Flamges of War General: Fast enough for you old man edition

>>49204875
>Flamges of War
God Dammit anon...

Anyone have the Great war book and can scan the painting section for Americans? It's not in the GW Full Book PDF.

>>49205609
it's tradition dammit

Fames of War

I'm debating on a Lorried Rifle company or a regular rifle company from Nachtjaeger. On the one hand, Comets. On the other, Ram-Kangaroos and night attack...

Going from last thread (Britanon):

What about an artillery barrage strategy? The Brits repeat-bombard with the time-on-target rule, can get an AOP, and they can't leave the bombardment area unless they go out of their foxholes.

>>49205700
>Anyone have the Great war book

People purchased the Great War book?

That's news to me.

Do we even have the full book? I thought we only had the pamphlet.

>>49204875
>Flamges of War

Come on... Even I'm not that bad...

>inb4

>>49206102
>Fames of War

Damn it.

>>49206761
Evidently someone did, as the scan is from the book as it encompasses the US and French forces (which weren't in the booklets included with the first 2 box sets).

>>49207045
I was being a bit facetious.

Obviously some people bought it.

But from everything I've heard, Great War did not have great sales.

>>49207205
Our group bought 8 initial army boxes - 4 german and 4 british. Only 2 of us have their armies painted since they originally came out. NONE of us have yet to play a GW game.

I just want the painting guide so I can paint up some All Quiet On The Martian Front infantry -- so all my stuff looks similir-ish.

File: KIMG0026.jpg (901KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 1600x1200px

>>49207205
>>49207205
apparently it was pretty bad. During Black Friday the Warstore was giving it away. It's the only reason I have one.

Makes a nice coaster though.

Also for those who missed it, magnetizing Jagd/panther hulls is stupid easy. I remember we had a guy asking if it could be done and the answer is yes, yes it can.

>>49207618
I magnetized mine a different way - but I agree it was super easy: http://farkongnome.blogspot.com/2015/06/pantherjagdpanther-swappable-hulls.html

File: rubber tank.jpg (98KB, 634x439px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 634x439px

>>49204875
>Flamges of War
why

File: straight to Berlin.jpg (176KB, 800x739px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 800x739px

>>49204875
flying tanks son, flying tanks!

>>49207618
>During Black Friday the Warstore was giving it away.

I remember that. I thought it was downright hilarious. And I still didn't order a copy.

It was a literal example of "You can't even give this shit away."

>>49207601
>All Quiet On The Martian Front

Now there's a truly dead game. Which is a damn shame. The setting is cool, and the minis for the tripods and the steam-powered WWI-style tanks looked cool.

I don't know if I would have played, but I certainly would have gotten myself some of the minis.

>>49208385
Are you aware that the IP has been picked up and the new company (that is part of Miniature Market) is churning out stuff right now? Check it out: http://quietmartianfront.com/

>>49208385
I got the British box set, but any interest locally for Great War died when the US was released...another case of "here we go again".

>>49208529
I was not aware of that, no.

I'll have to check that out.

File: CromWEEEEEE.jpg (238KB, 1375x1072px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1375x1072px

>>49208060
Best flying tank, taking off.

File: BMP.jpg (619KB, 800x907px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 800x907px

Started painting my BMPs and Gvozdikas lads.
Actually quite like the Gvozdika, it looked pretty rough and shitty in plain resin and metal but it seems alright now.
Gun barrel was still an absolute arsehole to attach though.
>>49207618
>why
Tradition!

>>49210354
Noice mate!

File: 1467850314100.jpg (240KB, 920x700px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 920x700px

>Buy 2 boxes of PSC M3 halftracks
>American crew is wearing German Y strap webbing.

What the fuck?

>>49210354
wow that edge weathering really makes the model

>>49210354
Sponge method? What color did you use for the chipping?

>>49211588
>hello there buddy! Like you I am freedom loving American! Apple pie, baseball, democracy, ah I love it.

>How about we toss around the schwein skin und have some bratwur- er I mean brats ya?

>By the way do you know where we can find HQ? Good Old Patton is a good friend of my father you know

>>49211977
God... I would totally fail any sports-based identification quiz given to me in that situation.

>Baseball question
Um.. Is it David Wright?

>Football question
Is it one of the Manning Brothers?

>Basketball Question
Shaquille O'Neill?

>Hockey Question
The Lake Placid Olympic victory over the Soviets?

Who am I kidding? Nobody would ask a hockey question.

File: Kampfgruppe-X-600x372.jpg (96KB, 600x372px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 600x372px

>>49212210
Hallo yes we are American Panzer Destroyer ya.

We are from New York Cities! Boy howdy those Cubs are swell yes?

Which way ist being to high command, we are of delivering important document.

File: 1468260981215.png (378KB, 1104x672px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1104x672px

>>49211977
>Patton

Right this way!

File: 1462937613503.webm (3MB, 644x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 644x480px

>7 hits on 1 infantry team
>make every single save

File: Totally Tubular Idler.jpg (86KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1024x768px

>>49211588
Yeah, The PSC sometimes does silly things like that.

BF's made mistakes too, but they've fixed them.

>>49212210
You and me both

Best one was when I moved to Denver and worked at Papa John's (Protip, some guy from the Denver broncos owns a bunch of them up there)

>Keep seeing boxes for Broncos in pizza store
>ask coworker who the broncos are
>Coworker looks at me like I've said "Have you accepted Bob Saget as your lord and Savior fellow pilgrim?"
>"Theyre.... theyre an NFL team hungariboo..."
>"Well no fucking wonder then, I'm from Kentucky moron, we don't give a shit about anything but college basketball"

This is about where I'd be shot in the battle of the bulge I'd imagine

>>49212210
>Baseball question
>David Wright

Eagles... You know as well as I do that the Mets are "That *other* New York baseball team.

The question would most certainly be about the Yankees. Something about Jeter or A-Rod.

>Hockey Question
Wayne Gretzky. The answer is always Wayne Gretzky.

>Who am I kidding? Nobody would ask a hockey question.

It sadly is a fourth-rate sport here in the US.

Although it tends to be more well known than soccer. The only thing I know about soccer is that every fucking 5 year old kid plays it, leading to the whole "Soccer Mom" stereotype.

However, nobody else fucking plays it at all. Unless they're fucking Latino or Central European.

File: bt7jump.jpg (19KB, 503x323px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 503x323px

>>49204875
Based B-7

Fastest tank around in 1939

File: low quality bait.jpg (5KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 200x200px

>>49212292
>New York Cities!
>Boy howdy
>Cubs

Virus, it's like you're not even trying...

Although I'm impressed you know enough about US Baseball to mention the Cubs.

Now, for bonus points, what popular sci-fi movie pokes fun at just how bad the Cubs were at the time the film was released?

>>49212991
Back to the Future II?

Does FoW have any supplements for the second sino-japanese war, or the nomonhan incident / battle of khalkhin gol?

BT-7's and BA-6's vs Japanese Rifle division (and some light tanks) in a superb combined arms attack by none other than Zhukov himself.

File: Rising-Sun-Book-Cover.jpg (63KB, 353x500px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 353x500px

>>49213103
Yes!
No Zhukov though, too high level command to see the battlefield.

>>49213126
I guess early Zhukov was much lower command than the standard mid and late war Zhukov we're all used to. He was still cutting his teeth in 1939

>>49213103
>a superb combined arms attack
More like they were both on the same bit of organisational paper and stayed that way because the Japanese couldn't find their own asses. Same people that gave us the Winter War clusterfuck, remember.

>>49213103
I wouldn't mind seeing Nationalist Chinese.

88th division trained by Falkenhausen inflicted serious casualties and surprised the Japanese during the assault on Shanghai.

File: cubs-win-ws-miami-back-to-the-future-2.jpg (146KB, 640x1223px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 640x1223px

>>49213066
>Back to the Future II?

Yup.

The cubs fucking sucked for most of the 80s. Making it totally believable that Marty was shocked by the screen saying that the Cubs could Sweep the World Series.

Anyway, to try to get this somewhat back on topic, what would modern ID quizzes look like?

American pop-culture, and the bigger sports teams or athletes are pretty well known around the globe at this point.

>>49213250
From what I've read the Soviets made good usage of combined air, artillery and ground assault. A superb combined arms attack for 1939 when only really the germans knew what they were doing with that kind of thing.

Zhukov is a pretty great commander, he wasn't involved with the winter war as far as I know. That was mostly shitty conscripts up against veteran Finns.

>>49213267
>Nationalist Chinese

Unlikely.

