Flames of War General /fowg/ - Tiny Ass Tanks Edition

Bulge compilation got linked last thread:
www.mediafire.com/download/oofsn55o2n9m0aq/Bulge_Compilation.rar

Though some report issues getting it to load.

File: Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-596-0367-05A,_Flugzeug_Me_323_Gigant.jpg (51KB, 800x509px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 800x509px

Really wish the Germans used these for tank transport.

File: images (1).jpg (28KB, 441x334px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 441x334px

m24 top tier waifu

>>49408045
>that pic
"Congratulations? It's a Sherman!"

>>49409910
>be strong proud kraut
"what the hell is this, where is my panzer son?! Who have you been seeing behind my back!"

>>49409910
>"Congratulations? It's a Locust!"
FIFY

>>49410025
babby sherman

>zombie rommels wolves
Welp, mostly due to a generous sale from the FLGS and some unexpected money that came to me, I was able to buy Rommel's Wolves and the Second Edition Bolt Action Starter. Talk about a lot of plastic for $180. The rule book and Desperate Measures look like they were stuffed in violently at the last minute, but I don't even care.

File: hollow Dresden.jpg (366KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 800x800px

>>49410000

>why no Luchs?

File: overlord-british-airlanding_15.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49408045
Tried to make a 1500 point list with the Tetrarchs that doesn't suck. Thoughts?

>>49412777
Better to take the Nachtjager version. Swap the Tetrarchs for Locusts, the Recce for the NJ version (Dingo+UC), and spend the 20 free points you'll have on giving the airlanding platoons Panzerfausts. You're reliant on your infantry for AT, might as well get the best you can. Also, consider dropping the HMGs for another 6pdr platoon.

>>49413183
I think you're missing the point. He's trying to make a list that includes Tetrarchs, but is still a good list.

The new Bulge Compilation books,"The Ardennes Offensive" and "The Battle of the Bulge" are now in the Scans Database.

https://www.mediafire.com/#8ciamhs8husms

Thanks once again to the original scanner.

>>49413557
>https://www.mediafire.com/#8ciamhs8husms
That just sends me to the home page.

>>49414582
Try
https://www.mediafire.com/?8ciamhs8husms

Although the other link that isn't working was literally just copied and pasted from the page to 4chan. *shrug*

>>49414765
It works with the question mark. Thanks! And thanks, scanon!

>>49411525
> The rule book and Desperate Measures look like they were stuffed in violently at the last minute, but I don't even care.

Were they damaged?


Cheers for the Bulge scans anon!

>>49417029
The rulebook more so than Desperate Measures, but we all know the mini rulebooks are made out of explodium. Desperate Measures just had a little bending in the corner. The entire bottom of the rulebook looks worn. I don't think it's bad enough to bother them about it, but a little packing foam in the box would have been nice.

>>49413557
>>49415360
>>49417029

Just doing my job, ma'am ;)

Is it me or these Brit Para lists look like they are copied from Nachtjager Digital List... like word-for-word?

>>49417538
They don't have the para heavy mortars.

>>49417538
that would be exactly BF's style.
except they would tame 6 weeks to do it and outsource the ctrl+p part to a malaysian sweatshop

>>49417538
They're close, but the Bulge ones don't get Panzerfaust upgrades, have non-guards Churchills for support, have SAS jeep squadrons for Recce, can get two full sherman platoons (though only 2 of those are fireflies), and can get Motor platoons as a support option.

Amusingly, this also means all 4 LW paratrooper lists have entirely different Recce options. There's the weird Motorcycle/UC combo in Overlord, the Jeeps that dismount in Market Garden, the SAS jeeps that can be armored and giving a million MGs in BotB, and the UC/Dingo combo in Nachtjager.

>>49417538
>Just doing my job

Still, thanks. Making scans takes a good deal of time and effort. Especially for the larger books.

I know Team Yankee took me a few hours a night over the course of a week, and that's not even as large as *one* of the two Bulge books.

Anyone playing Pacific?

Is it just me or does the FoW digital app just turn to a white screen when I tried to read stuff on it. I'm using an iPad if that matters.

>>49420659
>Pacific?
>ioudaug!

Japanese Sensha Rentai, and all the Kai's i can manage, right here.

at work, so pics later.

I noticed that Wayland is offering free Team Yankee rulebooks for orders over £50.

How far will just this book go and what size are typical games? Can you play small scale games with maybe a platoon or two of infantry and a unit of tanks, or what?

>>49422055
>free rulebooks
pls link

>>49422619
Go to Wayland Games, put something into cart, go to cart. You'll see available vouchers under your items, including a free Team Yankee rulebook or free Kings of War rulebook for orders of £50 or over.

So now that everyone's got access to the Bulge books, what do you guys think of the 761st?

>>49424701
I like they used 2-tone camo, not just a sea of green like every non-German army in Europe.

I agree with the WWPD guys; the FT option looks expensive.

>>49424874
Yeah, for 45 points more than a Inomarochnikiy
Tankovy M4A2 (76mm), you get a M4A1 (76mm). For those 45 points, you gain:
+1 AT
.50 cal AA
Stabilizers
Mission Tactics
Tank Telephones

Both options are FT with the Hero rules (skills and arty as vet). Seems like for once the Americans might be the overpriced side.

Well, until you pay 5 pts to get Detroit's Finest, and a measly 10 (!) to become Veteran. Really not seeing a reason to run the FT version.

>>49422055

>how far will the the book go?
It has all the rules and forces for all of the Americans and all of the Soviets except afghasty.

>small scale battles
We have set up small engagements (ie a small mechanized unit attacks afghansty defended town with only mortar support). And the rules seem to work pretty well. From my experience you need to have at least at least 3 platoons per side so you can get a little unit variety (arty, air support, etc.)

For smaller engagements terrain and buildings help keep things interesting.

>>49425055
How vehicle centric is it? Can you run plain infantry platoons? Does it use FoW style unit bases, rather than individual models?

Been looking online and 15mm infantry units are rather cheap and if you can represent a whole squad with a few models on a base, those minis will get me far.

>>49425168
Fow-style infantry bases are a thing, but infantry are normally mechanised, so they'll have assigned transports that can also operate independently.

Vehicles are powerful (especially MBTs, but holy shit do you pay tons of points for MBTs) but even infantry units will normally have weapons that are more than capable of taking them out.

>>49425168
I think pretty much any infantry we see now or in the future will be paired to a transport, whether it be APCs or Helos. Maybe if we are lucky we'll see some Motorized groups in the future.

But that doesn't stop you from deploying infantry without vehicles when you are playing with your friends. I think the way releases are trending there will continue to be more infantry options in the future, but always paired to some sort of transport.

>>49420659
I would, if some of it would show up at the FLGS.

>>49427038
can't they order in m8?

Honestly pacific stories would interest me since the period seems really tough to balance.

>>49427334
Well Pacific is already out. Basically you can either have Early War equal points, or Late War points.

>>49427719
Yeah, I know that. Just the kind of kit the US has seems to be really hard to get in the capacity of plentiful enough to use but expensive enough to be limited.

>>49427323
They're waiting for it to show up.

>>49428041
The curse of battlefront strikes again.

Hey guys what do you think of my early war french list?

http://fowlists.blogspot.com/2013/01/blitzkrieg-french-escadron-de-fusiliers_8.html?m=1

>>49428676
It only saves it locally, linking just shows us the blank company page. To show it off, print the "print" page as a PDF and post the PDF. Like >>49412777 did.

File: 2016-09-19-23-03-31.png (208KB, 494x879px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 494x879px

>>49428722

File: 2016-09-19-23-03-38.png (212KB, 494x879px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 494x879px

>>49428722
Last half

>>49428896
What points total are you aiming for? I'd max out the numbers in your core platoons; you're trained infantry, so you'll get hit relatively easily.

I feel like you need some indirect fire capability, as well, if just for smoke, etc. Also AT guns that aren't going to brew up as easily as a truck. If you're going to go for Portee guns, grab the armored 47mm version in a larger group than two. They're pure murder.

File: 2016-09-19-23-07-02.png (205KB, 494x879px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 494x879px

>>49428722
Sorry phone went full retard

>>49428925
Woops, disregard, missed your second post.

>>49428925
I'm going for 1500 point maximum

>>49428953
Whole list is fairly solid, but I'd personally ditch the portee 25mm and max out your second combat platoon. Trained troops don't die as easy as conscripts, but they're still only trained.

How big is a good starting army for Team Yankee? Points wise i mean.

>>49429965
100pts. What that entails, depends entirely upon what army you're going with. It could be anywhere between 5 to 9 tanks, with some supporting elements. With the upper end being an entire goddamned batallion of 21 T-72s crewed by fucking idiots.

>>49429965
>>49430212
100 Points is a full-sized army.

For a beginning force, I think you get between 50 and 60 points worth of stuff in the various national starter sets.

In TY, are milan mounts worth using in a Marder Zug? Or should I stick to having the infantry milan team instead?

so how is wayland games compared to BF? am i likely to see my order the same year i paid for it? is my real problem shipping to asia?

>>49431156

Generally, I think you will want to keep your Milan teams with the infantry, though depending on the table and scenario, I could see situations where you want to keep them on the Marder. It's a trade off between mobility and squishyness. For my Fuchs, I put the launcher on a brass pin so I can stick them on or remove them as I please.

