/hwg/ - Historical Wargames General

File: Enigma_machine.jpg (2MB, 2880x3460px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2880x3460px

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

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

File: tsar_bomba.jpg (80KB, 1024x528px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1024x528px

30th October in military history:

637 – Antioch surrenders to the Muslim forces under Rashidun Caliphate after the Battle of the Iron Bridge.
758 – Guangzhou is sacked by Arab and Persian pirates.
1137 – Battle of Rignano between Ranulf of Apulia and Roger II of Sicily.
1270 – The Eighth Crusade and siege of Tunis end by an agreement between Charles I of Sicily and the sultan of Tunis.
1340 – Portuguese and Castilian forces halt a Marinid invasion at the Battle of Río Salado.
1657 – Spanish forces fail to retake Jamaica at the Battle of Ocho Rios during the Anglo-Spanish War.
1806 – Believing he is facing a much larger force, Prussian Lieutenant General Friedrich von Romberg, commanding 5,300 men, surrendered the city of Stettin to 800 French soldiers commanded by General Lassalle.
1918 – The Ottoman Empire signs an armistice with the Allies, ending the First World War in the Middle East.
1941 – World War II: Franklin Delano Roosevelt approves U.S. $1 billion in Lend-Lease aid to the Allied nations.
1942 – Crew members of HMS Petard board U-559, retrieving material which would lead to the decryption of the German Enigma code.
1953 – Cold War: U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower formally approves the top secret document National Security Council Paper No. 162/2, which states that the United States' arsenal of nuclear weapons must be maintained and expanded to counter the communist threat.
1961 – Nuclear testing: The Soviet Union detonates the hydrogen bomb Tsar Bomba over Novaya Zemlya; at 50 megatons of yield, it remains the largest explosive device ever detonated.
1965 – Vietnam War: Near Da Nang, United States Marines repel an intense attack by Viet Cong forces, killing 56 guerrillas.
1980 – El Salvador and Honduras sign a peace treaty to put the border dispute fought over in 1969's Football War.
1993 – The Troubles: The UDA carry out a mass shooting at a Halloween party in Greysteel, Northern Ireland, kiling eight.

File: The Taking Of Stettin By French Troops 1806.png (1MB, 816x558px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 816x558px

It is 210 years since the surrender of Stettin, when the Prussian General von Romberg surrendered that city's garrison and fortress to a French light cavalry brigade led by General of Brigade Lasalle. This event was one of a number of surrenders by demoralized Prussian soldiers to equal or inferior French forces after their disastrous defeat at the Battle of Jena-Auerstedt two weeks before.

Following a two-week chase, Marshal Murat intercepted over 10,000 Prussians at Prenzlau and bluffed them into surrendering on 28 October. The following day, Lasalle's and another French light cavalry brigade induced 4,200 more Prussians to lay down their weapons at Pasewalk. That afternoon, Lasalle arrived at Stettin and demanded its surrender. A completely unnerved Romberg, believing he was confronted by 30,000 Frenchmen, captiulated that night. Actually Lasalle only had 500 French hussars to the Prussian's 6,000.

Neither of the two subordinate officers protested the capitulation, but instead agreed to surrender. These were von Knobelsdorff, the fortress commandant and von Rauch, commander of Fort Prussia. In March 1809, Romberg was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for giving up Stettin without a fight. He died on 21 May 1809, two months short of his 80th birthday, before his punishment began.

Petre concluded that Stettin's surrender was "shameful". Its adequate garrison and supplies would have allowed it to sustain a siege. Even if the fortress was indefensible, there was nothing preventing the troops from crossing to the east bank of the Oder, joining their Russian allies, and continuing the war. Lannes wrote to Napoleon, "The Prussian army is in such a state of panic that the mere appearance of a Frenchman is enough to make it lay down its arms."

Napoleon congratulated Murat: "My compliments on the capture of Stettin; if your light cavalry thus takes fortified towns, I must disband the engineers and melt down my heavy artillery."

File: A369479.jpg (116KB, 556x600px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 556x600px

It is 51 years since the attack on Hill 22, where a Viet Cong battalion assaulted A Company, 1/1 Marines ('the First of the First") five miles outside Da Nang. The VC assault was repelled during fierce night fighting, in what would be a grim forecast of battles to come.

The Viet Cong began planning the attack weeks before with the infiltration of the base by a young Vietnamese boy who had access to the company's perimeter. The company allowed him to come into the compound to sell soda pop and goodies to the Marines on the hill. He drew a diagram of the company's defensive position to include the positions of the eighty-one-millimeter mortar sections, tank positions, machine-gun positions, and ammo bunker. He also misidentified the outhouse as the Company Command post, due to the amount of activity there. (Later in the battle the outhouse would be flattened while the the real Company post - an underground bunker located on the north end of the administrative tent and not included in the diagram - was untouched). With this information, the Viet Cong mocked up a simulated version of the base in a nearby valley and used it to practice their assault to overwhelm and defeat the Marines on Hill 22.