I think Battlefront does a lot of printing in China, and they tend to react harshly to anything that doesn't follow the party line about glorious Chinese Communism.

Never mind the fact that basically being nothing but one big factory fueled by Capitalist Consumerism is the only thing keeping the Chinese economy from collapsing in on itself.

>>49213584
Also Chinese forces would be pretty similair to any other forces during WW2. low to average training, some AT guns, maybe some light vehicles, nothing really special to warrant their own army list.

>>49213616
I don't know enough about their forces to say one way or the other, but I'd imagine they had access to some semi-decent stuff if they were standing up to the Japanese.

Although granted, the Japanese were not exactly the best army in the world at that time themselves.

>>49213728
>the Japanese were not exactly the best army in the world at that time themselves.

Japanese tanks were actually pretty good in the 30s. The problem was they were still using them in 1944.

>>49213269
"Where were you on Nine-Eleven"

and if they aren't sufficiently tearful, choking on their own thick, rich, creamy, freedom, they're obviously some kinda Cock Sucking Nazi-Communist-Liberal Pinko-Faggot and you shoot them.

>>49213269
What's a biscuit?

File: Ka-Chi1.jpg (38KB, 600x396px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x396px

>>49213728
The Chinese were pretty basic, they lacked decent AT weapons. And yeah the Japs whipped them pretty good. The Japanese were the best army in Asia at that time. They managed to use light tanks and combined infantry / tank / artillery tactics to great effect. They didn't conquer 1/5th of the globe by being shit.

For example in the Philippines they overwhelmed a British force twice their size, by getting their light tanks to positions the British didn't think tanks could go. Most of their light tanks were under 20 tons, and could cross things like improvised log bridges.

The main reason they didn't do so well in the Pacific against the U.S. is they were massively outnumbered and out-produced. On the offensive and with surprise tactics they were excellent, but they hated defensive battles - hence their futile counter-attacks during the Pacific campaign.

Also the Japanese loved amphibious tanks, and actually used them!

>>49213728
>>49213616
they had a massive variety of equipment, training, and weapons. Not to mention you've essentially got two different armies between the nationalists and the Communists (can't remember what the original government was called, nationalist may not be correct)

There's really no force that could proxy out of the box for them. They really did have a bit of everything.

We had a guy researching them like a year ago, I always liked reading his posts. Learned a lot from that

>>49214067
I was going to say "Or they're a kid", but currently anyone that wasn't around on 9/11 is underage b& so who cares.

File: biscuits-and-gravy.jpg (169KB, 1276x918px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1276x918px

>>49214227
>What's a biscuit?

I may be a northerner, but nothing beats southern-style Biscuits and Gravy.

>>49214067
>"Where were you on Nine-Eleven"

At this point you might as well ask them where they were when Neil Armstrong landed on the Moon.

It's just a historical event at this point. Coming up on 15 years ago.

Students who just started high school were more than likely born *AFTER* September 11th 2001.

And the typical age for US combat troops is 18 to 21. They would have been in kindergarten or even pre-school at the time.

>>49214260
>And yeah the Japs whipped them pretty good

Japs lost a ton of men in China. And after several embarrassing defeats by "inferior" Chinese they really took it out on the civilians.

>>49214067
Getting ready for class. My first class was at 11 AM. Was watching the TV with my mom when the second plane hit, then got news the Pentagon was hit too. Called my college after watching and they told me the rest of the day's classes were cancelled. It was a surreal moment. I remember thinking it was definitely our generation's Pearl Harbor.

Yes, I'm an old man by 4chan standards.

>>49215103
true, there was the one battle I remember where the Chinese cut off Japanese supply lines and proceeded to mangle the Japanese main force as it retreated, but that was more of the exception than the rule, The Japanese did capture the capital and main cities pretty effectively to start with. Usually when someone takes your capital city you've been whipped. Maybe not with Russia in 1812, but Russia is a different story... Once most the large portion of China was under Japanese control, the Chinese reverted mostly to guerrilla warfare, after relocating tons of their industry and population to the west.

The U.S. lost a lot of men in the pacific too but still captured every island they wanted to. Casualties dont always equate to lack of success. same with the Soviets in Stalingrad.

>>49213269
Harambe jokes.

>>49215656
American Revolution and War of 1812. British capturing major cities and burning the White House really did nothing but cause anger and resentment to kill redcoats.

Also US overall casualties for the war were extremely light compared to what other countries suffered. In the Pacific it was like 10:1. Look how many Japanese died fighting at places like Saipan and Iwo Jima compared to what they inflicted.

>>49204875
needs some tank escorts

>>49215683
>Harambe jokes.

The gorilla that got shot because a kid fell in at the zoo? Okay... I don't even want to know what jokes might exist about that.

>>49213269
>what would modern ID quizzes look like?

Questions about celebrity relationships?

Questions about relatively recent video games, movies, etc?

I mean Eagles really hit the nail on the head. Pop Culture from the US dominates world-wide culture. Everyone knows who Luke Skywalker is and who his father is.

And you can't use US history. Our own people don't even know it.

It makes me sick to even suggest this, but maybe ask them to properly explain SJW terms like "cis" or "problematic".

>>49215753
Comparing US to Jap losses in the pacific doesn't quite work, the Japanese tended to fight to the death or commit suicide, and so we see pretty much 90% losses for all Japanese on all islands. If you look at US losses on peleliu, the deployed 50,000 men and lost/wounded 10,000. That's decently high.
Okinawa, US had 90,000 killed or wounded. Sure, they deployed 250,000 people, but thats still a colossal amount of losses to take one island.

Either way, my point about losses not equating to success still stands. The US were still able to complete their objectives, regardless of losses.

>>49216176
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTBftExjXuU

>>49216192
>90%

try more like 99.99%

Most prisoners werent even Japanese, but slave labor South Koreans and other non Japanese "sub quality" labor units.

>>49206761

http://www.mediafire.com/view/kk9rel0v0j02mb2/Great_War_scan.pdf

>>49214067
i also was in class.

professor took a message from an assistant, then after being shocked, told the class some very basic info then excused us all...

then, me and some buds whipped up conspiracy theories once we got the full story

>>49214067
Was spending the day at a different school than normal, because my mom wanted to see if there were private schools that would work better for me than public middle school. We had gone through the first few classes when the teachers started acting weird, and rumors started to circulate. I'm guessing around the time the second plane hit was when we all got moved to the various windowless rooms of the school. The teachers told us what had happened, and we basically stayed in those rooms with activities to keep us occupied until our parents came to pick us up. Ended up not going to that school. Didn't hit me at the time how bad it was, since I was barely 10.

>>49217201
>>49216761
>>49215136
>>49214467
>>49214341
None of you were sufficiently tearful, or choked on your own thick, rich, creamy Freedom. So we suspect you all of being Dick-Licking Commie-Natzi Pinkos and you're all being shot.

>>49211948
Sponge chipping indeed yes, I don't know why I never used it before, it's pretty comfy to do. Used Russian green highlight from the MIG interactive modulation box with German cano black brown for the chips down to the metal.
I am looking for a Vallejo alternative for the green though, its really designed for an airbrush so I have to wait for it to dry up a little before I can effectively sponge with it.
>>49210467
>>49211897
Thanks gents

>>49217278
>>49214067
You're a sheep-fucker, not an American. Produce 5 guns with their accompanying American flags in front of your collection of patriotic American literature and we'll listen to you. Otherwise you're not American, and therefore your opinions and statements are valueless.

>>49217643
>>49211948
What is this sponge method?

File: flying tank_04.jpg (61KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 400x300px

>>49208060
Awwww YEEEAAH!

>>49214277
Nationalist is correct. Kuomintang might be the word you're thinking of, and it just means Nationalist Party (it was a one-party state - even after fleeing to Taiwan, other parties were illegal there until the mid-'80s. "Free China" indeed.).

They had a few Panzer Is and a core of German-trained infantry, dozens of Soviet prewar light tanks, but mostly they had numbers.

>>49217690
It's basically just using a piece of sponge to lightly dab the edges to look like chipping.
http://migjimenez.blog(removethisbecausemuhspam)spot.co.uk/2009/11/sponge-chippping-and-rust-stains.html?m=1
The chips are slightly exaggerated in 15mm, and scaled up would probably be the size of your fist, but everything else on 15mm models is too so it seems to work pretty well

>>49213234
Army commander, which is something akin to a corps commander on the western side.

>>49213250
Zhukov's attack was the basis for most of the good strategies the soviets used later in the war, so no.