>>49432017
Aren't they just an online retailer. As long as they have something in stock, everything is fine, but if they are out of stock you may run into delays.

>>49432271
namefagging for the sake of clarity.

i didn't have problems with other online purchase but BF consistantly takes 3-6 months to arrive no matter i order big or small recent products or shit they'd need to dust off.

but if someone can recommend another Bf product retailer i would be happy. no flgs for hours :(

>>49432321
In the States the War Store seems popular. Not sure what online retailers can readily ship to italy.

Whichever one you choose it may be worth your while to see if it is in stock. Email or call whichever vendor you are ordering from and ask.

>>49432376
bookmarked war store.

thanks bro.

>>49432667
Miniature Market, also in the US, is also pretty good.

>>49433986
Last major US one is Noble Knight, though I personally have only used Miniature Market. Over in the EU you can more easily get some companies (Plastic Soldier, Peter Pig, and Skytrex come to mind) which have pretty good 15mm ranges (Since this isn't 40k, and BF can't copyright historical tank/uniform designs)

>>49434094
Seconding Plastic Soldier Company.

Their tanks and vehicles are very good.

>>49435240
Their infantry is a bit more hit or miss though.

Which I've always found strange for a company that calls itself the Plastic **Soldier** Company.

Picked up a king Tiger lads plan on using it as a HQ but dont know what to pick up next any suggestions? Ive had a look at grey wolf and ardennes but not sure how to approach it

>>49436911
A King Tiger is usually a solid support choice for an infantry company, but they get a bit too expensive points-wise to really build a full company around them.

File: FoWPrint.aspx-4.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49436911
The KT forms a bit of a nexus on this infantry list. Strong defensive options, with rocket artillery support, with some powerful, well armoured assault guns guns and a variety of specialist assault troops if you want to go on the offensive. The KT, Pak40s, and well equipped infantry keep enemy tanks at bay.

>>49434094
>and BF can't copyright historical tank/uniform designs
Didn't keep The PSC from using an original webbing design on their American infantry.

>>49436860
Generally any of them that claim they're mostly one-piece sculpts are okay; the russians and US aren't so great.

File: 778px--Joan_of_Arc_Saved_France._Women_of_America._Save_Your_Country._Buy_War_Savings_Stamps._W.S.S._War_Saving_Stamps..._-_NARA_-_512620.jpg (122KB, 778x1024px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 778x1024px

Any swell Canadian firefly lists?

Also, is ordering PSC from Canada a good idea?

>>49442411
Stealth Canadians, or Armoured Recce, particularly from Market Garden are supposedly very powerful in the right hands, or you can do regular Canadians and get two fireflies per squadron.

>>49442411
Canadian armor is pretty good, since they basically get Protected Ammo and Mission Tactics at the cost of British Bulldog and ~+10 points per platoon. That's a pretty damn good deal.

So I've got 50 points left to spend on a NJ Airlanding list. Do I:
>Swap one of my Airlanding platoons to a Airlanding Engineer platoon
Pros: Larger platoon (+1 Rifle/MG team), access to a flamethrower, they're Pioneers if the enemy has fortifications, and ability to set up some free barbed wire or mines when defending.
Cons: Lose the Panzerfaust SMG from the platoon command

>Add a sniper team
Pros: Can pin pretty reliably.
Cons: Already have (bombard-capable) HMGs and two Mortar platoons to pin.

>Add two HQ PIATs and give my 6 pdrs/HMGs Jeep transports
Pros: Larger core platoons with yet more AT, more flexible options if reserves bite me.
Cons: Don't have the 8 jeeps and 2 PIATs this would need.

>>49444364
First option. It's a larger platoon of pioneers. You can't dissuade tanks on the charge, but you do present a giant blob of instant death to tanks. Snipers aren't that great particularly in Late war with TANKS TANKS TANKS everywhere, or if your Meta isn't particularly infantry heavy.

>>49444487
This, plus the free obstacles are normally like 30-50 points if you bought them independently. And unlike normal obstacles, you place them with the Pioneers, after objectives are deployed. Note that they still pop up magically even if you're (immediate) ambushing with the pioneers, though then they follow the normal ambush placement restrictions.

Enemy has a bunch of tanks? Well, you have more guys for your TA3 FV Bulldog deathpit, and now you ALSO have a minefield. Now they need to make a motivation and then a skill test to get to you (preferably in such a way they need to cross it to assault!), and if they fail the skill test then they get a AT 5 FP 1+ hit to the nuts. Works great against people that think Reluctant is free points when using tanks.

Infantry or Mechanized? You get to place 24" of "get rekt m8" in the form of barbed wire. Very Difficult terrain for halftracks and skill test to pass at all for infantry/man-packed guns is great for splitting up an incoming assault (especially if you put your HMGs on the other side of the wire). And if they're Light+ guns or non-halftracked, non-tank vehicles, it's flat out impassible, and they have to go the long way around. Even tanks still are reduced to Slow when crossing, which can give you the extra turn you need to shoot them to death with your 6 pdrs (You do have 6 pdrs, right?).

Obviously, not a thing in Fair Fight missions, but the other 3/4ths of the time supply vehicles are amazing value.

File: 1414356950645.jpg (323KB, 936x817px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 936x817px

We're likely to be recording a episode of Panzerfunk soon. So turn in those questions and they'll probably get answered on the show.
>https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeOBxEJbNzS_Ec7I76zQmCU9P7o0C5bAgcXriKQ4bOWBp4QkA/viewform

>>49447477
Speaking of, did anyone ever figure out what that garbled meme question from last episode was actually supposed to be?

>>49448447
It's a garbled version of this.
>http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/has-anyone-really-been-far-even-as-decided-to-use-even-go-want-to-do-look-more-like
So someone fucked up at fucking up.

>>49442411
I'm using this and it's behaving really well:
Armored Squadron , Overlord CT
3 Sherman V HQ
3 Sherman V 1 Firefly Vc
3 Sherman V 1 Firefly Vc
3 Sherman V 1 Firefly Vc
2 Sherman V 1 Firefly Vc
3 Universal Carrier
1 Sherman V 2 Sherman Crab
2 AVRE
4 4.2" Heavy Mortar
8 platoons, 1625 points

It has a lot of tanks, it has 4 fireflies to deal with tough tanks, mortars for smoke, carriers for recce and it always attacks thanks to the breaching group.
If you play on a higher point limit you can add in a Typhoon wich is always another good way to deal with big cats or jumboes or even swap out the breaching group for some Achilles if you feel like risking to defend on some matchups.

>>49448492
As the guy that submitted the question on a lark, literally all I did was copy-paste from that page. Any garbling is from the docs.

>>49449309
Where the hell's your infantry? How do you deal with engineers/LLW US/LLW Germans? I feel like DM panzergrens would mulch that.

File: FoW Peru - Batallón de Infantería.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

So trying (emphasis on trying) to make a FOW homebrew about the 1941 War between Peru and Ecuador and later will try (emphasis on try) to do one about the Chaco War.

>>49450946
I don't know anything about that war specifically, but it seems like you've thought out the list organization in some detail.

I look forward to your future progress.

>>49450361
I shoot at them? I don't really see a problem, those full pzfaust team are small and cost a lot

>>49450946
Cool! Any particular reason why you chose that war? Ive been thinking of making a homebrew korean war with a grand campaign with a map over korea with different regions and then have you move troops on the map a little bit like risk and fight it out with FOW Rules and so on. Good luck!

>>49452256
Sure but you can get 2-3 of them easy into 1625. And you're attacking. And that's just panzergrens; if it's yanks with their million-stand bazooka platoons you're straight-fucked. How are you going to get them off an objective? You can't just shoot them, even unloading all the cannons, having removed GTG, your entire army statistically kills two stands. You have to take an objective, and that list can't against dug-in infantry of any reasonable calibre, especially not if they're drowning in ubiquitous LLW antitank nonsense (hint: they will be unless you have a club full of near-mythic period players who pick suboptimal lists for narrative value).

>>49450946
I didn't even know this was a thing.

Looks like I've got reading to do.

>>49452559
Strictly speaking it doesn't even need to be LLW cheese. Pioneer companies are in atlantik wall and let you put ten stands with TA 4 on the table for 180 points. Panzerpioneers are more expensive and smaller but 780 points for three platoons of headaches is going to make his job really easy.

File: Hans Liska - Motorized Infantry.jpg (312KB, 1542x1141px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1542x1141px

Which book do I DL for stronk T-34 spam?

Maybe some infantry.

>>49453099
What era? EW you're not spamming anything but Barbarossa has T-34s, MW Eastern Front's all you've got, and LW you probably want Desperate Measures which has the best lists (make sure you have the options from Berlin in the free digital download for some of those sick 160mm mortars).

>>49453099
What >>49453177 said, but I'd like to mention that MW FC T-34 spam is my favorite T-34 spam. Your conscript tanks move like a herds of lemmings, but the armor and gun are at a sweet spot for the price and numbers you can bring to the table. Line your attack up and shove your tanks down the enemies throat because the AT isn't nearly as nasty in MW as it is in LW. The goal isn't really to kill the enemy infantry in assault, but rather to force them to fail morale and fall back off the objective. You can also bring a pair of relatively cheap FC SU-152s which are really useful.


