fool at my shop.

>>49205699
True.

I'll see if i can fix this somehow.
I'm always really tensed when doing faces because i try to get them right and yet its so difficult to do somehow. I wish they would have used masks or balaclavas back then.

>>49205714
>And a couple that I mistakenly built with what appear to be Assault Rifles.
No problem with those desu. More points, but definitely stronger than rifles at this point.

File: G43.jpg (23KB, 236x1056px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 236x1056px

>>49205714
The grenadier box is the "late war" kit Warlord does. So there are more automatic weapons.

Using to much of these is considered "cheesy" in BA. They get a little nerf in BA V2 though, so things might change.

For K47 things are different. Since it takes place 2 years after 45, automatic weapons are far more widespread.

For rifle-soldiers:
The sprue has
>1 G43 with arms attached (the rifle with the small mag, pic related)
>1 K98 (standard bolt action rifle) with arms attached holding it "casually"
>1 K98 with arms attached aiming/shooting the rifle

Thats 3 guys with rifles.

Then you have a single K98 as well as a single G43.
You could use the arm pair with the Panzerfaust and use the K98 with the sling to attach it over the guys shoulders.
Then there is an arm with a hand grenade and one carrying an ammo box, each can carry a rifle in his other hand
There is also a pair of matching emtpy arms to be used with either an SMG, AR or one of the rifles.

File: 1358381366249.jpg (853KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

853KB, 1280x800px

Speaking of, was there a specific way Germans issued the Stg44? Would they give them to a whole squad and leave other squads with G43's/K98's, to squad leaders, to as many men as they could in each squad or a mix of all three?

>>49206207
In order with the reformation from Infantry- to Volksgrenadier-divisions in 44 they handed out STGs to entire squads. (everything else would make little sense actually, since it would only cause logistical difficulties)

One VG-division (around 15000 men) would have 3 VG-regiments.
Each VG-regiment would have 2 battalions of grenadiers, 1 heavy company with Mortars etc and 1 AT-company with (72) Panzerschrecks.

Each of the battalion would have 3 (infantry) companies (9 lmg and 2 squads with Assault Rifles) and one heavy company (9 hmg, 6 medium grenade launchers and 4 infantry guns)

(I left out the whole artillery and anti tank parts of the division because thats not part of the question here)

Of course thats the theory on paper. In reality these Volksgrenadier divisions were often under strength, and maybe the Assault rifles were spread a little, but in theory they had specific roles for specific squads in mind.

>>49206207

At that point in the war, it was likely something like, "The man with the sturmgewehr shoots. The man with the magazine follows. When the man with the sturmgewehr is killed, the man with the magazine picks up the sturmgewehr and shoots."

>also, it depended on the unit and their hierarchy in the supply chain. IIRC, most commonly, it was issued to the full squad, but only to 1 (or rarely 2) platoons out of the company. Only 1st ID of Army Group South was completely equipped with them.

........................

Does a SAGA Warlord count for the /hwg/ command unit challenge? It's only 1 model, not a "unit".

>>49206575
Germans, not Soviets in Stalingrad.

It counts.

10 more days left for the project. I might try and paint another general figure, or I might start work on the more boring units.

>>49206575
In SAGA often some additional men are modeled onto the command base as banner carrier or something like this, but in general i guess its fine


>When the man with the sturmgewehr is killed, the man with the magazine picks up the sturmgewehr and shoots."

We are talking about the wehrmacht, not the read army in stalingrad.
Keep in mind they pumped out around 450k of the stg-44 in just 44/45 despite heaviest bombardments of their industry. Thats almost 50% of the numbers made of the MP-40 in just 1,5 years compared to 4,5 years for the million MPs they built.. They really had lots of them.

>>49206575
>Does a SAGA Warlord count for the /hwg/ command unit challenge? It's only 1 model, not a "unit".
My entry was a single Indian Sachem, because Indian warbands in M&T don't have command "units" either.

We are pretty liberal, there are literally no rules really.

>>49206702
Not to mention the sheer skull-fucking number of semi-auto rifles they pumped out for the VS as well.

>>49206617

The joke.

......
P O S T
...
IS
...
NOT
...
SPAM

.......

Your head.

>>49206823
That was a joke? Must've been a shitty one because it looked like he's dead serious.

File: Ardennenoffensive-Grenadiere-in-Luxemburg.jpg (67KB, 800x570px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 800x570px

Pic related is probably well known. It shows some Grenadiers during the Ardennes offensive.

>>49206823
It certainly doesn't look like a joke, and I don't get it if it is.

File: 1431118462596.jpg (129KB, 660x922px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 660x922px

>>49206501
>>49206575
Thank you.

Given I plan to have 3-4 squads I will just give one AR's and the rest a rifle mix with NCO SMG's.

>>49206975
Seems like a historically acceptable solution.

Keep in mind that in Bolt Action, its smarter to spread the weapons around because a squad armed with only Assault rifles is very likely to draw fire from everywhere and you won't have "extra lives" (i.e. guys with regular rifles) to remove first. Every loss suffered will be an AR less.
2 squads with 10 men each, one of them with 10x rifle and the other with 10x stg-44 is a weaker force than 2 squads of 10 with 5x rifle 5x stg-44 each.

Keep that in mind.

>>49206617
>>49206702
I hate how enemy at the gates perpetuates this myth about the lack of rifles for the red army at stalingrad. By an large every man had access to a rifle when he entered the city

So I'm pretty casual when it comes to /hwg/, what's the community project? Just get a command unit painted?

>>49207552
Yeah.

>try googling some advice on paints
>100% results is to do with airbrushing.

Oh well taking the plunge here. Trying vallejo (mocel color white) for the first time (been using tamiya for a while)

>>49208356
What do you need advice on exactly, we might be able to help.

>>49208377
Well I already took the plunge and bought it but I was just looking for a solid colour white for brushing on details. Everything I could find was talking about consistency for airbrushing so it wasnt very helpful

>>49208408
For that, I could recommend the Off-White from the Game Colour range, not sure which one you went for. It'd a slightly (but not really noticably) darkes shade of white, has better attributes than white, better coverage in example, and if you decide to add an actual "bright" white on top of it, it gets much easier.

>>49208453
Oh cool thanks, I went for the flat white I think but I might pick up some more paints next week and will keep it in mind

>>49206868
Ive never seen it before. Neat.

Spending a winter outdoors with ww2 or earlier technology wouldn't be much fun

Holy shit i just bought my first 28mm stuff since i stopped playing 40k years ago.

You get triple the miniatures for under half the price for historics omg

File: 14117798_1228275253883387_6195163803222895120_n.jpg (31KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 960x720px

>>49207633

OK, I didn't know about it at the time but I painted Gunnar Hámundarson for SAGA last week so I guess he counts.