>>49215753
This is only true because Japan wouldn't allow men to be captured. As >>49216192 says, you get very different numbers if you commit suicide automatically when you're beaten instead of becoming a POW like a sane person.

By reasonable measures, losses in the pacific were horrific. There were two standards for casualties in the US military in WW2, "European" and "Pacific". Expected casualtieds in Pacific standards were horrific in European ones.

I think you realistically need to include both the Chinese armies, since they were a huge part of the fighting there.

How does kangaroos work and how do i field them, sorry if its a stupid questions but please point me in the right direction.

>>49219253
They're Armored Transports. Look through the rulebook for those (and also regular transports, since armored transports are a subset of transports).

They just happen to be VERY armored transports.

>>49217954
Is that the FHSW mod for Battlefield 1942? Used to play the shit out of it. Still hop on from time to time. Jump jet valentine is best valentine.

>>49219361
Admittedly is it really that hard to be best Valentine. Not exactly stiff competition, the poor thing was just about obsolete by the time it saw the frontlines.

>>49212417
Why does the Kraut in the Guard tower have a Lewis gun?

>>49214260
>or example in the Philippines they overwhelmed a British force
>British Force
>Philippines

Er, no. You may be thinking of Burma.

>>49219412
You shut your whore mouth. Compared to late war tanks Valentine's are slow, underpowered, and underarmored. However they were used to good effect in North Africa. It was a small, well armored tank that could support the advance of infantry and eliminate any light to medium armored threat.

If only the 2 pounder had a half decent HE round.

>>49219542

Wasn't there a Valentine model with a 75mm gun crammed in it?

>>49219534
ah shit I was actually thinking of singapore

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Singapore

>>49219562
75mm

pshhh. They forced a 17-Pdr into the humble valentine. had to rip her open to get such girth inside though...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(tank_destroyer)

File: Monty's M3 Sept 1944.jpg (97KB, 759x800px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 759x800px

>>49219542
Compared to mid-war tanks Valentines are slow, underpowered and underarmoured. They were put to good use in NA sure but much of that came down to well, their being put to good use rather than being particularly good tanks, it also helped that they often replaced such gems as Cruiser IIs, so their new owners weren't exactly hard to impress. They were also fucking TINY, like they made Soviet tanks look roomy. They are cute though.

>>49219562
Yup, the Mk. XI, though it only showed up in '44 I think and even then only as a command tank for Archer Troops.

>>49219589
Ah.

In all fairness, the Japanese's greatest asset in the fall of Singapore was the sheer bloody incompetence of the British High Command. You'd have to work hard *not* to win when the other side's deployment, logistics and plans are laid out by drooling retards.

>>49219562
Yeah, when they first shoved a 6 pounder in they had to remove the co-ax... pretty much making the tank useless against infantry. They redesigned the turret to add it back in. The final version got a 75 mm.

>>49219624
>sheer bloody incompetence of the British High Command
business as usual milord

File: image.jpg (82KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x364px

>>49219603
Points all taken, but you'll never dissuade me from my near-sexual love of the valentine tank.

File: Challenger is self conscious of its Tank Pattern Baldness.jpg (10KB, 252x200px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 252x200px

>>49219739
It's okay, I also have a deeply flawed tankfu.

File: DivCav05.jpg (59KB, 640x486px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 640x486px

>>49219739
>not the Crusader.

Looks like we got a queer here boys.

>>49219973
At least my tankfu isn't getting penetrated by every panzer on the front.

>>49220102
You hush your mouth, it's just a phase.

>>49220102

>Tankfu
>Penetration

my Girl is the Centurion. she's slow an' ugly, but she loves a good pounding and has no problem with intense radiation. God, is she stacked!

File: The fuck you say.gif (611KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 500x500px

>>49220990
> Centurion
> Ugly
Why would you say something so mean and untrue about your tankfu? Also, check out her rate of fire (0:54): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcRpeSSwpvE

File: 81333.jpg (181KB, 960x662px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 960x662px

>>49219762
She's my tankfu and you can't have her!

File: 2nd Fife and Forfar Yeomanry Comet 1945.jpg (359KB, 1772x1787px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1772x1787px

>>49221183
I suppose I can settle for her younger sister, even if she's not very experienced.

File: 1466918659011.jpg (92KB, 601x508px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 601x508px

>>49204875
>Iron Maiden will have 0 (zero) challengers in it even though the challenger was deployed in 1985.

It's not fair, the yanks aren't stuck with M60s.

Hey I'm possibly looking at getting into this game but looking at the scans file there is a lot of stuff, where should I start in terms of learning the rules?

File: image.jpg (297KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1024x768px

>>49221306
>>49219973
>60 year old sluts who've had hot loads inside them all over the world
Trash
Never penetrated, pure virgin tankfu coming through!
>but that Rpg29!
Doesn't count, that's experimenting with a sharpie at most.
>but that HESH one time!
Accident, so it doesn't count, still thhbically a virgin

>>49222224
Battlefront made a series of videos for the open fire set going over the basics. Should still be on youtube. Give those a watch.

>>49222193
>stuck

Cheiftain a best matey. Fuck all this new shit.

I dislike the fact that most Cold War gone hot stuff is mid/late 80s. I want ww2 jank fighting new hotness.

I know that WW2 stuff was still used Im looking at you Norway.

>>49222311
For some reason they cosplayed as Germans while doing it.

>>49222372
There would be zero point to putting Chally in TY at present because apparently a Chieftain with some applique on the turret is a better Abrams.

On the gripping hand, imagine how crazy the Challenger's armour is going to be if Chally with stillbrew is as good as an abrams.

>>49222833
Yeah the stats for the Chiefy seem way off.

>>49221046
Hot

>>49222227
>never leaves the house
>fat
>short
>breaks down often
Your waifu a shit.

>>49223084

>fat
>short

I think you mean "busty petite"?

Did the retards from BF still not realise they put the new bulge books on their app for free?

>>49222966
The only weakness it has is SA 6 (SA 10 against heat for bazooka skirts). So Soviet infantry and BMP-2 autocannons should be able to ravage it. You still have to get into knife-fighting range.

>>49223084
>not liking T H I C C tonks
Low-test beta-tanker detected

>>49223382
I meant more that it's supposed front armour is fucking retarded.

>>49211588
Did the "M3's" also have sloped armour and an MG42 on them?

>>49222193
I think it's a question of how many were deployed and ready to fight in June or July of 85.

If they were not there in any significant numbers, it would make sense that they might be a bit more rare.

It might also be a question of what was deployed along the front lines.

>>49223856
2 Battalions, one BAOR and the other was in Britain.

Out of interest why don't the British have the A39 Tortoise? I mean they have the TOG II* which was never deployed

The unit cards for the brits are up on WWPD.

The Brits look really good. So many options and a solid MBT that you can actually afford field 2 platoons of. Perhaps too good? Anyone have any thoughts?

>>49223732
>Chieftain Gundamium Front Armor

Yeah the base armor should probably be 15-16 with Stillbrew bumping it up to 16-17.

>>49223914
TOG II is a mid-war monster tank, i.e. a nonsense tank that's used for alt history games in mid-war. The Tortoise would've been a LW device, so it's not in there.

>>49224046
They were knocked out by T-55s in Kuwait, so they're probably 14 or so (or maybe a bit higher if the T-55's getting better AT from more modern ammo, as was suggested).

>>49224046
For my general Cold War homebrew I statted them at 15 with Stillbrew taking them to 16.

>>49224046
Bongs have the Carl Gustav which is like the RPG except it hits on 3s instead of 6s. Can't argue.

Bongs will be OP as fuck.

But that happens when you go the "it has to be better as all the other releases" to sell stuff.

>>49225946
>Bongs will be OP as fuck.

I never thought I'd live to see the day...

Next: OP Soviets ....well, one can dream...

>>49225946
How so?

Nothing I've seen so far in the Iron Maiden spoilers seems game-breaking.

What makes you think they'll be overpowered?

Because right now this just sounds like you're worried about Games Workshop style Codex Creep.

>>49219562
Valentine VIII with a 6 pounder is dirt cheap for a platoon of 10 with the Soviets. Sure its slow, but its 230 points for 10 tanks with FA 6 and AT 10.

File: laughing sickos.png (40KB, 152x254px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 152x254px

>>49225946
>>49226330
>Bongs will be OP as fuck.

>>49223852
No. I'm just scraping it off with a hobby knife, since I'm not bothering with the crew I only have to do it for the drivers

>>49227323
Its a BF apology for making American armor companies so superior to British ones in LW

I have Indian (8th Infantry Division in Italy) and Hungarian BAM forces and I kinda wanna get into FoW.
How are Indians & Hungarians in FoW?