Medium tank spam without proper anti infantry support doesn't work as well in late war.

http://www.thecombatcompany.com/categories/flames-of-war.html

Teh lols...

>>49451963
Thanks!
>>49452448
I chose it because it is smaller than the Chaco war and it was easier to find the actual full OOBs during the war.

And good luck to you too about your Korean War project.

>>49453587
So we've hit the stage in the GW life-cycle where they're trying to run their competitors out of business by clamping down on supply, huh? Wonder how long until we see Battlefront stores...

>>49453587
>http://www.thecombatcompany.com/categories/flames-of-war.html

The drama is so spicy.

File: Hans Liska - Motorized Infantry 2.jpg (183KB, 678x500px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 678x500px

>>49453390
I'm mostly interested in LW.

I'm not against taking infantry.

>>49453177
Fenks for suggestions.

>>49453867
Desperate Measures...T-34s with Tank Escorts, Bed Spring Armour and those lovely 160mm mortars in support.

>>49453867
And don't use the Hero tank companies. At least not for long - I guess you'd want to use them when your collection is only halfway there, but they aren't very good.

>>49453768
Nah, they aren't that big. I think they simply have no idea how to run a supply chain. Their supply issues have been ongoing for years now, with only marginal improvements.

File: FoW Peru - Batallón de Infantería.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

In which I finish Peru ... somewhat

>>49454438
Yeah, seems from a glance that BF might have gotten themselves into a contract with results they didn't intended. Will have to give the wall a proper read after game night tonight.

So is FoW going to be more like TY when 4th ed comes out? I've been out of FoW since early 3rd and just played a game of TY. TY feels much more streamlined and easier play than FoW.

>>49454588
Something like that seems likely, probably in the Mid-War rework Battlefront have planned for next year.

>>49454588
Doubtful just yet: invalidating all LW books would be an extremely foolish move, I doubt FOW would survive it.

>>49454588
In some cases, no. Because the key thing between regular Flames of War and Team Yankee was the massive improvements to Command and Control that took place between the Second World War and the Eighties. I mean just the amount of radios that every single nation now has would inspire Patton to weep patriotic tears. I'd say it's doubtful that WW2 Strike aircraft would ever be as on call as WW3 aircraft, but there probably is a lot of improvements that battlefront can retrofit.

>>49454588
I fuckinf hope not. Some of it is worth implementing, but not TY's motivation/skill setup.

>>49453867
Red Bear Revised. It has everything you could want or need, with exception to 160mm mortars. But you have 120s, and those are still really good.

>>49455628
With these command and control improvements, I still find they way TY does command distances funny, especially for the soviets. Your choices are either to blob or form a firing line. I don't have too many other gripes about the rules.

>>49455628
Good point, I'm just hoping the rules are a little tighter in 4th ed than they are now. Either simplify some aspects or maybe it's just I like the utility if TY's stat cards and army building.

File: the future.jpg (172KB, 800x571px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 800x571px

do we really need a FoW 4th ed?

>>49455748
DM is literally just the good lists from Red Bear plus a few better support options.

>>49457782
At the moment, not really.

But we'll probably be getting one sooner or later.

My guess is that the in-depth MidWar overhaul will probably be timed for the 4th Edition release.

>>49457782
Maybe, the only thing that I think the rules could streamline would be recce and whatever rules that were altered with tank destroyers

But arty, air support, shooting and assault mechanics are all pretty straight forward otherwise

>>49458847

tank vs infantry assault still confuses the poop out of me.

On a side note, about to buy TY for the first time and leaning toward the Brits. How do they compare against yanks and krauts?

>>49459799
The British Chieftain tank is the same armour as the Abrams with Stillbrew, same gun as the Leopard II but with Brutal, but is slower and has only IR instead of thermal vision which makes it the third most powerful MBT in Team Yankee behind the Abrams and above the T-72.

>>49459864

aww thanks Virus. I'll keep you guys posted how I get on. I suppose the big question now is, with britain done, will they add another country, or maybe go and flesh out the big four.

>>49459992
The East Germans are expected at the end of this year slash beginning of next. And they were upgraded to a full book rather than Magazine release like the Afgansty.

I want to get into the game but i cant tell if its dead where i am. I live in Raleigh N.C, most things i see played are magic, xwing and warhammer
Anybody can give a bit of advice?

>>49460059

collect an army, maybe get the starter set (open fire) and show it to friends, get them learning it. Run intro games. It's what I did. If the bug catches, great, and if not, have fun painting and collecting which can be just as fun

>>49459799
I replaced my anti tank guns for my americans with bazooka teams so I had to learn how to assault tanks without slowing the game down by reading the rulebook 100 times over

Still not sure that me and the group of people I usually play with do it right but at least we resolve tank assaults pretty quickly

>>49460200
I drug my freind into 40k and he like it. But hes not much for history. What era is best for playing i have heard early war is what most people play

>>49460417
Depends heavily on your local area.

Over here (northern Netherlands) it's almost entirely Late War.

were results from those straw polls ever analyzed?
Curious to see who plays what.
I cant be the only one who doesn't play one of the big 4

>>49461143
I play Finns so no.

>>49461374
i mean i know i am not the only one but i'm curious about percentage and where people are from.

Why Soviet artillery observer costs 15 points each? It seems German and US observers costs 5 points each in new Bulge book.

>>49408045
What if BF decide to release challengers at their own expansion list like the Afghansty? Do you think this may be the case?

Anyone want to weigh in on the Aetherworks/Combat Company spat?

>>49462073
Anything is possible, but I honestly think any of the more advanced tanks will probably be in a second wave, and not a pamphlet briefing.

>>49454480
Really cool, but for wich conflict it is?

>>49462482

WW2, clearly.

>>49462482
If you read up-thread, it covers Peruvian forces for the 1941 war between Peru and Ecuador.

Not sure if that is or isn't considered part of WWII...

>>49463093
It's considered a separate conflict

>>49460417
Late War is by far the most popular. It's pretty tank heavy. There are also more BF plastics for Late War (but don't get the big boxes that give you 10-15 plastic kits in one box, they're not good choices).

Early War is alright until someone brings a heavily-armored tank. Some armies can't deal with them so the balance gets thrown out of whack. They also pose a problem in Mid War, because Eastern Front lists have heavier tanks (and ways to counter them) than North African lists.

>>49460417
Australia's a very even split. A lot of the time, the armies overlap a fair bit, though.
>>49464652
>Early War is alright until someone brings a heavily-armored tank.
t. Doesn't play EW much.
>MW/EF
The range is very similar on the whole, and certainly for relevant list compositions.

So, the panzertruppen preview link on FoW's main site redirects to the main page.

anyone have the real link, or should i bitch to battlefront?

>>49464838
>t. Doesn't play EW much.
No, not much. Only a little, but then a Matilda list ran rampant through our gaming group. That was before Barbarossa came out, which seems to be even more extreme.

>>49464881
The Matilda's still going to do fuck all to infantry, especially given it's no HE so you need to kill loads of infantry with two trained tanks. British bulldog helps mildly but it's still going to be hard.

>>49461813
Observers are always 15 points.

>>49464881
T-34s are much less bad since they're conscript, there's a lot of good AT in Barbarossa, and they're only top 1.

>>49464881

Matilda's are a deeply flawed unit. They're hellishly expensive, only have 1 MG, and have a fairly unimpressive ATG with a low rate of fire for what you're paying for them. They're good infantry support pillboxes, but for their price, you really have to consider things. Much like Chars, they can shock, but in the long run, there's a reason they see minimal tornament use. They're handy as a sort of moving shield device for an infantry assault list, though. Extra unpinable MG shots, and tanks don't want to charge the infantry, either.

>>49465210
Low platoon sizes though. Same problem KV's have. They're very vulnerable to infantry counterattack.

>tfw small but real chance store might not get Brit stuff in time to build the free army for the event

>>49465444
And at Conscript level, they don't do shit in assault. On *purely average rolls*, you're looking at a Conscript KV/T-34 killing 1 stand for every 3 rounds it's in assault.

File: Flames of War - 1941 Peru-Ecuador War.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Ok, finished the organizations of Peru and advanced Ecuador only the carabineers are missing.

if Ecuador seems to be like shitty Peruvians well, they kind of were. the organizarions between both armies were very similar.

Panzertruppen fucking when?

>>49458154
>DM is literally just the good lists from Red Bear plus a few better support options.

>No SU-122s
>No KV-85s or IS-85s
>No 76mm M4s with Protected Ammo
>No flame tanks
>No Razvedki Briefing
>No infantry briefings
>No Forward Detachment Briefings
>Inferior Mediums Assault Gun list
>No Light Assault Gun List
>No Storm Battalion Briefing

Desperate Measures is only "literally just the good lists", if your idea of "good lists" is limited to just Motostrelk and Tankovy. And the only better support choices it has, are 160mm mortars (errata-ed in via pdf).

>>49463093
Oh didnt know about 1941 Perú-Ecuador conflict, looks interesting to play conscript vs conscript

>>49465653
Coming Soon!

>>49465671
He was asking about T-34 spam, so yes, DM is the good lists from Red Bear with better support options. Is your reading comprehension that bad or did you just see a post you had an issue with and immediately decide to respond before checking the context?