>>49208782
28mm is one of the more expensive scales for /hwg/ too. At 1/256 you get like 5 tanks for $10

>>49205887
Well I don't want to be cheesy. I have Warmachine to get my cheesy cravings out.

I'll just build them as what looks best then...They are gonna do double duty for Bolt Action and K47 and if anyone has a problem the folks seem cool enough to let one or two things fly by.

I'll check with my local BA/K47 group as to what they would recommend as well, to make sure I don't step on any toes.

Just played a 1,000 points game of Bolt Action, Soviets vs Germans.

I got rekt. Hard. By a single flamethrower.

It's my first time facing them.

My club has agreed that they're now banned.

:^(

>>49210521
>It's my first time facing them.
>My club has agreed that they're now banned.
Is one experience really enough of a sample size?

I dont play BA so idk but that sounds a bit knee jerk.

>>49209241
You're further along than I am!

>>49210521
Flamethrowers are getting changed in the new edition, most I know just houseruled them to be less broken rather than banned them outright, because they're pretty simple to fix.

It does amaze me that their state not only made it to print as is, in spite of playtesting, but also took ages to actually get recognition of how OP they were from Warlord.

Im not going to be able to make this mmonths group project but whats the next one going to be

>>49211198
Dunno, it'll be decided by strawpoll/general consensus around the time this one ends I guess.

File: image.jpg (126KB, 1600x1060px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1600x1060px

>>49210538
>I dont play BA so idk but that sounds a bit knee jerk.

No, it's not. Flamethrowers are ludicrously good in BA. They auto-hit, ignore cover, deal more hits than almost anything else short of heavy artillery, deals an automatic d3+1 pin markers (2-3 times what other non-artillery shooting deals) each of which is a -1 penalty to your unit morale, and then after 2-4 point penalty to your morale has happened, it causes a check for the target unit not to be destroyed instantly (whether it's a vehicle or infantry doesn't matter).

So, compare a regular infantry squad of 10 guys in cover getting shot at by three MG-42s, or a flamethrower.

>3 MG-42s.
Fires 4+1 shots (German) each for a total of 15 dice. Regular guys in soft cover are hit on a 5+, so assume 5 hit. Regular guys are taken out of action on a 4+, so assume 3 guys are taken out of action. The squad took a hit (even if a casualty wasn't inflicted) so it takes 1 pin marker. Because less than half the squad was wounded, there's no morale test. If there was one, they'd take the test on <8 on 2d6 (9 or less base value, -1 for the 1 Pin marker).

>1 flamethrower.
Fires 1 shot, auto-hits. It deals 1d6 hits - assume 4 - and the regulars are wounded on a 4+, so assume 2 casualties. Because the squad took a hit (even though no casualties were inflicted), it gets 1d3+1 Pin markers. Assume it gets 3 markers. It then takes a morale test on <6 on 2d6; if it fails, it is automatically destroyed, irrespective of the number of casualties inflicted.

VS a regular Sherman tank
>MG-42s.
An fixed MMG can't hurt a medium tank (needs to roll a 9+ on 1d6), so all 15 shots bounce.

>1 flamethrower.
Automatically hits. Hits don't matter because it can't beat the damage value. Because the vehicle was hit, it gets 1d3+1 Pin markers. Assume it gets 3 markers. It then takes a moral test on a 6 or less on 2d6; if it fails, it is automatically destroyed, irrespective of the number of casualties inflicted.

>>49211303
>character limit

Basically, flamethrowers let you kill any other unit in the game, for an immensely cheap point cost (about 50 points in a 1000-point game). They aren't actually all that vulnerable to enemy fire either; a 2-man FT team can operate just fine with one guy dead. They aren't any slower than regular infantry, can use cover just as well, and they don't explode or anything when it. The only mild inconvenience for using them is the short-ish range...but on a BA board, you're going to be in short range almost by default on Turn 2 anyway. Oh, and vehicle-mounted FTs double the number of hits (2d6) and have a range of 18" instead of 6". Light, fast vehicles with flamethrowers are both immune to small arms fire and delete basically everything they come across.

They needed a massive nerf, at least, and I don't blame anybody who feels like banning them under the 1e ruleset.

>>49211472
>explode

Did that happen in real life or is that more Hollywood?

>>49212259
>did a pressurised container of flammable liquid ever explode

File: rpo-a_2.jpg (30KB, 650x315px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 650x315px

>>49211472
Suffice to say, BA models all the best bits and none of the downsides of flame throwers.

They went out of use for good reason after all.

>>49212259
Actually, that was a thing. 60-ish lbs of pressurized canister ripping itself apart isn't nice. That, or you accidentally turn into a man-powered fougasse.

I don't play that game. Does it model how little the flamethrower can go for before it's empty?

>>49212759
Thats a good point. Usually you have 10 seconds of burn time max.

Well I guess horribly broken rules is what you expect from an ex-GW designer who admitted to not knowing much about WW2 when he wrote the rules. At the very least he should have playtested it a bit and adjusted the points / power of flamethrowers if they turned out to be broken.

If it was me I'd make them the same range as a thrown grenade or pistol, and have 3 shots total per game. Oh and they wouldn't be able to touch armored vehicles - just becuase fuck you you need an AT gun or a HEAT charge for that. (yes, of course with an extended fire-time at the rear engine grille you could probably knock out a tank, but thats not what flamethrowers were designed for and I would discourage that kind of thing in a WW2 game - use AT grenades or actual AT weapons to knock out armored vehicles like irl)

>>49206575
The /hwg/ projects are just to give people an extra incentive to make something and show it off. A warlord figure seems just fine

>>49201296
Are you Ostfront/game design anon?

If not what rules did you use? Sounds higher level than BA

>>49213061
I would keep the vehicle-killing potential, considering how unprotected tanks were from that, never mind all the vision slots. Molotov cocktails were quite proficient at wrecking tanks. Plus, and I might be wrong here, given I don't play BA, but it seems like the crew freaking out and bailing is abstracted into the kill result.

>>49213061
Actually, a flamethrower would kill the shit out of a tank, provided it could get close enough. Either the engine ignites, burning fuel gets in through a vision port or unbuttoned hatch (potentially cooking off the ammunition even) or the crew just suffocates as the fire consumes all the oxygen in the vehicle.

File: 97ed7ad86422423cbe97a476463f2328.jpg (98KB, 593x800px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 593x800px

>>49212259
>Did that happen in real life or is that more Hollywood?

Largely Hollywood, it's one of those embellishments which creep in the movies over the years. To quote from the Osprey Weapon on the Flamethrower:

>One myth about the flamethrower is that it was liable to explode if the fuel tank was struck by a bullet. In fact, ignition rarely took place in such circumstances if the round was a solid ball round, and instead the fuel would simply leak out - the situation would natural change if the fuel was hit by a tracer or exploding round. Far more dangerous was a hit on a propellant tank, the explosion of the pressurized container causing blunt injuries.