>>49228344
Not familiar with Indians but Hungarians are pretty well off. We're a favorite army of one of the main designers so we tend to be treated well.

Not familiar with BAM abbreviation though, what does that stand for? I feel like this is really obvious and I'm blanking hard.

>>49228659
Neat. Hungrian AFVs are sexy as hell, I wanna flood people with Magyar Steel!

BAM= Bolt Action

>>49228716
>BAM= Bolt Action

I've only ever seen it abbreviated as BA.

The only reason I can think of for using BAM is to go for the obvious onomatopoeia.

>>49228906
Literally no M in the name, either.

>>49228938
It used to be used for Bolt Action Miniatures but that was back in the time before it was bought by Warlord. I haven't even seen it in years.

>>49219507
looted

>>49223224
>>49223668
Nah, I'm just fishing.

But I am the kind of fucker that likes ontos so.

>>49228716
>Hungrian AFVs are sexy as hell

You gotta love the Zyrinis. They have pretty good in-game stats. Especially against enemy infantry.

File: Hungary Jack.png (180KB, 301x408px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 301x408px

>>49231121

Those things are nightmares against infantry.

File: what am I doing.jpg (179KB, 867x678px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 867x678px

I decided to make a list focused around the Romanian drive into Austria. For the uninitiated the R-35 in this list has a 45mm gun instead of the shit French one and MG. The tank hunter is literally just a T-60 with a 76.2mm gun. Hilariously there is no Allied version of this list. Because the only other platoons I am able to take are another Blindata and some 20mm AA, I cannot really modify this list at all. Instead I want to know how to be a pro gamer with this.

>>49228716
Zrinyis are love, Zrinyis are life.

Seriously they are death incarnate to infantry.

Toldis are solid recce vehicles, as are csabas, and even turns aren't bad for cheaper light tank duty.

Not to mention our howitzers are shenanigans in a tube.

>>49232187
Hungarian Assault Gun Battery is a very strong list overall, ten breakthrough guns, access to Panthers German or otherwise, Rockets, cheaper heavier tube artillery, good recon, and okay airsupport.
It's surprisingly really that Hungarians haven't been major tournament breakers.

>>49232469
The list really struggles against medium tank hordes.

Simply put, you don't have the range and the AT to stand up to a concerted tank attack. Given many tank companies use always attack, I usually find myself on the defensive vs other armored companies to boot. When your only serious anti tank options are a couple panthers, maybe some PaK 40's, and maybe air support or howitzers, its pretty rough. You just get swarmed and can't knock them back.

So yeah, in an infantry heavy meta Zrinyis will stomp anything they face. However, when you do that tanks come back with a vengeance and man is it served cold.

>>49221046
aww damn, she's sexy.....

File: tankrider1.jpg (273KB, 780x530px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 780x530px

>>49233122
XAXAXAXAXA CYKA BLYAT

File: Bundeswehr-Leopard-2A6.jpg (2MB, 3240x1375px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3240x1375px

>>49222227
mine's the leopard 2A6.....that sweet virgin ass.

balls out awesome as shit, too...

>>49233122

The Pancake list also meets doom at the hand of RT pantherswarm, the Remagen or Ausbildung Superheavies, and -mass- infantry.

despite the fag who says otherwise, an optimum 20 shots of BTG is not enough to kill wave attacks of fearless cheap rifle teams. it's been played out with all kinds of dice rolls. you never get all 20 shots on one unit.

Zrynri's do great against all those obsolete tanks in LW..they'd love to fight Japanese...

>>49235580
I've fought the Remagen superheavies as well with IHOP, and it was rough, but didn't feel *as* tough as medium swarms. Granted that was a newer player though, and not a real fair fight. It's mainly all the shots that gets you. Superheavies hit hard, but with only a few shots if they hit you can weather it. 12+ Shermans firing on the other hand is a lot scarier.

Essentially, you are using 75mm shermans in 3 tank platoons with no turret. In LW thats a surprisingly rough handicap sometimes. So yeah, tanks hurt. Your only true armor is veteran and the insanely low profile in my opinion. That thing puts hetzers to shame.

I'm not so sure about not being able to stop infantry though, even swarms of Fearless cheap infantry. Between your 149 howitzers and nebs, zrinyis, MG's that multiple other vehicles have, and infantry of your own, I think an IhOP list could be expected to fight any kind of infantry list and win. It wouldnt necessarily be easy, but it would be possible. The infantry won't be the problem so much as the support will be, such as ambushing AT weapons or air support. If the Hungarian can knock those threats out early, he just needs to pick an objective and focus it down.

I once fought an American D-Day landing company that had something like 80 infantry stands, and only really lost due to stupid mistakes because I was a newb at the time. Namely, I spread out and tried to attack both objectives at the same time (and assaulted bazooka infantry in urban rubble with Panthers, didn't need to repeat that mistake ever again let me tell you) The Zrinyis pretty much got guaranteed kills every shot, especially when the infantry was trying to move up to make room for reserves and spread out for arty. I wiped out 2-3 platoons between the artillery and zrinyis alone, and my infantry helped as well. However I split my forces, which is the worst thing you can do as a tank player, and paid for it.

>>49236651
sorry that was me. Been doing a lot of namefagging today but I feel like any time Hungarians come up I have to throw it on so people know to ignore my advice.

Essentially what I'm getting at is that any player packing that many infantry is fighting himself as much as you at that point. Any player running true horde infantry is going to have issues with bunching up in his deployment, especially with terrain. Since he can only put a finite amount of teams within 4-10" of an objective before it becomes the ultimate arty target, you need to be smart and pick one objective to concentrate on.

And you don't need to kill all the infantry on the table either, just those within 4" of an objective and keep em off for a turn. Which can be surprisingly easy if you range in on a point near the objective and can just drop barrages turn after turn to pin and kill exposed infantry.

Now it is by no means an easy win, but Id take 80 Fearless infantry over an enemy tank swarm any day.

Looks like WWPD have a preview article for Iron Maiden up.

Plenty of interesting stuff for the Brits.

>>49225946
Our cousins in New Zealand always look after the Bongs. Also Britain is big on war gaming so I assume they'll see quite well.

>>49237718
Excuse me while I laugh. Battlefront hates WW2 British a lot. Look at the prices for our Cromwells and Comets.

>>49237759
This.

BF is all about German Big Cats and.... 'MERICA!

>>49237706
I really want to see someone put a full clown car recon force on the table.

What does people think of using Battlefronts USO188 (for converting Stuarts into their turretless version) to instead get machine gun rings on M8 Greyhounds? Good idea? Bad idea? (One will of course need some additional converting, but it gets the initial ring mount)

so um... anyone in Japan?
i played FoW back home but i wanna start playing here too. Also where can i buy vallejo paints? goddamn inaka

>>49237808
this is my only issue with bf.
also that only LW is supported and expanded upon. when will i be able to get EW italians that don't look like they are melting because they're still using the original molds

>>49238351
Other companies make 15mm WW2.

>>49238362
well aware but will sperg out with scale creep

>>49219739
> Stalin

God I love lend lease and how it emphasises the bizarre nature of the Soviet - British alliance.

>>49238351
Next year there is supposed to be a serious return to Mid War, fingers crossed.

>>49238322
Does japan not have a pretty big modelling scene? You should be able to get Vallejo somewhere, even if you need to turn to Amazon.
And you don't have time to be playing FoW, you're supposed to be chasing Japanese girls.
>>49238384
There are a few places that do comparisons between manufacturers, they might be worth a look to find minis that will work well together

>>49238461
Peter Pig have matched well with my BF stuff.

>>49238322
Japan has pretty good scale model shops in every city.

>>49239080
japan has a huge modelling scene but your options for paint are Mr color (not a joke i swear) or tamiya. neither of which im a huge fan of. the gaming scene seems non existent. people here just wanna paint their 1:35 tankfus in the peace of their parents apartment.
and chasing japan poon got me into this situation in the first place.

>>49239305
You have a japanese GF?
Why arent you giving her the 88mm instead of painting little figures?

>>49239350
wife. and because she needs to sleep sometimes i guess...

more to the point i was wondering if there were other fow anons in kanto area.

>>49239440
Do you think Wittmann cared if his enemies needed sleep when he put his 88mm in their face?

>>49238461
The brits and the soviets were much friendlier than is popularly remembered, at least.