>>49465444
>Low platoon sizes though. Same problem KV's have. They're very vulnerable to infantry counterattack.
That's what I mean. T-34s are easier to deal with than Matildas because they're bad at assaults and more vulnerable to shellfire.

Also, as said, there's a lot more high-end AT in Barbarossa.

>>49466127
The best soviet infantry list is digital, anyway. Berlin's digital generally has the better storm lists, too. Red Bear's got IS-85s, razvedki and the non-hero LL tankovy, but it's much less important with the more recent stuff, in no small part because they get infantry with actual AT options and 160mm mortars, which you're an idiot if you don't bring.

>>49464852
>>49465653
>>49465923

it's on the Team Yankee website, go there.

>we get Leo 1 panzers, M113's, and Fuchs infantry

also, it says September release, so expect it to be in October. rule of thumb.

also, who here wants to guess what the Leo 1 company looks like. will we get Jaguars and M109's with our shitpanzers?

i really hope so!

>>49466127
>better support options
In your limited and subjective opinion. The only "better support options" from DM, are the 160mm Mortars. Red Bear still has the better variety, and arguably far superior, support options.

And yes, even if he's looking at spamming T-34s, you'll have more lists to work with from Red Bear. Forward Detachment is a tactically superior list to Tankovy, due to the sheer versatility and availability of vehicles. You can run as little or as many tanks as you want, with the only requirement being a company of infantry.

Desperate Measures is literally only worth getting if you're adamant about having a generic Fearless Tankovy with shurtzen, 160mm Mortars, and a panzerfaust in your infantry, but are willing to lose out on the better array of support choices, possible briefings you can use, Dedov, and so much more. Red Bear is the Soviet LW book you can't do without. Desperate Measures is the one that's purely optional with it's 1 tank briefing of value, and Berlin is the pile of worthless trash-book to skip.

Besides, Red Bear has cavalry. CAVALRY!

>>49466213
Infantry with Panzefausts is a band-aid for your infantry. 160mm mortars are awesome, but are not themselves indicative of which book is superior.

>>49466213
Berlin digital doesn't have a new Storm list. Storm is a company you can take in with your Udarni 2.0 list. The only Storm list currently, is in Red Bear.

But yes, the best LW Soviet Infantry list (Vistula Order) is indeed a Digital-only.

>>49408078
>>49408078
woah thanks for the link. em free off the android app but waiting for them to pull it.

by chance did the database also get the new team yankee british book?

>>49466460
It's still the best infantry soviets get in LW. The alternative is an infantry list with AT rifles, relying on overpriced fixed howitzers.

>>49466532
The udarny 2.0 get a veteran storm platoon, though, and you get assault engineers in the berlin digital stuff which are again outclassing the originals.

>>49466444
How does "more tank options, of which you can run fewer", help this man spam T-34s? He wants to spam T-34s, not make a bullshit space bat CS Matildas and SU-100s list.

If you want T-34s, which he does, you want the LW briefing that gives you the option of schurzen, a cheap, powerful artillery option, and infantry that actually do something. The only things he loses is things he doesn't want anyway.

File: nisekoi-3938337 - Copy.jpg (127KB, 433x394px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 433x394px

>>49467339
>tfw the only decent LW soviet lists are the ones that're historically impossible

>>49466767
If it's not in the database, it's not there.

>>49467339
>How does "more tank options, of which you can run fewer", help this man spam T-34s? He wants to spam T-34s, not make a bullshit space bat CS Matildas and SU-100s list.

What the fuck crack-pipe are you smoking? From a strictly T-34 standpoint, Red Bear gives you three lists that centralize on them. Tankovy (allows for mixture of T-34-76 and T-34-85 tanks in only Confident motivation), Guards Tankovy (all T-34-85, all the time), and Forward Detachment (whatever the fuck you want it to be). All three of those have more support options available, and better support options, as well as a warrior hero 2iC.

The Matilda/SU-100 spam is a gimmick list, that fails hilariously against tank armies.

>If you want T-34s, which he does, you want the LW briefing that gives you the option of schurzen, a cheap, powerful artillery option, and infantry that actually do something.
Well that is certainly one option to go for. But by no means is it necessary. Schurtzen are useful, but only required if your inept at dealing with defending infantry (which SU-122s are great for). The infantry with a panzerfaust option is nice, but all it does is cover your ass if they get assaulted. A 200pt platoon of Sapper Engineers can be just as useful, and Razvedki shouldn't be in a position to be assaulted by tabks anyways (in short, use your infantry better). The artillery I'll give you. 160mm mortars are awesome, and historically should be included in Red Bear anyways.

>>49467361
Quiet, troll.

>>49467706
>The Matilda/SU-100 spam is a gimmick list, that fails hilariously against tank armies.
It's not designed to fight tank lists it's designed to fight infantry lists because Matildas are top armour two, and generally speaking an Infantry Company won't have as much armour support, so the SU-100s are acceptable in that role.

>>49467726
Hence why it's a fucking gimmick list. And it's not even the better tank list to troll infantry with from that book. The Matilda spam list had it's brief day in the sun, and then was promptly shelved as an uncompetitive, and exceedingly dumb list to play. Surpassed only by how historically innaccurate it is.

>>49467706
So basically your defence is SU-122s. Okay cool.

How do you attack vs a tank list (due to you having Always Attacks or them having Always Defends) as an infantry company?

>>49467974
It's pretty fucking tough... The two ways I've seen to do it, is to either spam all infantry (the "strelk horde of fuck you"), or combined arms. Always Attack and Always Defend armies are probably the single biggest reason to always build your forces to have a mixture of platoons. That way if you get stuck having to attack with infantry, you at least have elements to work with as you (slowly) maneuver your infantry into position.

>>49467974
Usually you don't, the exceptions usually have some way to leverage things to your advantage. The AD KT/JT lists have very little infantry protection, while lists like night brits or japanese have the cover of darkness to allow them to run into assault range before they can be reliably shot (with automatic cover, too).

It's tricky though and there's a lot of lists that can't do it. I've never managed it with Shtraf, for example.

>>49467974

Night attack, smoke, pioneers, flamethrowers, bring tanks anyway...

>>49468107
Strelk I've never been able to attack with all that well, they're way too vulnerable to rockets and mortars. Sure, a fearless komissar means you're almost certainly unpinning every turn, but it's going to take 2-3 turns to get into assault range and you're going to have lost a lot of men by the time you do get there, and if you've lost QOQ it's game over.

>>49468145
As an aside it really annoys me that soviets are completely gimped without a totally ahistorical rule. I would far, far prefer it even if was just redone as "Great Patriotic War - Soviets took a lot of casualties and were a tenacious foe, so you may reroll but if you do your casualties are worse and you lose a stand" rather than the 40k bullshit it is at the moment.

>>49467930
>defence
Do you think this is a fucking sportsball game, faggot? SU-122 are one of the most blatantly broken things in the Soviet toolshed. Shurtzen is nice, but a shitty alternative to adding 2 platoons of 4 SU-122s to your T-34 spam. And of course there's the objectively superior choice of 85mm armed Heavy Tanks that Red Bear has...
>but muh FA 11 IS-2...
Still sucks.

>>49468145
I watched first hand a player run Fearless Trained strelk-horde at a Churchill -spam army. He lost like half of the infantry he brought, but killed the damned tanks with nothing but AT Rifles and Sappers. I don't think it'd do well against some lists... But it was funny as shit to watch.

>>49468107
>>49468114
>>49468135
Was mainly thinking Airlanding Brits here, using Night Attack against a friend's planned Infiltrate spam lend-lease tank list. Though honestly just sitting back and letting him try to get through my infantry and 6pdrs might be better.

>>49468114
Similarly, he's really interested in running a Shtraf list. Is the best way to deal with them to just line up, present as many HMGs and mortars as possible, and gun him down as he advances? Having to deal with that many infantry teams running at you is terrifying.

>>49468297
I've won games, for sure, but if I'm attacking with strelk I feel I lose more than I win and there's not a hell of a lot I can do about it. I think the autopin from artillery is the really crippling thing; it means you really have to haemorrhage platoons to get across the board and really fucks up your manuevering, and it's goddamn trivial to do.

>>49468394
If you're a veteran night-attack army you're golden, your real problem is if dawn comes early, but if you can make it to turn 4 or so you should do well. You have gammon bombs and PIATs and you're fearless British Bulldogs, so you can mulch tanks in assault, and you're autoconcealed veterans, so you ought to be able to get into said assault with a little positioning (if you can assault a bailed out tank, you're laughing). Move the 6pdrs up during the night so that when dawn comes you've got good visibility at short range. I don't think you should have too many problems pulling off a night attack. Sitting pretty and making him attack you is also to your advantage, really; I think it's a pretty good matchup for you.

>>49468271
You don't need heavy tanks when you can take more T-34-85s, which is what he wants to do.

SU-122s I'll admit are crazy good but that's literally it and you lose out on the more general-purpose 160mm mortar, plus again, he wants T-34s. I don't see why this is hard to understand; the variety and options you're advocating aren't a thing he wants. He wants lots of T-34s. Who gives a shit if he's not taking matildas or IS-85s?

>>49468394
Shtraf have really, really shitty support, so for one the huge blobs of infantry are about it.