The main problem with being the guy carrying the flamethrower is that the enemy would focus all fire on you, so an exploding tank was far less of a concern than just being shot to pieces the minute they saw you. At Stalingrad, the Germans used flamethrower duty as a punishment detail.

File: 1312065126590.gif (2MB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x197px

>Flamethrowers explode when shot

>>49213061
>and have 3 shots total per game.

IIRC, you roll a d6 each time you use it. On a 6, it's out of ammo.

What's more important is the synergy it provides, though. Got a problem unit? Shoot at it with a few guns, just to put pinning markers down. Each one of those is a penalty to your morale check. Get 3-4 pinning markers on there (maybe cause 1 casualty), then hit it with the flamethrower, with puts 2-4 MORE pinning markers on it, and then has the auto-kill morale check. Basically, it's trivially easy to kill any unit but giving them between -6 or -9 to their morale check, forcing them to pass on a 2 or 3 (or even less) on the dice, and then that unit is autokilled on the morale check failure. It's a ridiculously ahistorical synergy.

>an ex-GW designer who admitted to not knowing much about WW2 when he wrote the rules

This. That. The other.

At least he's been browbeaten enough that the 2nd edition rules look a lot better. I mean, they're still basically 3e 40K with a better initiative system, but they're definitely an improvement. And it doesn't matter HOW good your rules are if nobody's willing to play the game with you.

>>49213164
Yep thats me, used ostfront as usual, Just released the Japanese army list and that was part of the playtesting - included 6 pacific scenarios with the army list.
It was a small game, only 100 points for the japanese and 150 for the U.S. Our usual games are around 250 - 300 points.

U.S. had:
2 Sherman 75mm
2 Sherman 105mm
7 Platoons of infantry (14 bases)
Air Superiority 1 (allows free air strikes during the game)
Priest Howitzer Assault Gun
and 2 Transport Trucks

Meanwhile Japanese forces had:
5 platoons in Fortified Bunkers (Very hard to dislodge!)
5 MG Nests
2 Chi-Ha light tanks
and a Man-Portable Mountain Howitzer

It was a very rough game - US having to work through the jungle to attempt to capture the hill - covered in Japanese bunkers. All the Infantry were wiped by the end of the game, but U.S. could have made better usage of smoke grenades and patience. Running at machine guns is never good!

>>49213395

>The pressurized tank explodes when shot, with a small but decent chance of sympathetically igniting the flammable material.

>>49213439

Yeah, but that doesn't happen.

Anybody happen to have a link to a PDF of Age of Dreadnoughts for Victory at Sea?

For those of you that think a flamethrower would explode when shot, watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts55TNp1Fq4

The guy is a flamethrower expert, at 20:00 he addresses flamethrowers being shot and exploding. 1) would have to be an incendiary bullet, 2) would have to be a volatile fuel like petrol.
Idk what German flamethrowers used, but US flamethrowers used a non-volatile gel. Yes its under pressure, but its not petrol and its not going to evaporate into a flammable gas. you need a proper flame to ignite it.

If you shot someone with a flamethrower, then ran up to him and lit him with a lighter, then he would be in trouble, but until then he'd probably just piss gel-fuel all out of the hole (high pressure tanks dont usually explode from small arms fire - they just rapidly depressurize our of the small hole)

The tank could act like an acme jetpack, briefly pushing the soldier around as it ejected fuel everywhere, but it wouldn't explode.

>>49214010
oh shit I'm wrong, they do actually explode, worse than a hand grenade supposedly - the shrapnel being the main issue - not a "fire" explosion, just bits of metal and fuel going everywhere. high pressure, fairly thin tank (compare to a diving tank that I'm thinking of) and yeah they do explode.

File: Voroshilovskaya Batareya, on Russky Island, Primorsky Krai.jpg (306KB, 1500x891px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1500x891px

>>49201835
For games without point systems, generally just take a platoon/squad/division as relevant to the rules for each side and modify depending on the situation. Generally for attacking a defended position give the attacker 2x the number of guys. For irregulars, give them about 3x as many guys as the regular force for a straight up battle and 5 or 6x if they're attacking entrenched regulars. Points systems are more thought out than just doing this but just a rule of thumb setup like outlined above with get you fairly close without taking much effort.

So uhhh I take it that BA isn't a very balanced game?

How bad is it? I'm coming from Guild Ball and Warmachine and I want to chill out not tense up.

>>49209710
>28mm
I can get 30 AWI figures for 35 NZD or I could buy a 5man devastator squad from GW for 92 NZD

>>49214924
I can buy 48 1/72 minis for $10 NZ

so thats 144 figures for less than the price of your 30 AWI minis. Granted they're smaller, but still pretty dirt cheap.

>>49215056
True, I find 1/72 is often of inferior quality sculpts and plastic. Not saying 28mm is the most cost effective by any means but coming from GW trash its amazingly cheap

>>49215093
totally, your average airfix 1/72 sculpts are pretty mediocre compared to the detail you see on a 28mm mini. Partially due to scale, partially due to airfix cheapo mass production.

I'm painting some italieri Winter uniform russkies at the moment (1/72) and the detail is very nice, much better than the average airfix minis.

>>49210521
AFAIK infantry flamethrowers are not that much of a problem, vehicle flamethrowers are.

>>49214866
It is balanced for what its worth.

>>49215529
Mostly because Airfix minis were made in the '70s or '80s at best, they only had one set recently, their WW2 British infantry, which was...meh, I like it, PSR not that much. If you want great sculpting, check Zvezda or Caesar.

>>49210521
>gets toes wet, doesn't like the pool
>never swim here again

>>49216468
sounds more like
>plays broken game
>clubs are already having to house-rule or ban certain units to fix balance
>neutrally states what happened /tg/

>>49216624
For sure, that game sounds like a shit pile, but babby-moding something after a single bad time is like Lion Rampant.

>>49216689
like what now

>>49216464
>Ceasar

If only they would produce something besides more Germans. Generally great figures but I need some opposing figures to do fights

>>49206853
>>49206898
the joke is the meme about the soviets is bullshit and the germans had massive logistics incompetency throughout the entire war. not actually to _that_ extent, but they were pretty awful at it.

File: Viking Warlords Small.png (5MB, 1600x2176px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 1600x2176px

Posting command unit for the September community project (and so I can show off something that isn't a naval unit).

This week, I painted Lagertha for my wife's Viking army in SAGA. While we're both painfully aware of the historical inaccuracies of the show, as long as the history-brain is turned off, it's fun. Plus not only do we know the fight choreographer (Richard Ryan), hopefully we'll both be visible in some fights during the upcoming season.