File: BoW-Warren.jpg (9KB, 394x136px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 394x136px

>>49204875
Holy fuck what is this guys issue? He has no respect for guests or their game (flames of war/bolt action) and inserts UFOs and Hitler werewolves into everything while shitting on everyone who likes historics. He's a "That Guy" why does he primarily cover Flames of War/bolt action when he clearly does not care?

So one of this week's big announcments is that they've recast the M5A1 as a one-piece kit. Wow, really compelling. That's really going to lure people back from PSC's versions, I'm sure.

>>49241476
PSCs seem so fucking huge, though. And I've already got 5 of BFs.

File: image.jpg (61KB, 311x311px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 311x311px

>>49241287
Hello, and welcome. You must be new around here.

Warren is much hated by our community for exactly the same reasons you just stated.

He has no respect for the history, and really just wants to play something with Nazi Superscience and Occultism.

You could almost feel the pain of his teacher as he rambled off about how he wants to make Indiana Jones-style Nazi Artifact-Hunters.

But, he's their face-man and appears in almost everything they do. Unfortunately.

Including a Team Yankee video literally entitled "What about the Nukes?" Which he asks Phill with almost mischievous glee in his voice.

At least they have John, who actually is interested in World War II and Cold War history doing the Flames of War, Tanks, and Team Yankee review videos.

And maybe Warren can be distracted by the "Oooh! Shiney!" of Konflict 47, which seems to be exactly what he is looking for.

>>49241287
I try not to think about the illiterate baboon (and the only reason I make that comparison, is that there are no illiterate baboons on the internet, so they won't be offended). I will also immediately close down any video I see him in. Were I ever to meet him in real life, there's a non-zero chance I would look for the closest seller of rotten fruit.

>>49241287
>same thumbnail
>same reply to OP post
>More or less the same post.

Need to get in your daily dosage of jimmy rustling or does Warren really bother you that bad?

>>49241757
The hell are you on about?

Please for the love of God tell me Warrenposting isn't a thing.

>>49241287
Yeah he's a jackass.

There's two other guys that are pretty good though. Can't remember their names but it's the guy who likes a member of Anthrax and the slightly chubby tank enthusiast guy (apparently he's part of a group that restores shermans)

Theyre really good and enjoy history. They dont know everything but they clearly put more effort into one episode than Warren has since the website was made. Unfortunately they most play Bolt Action, which I also play, but it'd be nice for them to take the reins from Warren on the FoW stuff.

Theyre also funny because they clearly dislike Warrens shenanigans too, they just can't be as up front about it for obvious reasons. Theres a great episode where they explain to Warren how theyre gonna make his Bolt Action Soviets. Warren gets all excited and is about to start rambling when one interrupts him and says

>"And there will be NO weird stuff! You're gonna make this 100% historical! We already made a list for you and bought the models!"

>"But what ab-

>"No weird stuff!"

Theyre the only reason I watch the boot action videos, theyre pretty good. They got preview games for BA 2.0 and K47 and unlike Warren actually asked good questions and tried to stress test the rules to show situations people were asking about.

>>49241795
Believe it or not, yes it is. It's a favorite drinking game of /fowg/ to play whenever a new Warren video comes out. You try to drink away the seething rage that this jackass gets exclusive previews while actual fans get laughed at by him for being "nerds"

File: Deja Vu Warren.jpg (153KB, 1544x681px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1544x681px

>>49241795
>>49241287

In case anyone else is having Deja Vu.

>>49241902
>a 9mm bullet kills a 1.8m person, a 90mm cannon should kill an 18m monster

what the hell were we talking about there

>>49241985
I imagine how to kill 18m tall monsters with 90mm guns.

File: image.gif (2MB, 240x103px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 240x103px

>>49239872
Fucking kek
>>49241985
>9mm
>kills a person

>>49222227
are these decepticon markings on the fenders?

>>49242960
Lol I didn't notice those, but they might well be, iirc the Challenger 2 with TUSK upgrades is unofficially(?) referred to as the Megatron.

>>49237759
Phil plays Desert Rats. They're his favorite army. German and US are just their "money-makers". Also, New Zealand forces are always good.

Does someone have the PSC and BF (plastic!!) Sherman M4A3 and could do a size comparison picture?

>>49243851
Of course I do. Hold five, uploading (shitty) pictures.

File: PSC v BF - Front.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>49243851
Now, bear in mind, I literally grabbed two models from the "I should finish this" shelf. The BF Sherrie is covered in sandbags, but you should see the most important stuff anyway.

First up, front view. Nothing spectacular here.

File: PSC v BF - Rear.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>49243988
Net up, from the rear. Here's it's easier to see, the BF Sherrie is about 1mm wider (ignoring the sandbags). Not as easily seen (due to sandbags), the turret is also wider.

File: PSC v BF - Side 1.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>49244019
Looking at it from the side, doesn't the BF Sherrie look longer as well?

File: PSC v BF - side 2.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>49244035
Why yes, it is. Significantly so (my mk 1 eyeball claims 3-4mm difference in front when the rear ends are even). And once more, we see that the turret is also larger.

Conclusion: I would personally not field BF and PSC Sherries in the same platoon. The only reason that I will ever field PSC Sherries, si because I've already bought and built them, I try to paint everything I build, and when they're painted, I might as well use them.

>>49244087
Well thats quite a difference.

Thanks, Shermanon.

>>49244087
A Sherman should be 5,84cm long at 1/100.

Could you do a quick measuring to see which one is closer?

>>49244179
Ignoring the tailgate of both, PSC is roughly 5,5cm, while BF is 5,9. Tailgate adds 2-3mm... so, are your measurement with or without tailgate?

>>49244254
I just took the measurements from wikipedia.
But it looks like the M4 is 5,84 and the M4A3 is 7,54m long.

Looks like both companies are off by quite a bit.

>>49244447
I would highly suspect that the length quoted for the M4A3 is including the 76mm barrel. BF 76 Sherrie is roughly 7,5cm if you include the barrel.

>>49244635
Sounds like that to me as well.

File: image.png (88KB, 500x563px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 500x563px

>>49242960
Good eye!

Yes, yes they are.

>>49244635
Sounds pretty spot-on in that case.

>>49239872
>>49239440

>Give her the D , they said
> been there, done that...
>needs moar models. and paint

a true man, you make us proud

File: RR1625.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Any thoughts on the list? Trying to make all-comers list. Any ideas or suggestions will be happy to hear!

>>49247727
>Spetsnaz
>late war WW2
umm... Spetsnaz weren't started until 1950. by which time the Soviets would have been using T-54s and AKs

>>49247829
While it wasn't the proper Spetsnaz GRU forces, there were specialised forces under a similar name in WW2.

>>49247727
I like it for the most part. Rota are solid. Not sure I'd use Katy's but also not sure what else I'd buy with 100 points...

>>49247727
Depends on your meta, but against heavy armor you are going to be forced to flank or pray for a magic mortar shell/rocket to force a bail. Against everything else it looks nice. I guess the plan is to spearhead and remove GTG before you bombard the enemy? Then use the tanks and recon units to mop up?

>>49244993
oh god i have got to do this with my americans....

>>49250528
You do realize the "Megatron" tank in that picture is a British Challenger 2, right?

Although one of the late 90s Megatron toys was based on the Abrams.

Thoughts on this MW parachute company? Using the free digital MW update for brits in Italy.

Company HQ - CiC SMG, 2iC SMG, 3 PIAT, 2 3" Mortar - 215 points

Parachute Platoon - Command Rifle/MG, 4 Rifle/MG, 2 SMG - 210 points

Parachute Platoon - Command Rifle/MG, 6 Rifle/MG - 210 points

Parachute Platoon - Command Rifle/MG, 6 Rifle/MG - 210 points

Parachute Mortar Platoon - Command Rifle, Observer Rifle, 2 3" Mortar - 85 points

Airborne Reconnaissance Platoon - Command Recce Jeep, 3x Recce Jeep - 150 points

Airlanding Anti-Tank Platoon - Command Rifle, 4 6pdrs - 190 points
->Jeeps - 5 points

Field Battery, Royal Artillery (8th army) - Command Rifle, Staff, Observer Rifle, 15cwt truck, 4 OQF 25pdr gun - 215 points
->Transports - 5 points
->OP Scout Car - 5 points

PIATs obviously get attached out, Mortars and 2iC form a mortar battery. Mortar platoon can swap the OP and the Mortars for 2 HMGs, if infantry assaults are a concern. 25pdrs and 6pdrs form ranged AT assets and the 25pdrs can be used more conventionally as artillery if infantry are a larger concern. Transports let the guns be mobile if need be. Jeeps do recce, but can be dismounted as MG teams if either not expecting to advance or if night attacking.