Your big weapon is artillery; quality of quantity protects him from MG pinning a little, but artillery pins with one hit, and it'll be hard to both advance and not be vulnerable to shelling. You will almost certainly be able to spot an unconcealed team, so as long as it's not literally the worst team you range in on 3 and hit on 3s. Mortars are just as good, if not better than tubes for this purpose, since you don't need to repeat barrage and they get a reroll on that first range-in attempt. Plus they're usually cheap to get 6 tubes of.

You'll almost certainly kill 2-3 stands of each platoon and one of them is probably going to have to execute someone. Unload with HMGs when it's convinient to do so, but you're using cheap artillery to pin him, the HMGs are just to add casualties. Once he's under 15 platoons it's basically game over. If he loses his Komissar (either an unlucky hit or the nat 1 on a reroll) he's proper fucked.

>>49468644
Christ, I just checked and their support's worse than I remembered. They can only have two blobs, to start with, and they have absolutely no hard AT worth mentioning and virtually nothing that's appreciable in tank assault, either. Even Churchills will fuck over Shtraf, and hard. So "bring literally any tanks, anything at all" is one option. He might try and combat attach platoons once he realises you're trying to slaughter his companies, but this fucks up his firepower, so that might actually work to your advantage.

Reading this over again I'm amazed anyone plays shtraf. How do you win against anything, but especially tanks?

>>49468980
Sheer weight of bloody numbers, an inability to reasonably fail morale, and flamethrowers.

>>49469201
Yeah, the flamethrower platoon was the only real thing I zeroed in on for doing anything. Their numbers are going to disappear real fast since they can't dig in, though.

>>49468394
>Is the best way to deal with them to just line up, present as many HMGs and mortars as possible, and gun him down as he advances?
Yes. And try to get a Pioneer Supply Vehicle: 3 strips of barbed wire is nearly a hard counter to such a list.

>>49469399
Imagine all the dice rolling just for crossing checks for the infantry. In reality I guess the front ranks would be forced to throw themselves onto the wire so the rest could cross.

have some fun:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCN8Wxy5F88

>>49470297
If I wanted to watch this ridiculous show, where would I go to find it?

>>49470457
Get the combined community codec pack, head over to nyaa se and find the ak-fansubs release.

Assuming you want a high-quality download and not a stream that probably has Commie's memery in the subs.

File: halp.png (138KB, 1327x820px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1327x820px

>>49470639
I have never into an anime before (besides TTGL and a bit of LoGH), so I have no idea what specifically I'm looking for here.

Trying to keep on topic, anyone used Crusader II spam in MW? Seems like it'd be fun running forward at full speed, then blasting away at point blank range.

>>49470878

I have the second one, the one that is 3.05 gigs. It's good quality. You won't get a lot of the references without watching the anime though.

Looking to start building models and stuff, with a secondary concern of playing the game. If I'm going to make models though, might as well make a list in the off chance I actually get a game. After perusing the army books for a good read, I think I've got it narrowed down to three possible lists:

German Schwere Panzer Company - When your entire compulsory selection comes in a platoon box of five models, I'm a fan. No backlogs that last years there. Toss in some infantry and Panzer IVs and we're good?

British Lorried Rifle Company - Uh... I like Comets and universal carriers and brodie helmets. Lot more bodies I guess.

Finnish Jalkavaki - I think building a defensive line with pillboxes and stuff would be an interesting modeling project. I dunno if playing a static defensive line is particularly interesting or if it's like playing 40k Imperial Guard gunline where you just roll dice.

Are any of these particularly good/bad ideas? Thanks.

File: 1945-PortraitOfAPrisoner.jpg (152KB, 326x425px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 326x425px

Can anyone describe Canadians to me? Nothing in the noob guide about them.

>>49471594
heavy panzer companies are good to look at. im actually mid way through doing a medium company with autumn themed bases for my support units. Game wise, its usually expensive to field big tanks and you wont have enough points to support them properly.

i have no experience with brits or commomwealth. other than having maoris assault my shit and utterly wreck me. sorry.

As for Fins i think it depends on the era. MW and LW they get better artillery but fortified lists are usually just smoked by their opponents. unless that opponentsl is soviet in which case holy shit you're gonna have a good time.

show us how your project goes though. im also more interested in the modelling aspect too.

>>49472104
Basically brits, but they lose British Bulldog (re-roll motivation to Counterattack in assault, making opponents have to work hard to dislodge brits in melee) to get Mission Tactics and re-rolls to unbail (for tanks) or unpin (for everything else). Pretty good, especially for armor. Downside is that they never used Cromwells or Churchills (aside from the specialists), so you're basically stuck with Shermans for armor (albeit ones with "protected ammo" as a national rule).

>>49471594
Schwere Panzer - Yeah, you get an army in a single box. On the other hand, that army has only 5 models, and smoke/flankers will ruin you. You're also only Slow, so redeploying will take forever or make you even more vulnerable to flankers.

Comets are best as a single support unit, and British infantry are fine. Sadly the list isn't technically an Infantry list, so no Night Attack, but you've got pretty reasonable infantry in the Lorried Rifles, and can get a mix of cheaper Cromwells and nastier Comets. Also very easy to collect, just get some PSC (Plastic Soldier Company) or BF (Battlefront) British infantry, PSC 6pdrs and/or support weapons, and then a box of either PSC/BF cromwells or BFComets. Bam, decent army in 3-4 all-plastic boxes.

Can't comment on the Finns, no experience with Fortified companies.

>>49471594
Finland gives you a fun, eclectic mix of kit.

But I don't play this game.

Panzertruppen!!! GIVE ME MY PANZERTRUPPEN!!!

Greetings, strangers! I come from the distant land of the Kill Team general. I was recommended your advice regarding tank customization. Things like sandbagging and improvised armor. Do you have any neat references or sites I should check out?

File: Tank Protection.png (210KB, 699x432px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 699x432px

>>49473013

>>49473013

Well, 40k has basically the options

Camo netting or attaching random bushes to your tank, extra armor (throw on tracks or scrap metal or sandbags on your tank), painting rings on your barrel to confuse the length of your cannon

Not really much else I would think.

Romanian Puscasi
Infantry Company, from Red Bear, page 192

Compulsory Batalion Puscasi HQ (p.193) - CinC Rifle, 2iC Rifle (25 pts)

Compulsory Puscasi Company (p.193) - Command Rifle/MG, 24x Rifle/MG (405 pts)

Compulsory Puscasi Company (p.193) - Command Rifle/MG, 24x Rifle/MG (405 pts)

Compulsory Puscasi Machine-gun Platoon (p.194) - Command Rifle, 4x ZB53 HMG (105 pts)

Puscasi Pioneer Platoon (p.196) - Command Pioneer Rifle/MG, 6x Pioneer Rifle/MG (150 pts)

Artillery Battalion (p.197) - Command Rifle, Staff, 12x Skoda 100mm M30 howitzer (IeFH30) (345 pts)
- Observer Rifle (15 pts)
- Horse-drawn wagon per gun (5 pts)


1455 Points, 5 Platoons

R8 my romanian meat swarm.
my plan is to tire the enemy out by sending wave after wave to their death.

>>49473135

Needs more AT assets - as it stands you have nothing to stop medium tanks from running over you.

>>49471594
Be aware the mannerheim line strongpoint is early war only, all the other lists you've talked about are late war.

>>49473033
It's funny, but what they mean is "Have infantry on-hand to intercept so the bastards can't shoot you in the first place", not "tie them to your tank to deflect the shells".

>>49470878
You want the batch release.

>>49474832
Well, if the tank riders aren't alert enough, they might become part of the tank's "armor" if caught by surprise.

>>49477049
True, but everyone always reads that as "Ablative crew".

>>49477341
With all the other ahit that allegedly happened on the eastern front I wouldn't be surprised if some tankers tied frozen corpses to the outside of their tanks as appliqué armor.

File: Valentine_II_photo.png (237KB, 1024x616px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1024x616px

>>49477400
ahit...

Autocorrect

>>49474805

Grey Wolf Jalkavaki have access to fortifications, it's not a full blown fortification list, but it does count as a fortified company.

>>49478192
Yeah, but "with the pillboxes and things" implies the full strongpoint, which you can't get in LW.

>>49479153
Turns out I was thinking of turret bunkers, not pillboxes, which the finns can get. Redacted.

>>49471594

I main Finns, and they're fantastic. They get some fortified options, but for the most part, as they had in the war, it was mostly men over metal and concrete. Having said that, they make great defensive infantry lists.

The important thing is the counter attack. Many scenarios promote it, and the Finns are pretty good at them. Hide, survive, endure, endure, charge, win.

>>49480138
Any tips for how to play Jaakri? I painted them up as a modelling project and I want to run them.

>tfw nobody plays east front

>>49480929

Pretty standard veteran infantry stuff, really. Dig in, deploy carefully, have a keen eye for when to ambush or rush across open ground, and don't half-ass anti-tank or artillery fire.

File: pa3back.jpg (34KB, 654x434px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 654x434px

So cromwells seem pretty rad. How does their cost compare to shermans?

>>49481878

They're more expensive, but light tank is pretty great.