The main model is cast in resin, purchased from Warhansa about 3 months ago, and was pretty straightforward to paint. The mail texture isn't great, but otherwise the model was fine. This model doesn't represent a specific costume she wears in the show, but is sort of an amalgamation of 2 or 3. With that said, I tried to match the colors appropriately, and I think I nailed the shield. This is also my first time trying purely-painted battle damage on shields, so I was glad for the opportunity to try out the technique. The casualty figure on the base is a Wargames Factory Saxon Fyrd. The whole thing presented some real challenges, because I was asked to make a socket-able base; Lagertha is based on a 25mm disk, inside the 40mm SAGA Warlord base, which is why her base is so tall compared to Ragnar's. This way if my wife uses Ragnar as her Warlord, she can field Lagertha as a hearthguard alongside him. Unfortunately, it made mounting the casualty a real problem, and it does overhang the 25mm base somewhat.

For completeness' sake, the Ragnar mini is from Stronghold Terrain/Brother Vinnie. It was the only show-accurate Ragnar when I got it for her (they have most of the TV show's cast now, but the Lagertha model they sell is terrible). I'm not terribly happy with the paint job (it's show-accurate, but the casting was pretty soft on the detail and I couldn't fix it with paint), so I may be getting a new Ragnar pretty soon.

>I'ma post my own command units next, just because I want to. Not for the project.

File: Anglo-saxon Warlords Small.png (4MB, 1600x1891px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1600x1891px

>>49216951

My Anglo-Saxon Warlords. Because in the SAGA skirmish game, I had to find the one faction that is the opposite of "skirmish" (50 models on-table for the faction is the "correct" way to play Angry-Saxons).

The top model is the "official" Alfred the Great model, with some HirstArts plaster stonework behind. This was the first time I'd done a freehand image on a shield before; I'd done plenty of patterns and even knotwork on the 70-ish shields I painted for SAGA, but I hadn't tried to freehand an *image* before. From 3 feet back, it looks great, but I'm not a good enough freehander to make it look solid up close, unfortunately.

And for when I don't want to field Alfie, I have a generic Warlord from some other dead and pointless model range I wasn't doing anything with, nor was I likely to do anything with in the foreseeable future.

>>49216951
you irish senpai?

>>49217024
sorry are those pillars mounted directly onto his base?

Odd choice. Figure looks great though.

>>49216840
>If only they would produce something besides more Germans.
I'm seeing Partisans, Frogs, and Italians up on Amazon just in the first three pages. I mean, I know they've discontinued some of the moderns stuff I want, but they do have a pretty wide pool out.

>>49216840
True that. I asked them if they want to make something like Middle-Eastern insurgent heavy weapons, Vietcong along with heavy weapons, but they said "we'll pass them to the design team". Hope the next batch will include something like "Waffen SS Assault Accordion Players on the Western Front" because I have no fucking idea what more can they do with WW2 Germans.

>>49218108
They did and do some awesome stuff, but fuck me, 90% of their new releases are Germans. Fucking Wehraboos ruin everything.

>>49218108
Oh yeah they do have some obscure sets but look at the list here: http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/ManufacturerList.aspx?id=37
It's hard to imagine Germans sell *that* much better than everything else. It's also weird that they don't have a single Soviet set despite all those Germans. Also nice USMC but no Japanese.

Nice figs, just wish they'd cool it with the wehrabooism

>>49218826
>Also nice USMC but no Japanese.
Check the Waterloo 1815 Japs, they are basically Caesar figures. Same sculptor, same moulding technology, all bagged up with no sprues. Get a box of Matchbox or Revell japs to go with them (or even Esci if you find the reissue), and you got yourself a nice platoon with some extras. Early War Miniatures does some nice guns and infantry for your special needs.

>>49211198
Feel free to suggest something, but the current one lasts for 9 more days.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (54KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1280x720px

>>49212721
>They went out of use for good reason after all.

The SAA uses them in Deir Ezzor and other urban battlefields with great effect. Just saying

>>49218861
I already own everything you listed

SHQ's Japanese are really nice too

>>49214866
Its pretty balanced and while flame throwers are very strong (and get nerfed for that reason) its not like everyone runs around with them only. (these people exist ofc, but they are a small minority)

You can have perfectly balanced games with historical units and everything if you and your opponent desire it. It really depends on your group of players.

Personally, if there would be a new guy in my group who comes to the first game with a list like 2 flametanks, flame-halftrack, 2 flamer teams on foot and some units of cavalry i would simply refuse to play against him

>>49214924
Welcome to the "good side" of tabletop wargaming.

>>49218996
The Airfix box too? Not the best of the bunch, but the only box that has SMG armed japs.

File: vikings lagertha kiss.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>49216951

Even the greatest sculptor in the world couldn't do justice to Katheryn Winnick's gorgeousness, but you did a fine job on the armour and the shield and anyone familiar with the show will recognize her straight away. Ragnar works really well too. But I particularly like your not-Theoden here >>49217024 because he could pass for a great Ecbert.

>>49213736
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYRSHJdNSS8

>>49216689

I love the amount of whining my flamethrower post has created.
Most tournaments disallow vehicle-mounted flamethrowers. I've played quite a few games of BA, against the same few players. All of them have ended pretty evenly, with close finishes based on squad loadouts and tactics rather than rolls and overall lists. This is the first time I've been completely unable to even stand a chance, and it was the flamethrower that caused it; it took out two squads in two turns, who otherwise would've been in perfect positions to sit on the central objective the entire game due to their scout deployment and the surrounding soft/hard cover. Yes, it's a textbook flamethrower situation, but the sheer impact a single model had on the course of the game was agreed to be massively overpowered. We've agreed (at my opponent's suggestion, actually) to not use flamethrowers til they're changed in V2.

Other than that it was a fun game of Tanks/AT guns duking it out and bouncing rounds off schurzen/angled armour :^)

>>49219732
Sounds like flamethrowers are correctly powered, just need to cost much much more to represent their power. something like 200 points. Essentially add up the points of the squads they took out and see what their rough killing power was.

Essentially everything inside a small bunker is going to die if you fire a flamethrower in, either from actual flame, or from carbon monoxide poisoning (one breath of a decent concentration of carbon monoxide, and you're dead).
So provided your 2 squads were in a roughly 10ft by 10ft area, its perfectly realistic.

>>49213872
Nothing in the shared folder, and I wasn't able to locate one last time somebody asked. If somebody has one, I'd enjoy reading through it even if I am pissed at Mongoose.

>>49219931
They were spread out behind hard cover in a field. total cost of the flamethrower's kills was 254 points. Cost of the model with the flamethrower was 33 points.

>>49219705

>This completely different thing is evidence for my argument.

Well I'm convinced.