Air Alternate: drop 25pdrs, move HQ mortars into mortar platoon, add 2 jeeps to the recce platoon and get Limited Hurricane IIC Air Support. Having to choose between 4 mortars OR 4 HMGs that can't bombard quite hurts, though. Makes the army much more defensive in nature, due to lack of sufficient bombardment and smoke for easily launching an assault.

Maori alternate: Drop a Parachute platoon and a HQ PIAT, add a support Maori Rifle platoon with all the gubbins and have New Zealand 25pdrs. More aggressive use, favoring Night Attacks.

>>49251307
Oh, and since I forgot:
1500 points, 8 platoons in the base one, 6 in the Air alternate.

Σ(ﾟДﾟ) NOOB QUESTIONS INCOMING BRACE FOR IMPACT! ﾍ( ´Д`)ﾉ

Firstly, will a wash over my army mans with agrax earthshade turn my fieldgray germans brown?

Secondly i bought the rommels wolves box set mainly for economic reasons but i should probably expand on that right? recce and smoke seem like a big deal in this game. or do i need arty or more infantry? MG42 seems useful too with ROF 6

also whats the deal with plastics vs metal?

>>49252086
>will a wash turn Germans brown
Only very slightly, although it will make them pretty dark at this scale so I would go back and highlight them after you do so.
Agrax is also good for pin washing vehicles.
>plastic vs metal
Just a way to make common infantry and vehicles cheaper.
Building plastic vehicles is comfy.

File: Cav.png (145KB, 843x682px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 843x682px

How do you think about this list?

>>49252086
>rommel's wolves

oh god its already started.

Yes, you will need to expand on it, running nothing but panthers will lead to much sadness.

Best advice, run the confident trained panzer kampfgruppe from desperate measures. Augment it with rocket launchers (either nebelwerfers or Panzerwerfers, as long as they have smoke) recce (which will be called auksflarungs or Panzerspah usually) and some mounted infantry to support your assault. You probably will not make use of all your panthers, anything more than 8 is getting into magical realm territory in a bad way.

I came up with a sample 1750ish list that builds on what you have and uses mostly models that can be used in a wide variety of lists

1iC, 2iC panther G

x3 Panther G

x3 Panther G

Panzer AA platoon x2 Ostwind

x2 heavy Panzerspah patrols

Panzergrenadiers with 15cm aaa gun

x3 nebelwerfers w/tows

All trained, covers most bases. Not *perfect*, but about the best list you could be expected to build out of the box and uses Desperate Measures, which is an excellent book, to boot. Desperate Measures is nice because it's insanely flexible with how you can field tanks, so you can start adding in or trying other tanks a platoon at a time with no problems.

>>49253344
those platoons seem incredibly anemic, and you have almost no long range at to speak of. How exactly do you plan to engage tanks without zerg rushing with 3-7 stand platoons of panzerfausts?

>>49251307
seems solid, you lack a lot of long range at but I'd imagine you'll be a bitch to dig up from an objective

>>49253604
FV with British Bulldog and TA 3+ on every team? Yeah, they're a fucking bitch to dig up. StuH's and SU-122s are the best solution, though the guns that list has (12 AT 10 shots, jesus H...) would make me nervous. And this is if they don't night attack, get close while I'm slowed to a crawl, and then surprise gangbang assault me.

I fucking hate fighting paras as medium tanks. And they don't change much in LW.

>>49248120
yeah, couldn't get anything remotely viable, maybe medium mortars, but since they have no smoke, not that great...
>>49249585
yeah, that was the main idea. The list itself is great but doesn't have much to deal with heavy stuff so, flank or mortar are a way to go...

>>49253560
that sounds good.

my local meta seems to be all US and soviet lw tank lists. i wanted to bring something different to the table but still keep that ultra late war theme they seem to like...

also i only get one platoon of infantry. is that really enough to support tanks?
anyway my main interest historically is the italian campaign so i might buy some panzer iv and a grenadier or falschrimjaeger company later too.
(i don't think any theater im interested in had panther g's)

>>49247829
"Spetsnaz" is short for "Voyska spetsialnogo naznacheniya" and means "Special-purpose forces". There is no one organisation called "-The- spetsnaz". WW2 spetsnaz were special teams assembled from the best of given battalions for particular missions, usually infiltrations.

>>49255283
>Infantry
One platoon of infantry is generally enough in a tank force.

Depending on the scenario you'll either dig them in on an objective you need to defend or use them to assault enemy troops that are trying to defend an objective located in woods or buildings (where you'd rather not assault using tanks).

>Italian campaign
Some pretty interesting stuff there, and you would have access to small numbers of Panthers as support in various lists.

>Potential other lists
If you wanna have large numbers of German tanks, you could also take a look at the FHH Panzerkompanie from Blood, Guts & Glory for Reluctant Trained German forces.
One of my local players has done quite well with them, though he mixes Panthers and Panzer IVs.

Don't buy the book tho, it's getting folded into a new hardcover compilation extremely soon.

Got bored, statted up some more Soviet tanks for TY.

T-62 - FA 12/SA 8/TA 2
IR
Hit on 3+
Courage 4+ / Skill 5+
Morale 3+ / Assault 5+
Remount 3+ / Counter Attack 4+
Tactical 10"/Terrain Dash 14"/Cross Country Dash 20"/Road Dash 24"/Crossing 3+
115mm U-5TS Range 32" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 21 FP 2+- Stabilizer
12.7mm AA MG Range 20" RoF 3 Halted/ 2 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-
7.62 MG Range 16" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 2 FP6+-

T-62 Model 1975 - FA 14/SA 8/TA 2
IR
Hit on 3+
Courage 4+ / Skill 5+
Morale 3+ / Assault 5+
Remount 3+ / Counter Attack 4+
Tactical 10"/Terrain Dash 14"/Cross Country Dash 20"/Road Dash 24"/Crossing 3+
115mm U-5TS Range 32" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 21 FP 2+- Laser Rangerfinder, Stabilizer
12.7mm AA MG Range 20" RoF 3 Halted/ 2 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-
7.62 MG Range 16" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 2 FP6+-

>>49255600

And the Deluxe model:

T-62M - FA 14/SA 8/TA 2
BDD Armor - IR
Hit on 3+
Courage 4+ / Skill 5+
Morale 3+ / Assault 5+
Remount 3+ / Counter Attack 4+
Tactical 10"/Terrain Dash 14"/Cross Country Dash 20"/Road Dash 24"/Crossing 3+
115mm U-5TS Range 32" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 21 FP 2+- Laser Rangerfinder, Stabilizer
9M117 Bastion Range 8"- 48" RoF 1 Halted/ - Moving -AT 21 FP 3+- Guided, HEAT
12.7mm AA MG Range 20" RoF 3 Halted/ 2 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-
7.62 MG Range 16" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 2 FP6+-

>>49255607
>>49255600
What about the T-10M, ISU-152, SU-100M, Soviet Third line gear?

>>49255626
We've got IS-3s, the T-10M is largely just a modernisation of that, maybe a point more front armour. The ISU-152 will be the same as WW2, maybe with an ammo upgrade, and the SU-100M is just the SU-100 with desert modifications; again, potentially an ammo improvement, but that's all.

>>49255626

Sure I'll do those next.

>>49255659

>T-10M
>Just an upgrade IS-3

Sure, lets just forget the M-62-T2 122mm gun, the stabilizers, the autoloader, and the IR gear.
Not to mention the armor protection was significantly improved over the IS-3,

>>49255428
Still feels out of place in WW2. Most of the forces that lie under the spetsnaz umbrella didn't start operations until well after WW2. Those who were operating in WW2 like red army sabotage detachments or marine commandos didn't go by the name "spetsnaz". The modern connotations are just too strong for a WW2 list imo. Its like calling royal marine commandos specOps. I guess they just wanted to use as many Russian words as possible.

>>49255694
It didn't have an autoloader, that I could find. The gun improvements are going to be relatively meaningless compared to the allocation of HEAT and APDS, and in any case there's only really a few points either way it can go due to the compression of TY's scale. IR gear and stabiliser improvements are both fair but that's going to be all. We're basically hitting the issue that tanks in TY have a very narrow band for potential improvement.

>>49255827
Aside from the fact that you're utterly wrong, your argument is basically a temper-tantrum that people aren't using your personal headcanon of terminology.

Stop being such a farce.