File: B Squadron 15th-19th King's Royal Hussars.jpg (483KB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1426x803px

>>49481878
Compared to British Shermans? Pretty good, you pay +10-15 points to go 4" faster (a lot more than it sounds) and gain protected ammo (very nice on medium tanks). Challengers also compare favorably to Fireflies except in dense terrain. Generally what you want to do is have the Challengers sit back and shell enemy tanks with 3 re-rolling AT 15 shots, while your Cromwells advance into their flanks and fire smoke at anything scary that the Challengers aren't blasting. Sadly it's a hard to use the Tow Hooks on them, since the companies with Cromwell combat platoons don't get towed 6 pdrs or 17 pdrs. Lorried Rifle infantry in particular work well with them, since they get a 3+ save when riding instead of the normal 5+ riding save, and 16" move far more than most infantry get. Still sucks to get shot while they're riding, but you'll probably keep a decent number of teams after a forced dismount.

I submit this picture (a few months and a coat of primer out of date) as proof that I'm not just talking out my ass.

>>49481878
Where's that tank design from? Kinda owns.

File: image.jpg (80KB, 496x610px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 496x610px

>>49481878

>>49482907
Panther III. Some ahistorical modelbash or something.

File: pzfront.jpg (71KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 500x500px

>>49484438
>>49482907
Its a made up tonk called the schwarzwolf [Translators note: schwarzwolf means black wolf] from Panzer Front

guys i need my eyes bleached.

>see cheap movie on sale
>battle of the bulge
>maybe this will inspire me to get painting again
>get home
>on closer inspection the title is just "battle of bulge"
>this turnd out to be highly appropriate as all of the actors are tubby middle aged men
>apparently the battle happened in spring
>random black guy despite no mixed units until korea
>yankies in destroy tigers front armor but tiger shells bounce right off freedom laden steel.
>Germans have IS2, yankies have fireflies that on occasion turn into m10s
>heer and SS markings on helmets replaced by giant swazstikas
>yankies need to side step battle to help a sexy nun rescue orphans.
>because we all know germans tryina get their hands on sweet sweet orphan juice to power their death machines right?

and it just gets worse from there.

any fow approved movies to help wash this out of my head?

>>49485929
Das Boot, Cross of Iron, A Bridge too Far, Kelly's Heroes, although I vote we strip Fury from the list.

>>49485929
But that sounds like danger 5 levels of amazing, im definitely going to look that up

Was it intentionally meant to be shit?

>>49486016
fury wasn't too bad as far as hollywood goes. the end where an single detracked sherman takes on an SS battalion kinda seems like the writer gave up after the first half of the script.

>>49486029
i wondered that but it was too painful to get through. if it was for laughs i think theyd have mixed a few jokes it but this was just stupid. not even just historical mistakes but logical.

>>49486016
What about The Longest Day?

>>49486117
No the entire Tiger battle is written by someone who got the cliff notes from someone who played Company of Heroes for five minutes, Brad Pitt's Character is a war criminal, and the entire movie generally only seems to work because someone's holding the idiot ball.

>>49486148
Haven't seen it. It's probably very good.

>>49485929
I'll mostly second what Virus said here >>49486016.

I'd also add Bridge at Remagen, Saving Private Ryan(for it's brutal portrayal of the D-Day landings), Band of Brothers, and Tora! Tora! Tora! to the list.

Also, it's not entirely historically accurate, but if you can find it, episodes of Black Sheep Squadron are a lot of fun.

File: bhc000699zoom.jpg (53KB, 650x458px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 650x458px

Well, I've gone and done it. Ordered 1 box of British Paras, 1 box of British Para heavy weapons, 1 box of Churchills, a blister of the British Para tank riders for flavor, and a mound of Vallejo paints. Time to start this second army. Locals want to field all tanks, all the time? I'll show them why at least a platoon of infantry is vital for an armored list.

>>49486117
The fact that the Sherman in Fury didn't get blasted with the all those panzerfausts they showed them lugging around is a damn tragedy in common sense.

>>49485360
i own that game.

graphics of shit over a very accurate engine.
super hard to play.

>>49486630
Sweet. That could shake up the local meta significantly!

>>49486159
compared to the things i have seen today, Fury is a documentary. i forgot about that tiger battle though... goddamn.
actually thinking back yeah shermans survive pak40 hits at like 100 metres. fuck that movie

File: MG Air Eng 1500.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Who says British Pioneers suck? They can say it again after they deal with two platoons of 12 FV infantry behind two supply vehicles worth of free obstacles, with artillery, AT, and HMG support. And if I need to attack, those infantry sprout 3 flamethrower stands each and suddenly it's night time.

>>49485929
>Battle of the Bulge
You know that Ike came out of retirement just to officially condemn all the historical inacuracies of that movie.
For real.

>>49485929
You know I thought it'd turn out to be a porno.

File: come and see - glasha.webm (3MB, 704x528px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 704x528px

>>49485929
>young fella discovers the joys of the Bulge movie

Funny. I was going to add what >>49487766 said.

>>49486117
>it but this was just stupid. not even just historical mistakes but logical.

It's the definitive example of a Hollywood war movie. Harlan Ellison wrote a memorable review at the time that roasted it. He was most offended at how the "Battered Bastards of Bastogne" sign was censored.

More good /fow/ movies: Come And See (Russian partisans), Days of Glory (Algerian goumiers), Many Wars Ago (Italians in WW1), 84C MoPic (a 'found footage' Vietnam movie made before that genre was really a thing), Battle of Sevastopol (Ludmilla Pavilchenko biopic) and the German Stalingrad movie from 1993 (not the awful recent Russian one).

>>49486433
The Midway movie is also pretty good. I think they may have used some of the same footage as tora tora tora. I am a sucker for anything with the US WWII naval aircraft. Also The Bridge over the River Kwai is a really good movie set in a Japanese prison camp in ww2.

A lot of the old US movies about WW2 have a touch of USA bias about them, but I guess you'll see that most anywhere. Though Fury takes the cake with it's portrayal of the Fearless Potato SS company.

File: MPW-19744.jpg (63KB, 300x746px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 300x746px

>>49489616
>A lot of the old US movies about WW2 have a touch of USA bias about them, but I guess you'll see that most anywhere

Two interesting and notable exceptions : Go For Broke! (1951) is about the 442nd RCT and doesn't shrink from showing what they had to put up with; and Battleground (1949) actually looks at PTSD and combat strain rather than focusing on ooh-rah heroics.

>>49489658
Nice, I'll have to give them a watch.

File: 1392484163914.jpg (293KB, 1153x797px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1153x797px

>TFW a T-70 company kills a platoon of F/V Panthers

Anyone else get mileage out of T-70s? They're awful little things, but 10 of them at 20 points each while fully armored with an MG + 45mm can certainly get some work done.

>>49490132
out flank and hit the side armour?

>>49491813
neat.
post more

>>49491813
Very nice paint job on those! Amazing work.

Still no Panzertruppen?

>>49492772
Not that I've seen yet, but I'll admit to not having a chance to check for the past few days.

>>49486433
Adding a vote for the original "The Dawns Here are Quiet", which is a pretty damn good Soviet movie about a grizzled Russian NCO who gets transferred to command of a female AA unit.

Deals with some pretty heavy themes, honestly. Got nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars in '72.

File: 1472256160627.png (728KB, 1165x1075px) Image search: [Google]

728KB, 1165x1075px

>>49491813
Noice

I can't remember the name of it but I watched a film in one of my college film classes where the main character is a teen boy who starts off fighting for the Germans, avoids getting captured by the Russians, and then willingly joins the Russians.

>>49481878
edelweiss?

File: image.png (363KB, 615x510px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 615x510px

>>49494973
>Edelweiss

Speaking of, does anyone know when the new season of The Man in the High Castle starts?

>>49496397
December 19th. So far away...

>>49496505
Ah, ok.

I'll hold myself over with Luke Cage and The Walking Dead in the meantime.

Hey guys, I'm thinking of getting into this. I'm kind of a WoT nerd, and I've seen it being played down the pub. I'm generally a tank-destroyer kind of player, and I'm thinking of maybe going for StuGs since I saw you can get those in plastic and some in the starter box. Are they any good in game? Can I get an all-stug list, or is that not a thing?

>>49497021
>Can I get an all-stug list
Pretty much yes, get yourself a copy of grey wolf and try the StuG Batterie list. Although you might want to add SOME support to it

Which are all the books with Canadian lists?

>>49497610
North Africa, Overlord, and Market Garden.

>>49497610
>>49497630
There's also Canadian Paras in Nachtjager Digital and The Battle of the Bulge.

>>49491813
saved to fap folder.

Hero Sappers: How kill? Last time I had to play against them they were a giant pain in the ass, and now the local soviet has expanded them and wants to take them out for a spin again. Two 13 strong platoons of tailored FV infantry isn't fun to play against.

>>49499258
They aren't capable of covering themselves against fire while manuevering, so just some HMGs with decent visibility ought to be able to do some damage.

>>49499258
Same way you kill other FV infantry. You hit them with Flamethrowers and Breakthrough guns. Failing that, pound away at them with medium guns and machine guns until you run out of shots.

>>49497021

better, is there a company in 3E that allows platoons of 5 stugs?

>>49499336
I've got paras (and not the nice MG type with medium support) and Cromwells. Flamethrowers and Breakthrough guns are for armies BF likes.