>>49219705
>purpose built military flamers are just propane tanks on fire

File: L-TARR.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49220138
damn thats a tough one, in open air you're not going to have as many issues with CO, and something like a low solid wall would actually protect you partially from a flamethrower. The troops in that situation would still have a bad time, but perhaps they need special rules for hitting enclosed spaces vs open targets.

Problem with real life is there's lots of variables and you only want to include a small fraction of those in a wargame to keep it playable.

I always like to look back to Lional Tarr's WW2 rules and see how he handles things. in his rules flamethrowers have the same range as an SMG, and do the same amount of damage, unless they're firing at units in a building, in which case everyone inside takes damage, and any survivors who can't escape outside the back of the building are killed outright. They can also attack vehicles if used from behind.

Sounds pretty reasonable, easy to handle and not overpowered. I really believe game designers need to look at other games from the period as an important part of the design process.

I'm thinking about making a Warrior Priest for my Normans in SAGA but I'm a bit stumped on how to model him, anyone got any neat ideas?

>>49220262
Get a Norman, replace sword with a club/mace.

Odo/10

File: Odo of Bayeux 01-001.jpg (226KB, 1024x970px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1024x970px

>flamethrowers in wargaming

There's an ancient story attached to Bruce Quarrie, one of the great game designers of the 80s. He noted in a wargaming column and in one of his books that he considered flamethrowers barbaric, and it was said he refused to include rules for them in his WW2 games! (Although actually that's demonstrably false, but the story came up every time his rules were mentioned).

>>49220262

Bishop Odo of Bayeux? Big bull-necked psycho with a giant club.

>>49220327

The book says they're armed with clubs, what's the reason for this? Some kind of religious observance about weapons or something?

File: Odo_bayeux_tapestry.png (4MB, 1500x1088px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1500x1088px

>>49220336

Wiki article on maces puts it well:

>It is popularly believed that maces were employed by the clergy in warfare to avoid shedding blood (sine effusione sanguinis). The evidence for this is sparse and appears to derive almost entirely from the depiction of Bishop Odo of Bayeux wielding a club-like mace at the Battle of Hastings in the Bayeux Tapestry, the idea being that he did so to avoid either shedding blood or bearing the arms of war. The fact that his brother Duke William carries a similar item suggests that, in this context, the mace may have been simply a symbol of authority. Certainly, other bishops were depicted bearing the arms of a knight without comment, such as Archbishop Turpin who bears both a spear and a sword named "Almace" in The Song of Roland or Bishop Adhemar of Le Puy, who also appears to have fought as a knight during the First Crusade, an expedition that Odo also joined.

>>49220336
It's an old myth about fighting clergy, saying that they used clubs over swords in order to skirt a prohibiton on spilling blood.

This is actually a load of old cobblers, and on the battlefield there would be no easy way to distinguish a Bishop or a Baron except by his banner. They wore the same armour and weapons as their secular counterparts, and commanded armies just as any landowner would.

This myth mostly springs from armchair historians looking at the Bayeux Tapestry and seeing that Odo has a club, so clearly all priests used clubs for the reason above. What they miss is that two figures wield clubs and the other is William himself.

The club is essentially a baton of office that signifies command, and helps to identify William and Odo (who was 2iC) as artistic shorthand.

So for a Warrior Priest model, pick a cool looking Norman Knight and give him the colours of the Abbey or Diocese he hails from.

File: DSC_0426.jpg (224KB, 939x527px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 939x527px

One chap's take on (L to R) Harper, Sharpe and Frederickson in 28mm.

I'd like some help with the rules for Bolt Action. If my artillery piece fires 'point blank' at a unit, does it still use the indirect fire rule?

>>49220425
And then Gygax ran with it, and a generation or two of fantasy fans ran with that, and... yeah.

Maces are rad though.

>>49220202
>>49220221
Simple fact of the matter is, when you get an explosive release of flammable gas with a flame nearby (i.e the flamethrower's pilot light), it explodes.

File: 10026033.jpg (137KB, 676x887px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 676x887px

>>49219018
Oh no I responded in haste. I dont have that one. Since SMGs were so rare (and probably didn't have ammo to fire much) I've never needed one.

The Giretsu raid on Yontan would make a good wargame scanario

>>49222725
>Since SMGs were so rare (and probably didn't have ammo to fire much) I've never needed one.
My favourite part in CoD World in Flames is that every second Jap has an SMG. Like...what.

>>49222453
>Simple fact of the matter is, when you get an explosive release of flammable gas with a flame nearby (i.e the flamethrower's pilot light), it explodes.
Which is why flamethrowers in-period used a non-volatile or semi-volatile gel, and the US flamers didn't have a pilot light, either. There was a ten-shot igniter that only burned for a few seconds. Just because the Imperium of Man uses shitty, explosive flamers doesn't mean that actual humans used them after WWI. We're less stupid than wargame tech designers. Most of the time, anyway.

>>49213317
>The main problem with being the guy carrying the flamethrower is that the enemy would focus all fire on you
Is maybe this how they will solve it? It's easier to aim the fire on the flamethrower dude?

>>49222453
>military flamethrower
>gas

You better square yourself away, boy.

File: chester_light_industrial_building.jpg (57KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 800x450px

I want to make some light industrial sheds like this for 28mm. I have not made much terrain but the basic plan was to make the building out of foam then score the sides to make the panel lines and paint it with textured paint. Then just use corrugated carboard and a few bits of cereal box card for the roof.

Does anybody have any suggestions or does that seem like a decent plan?

>>49219931
>Sounds like flamethrowers are correctly powered, just need to cost much much more to represent their power. something like 200 points. Essentially add up the points of the squads they took out and see what their rough killing power was.

Assuming a flamethrower can fire 2 shots before running out of ammo (I think statistically it safely can fire 3), you'd have to charge 1,100-ish points for it. A regular Tiger II is 555pts, is the most expensive base unit in the game, and the flamethrower has a better than 50% chance of killing it each time it shoots (a 72% chance, actually). Killing two of them isn't an unrealistic expectation, so price it according to the point value of killing two of them.

Not having to hit, AND ignoring all cover, AND dropping a ton of morale penalties on the target just before making them make a morale check makes them obscenely overpowered. Putting them a vehicle (ie, 18" range on a 4x4 board and removing the ammo concern) makes them even worse. There's no way to charge a fair point value for what they currently do, so the only other option is to change the lethality of the weapon system.

>>49224452
>and the flamethrower has a better than 50% chance of killing it each time it shoots
Given it can get into range before gets fucked up at least 8 shots a turn from its MMGs, if the Tiger gives a shit...or you just pin the fuck out of it.

Seriously, learn how to counter it. Vehicle flamethrowers are OP for what they cost, but they could launch that flame really fucking far away - and they were really rare compared to normal tanks. You don't want to get fucked by it? Counter it in unit placement, put your tank with a decent AT cannon or an AT gun as far away as possible and leave it in ambush or something.