>>49255845

On closer inspection, you are correct it does not have an autoloader - some vehicles did receive a sort of power/automatic rammer, but it was apparently problematic enough to be discontinued.

>>49255827
In either case it's not like he picked the name, so I'm not sure what you're hoping to achieve.

>>49255847
>>49255890
my issue is more with the FoW writers, nothing against the guy writing the list.
"I'll take some valentines, a churchill, and a specOps team" just doesn't sit right. Why not use flavored WW2 titles? you dont call a katyusha an MRLS, even though it falls under that general category

File: Time_for_tanks.gif (991KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

991KB, 500x281px

Getting to work on some of my Brits for Tanks since my FLGS finally got their second batch of starter boxes.

This should add two Comets to the Comet, Cromwell and Firefly I've already got in 11th Armoured colours. Should be decent as a starting selection.
If necessary, I could toss in some of my 5th Canadian Armoured Shermans/Fireflies to change up my forces as well, but I'm probs gonna stick with the Brits for my main faction.

In addition, I'll be painting up some German tanks in Girls und Panzer colours (specifically Kuromorimine colours); a Panther/Jagdpanther and Tiger I (proxies as a Panther for now).
For that I'm unsure if I should try messing around with home-printed decals with white backing (which might be really tricky) or just try freehanding the markings.
What say you?

>>49255940
What WOULD you call the Spetznas platoon, then? Since it's got your panties in such a twist.

>>49255951
>I'll be painting up some German tanks in Girls und Panzer colours (specifically Kuromorimine colours)
Soo... Dunkelgelb, then? (and special crosses, fair enough).

Do you think you're skilled enough to do the markings freehand? Personally, I would never even consider it, decals are (almost) always better for crisp markings.

>>49255952
Spetnaz is literally just "Special Purpose" in Russian. It's like basically like Commando in English.

>>49255940
You're letting your cultural context of modern/cold war warfare influence your opinions on older naming conventions - "Spetznaz" is a mere descriptor; that was used during the period in question, regardless of whether you think it sounds "right" or not.

Or, continuing your logic, do you intend to object to calling pre-cold war mounted units "Cavalry", despite not being mounted in helicopters or IFVs like modern and cold war Cavalry units?

>>49255975
It's even more blandly generic than Commando, really. "Marine" would be closer, since it's equally generic and a sort of contraction of a longer/older/less-used name.

>>49255967
I'm thinking the flat colours with pin washes and maybe some edge highlighting should look decent enough while also simple and clean.
And a simple, clean look will nicely fit for Tanks, especially minis I'll probably use for demo games.

When it comes to the markings, I feel I could make it decent-looking, even if the characters in the middle of the marking might not be entirely correct.
I've also freehanded the divisional markings on my Brits and they look decent at tabletop distance.
Custom decals involving white seem to be a pain anyway, from what I've heard.

>>49255659

Right here we are - one thing though, the AT on the ISU is based on the assumption it can use the direct fire HEAT rounds the 2S3 will have.

ISU-152M - FA 10/SA 7/TA 2
Hit on 3+
Courage 4+ / Skill 5+
Morale 3+ / Assault 5+
Remount 3+ / Counter Attack 4+
Tactical 10"/Terrain Dash 14"/Cross Country Dash 20"/Road Dash 24"/Crossing 3+
152mm ML-20SM Range 24" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 21 FP 2+- Brutal, HEAT, Slow Firing
12.7mm AA MG Range 20" RoF 3 Halted/ 2 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-

SU-100M - FA 9/SA 5/TA 1
Hit on 3+
Courage 4+ / Skill 5+
Morale 3+ / Assault 5+
Remount 3+ / Counter Attack 4+
Tactical 10"/Terrain Dash 14"/Cross Country Dash 20"/Road Dash 24"/Crossing 3+
152mm D-10S Range 32" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 18 FP 2+-
12.7mm AA MG Range 20" RoF 3 Halted/ 2 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-

T-10M - FA 17/SA 11/TA 2
IR
Hit on 3+
Courage 4+ / Skill 5+
Morale 3+ / Assault 5+
Remount 3+ / Counter Attack 4+
Tactical 10"/Terrain Dash 14"/Cross Country Dash 18"/Road Dash 22"/Crossing 3+
122mm M-62-T2 Range 32" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 19 FP 2+- Brutal, Stabilizer
12.7mm AA MG Range 20" RoF 3 Halted/ 2 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-
14.5 MG Range 20" RoF 1 Halted/ 1 Moving -AT 4 FP5+-

File: 879015156f51a7dea60eb02b2156cbb8.jpg (90KB, 564x752px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 564x752px

>>49256559
The SU-100 is a 100mm gun, but I assume that's a typing error.

The 152mm gun should be 1+ firepower, since all guns over 150mm seem to be.

I think the T-10M is overarmoured; it's an evolutionary upgrade of the IS-3, so should only be a point or two higher. On the other hand, FA 12 for the IS-3 seems like a joke, so I'd probably put it at 14/15. The armour should be comparable to the Chieftain (Chief has better turret and a similar hull), but the Chieftain's stats are ridiculous so that's probably not a good benchmark.

Side 11 sounds about right.

Working on a Brit rifle list out of the Bulge compilation. Trying for 1420 and it breaks down like this so far:

HQ - 30
Rifle Platoon - 180
Rifle Platoon - 180
Heavy Mortars - 155
AT Platoon w transport - 145
Innskillings Armored Platoon (CT, 3 Crom, 2 Firefly) - 350
2 Carrier Patrols w/ extra MG - 205

Trying to figure out what to plop in to round out the list.

>>49257530
IS-3 should be (at least) 13. It's what it has in Fate of a Nation.

>>49256559
While we're at it, can we give th SU-100 some historically-accurate movement values? It wasn't a Slow tank, and certainly wasn't as slow as the ISU.

I really want to do a US armored list but BF only makes the M4A3 late as a plastic kit and the PSC kit doesnt fit the scale of the BF tanks and I dont want to buy BFs resin crap.

What do?

>>49259758
You can make a quite decent list from just M4A3(lates)? Not really that hard, even if it's without the insane cheese that is E8s and Jumbos.

Also, BF resin is generally not all that bad.

>>49259758
A mix of M4A3 Lates and M4A3 76mms is actually quite good.

Or are you looking for earlier models of Sherman, like the M4 or M4A1?

>>49259826
>>49259894
I want it to be loosely based on the 2nd armors advance on the Rhine or the units that captured Cologne.

Looking at pictures of Shermans in Cologne its quite a mix of all kinds of Shermans. So only M4A3 lates wouldn't satisfy my historical autism.

With the M4s of PSC I could kitbash most of the common variants except the HVSS and Jumbo tanks. And as BFs tanks are quiet a bit longer than PSC I cant use their HVSS tracks.

File: thisisastug.jpg (44KB, 648x395px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 648x395px

>>49262005
Seems we're having a bit of a slow day today. Eh, it happens (especially fridays, since many regulars here seem to be well-adjusted people who have stuff to do on fridays).

Me, I'm just happy I got a moderate shit-ton of decals placed tonight.

File: death_by_decal_1.jpg (260KB, 1600x1123px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1600x1123px

>>49263560

File: death_by_decal_2.jpg (272KB, 1600x1138px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1600x1138px

>>49263560
>>49263919

File: death_by_decal_3.jpg (346KB, 1600x1044px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 1600x1044px

>>49263560
>>49263919
>>49263940

Decals: Story of My Life

>>49263961
Now repeat for 13 tanks...

>>49263999
>13
>He doesn't play Tankovy.

>>49264400
He does. Unfortunately it's Hero Tankovy.

>>49263560
>Seems we're having a bit of a slow day today

I am literally just finishing dinner after getting home from work.

>>49264571
>He does. Unfortunately it's Hero Tankovy.

>inB4 over 100 posts about everything wrong with Soviets

>>49264400
I would have preferred Tankovy, that's only 2 decals each, or possibly 4. Not 7, as for the brits (would have been 8, if I gave a shit about bridge numbers).

>>49264980
I feel you m8. 15 Cromwells, 3 Challengers, 2 ARVs (one Sherman one Cromwell), 4 Dingoes, 2 OP UCs, 3 Wasps, and 2 Bofors SP. All needing division symbols, bridge numbers, allied stars, and arm of service squares. And a large chunk then also need (handpainted) squadron markings.

Makes it really easy to ID who you're exactly you're seeing when looking at photos, but it's a pain on the models.