>>49499330
That'd be great if I could force them to attack. Since they're infantry, I've only got a 50% chance of that if I'm using my paras, and no chance if I'm using my cromwells. And if they don't have the maximum number of supply trucks to littler the field with obstacles, I'll be surprised as hell.

>>49499258
what army you play? tell us what you got to work with?

Waiting warmly for PSC to make hungarians so I can run that fun sounding zrinyi list.

>>49499605
They need to revisit their US and Soviet sculpts first, I think. If they could do winter soviets and winter heavy weapons I think I would fucking love them. Especially since AFAIK there's no soviet winter PTRDs on the market atm.

>>49499575
Wasp Carriers. If they advance, cut them down with MG fire, even Veteran Infantry caught in the open can't stand up to shittonnes of MG fire.

>>49499647
That, or Churchill Crocodiles, depending on the specific type of Cromwells.

>>49499389
Grey Wolf Panzerkompanie.
There are also various LLW panzerkompanien that allows you 4 StuGs (both in Desperate Measures and Ardennes Offensive)

>>49497610
>>49497630
Also in Road to Rome. Basically, if the book's got british, there's a decent chance it'll have some kind of canadian as well.

>>49501252
>Churchill Crocodiles
U wat m8? There aren't any Cromwell lists with acess to crocs, unless I missed something big in Bulge.

>>49499647
Take always Wasp Carriers, they are dirty cheap and they will draw some fire from your transports/tanks, since they are veteran and you're almost always night attacking though they still are pretty hard to hit so it's a win win situation where you either get to roast some infantry or the rest of your army doesn't suffer much damage while the enemy is buy trying to hit those pesky buggers.

>>49501376
Apologies, I misremembered and didn't bother to check. Crocs sadly aren't an option.

File: fow-10.jpg (136KB, 1024x520px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1024x520px

>>49491871
>>49492770
>>49493063
>>49499056
T-that's not my stuff fampais, I just grabbed a random pic to bump the thread. Check out: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/02/fow-who-are-the-germans.html

Tourney coming up, 800 points, only North Africa. Decided to go with a Matilda Company (because I can, and because it's reasonably fast to play).

The base is of course 8 Matildas. Should I then go for 4 CV 25pdrs (for smoke, and something capable of killing infantry (and threatening Tigers, if someone decides to be funny), but leaving me with 3 platoons (pray to Odin that I get to be the attacker), or 2 CS Matildas and South African RV Carriers, for that 4th platoon, but the ONLY way I can kill infantry (and gun teams, such as 88s or PaK40s) will be in assaults, which is tricky if the enemy is in difficult terrain (or has some kind of reasonable defensive fire).

>>49502418
Sucks that you can't squeeze a 4th platoon, but I think 25 pounders are the way to go. A gun that hurt heavier armor will be more useful than the carriers and CS tanks. I don't guess you could try to squeeze in 2 x 25 pounders and another platoon to try and get the 4th platoon.

>>49501600
>February 2010

Damn, that's an old article.

>>49503400
When I said "coming up", I meant today. Guess I should not get new crazy ideas the day of the game...

Anyway, decided to go with the 10 Matilda list, and in hindsight I'm happy that I did (and not just because I placed 3rd out of 6).

Report coming in, though I forgot to take pics during the games (and to note stuff down, but I think I still remember it)

Haven't played FOW but I've read the rules a little. How are the Late War Japanese? Their model range looks a bit crap from what I've seen.

>>49506338
Game 1: Free for All, against Italian Carri.
The only thing he's got that can hurt my Matildas to a significant degree is a single Lancia 90/53. Still, because I don't respect it enough, it manages to nail one platoon commander (with the company commander out of position), and then the rest of the platoon over a few rounds. Meanwhile, my Matildas are moving forwards and backwards trying to kill the annoying little tin cans zipping around. He gets his Hero on the first killed command team, and that platoon the simply refuses to die, though it's reduced to a single tank (that hides). I also gets daring with my carriers, and they're cut down after a failed disengage move. The other Carri platoon is slowly ground down, and makes a last stand in a forest, but is gutted by (way too many rounds of) 2pdr fire. He decides to be gutsy with his Motociclisti, but they're cut down in a fusilade of MG fire, after twice having failed to be brave enough to assault the Matildas. And then it's time, we end on 3-3. All in all, it was the funniest and most hilarious game of the day, partly because we both had dire trouble rolling a 4+.

>>49506418
Game 2: Hold the Line, against German Grenadiers with a Panzer Platoon (2 Panzer III L, 1 Panzer IV G).
He decides to hold the panzer platoon in ambush, deploying only a grenadier platoon on one of his objectives. I rush the other objective, with carriers on recce move, and 6 Matildas (1 platoon and the HQ 2iC/CS tanks) moving at the double, with no engine breaking down. The last Matilda platoon goes for a more sedate pace as flank protection. He reveals his ambush (since I'm already almost at the unprotected objective). However, he decides to fire at my carriers, and not the Matildas aggressively trundling straight towards him). He kills one, but the return 2pdr fire nails his Panzer IV G twice (yay, gun tanks). A crazy furball errupts, with both his reserves (a short grenadier platoon, and a pair of leIGs) arriving, the large grenadier platoon charging my matildas, only to be driven back by a desperate defensive fire (5 hits from 9 shots). The Matildas form something close to a hedgehog, with one platoon managing to find side shots against the Panzer IIIs (without unduly exposing themselves), and all the rest firing machine guns in all directions. When the shooting stops, only a single infantry team and a pupchen remains, the rest having been shot to pieces (including a machine gun salvo that sees 4 out of 5 hit teams failing their saves). The lone infantry team is promptly transformed into road kill, and the game is over, with only a single carrier lost. 6-1 and a hilariously fast played game, though my opponent was defeated more by the mission than by me.

>>49506551
Game 3: Surrounded, against a Grenadier Marchkompanie with a fucking Tiger.
I have nothing that can kill a Tiger, my only chance of winning is to kill everyting else (well, at least make a spirited attempt at it, and drive him away from the objectives). Said and done, I charge against the objective currently without a Tiger, all the while tossing smoke on the Tiger whenever I see him. I manage to clear away the opposition there the round before the Tiger gets there, but since it gets there the round after, I now have a Tiger in the middle of my (somewhat diminished) Matilda horde. Only one thing to do, run away. By leaving my Carriers behind (along with 5 burning Matildas, in the end), I tie down the Tiger to that objective while I rush towards the other. I slowly work my way through the blob of germans there, all of them hiding in a forest, all the while taking potshots from the Tiger whenever I leave a slight opening for it. I make a few saves, but loose enough Matildas so that my second Matilda platoon decides that enougn is enough and leaves. I am now down to my Company Commander (in the 2iCs tank, amusingly enough, having left his own when it bogged down (and was then promptly shot in the ass by the Tiger), and the 2 CS tanks, but I manage to grind him down to only a few grenadiers and the company commander defending that objective.

>>49506705
The Tiger is trying to do something about my carriers (in between taking pot shots against matildas half a table away), but generally fails to hit them (well, until I utter the fateful "you'll never manage to hit on a 6). One carrier is promptly ventilated. With a careful eye on the timer, I decide that enough is enough, and I charge the infantry. One CS tank bogs down on the way in, but the other, together with the CC turns one infantry team into roadkill. The few remaining guys (his company commander and platoon commander) decides that crazy brits in hard as fuck tanks are too much, and legs it, only to then fail a platoon morale due to being below half strength and runs away with the company commander. 4-3 and victory is mine, with only two operational and one bogged down Matilda (and 2 carriers) remaining, and 15 minutes on the timer.

All in all, it was a fun day, I made 3rd place, and managed to either draw (the italian) or defeat (the marschkompanie/Tiger) the guys sharing 1st (thus no 2nd)

airports suck bump

we got tha funk, funk, we got tha funk, funk...

>>49507587
>airports suck

La Guardia here in New York has been a bitch lately due to construction. And I've had to go there to either fly, pic someone up, or drop someone off 4 times this month.

>>49508439
>we got tha funk

Getting set-up now.

Never had any experience dealing with or using Obstacles, anyone have tips on using/removing them besides the obvious (chokepoints, pioneers, etc...)?

>>49506418
>>49506551
>>49506705
>>49506714
Man, this game sounds fun.

Does anyone happen to know when ERA started to be introduced to the T-72? (In soviet/russian service that is, i know Syria etc still field them without it on occasion)
Im wondering how far I could push the battlefront model timeline-wise. Mid-90s? Early 2000s?

Looking at starting some Japanese forces as an additional force.

What should I grab to get started besides infantry and Nikuhaku teams?

>>49510735
>ERA
Don't recall when they started using it, but since it's something that is an optional addition, you'd be able to field them without it for quite a while.

>>49511176
>What should I grab to get started besides infantry and Nikuhaku teams?
Guns. Your 2-gun artillery hits as hard as normal 3 gun artillery, and because your direct fire AT is balls you pay a nice price for the bombardment statline.

>>49510735
You probably get more timeline stretch out of the NATO forces, but you could potentially reach early to mid 90s with the current Soviet kits as well.

>>49510285
You should check it out. We have the main rule book, and pretty much all the forces books, linked in a Scans Database in the OP.