>>49221900
Artillery can choose to fire directly too

File: Bolt Action IS-3.png (168KB, 666x626px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 666x626px

Is it cheesy to take a 600 point tank at 1250 points in Bolt Action?

...I need to use my IS-3 D:

>>49225264
You're actually considerably nerfing yourself by taking one.

Tanks are basically crap in BA, massively over-costed once you go above mediums because really they're just there to be a couple of machineguns and a cannon that are slightly difficult to kill.

>>49224350
Seems fine to me, do you need to have it be accessible via a removable roof? If not that'll massively simplify construction as you are basically making a box then adding detail. Don't forget to reinforce it internally though, adding some extra stuff like an extra block behind the corners helps a surprising amount, especially when dealing with cardboard.

>>49225264
You will lose horribly... just saying.
Its not cheesy, its wasting your points.

SAOIRSE I LOVE YOU

>>49225544
>>49225539
This makes me sad.
I love my IS-3 :(

>>49225544

This. What wins games in BA are recce units with vehicle flamethrowers. Recce is completely broken. Vehicle flamethrowers are completely broken. Two great tastes that go together.

>>49225651
Is this better then? I usually run pure-vet lists, so this should be a new experience. Parameters are 1250, with an extra tank slot.

File: BAPrint.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49225713
Helps if I add the fucking list....

>>49225673
These days are almost over. Todays Warlord newsletter said they are shipping the pre-ordered V2 bundles. Official release should be next week.

>>49216951
Post naval units too.

>>49225728
looks better, the ISU still seems a bit of overkill

>>49225925
I love tanks.
My opponent used a Pz IV H and a Puma last time I played him, and he had issues dealing with my SU-85. I suspect he'll be bringing a Panther this time, so I wouldn't mind something that can punch through it.

Has anyone played with/against Soviet infantry hordes before? This'll be my first time using it and I have no idea what to expect.

>>49225651
Tbh if you want to take heavier tanks, or more tanks in general, play Battlegroup. Bolt Action is, and I can't stress that enough, is an infantry based game for roughly a platoon's size. Anything above that is a clusterfuck, under it can work, but only on a smaller table and with smaller units.

>>49226037
Also heavy tanks are massively over valued in BA, no matter the rules.

And the Tank War supplement might as well have been a sheet of paper saying 'yeah you can take more tanks now'.

File: Brit Destroyer.gif (64KB, 1367x2027px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1367x2027px

>>49224350
You know that corrugated plastic shit they use to make roadside signs? If you sand/cut one side layer off it looks >exactly< like the industrial steel siding on the top of the building in your pic. All you have to do in the States is go out after the primaries and pick up the signs of the candidates that didn't win. Plus, they start out weathered. Win/win.

Foamcore and textured paint, or the old standby "soak it in white glue and roll it in sand" both work for that shitty Public Works Concrete feel for the lower walls on the building in your pic.

And yes, corrugated cardboard is perfect for tin sheeting.


>>49224452
>>49224570
A lot of the problem could probably be solved by skipping the Pinning markers, having it take an unmodfied test or die, and then adding the Pin markers AFTER it passes.

>>49225785
I have a Fletcher-class tin can on my painting desk right now, but most of the rest of my stuff is alt-history.
I also saved a Bismark model from the bin, it was missing most of the turrets so I converted it into an Aircraft Carrier for the Krauts, along the lines of the Kaga. I need to re-do the flight decks before I paint her though, I was.. less skilled at the time.

>>49226301
That platoon composition is bullshit to be honest...

File: Chopped PPSH41.jpg (21KB, 384x280px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 384x280px

>>49225981
>Has anyone played with/against Soviet infantry hordes before? This'll be my first time using it and I have no idea what to expect.
About sixty of these and a shit-tonne of greatcoats.

File: command.jpg (1MB, 2413x1833px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2413x1833px

Little update on my command element.

I worked a bit on the faces to try to make them less "mask-like", highlighted the field grey and the metal parts of the weapons a little and painted the bases.

Tomorrow when i have daylight again i'll paint some small details like the eagle on the cap and maybe try to give the lenses of the binos some kind of glass/gem-effect, finish the bases and then i'm done i think.

>>49226347

>LESS-accurate PPSH

y tho?

File: British BCs.png (6MB, 1800x2042px) Image search: [Google]

6MB, 1800x2042px

>>49217084

No sir. But having trained with the fight choreographer in the past (fight direction is also my own business) has some advantages.

>>49217744
>pillars mounted directly onto his base?

They are. I wanted something scenic that would call attention to the mini; I like having my Warlords up on something so they're elevated above the common rabble. In the case of the Alfie mini, the "1-leg up" stance made it more irritating to pull off and the first couple of go's didn't look good. I eventually just threw some rubble under his foot, and then thought back from there; why was there rubble? Where did it fall from? So the overall idea was to invoke the theme of a crumbling Roman building and provide a thematic link to Alfred the Great's connection to Rome. I wish Warlords weren't limited to a 40mm base; I'd prefer for it to be on a 55mm base so that the pillars didn't overhand the edges.

>>49219201

I...do not remember that scene. I'm immensely glad it exists, though. I actually didn't think about Theoden as Ecbert, but now that you've pointed it out, I can't unsee it. Sincere thanks for that.

>>49225785
*sigh*

>>49225738
Official release should be next week.

That is awesome. My Desert Rats will start trickling in late this week, so I should have a field-able force by the end of the month. I'm looking forward to being in a game when it's released for once, rather than 3 years in after everybody's figured out how everything is broken.

>>49227158
NEA youre my favourite person here. truly an inspiration

>>49227158
>HMS Tiger

I have an ash tray that was my grandfather's made from the bell of her. It's one of my favourite things.

>>49227262
>picking favourites
rude!

AWI era america. Would it be unusual for villagers/militia weapons to be rusted at all?

>>49226991
Is okay, just use additional bullet to make up. Always more bullet.

>>49222453

Do you never tire of being wrong?

File: 935px-FlintlockFiring.jpg (310KB, 935x1024px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 935x1024px

>>49228192
AWI...oh, Revolutionary War. Could be if they weren't cared for very well before being brought out, sure. A lot of militias were pretty serious back then because you still had the threat of Indian attack and other kinds of shenanigans though, so you'd certainly see plenty that were relatively spit and polished.

File: 800px-MA.jpg (46KB, 800x315px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 800x315px

>>49226991
Same reason these things, machine pistols, coach guns and marelegs all existed. The PDW concept has existed for a long-ass time. Carrying around a an SMG the size of a gimped rifle everywhere you go sucks way more than a machine pistol or sawed-off SMG - especially when you only rarely (if ever) get shot at and you're constantly climbing through hatches and shit. It's why Navy VBSS teams use sawed-off shotguns and MP5s.