>>49257530

Nice catch on the 100mm gun and the 1+ firepower.
The T-10's armor is REALLY heavy though, 230mm turret front, 250mm gun mantlet, 120mm on the pike nose (I think the chieftain has the better hull front though).
I would not want to drop the frontal armor too much as a result. Maybe 16 as a revision?

>>49259022

The ISU-152M has better engine in it, getting it up to 44kmh. By comparison the SU-100 and T-54 managed about 48kmh, so they all have the same profile as a result.

>>49265501
That does not sound like fun.

But, it'll be worth the effort when you're finally done and it looks great.

File: 13641314_10208862680178769_6554992679061716931_o.jpg (334KB, 2048x1332px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 2048x1332px

>>49270129
Sad thing is, I only have 5 of those even partially past basecoating. I've still got to order a bunch of paints.

Speaking of, what colors do you guys use when painting your stowage?

>>49265501
I really hope, for your sake mostly, that you intend to do those one (or two small) platoon(s) at a time, and not sit down and do them all in one go.

>>49264571
Tell him to play Rota Razvedki, and get (gud with) Red Bear.

>>49264687
Hero Tonk sucks and you know it. It's 'murrica, but without any special rules or 4+ to be hit.

>>49266455
So you're saying the SU-100 and T-54 shouldn't at least be "standard tank" speed in TY?

>>49271781
Yeah, playing in a tank aces campaign where we get extra xp for the tank commander if all your tanks are painted. So far I've got two of my challengers and one each of the VIs, IVs, and the sherman ARV partially painted.

>>49271938
It's a joke, m8. Calm down.

Got to see the Iron Maiden book today briefly (don't ask where, BF Gestapo), Brits look pretty fucking solid. Definitely gonna start a Brit Airmobile Company, as they can get a platoon of 8 Milans for 11 points, in addition to the integrated Milans in their two combat platoons. Regular foot infantry for the Brits have Carl Gustav teams, which are slightly better RPG teams, and you can upgrade each infantry platoon with a Milan section of 2 Milans for 2 points. Anyone got any questions? I scanned over it briefly, and my memory is bad, but I'll tell you what I can remember.

>>49266455
Sure, but consider that the T-72 ural is FA 16 and has a minimum bound of 335mm (hull vs sabot). The T-10M is more comparable to the KT.

>>49271945

Looking at TY profiles for other units the Cross Country and Road Dash speeds might be lower that they should be, but the Tactical and Terrain speeds match up.

The thing to keep in mind is that there's no 'standard tank' speed in TY like there is in FoW.
Additionally neither the T-55, T-62, SU-100, or ISU-152 are particularly fast vehicles by late clod war standards. They aren't slow by any means, but stuff like Leopards, T-72s and Abrams are much faster than they are.

>>49271945
Everything in TY is one of two speeds, fully stabilised or part-stabilised. Fully-stabilised tanks can move 14", part-stabilised get 10".

>>49272610
Must be upsidedownland new Zealander

Must be either Photoscanfag (holy shit my phone autocorrected to add fag in, I've been on 4chan too long), Virus, or a new one that I'm not aware of

>>49273016
No Battlefront know where I live. I don't want to piss them off. I reckon Phil's a biter.

Speaking of 150mm calibre guns, I keep coming back to the idea that big guns should fire like the AVRE. The fact the ISU can't do anything to the king tiger is kind of ridiculous, same with the IS-2. Would have some relevance for other guns too, like the Brummbar and Sturmtiger.

>>49270503
Typically khaki, washed and then highlighted with German camo beige, mostly just because it stands out nicely against the hull.

>>49273741
I had an idea once for an additional most weapon special rule named "Concussive" wherein they have a concussive rating, say 4+ for Su-152, where after they shoot, they roll a die, and if you score equal to or above your concussive rating, the target is bailed out. Representing crews getting stunned, tracks being blown off, etc.

>>49272610
>>49273016
Our FLGS in Kentucky has a copy. They must have been ahead of schedule on printing.

>>49272610
Everything is better than soviets.

Now THAT is a surprise.

>>49273892
Here you are.

>>49273996
Except he's right: Soviets are going to need some new formations and equipment. The T72 is countered by everyting at present and looking pretty weak. I know it will take time with BF's staged releases, but they need that Soviet book out as soon as possible.

>>49274392

T-64s, T-72s, and T-80s with ERA should take the bite out of many of these ATGMs with their HEAT warheads.

Of course it remains to be seen if we actually get that.

>>49274532
At least against the lower AT heat, like rpgs and gustav's. You'll need a 5 for bail and 6 to bounce a Milan. I guess that's better than an autokill.

Anyone know what's next in PSC's pipeline? Someone said 88s to me.

Speaking of plastics, anyone know when the M10/Pumas are actually out? I'm seeing Ardennes books already listed online but nothing for the plastic kits.

>>49274392
Throw more tanks at the problem
MOAR TANKS
MOAR TANKS
MOAR TANKS

>>49276798
I don't think release dates for them have been announced yet, but since Tank Destroyers were a big part of the original Bulge books, I'd imagine that they'd be out shortly after the new Bulge compilation set.

>>49274392
>I've never actually played TY in my life, the post.

>>49278199
Honestly, I want pumas for my panzer lehr in normandy.

Can you use raiding forces in normal-size games?

>>49278900
>Projection: the post

>>49276798
I cant see any pumas on the sept releases list, btw anyone knows if kiwis may make plastic koenig/jagdtiger in a nearest future?

File: my gramma will kick your ass.jpg (79KB, 620x372px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 620x372px

>>49274392
with the arrival of the Chieftain, i agree.

we have a tank that can close to match price the T-72 , same gun, much better support. potentially better armor

the Iron Maiden will see the end of the Russians might....

>>49281530
I think you are over reacting.

The Russians are hardly done for, although they do have some stiff competition from the 3 NATO powers in the game.

The Chieftain is in a nice sweet-spot both points-wise and stats-wise between the T-72 and the M1. But while they'll likely be more numerous than the M1 or the Leopard 2, they'll likely be hurt by their moving RoF being the same as the T-72.

>>49283155
And side armor that is useless against RPGs and any guided missile. Side armor that is also vulnerable to BMP autocannon fire and can even be bailed by the lowly Luchs. I think outflanking the Brits will help crack the Chieftain.

>>49283155
Don't forget very tiny platoons, without the benefit of the super motivation of the Germans.

>>49283257
Pretty much the opposite of Flames, where the Brits want to flank into the very weak sides of the Germans

>>49284188
Well, that hasn't changed from Flames, at least.

http://www.zvezda.org.ru/catalog/aot-bronetehnika-1-100/tyazhelyj-nemetskij-tank-korolevskij-tigr

some anon asked about Zvezda's KT some thread ago... just to inform its out

>>49284673
Glorious.

>>49284673
Very nice.

>>49283257
>I think outflanking the Brits will help crack the Chieftain.

Most likely. Something tells me they'll want to play defensively to defend their flanks.

>>49255952
GRU Marine Commandos or Red Army Sabotage Detachments

>>49287581
Or you could just say "Spetnaz".

>>49289083
lets call British commandos and U.S. frogmen, SpecOps too while we're at it.

>>49289224
Except that wouldn't be correct from a historical perspective, whereas Spetsnaz *Is*.

Hey gang. My dad's just started collecting FOW and picked up the old Vasily's Hammer boxed set. He's got 10 x T34/85 and 3 x SU-100.

Would you recommend I grab the new Russian starter set as a means to give him some additional vehicles?

>>49289293
No, it's awful.

Figure out exactly what you want first, then get exactly what you need.

>>49289331

how come it's so bad, if you don't mind me asking?

>>49289365
It's primary strength is IS-2s, it's not an efficient list to run because IS-2s are overpriced, inefficient and outclassed.Although with Vasily's hammer, it might not be that bad to build with. You'd get him four more T-34s, a copy of Berlin which is all right for Soviets as opposed to Amazing for Germans, and a rule book.

>>49289365
Poor unit synergy, to start - 6 IS-2s, 4 T-34/85s and 3 ISU-122s are an awful list together, and hellishly pricey in terms of points.

Also, while ISU-122s and T-34/85s are solid, IS-2s are... difficult. An experienced player can get some value out of them, albeit inefficiently, but a new player is just going to find them a waste of points.

The Book combo is nice, to be fair - all this stuff *is* coming at a fairly Significant discount. But you have to seriously think and question whether the bulk of this stuff that you're getting discounted is even worth having in the first place.

>>49289331
>>49289513
>>49289439

much appreciated and thanks anons

As if by magic. A new thread.

>>49289700

>>49289705
Perfect timing

>>49289243
[citation needed]