>>49508699
La Guardia in my experience has never been good to me. I only fly out of Newark or JFK now.

File: 1269155019334.jpg (136KB, 605x464px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 605x464px

>>49512628
>Open Fire!
>CDN$ 255.85

fug

>>49513347
What website are you using?? It retails at around $75 US dollars. Make sure it's not some retardedly high seller on ebay or amazon.

/fowg/ I'm looking to try and get people interested in Flames of War and I'm looking for good ways to do it. I'm wanting to get into Italians, but I don't know what other good ways to get people hooked on the game are. Any suggestions? The LCS here in town doesn't carry any FoW stuff. I'm thinking that perhaps the Open Fire! box and running a game or two with my friends will convince them to get into it.

>>49513347
Uh, what the fug? I got mine for $99.99 CAD.

>>49513347
that is wrong. whoever sells that is shitting you.

also, fuck Sears.com, they know nothing

>>49514478
Sears? What do they have to do with anything?

Q: It's World War II. A Polish soldier is in a trench. He sees a German soldier running toward him from one direction, and a Russian soldier coming from the opposite direction. He only has enough time to shoot one of them. Which one does he shoot?

A: The German. Business before pleasure.

>>49517750
He uses a stolen panzershrek, and waits for them to get really close, using the projectile to rek the German and the backblast to blow up the Russian

>>49518176
If we're talking about the opening days of the war, wouldn't that be way too early in the war for panzershreks?

>>49518575
He uses his functional strength and a shaving mirror to shoulder-fire a Davis gun

File: bbb5f5beb9e6945df3577f9450dc4d34.jpg (45KB, 500x323px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x323px

so, FoWG, I haven't played miniature games in a long time and when I did I sucked.

I love this games though. And I also love Company of Heroes games. So, is the starter a sound investment even if I want to play Russians as an ally?

Keep in mind that it have been longs since I painted and I will need to buy at least 2 armies as no one I know will buy one so I want to keep things at low cost in money and points.

My fav tanks are the elephant and the isu 152, are they in the game?

Finally, I know italians sucked in ww2, but are they playable?

>>49520201
Italians are playable, but mostly early war. Company of heroes was a great game, by the starter pack do you mean the open fire box? and
here you go
http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=4864
So yes you can get ISU-152s both in a package and in singles i believe but i dont know about the elephant

>>49520439
the models are amazing, thanks a lot anon, shame it contains so many of them in one package, doing cheap armies seems not an option.

>>49520201

The starter's a great deal, and you can always flog the army you don't want. Bonus points if you get into FoW with a friend and split the starter.
>Elephant
Eh. It's useable, but the the expression concerning eggs and baskets comes to mind. Much like King Tigers or Jagttigers, you get what you pay for.
>ISU-152
As a rule, basically anything that most sides fielded is in the game somewhere. Particularly a major asset like the ISU-152. And all the other big chunky assault guns they made.
>Italians
Oh, certainly, they've got some great options. They're a tad unpredictable, but they have everything they need to win. Their gear actually tends to be very good value, even if objectively it doesn't always stack up well against equivalents.

Just remember that FoW is played in 3 periods, so the army that works for one might need adjustment for other periods.

>>49520526

You could check out Plastic Soldier Company. They do most of the primary units for very low prices, in plastic.

>>49520533
I'll keep that in mind, thanks.

>>49520545
I prefer plastic over any other material actually. I could never keep WFB metal dragons in one piece ever.

>>49520526
http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=4826 here you go, there is other than individual sprues as well

>>49520600
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=79&ProductID=7037
Update - Here's a better link for you and if you search for isu-152 it will also be the second from the top for a metal one etc

>>49520600
>>49520726
Thats great! I love when companies do this. How few units are in a platoon? can I have just one tank of that type?

>>49520201
The Open Fire starter set is designed around a German force and a combined British-American force, so it probably wouldn't be the best purchase if you are planning on playing Soviets.

There is a new Soviet box set, Stalin's Bears, which includes the Rule Book and the Berlin forces book, but it's heavy on IS-2 tanks which aren't that good in-game.

Your best bet is to probably look at our Scans Darabase in the OP to read a copy of the Version 3 Rule Book.

After that, you'll probably want to look at either Berlin, Desperate Measures, or Red Bear to build your army list assuming you want to play in the Late War(1944-45) time period.

>>49520581
>in one piece
Happily, the scale works in your favour here. Most infantry are either one piece, or 2 pieces for the occasional heavy weapon. Guns tend to be compact enough that breakage isn't an issue, and for the most part have good contact levels. The size means they're less likely to get caught on stuff as well.

As for the tanks, they're multi-part, but pretty solidly assembled, IMHO.

>>49520752
For things like King Tigers you might have only 1 or 2 in a platoon.

For stuff like Shermans or Panzer IVs you might have 3-5 tanks in a platoon.

For T-34s, probably between 5 and 10.

>>49520892
If I play Russians it would be to spam shitty armor and shitty soldiers like I do on CoH, with only the occasional elite support or soldiers. So what would you suggest to achieve that? are all those books like different armies in a space marine sense? (as in they are all the same but with slightly different rules.)

>>49520993
The different books represent different forces available during different historical battles.

You'd choose a Company type from one of those books(say a Soviet Tankovy Company) and build your army list based around the options in that book.

Multiple books take place in a he same time period, and armies from those books are relatively balanced against each other.

>>49520993
You can do that with Red Bear or Desperate Measures; Berlin ties you to heavy tanks, specifically.

Desperate Measures gives you a really nice artillery option in the form of 160mm mortars, (which are good because most artillery in this game is overcosted because of it's high AT value you'll never use (in direct fire). Mortars can't fire directly, so they don't get lumped with it), while Red Bear allows you to bring SU-122s into Berlin (which are an overpowered mid-war unit that was still fighting during the 1943 winter offensives and have thus earned the right to blow up fucking volksturm).

Since we're back onto soviets, I have a question: Where are the soviet paras? There were airborne operations in all periods of the war, so it's a bit weird they're completely absent.

>>49520993

Wait, you said "Soviets as an ally"
Ally of who?

>>49521189

Oh kindly get fucked. We're having a nice conversation, enough with the starting shit.

And you know damn well you're going to start shit.

>>49520993

All periods of Soviets can do spam tactics pretty easily. Although you'll probably want to review your ideas about the Soviets. Their armour was easily on par or better than their opponents one way or another.

EW and MW lend themselves very well to conscript waves, particularly EW. LW has the same options for huge numbers.

>different books.
It's more like Codex Market Garden, or Codex Barbarossa, or Codex Stalingrad, or Codex 1944 Eastern Front Axis.

>>49521189
>where are the Soviet Paras
Where they were in the war. Almost always on the ground, and part of operations that didn't feature them as a particularly relevant component.

Just use the Guards rules.

How fucked would a tank only list be in Flames of War?

>>49521408
Not necessarily, depending on nation.

>>49521246
I meant as in axis and allies. While playing against Germans I would play as Russians.

>>49521292
I know some tanks from the Russians where good. But I mean T-34/76 (not even the T-42/85), T-70 and SU-76

>>49521408
You'll likely still want recon, AA, artillery, and a dedicated infantry-killer, but it's possible to build a list that is mostly tanks and other armored vehicles.

>>49521504
T-34/76 and T-70s are widely avaliable in plastic. Sadly there is no plastic SU-76.

Is there a FoW community where you are? If so you may want to find out what eras they play. The T-34/76 swarm works best in MW, but people may not play MW where you are. You can still use it in LW, but you need some support in the form of artillery or assault guns. Most kits will let you build bothr the 76 and 85 variant of the T-34 so you can mix and match them in your lists.

>>49521581
sadly where I live people only play heroclix at best.

I will have to buy 2 armies because of that, and that is why I want the cheapest options.

Don't really mind using the T34/76s on LW with some support, anyway I like the 120mm mortars the soviets had.

>>49521659
I would prolly buy the open fire kit if youre starting out since you might not actually like the game, and if you buy two armies individually you will get much less units. Yes the open fire kit is known for its bad quality rulebook (it supposedly falls apart easily) but other than that its a good start, once again what if you dont like the game? or do you think that you will?

>>49521842
I think I will, rarely I dislike a miniature game. Sounds like the LW rules are streamlined so that is a plus for me.

I will get the starter though, as it is enough to start playing with 2 players and then expand from that if I feel necessary. Shame about the rule book, first time I heard something bad about that starter.

ARE THERE STILL NO FUCKING PANZERTRUPPEN?!

>>49521894
There is always the pdf in the OP's post with the full rulebook and its not bad for everyone its just what ive read from reviews and so on. Welcome to the community btw, i hope people will treat you nicely but dont be discouraged if they dont after all its 4chan.

Someone mind starting up the new thread?

>>49522263
thanks a lot, I've been watching some games on youtube and the only think that seems off for me is how hand to hand combat is so important in the game.

>>49522338
Keep in mind that assaults aren't just hand-to-hand; it also includes grenades, close-range bursts of gunfire etc.

And storming defended positions is something that happened quite a lot in WW2.

>>49522338
Yeah, what >>49522356 said.

Assaults in Flames of War are more like close-range fighting over a single street corner with rifles, pistols, grenades, bayonets, etc being used at very short ranges.

Regular shooting is more like a battle over a large clearing or other open ground.