>>49223788
more kinds of gas than american gasoline, boet.

>>49222725
I always wondered what that pole thing was that the guy in the back is holding. We have a few minis with that and were never sure what it was.
Looking at the osprey, its an anti tank suicide "Lunge charge"
Literally runs up to a tank and rams it into the side, detonating a shaped charge

damn...

>>49225651
Play a game that lets you use lots of tanks then. BA is not really a tank game

File: sacredguaranteedreplies.gif (1MB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x169px

>>49230802
TENNO HEIKA BANZAAAAAAAAAAAAI

Does anyone know some cheep as fuck 28mm tank mfgs? I need some that are in scale.

File: vikings lagertha ecbert.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>49227158
>I...do not remember that scene

There are several raunchy scenes from Vikings that are cut from the History Channel US episodes. There are included on the Blurays though.

>I actually didn't think about Theoden as Ecbert, but now that you've pointed it out, I can't unsee it. Sincere thanks for that.

He's my favorite character by far.

Does anyone have PDFs of Bolt Action?

>>49232354
No, sorry man. I don't think anyone's ever scanned them. Maybe you could find a cheap copy on eBay or something

>>49232678

Might have to, I just wanted to see how the rules are, see how many models I'll need to play.

>>49232787
the main rulebook is in the OP

>>49232876
Wow, I'm blind as fuck, thank you.

>>49219958
Yeah, I checked the folder before asking. Thanks, though.

>>49225651
Then use it. Have fun with it, for the Motherland. Play with mates.

>paint mini
>it looks good
>varnish it
>varnish ruins the key color

t-thanks

>>49235841
>be afraid of this
>never varnish
>have to worry whenever the miniatures get near any terrain which could cause them to fall over etc

t-thanks

File: 20160907_181306.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2322px

French voligeurs from the early napoleonic wars. 1/72 hät figures, 2 afternoons worth of work

File: banzaigai.jpg (8KB, 282x257px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 282x257px

>>49226464
Lookin' good anon, might need some touch upps on skin, maybe more washes/highlights, but otherwise, the cloth and camo looks good mate.

File: M8.jpg (23KB, 600x410px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x410px

Does anyone have the M8 Greyhound Osprey (Vanguard 53, I think) as a pdf?

File: NVA 053.jpg (961KB, 1161x820px) Image search: [Google]

961KB, 1161x820px

>>49237836

M8 Greyhound Light Armored Car 1941–91 (New Vanguard 53)

The M8 light armored car was the only significant wheeled combat vehicle used by the US Army in World War II. In conjunction with the lightly armed utility version, the M20, it was the staple of the army's cavalry squadrons for use in reconnaissance and scouting. First entering combat in Italy in 1943, it was widely used throughout the campaign in northwest Europe, though its off-road performance was found to be wanting. This title describes the design and development of the M8, covering the many variants that were produced during World War II and afterwards, along with a comprehensive survey of its operational use.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/86899p2osa1io14/Osprey+-+NVA+053+-+M8+Greyhound+Light+Armored+Car+1941-91.pdf

>>49235841
>>49236058

What varnish do you guys use? I never had problems with vallejo satin followed by vallejo matte. (i brush it on by hand though)

>>49237874
Awesome. Thank you.

>>49237797
very flat colors anon, get a wash on those fuckers, will help show up detail

File: without flash.jpg (2MB, 2568x4024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2568x4024px

>>49237830
Thanks Anon!

why is taking proper pictures so hard? I edited two pics together because i couldn't get my shitty phone cam to focus on all of the minis at the same time. Without flash too, so the colors look quite different and more natural than on the previous pic.

I tried to improve the faces a little, but i feel that i should stop at this point as i think i'll make it only worse if i keep adding more paint to them.
Also i'm kinda satisfied with them at this point. Compared to other minis i did in the past they really look good now. Pics without flash help too.

At this point i think i'm done. Hopefully you guys like the result and my nooby style of doing splinter camo.

>>49237797
Did you prepare these minis before painting them somehow?
Or is Hät somehow harder plastic than "regular" 1/72 minis? I had plenty of these as a child, and i remember these rifles (and sometimes even the feet) to be bending around all the time while yours look extremely straight.

>>49238370
Regular bendy 1/72 plastic, just tried to straighten it as much as possible by hand. Now I desperatly need to get some plastidip if it is as good as people say, or something similar. If anyone can give any help i'd be grateful

>>49238366
>Without flash too,
Photographing minis with flash is the best way to make them look like trash .
Your pictures without it look much better. You could do with a bit more light to make the pictures better still.

>>49192420
But isn't this only a part of the book? I mean didn't it have lots of foot soldiers and soldiers from different counties in it's "parade"? Or am i confusing it with some other similar book?

>>49240027
The Triumphs as a whole wasn't a book but a set of woodcuts (really fucking big ones too), this is a book of preparatory sketches.

>>49238513
As to where to get it, or how to use it?

Has anyone considered mixing the Perry ACW cavalry and artillery kits with the Second Afghan War infantry box to make some plastic British guns and horsemen, uniforms look superficially similar to me at least.

>>49240331
Probably doable. I know someone did something similar to make mounted Soviet cavalry for WW2.

>>49240331
100% doable.

At this point i think perry sold more of these boxes to people making Soviet/German/Japanese cavalry than to people using them for ACW cavalry.
Their legs and saddles look totally generic.

>>49235841
>>49236058
>only buy metal
>paint
>paint it poorly or varnish goes wrong
>into the acetone it goes

Could the MG-34 be fed from both sides or has the ammo belt to be at one specific side?

>>49241235
Do you even machine guns

>>49238366
>i couldn't get my shitty phone cam to focus on all of the minis at the same time.
It looks like you are taking photos from about an inch away which 99% of cameras arent expecting. You could try taking a photo from about a foot away, if not a bit more, and cropping out the excess. This usually looks better for me.

So how do you guys feel about the kings of war historical rules that were recently announced. My group seems pretty excited for it. Figure it be an decent way to ease into historical games.

>>49241416
I'm a bit concerned it won't have the granularity I'm looking for in a game of that sort and all the armies will feel a bit samey.

Still, KoW is a very easy ruleset to learn so it could be a good gateway drug for potential historicals players.

>>49241416
33 list with a single list for Romans with a generic master list of "spearmen" "archer" and so forth. Oh, did I mention a single Roman list?

Yeah, I'll either stick with Hail Caesar or the army lists at Hour of Wolves since he updated them to 2nd ed KoW and they are absolutely free. Plus contain four Roman lists among many others.

>>49241416
I'd be surprised if it gets played a single time at my local. We all already play a variety of more entrenched historical games and the guys who play ancients (a couple of different rule sets) seem very happy with what they have already. I haven't heard good things about the army lists for KOWH anyway, especially lots of complaints on the Roman list, very "hollywood roman" is the term I've heard bandied around.