Around 0100hrs on the 30th, a VC recce patrol walked into a squad ambush south of the hill. The Marines opened fire and killed three of the enemy, but the squad had not been able to maintain communications with the company and was unable to notify the company commander of the contact. All was quiet for about two hours, when suddenly approximately 25 enemy enveloped the Marine squad, killing three and wounding six. At 0315 the rest of the VC force attacked the main Marine positions on Hill 22. Enemy troops, supported by two recoilless rifles, penetrated about a third of the northwestern perimeter, capturing three M-60 machine guns, two 3.5-inch rocket launchers, and one 60mm mortar. They also gained access to the company's ammunition bunker.

File: DSC_0033.jpg (363KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1500x1000px

>>50022112
The battalion commander immediately sent reinforcements and ammunition to A Company. One resupply helicopter was "so fully loaded that it barely could get off the ground" and its "rotor wash blew the supply tent down." He also called for supporting artillery fire and close air support.

Apparently several Viet Cong attempted to use grenades they had looted from the ammo bunker, but neglected to remove the safety tape; much to the relief of the Marines who promptly took off the tape and threw the now-live grenade back.

About 45 minutes after the enemy had launched the main attack on Hill 22, three UH-34s landed Sergeant Russell L. Kees' 13-man squad from Company C on the hill. Kees stated, "The VC were everywhere; in the tents, on the tents, and in the trenches." Supported by air, artillery, and mortars, the Company A commander. Captain John A. Maxwell, rallied the Marines; they counterattacked and drove off the enemy. USMC casualties were 16 dead and 41 wounded, while the Communists left behind 47 bodies and one wounded POW - the boy who had spied on the camp.

Marine aviation accounted for a few more enemy when the VC unit tried to cross the eastern bank of the Song Yen three miles south of Hill 22. The Marine pilots reported destroying 10 boats and seeing 10 bodies in the water. Villagers in the area told the American troops that the Viet Cong forced them to bury several bodies, apparently casualties of the Hill 22 fight.

The VC had planned the operation thoroughly. They hit the critical portions of the perimeter and knew exactly which bunker contained ammunition. American intelligence sources discovered that the VC unit involved was the R-20 Battalion which had just completed training. The Hill 22 attack was apparently its final "graduation" exercise. Over the next two years R-20 would become the main enemy unit faced by the USMC in the area, until it was finally destroyed during Tet '68.

File: a1g7c4h8s1v1u7i7.jpg (141KB, 736x729px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 736x729px

>>50022123
Hill 22 isn't a hugely famous or important Vietnam War battle - but it's a perfect example of a type of situation which would become all too common as years went by: an isolated American position making a frantic nighttime defence against a massive Vietnamese assault. The early-war Marines are under-equipped (they were using the dodgy, unreliable first model of the M-16, and one of the platoons had no grenades on them when the attack began) and surprised, against an aggressive enemy three times their number with intelligence on their position. A little too big to be a proper skirmish game, it would work well as a company-size small unit battle, with the focus on individual squads fighting their private wars across the board. Rule regarding visibility, fighting at night, and flares, would be of prime importance when choosing a system.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/o6ex9rca4mn1171/Osprey+-+BOR+019+-+US+Marine+Corps+In+The+Vietnam+War+-+III+Marine+Amphibious+Force+1965-75.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/oix0da4k1iz2zxi/Osprey+-+ELI+002+-+The+US+Marine+Corps+Since+1945.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/c1czo4h3394d13f/Osprey+-+ELI+038+-+The+NVA+and+Vietcong.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/0m0f7kchp21b80o/Osprey+-+ELI+186+-+Vietnam+Infantry+Tactics.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/xrb2a96uc6fp9qy/Osprey+-+FOR+058+-+Vietnam+Firebases+1965-73.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/itaow968y838hyv/Osprey+-+WAR+023+-+US+Marine+Rifleman+in+Vietnam+1965-73.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/f95s36h9z00z0mh/Osprey+-+WAR+116+-+Viet+Cong+Fighter.pdf

File: 4412019b39b1ddbf9c35e4448dcbd619.jpg (80KB, 610x602px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 610x602px

This month's community project is a recon or scout asset.

Thread closed before I could follow up question on basing ships, how do people do wave effects? I'm liking most of what I see but am horrendously out of my usual frame of reference here.

I liked those britboats though, might have to do something similar, though may use felt instead of magnets to help the ships not get jostled on battlematt.

Thanks guys who mentioned Verdun last thread. I've been thinking about fooling around in a online shooter again, and Verdun is on sale right now (17.50 USD). So I might pick that up and enjoy some trenches.

File: 250 point late war game.png (695KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 1546x1159px

Headed down to the local gaming club today to do some Ostfront demo games.
Good late war game, Wehrmacht player took the Königstiger out for a play, as well as a tiger and panther, and some infantry, 88s and PaK 40s, and 2 Howitzer batteries
Soviets went for an infantry and medium tank spam, and some air support.
After an even start (pic is start of battle) Wehrmacht howitzers under-performed, and a few poor dice rolls didn't help, meanwhile soviets were rolling great all game, destroying field guns left and right, and rolling both flanks with T-34s and aerosans, while a mass of infantry pushed the center. Wehrmacht were left with on the king tiger at the end of the game, while soviet infantry cut off the German the supply train with 3 entire platoons.