As said it will probably be good gateway I suppose, although I don't know how big the KOW scene even is?

>>49241381
Another trick is manually focusing on something further in the background and then moving the mini in front of it.

>>49241465
Its not like they can release supplements afterwards right?

>>49241416
I'm looking forward to it. Hopefully it gets some popularity and they flesh it out properly over time.

>>49241489
You could also just photograph each individual mini then stitch the photos together in paint or gimp or something.

>>49241512
This is a great solution (probably the best) until you start doing more than ~6. Then it is just a hassle.

>>49241506
>Its not like they can release supplements afterwards right?
As half assed this feels like as it is now, I'd say it's really unlikely. This will most probably end up as "Kingdoms of Men - The Supplement".

>>49241506
>Its not like they can release supplements afterwards right?

>the no mans sky argument
This only matters if people are around who want to buy the supplements.

>>49241618
True, but thats how most popular wargames work these days. You don't have to like it of course.

But if the market is there and people are buying the core rules like crazy, they always can improve upon it.
It makes no sense to scare potential buyers away from the start by putting in 10 different lists for rome alone.

>>49241661
>It makes no sense to scare potential buyers away from the start by putting in 10 different lists for rome alone.
Why would it scare them away?

>>49241661
There is a wide wide middle ground between a list that's "you can take humans and give them weapons, sort the rest out yourself" and DBA coming with like 500 armies listed in the book. 30 seems high for a historical wargame, but when you think about the amount of time it's covering, that's fuck-all.

and yeah, you need two roman lists minimum, really. if you really can't handle having two roman entries on the list, call one "arthurian brits maybe on the continent too" or something.

File: i need a photo box.jpg (372KB, 2204x928px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 2204x928px

>>49241381
>>49241489
>>49241512
>>49241532

I experimented a bit with my cam and with different spots in my room and came up with this.

Now i really consider building a proper photo/light box.

>>49241661
>It makes no sense to scare potential buyers away from the start by putting in 10 different lists for rome alone.
Why have you lept from 1 to 10? Is it to make us sound ridiculous? No one is asking for 10 Roman lists, but Rome is typically (and sensibly!) split into at least "republican", usually meaning pre marian reforms, and Imperial, generally post marian reforms. It's not uncommon to also find a 3rd list for Late Imperial Rome.

>>49241738
Lighting is really important, especially with phone cameras I find.

Natural light is the best if you don't have a specific light box.

Any suggestions for a good Age of Sail naval game? Preferably one with minis that aren't too hard to come by.

>>49241675
Because they will get confused. KoW is aiming at the Warhammer Fantasy crowd.

>>49241727
>but when you think about the amount of time it's covering, that's fuck-all.

True, but having a core rulebook for "historical" you need to be generic somehow.

The only way to satisfy all people is by diverting things with books for different eras. There you can have all the detail for specific units and factions.

>>49241727
>30 army lists
>from antiquity to the LATE middle ages
30 armies is not a lot for a ruleset covering potentially over 2000 years of history.

>>49241758
I tried positioning them on the window ledge to get some natural light but its way to bright outside and pics looked like shit. Also placing them into direct sun light inside the room didn't work.

The pic above is actually in front of my 2 computer sceens.

>>49241810
>I tried positioning them on the window ledge to get some natural light but its way to bright outside and pics looked like shit.
The light cant come from directly behind the model of course.

>Also placing them into direct sun light inside the room didn't work.
It should, what was wrong with the photo?

>>49241783
>Because they will get confused.
What are army descriptions.

File: sun.jpg (1MB, 2821x1365px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2821x1365px

>>49241835
>It should, what was wrong with the photo?

It was way to bright. I think the pic above looks better

File: Iberian-Cavalry-Renders.jpg (108KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 960x960px

New Iberian cavalry on the way from Victrix

>>49241931
WW1 figures when.

File: cropped.jpg (392KB, 1584x1148px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 1584x1148px

>>49241871
I've put the images together. The one in "proper" lighting is much better where things are properly in light, I hope you will agree. It is especially much nicer with regards to your flesh tone.

The issue regarding shadows obscuring the models and the big drawback that image has at the moment might be fixed if you try to get the light direction coming from as close to directly behind the camera as you can, without your own shadow obscuring the figures.

If you want to try that and see how that goes?

>>49241959
Wow the skin looks way better on the bottom photo.

>>49241986
>Wow the skin looks way better on the bottom photo.
Proper lighting.

>>49242003
Makes all the difference, I suppose.

File: xxxxxs.jpg (787KB, 1568x1940px) Image search: [Google]

787KB, 1568x1940px

>>49241959
Yea, the difference is quite noticeable when the pics are together.

Sadly the sun is almost gone for today, so pic related was all i could achieve. The piece of wood with the minis on top is placed at exactly the same spot than before as the sun was shining onto that place, all i changes was my own position.

Anyway, enough spam from me for today. Thanks for your help though, i learned quite a bit.

>>49241416
Seems like it'll be very game-y, that is more focused on being a game than trying to represent any specific aspect of historical warfare. Not really my thing if that's the case.

>>49241738
I've been considering the same for years. Why I haven't done it I don't know.
Though it's probably that where I play has fuckawful lighting anyway so it hardly matters.

>>49242145
>Seems like it'll be very game-y

I actually like it because of that. Not necessarily because i want to play it myself, but i really hope it can fill the role that Bolt Action and Flames of War have for WW2 games: Being easy and game-y enough to lure in players of other (i.e. Warhammer/Kings of War) tabletop wargames without bombarding them with to much history right away.
If they like it, they will look for more historical alternatives on their own. If anything, it creates sales for the makes of historical minis, which in the end, benefits all of us.

>>49240979
>>49241011
Yeah, that's what I thought. Figured it gave me more sabres and pistols too, since the infantry mostly have rifles.

>>49241777
Wooden Men and Iron Ships is a classic, and Frigate looks pretty good too. Take a look through the naval MF link in the OP. Both rulesets are in there, and several others for Age of Sail as well. You don't really have to use specific minis with a given ruleset typically.

Now if you want something that's accessible and easy (but not necessarily cheap) to get into, you could look into Sails of Glory, which is Napoleonic . If you've got a different specific time period in mind, you're going to have to find the particular line of minis you want.

>>49242235
>Wooden Men and Iron Ships

Wooden Ships and Iron Men, anon. Just sayin'.

File: NH_66721_Honda_Point[1].gif (100KB, 566x394px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 566x394px

>>49242267
I've spent the better part of the day up on a roof. I'll beg you to forgive me for being a bit sun addled.

>>49242267
Ship Men and Iron Wood

>>49242378
Wooden Iron and Men Ships

>>49242422
Ship Wood and Men Iron.