Good mix of games down at the local club - no historicals except for us today, but sound like people play a bit of Fow, BA and TANKS! with 1/72 scale minis, so might be a few converts there. Definitely some interest in the system. Found a WW1 dogfighting buddy too so will introduce him to Dogfight! (he plays Wings of War) and see what he thinks.
Other games being played were a lot of X-Wing and SW Armada, couple of 40K games, warmachine, some guys running a SW-RPG, and a very interesting looking game called Kingdom Death: Monster which had some of the most beautiful sculpted hard plastic minis I've ever seen. Very nice looking game with monsters having AI cards drawn from a deck (one for each monster), and players having to craft weapons from fallen monsters, and gaining experience between games. The Art style and production quality were flawless, but its only available from the publisher in limited quantities I think.

>>50022324
>boats

Antiship missiles from a certain time period comes into mind.

>>50022563
If you are a grognard or enjoy WWI, I think you'll like it.

Just be prepared for no decisive victories... ever.

I think they hit that part quite well :D

Also to the Anon who posted his ships at the end of last thread: Those look glorious m8.

Playing Axis and Allies: 1940 with a mate and it's wonderful.
Are there any home brew rules out there for different starting years? I made a 1942 one and it was glorious albeit not extremely balanced

>>50022585
>The Art style and production quality were flawless, but its only available from the publisher in limited quantities I think.

Afaik it was a hugely successful kickstarter and the company underestimated the desire for their minis and they can't produce enough, so they went with limiting the amount of each they produce. (or maybe they are just greedy and want to create some artificial hype for their "limited" stuff, who knows).

>>50018803
My hero. Thanks!

>>50022585
that table is puke tier

>>50023356
>just greedy and want to create some artificial hype for their "limited" stuff
Basically this.

File: 1__10017.jpg (38KB, 350x243px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 350x243px

>>50023403

Funnily enough, Kingdom Death minis really are among the best looking minis on the market.
They certainly wouldn't need a practice like, people would buy the shit out of their stuff anyway (me included, but since all the interesting stuff was marked as "sold out" the few times i went to their site i still don't own a single mini of theirs.. apparently they dont want/need everyones money).

Btt:

How common would camo patterns be for US tanks during WW2? Not white winter camo. but like pic related for example.
I saw some pictures but i'm kinda interested in numbers. Would a whole platoon apply camo? Or was it up to the crews (kinda like with the germans?) to do it themselves?
Would it be odd to have one camo sherman together with 2 just green ones?

>>50022065
Fuck boys, drink with me. Here's to the Old Breed, the toughest to the end

>>50023585
J'aime l'oignon frit à l'huile,
J'aime l'oignon car il est bon.
J'aime l'oignon frit à l'huile,
J'aime l'oignon, j'aime l'oignon.

>>50023585
Never was a grunt and had plenty of friends in 1/7 and 5th Marines.

I can always drink to and for fellow Jarheads though.

>>50023452
Looking at photos it seems they would apply camo to the entire platoon. The photos I saw were of either desert or winter camo, but I guess it would apply to your green/tan camo too.

>>50023452
>How common would camo patterns be for US tanks during WW2?

Damn rare overall. Mostly a Sicilian thing I think.

File: WESTFRONT_4.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Most of this sucker sorted out. Still need to work out points for the vehicles, but that will take time and playtesting.

Built up my Mk I male and female tanks, so I'll attempt some games over the next few days. Hopefully creeping barrages work correctly, providing cover as the infantry advance, but with the possibility of inflicting casualties on friendly infantry in the process...

Supposedly if you aren't taking casualties from your own artillery, you aren't close enough to the creeping barrage

Hi guys,
anyone is playing Bolt Action or wwII games using 54mm toy soldiers ?
any suggestions ? just bored to play in 28mm and 15mm !

File: German TorpBoats.png (7MB, 3045x1731px) Image search: [Google]

7MB, 3045x1731px

>>50022324

All of my wave effects are done with Woodland Scenics Water Effects. I paint the base in the blue color I want, then I pretty much just drop a big dollop of Water FX onto the base and smooth it as much as I can with a popsicle stick out to the edges of the base. Using a sculpting tool (the actual Citadel-brand one with the flat scoop on one end), I use the flat edge of the scoop to "pull" a thin layer of the Water FX towards the back of the base in a left-to-right row; the scooping action digs into the Water FX and creates the back edge of the wave. Once I've created 4-7 rows across the width of the base, I take my painted and varnished ship mini and push it into the Water FX about 3/4" back from where I want it to be. I then push it forward through the Water FX to its final position, which has the effect of creating a "bow wave". Ideally this push forward will go through a wave, because breaking through a wave creates a very nice effect. Then I just sculpt a messy wake behind the ship, which also breaks up the existing waves - you'll want to study how ship wakes actually look, I tend to make my wakes like the ships are moving at close to their top speeds. If you have a ship nameplate, you'll want to push it into the Water FX at this time. Do one last go-around the edges of the base to remove excess material.

Once that's done, wait for the Water FX to dry (~24 hours). Then go and drybrush white paint over the tops of the waves, the bow wave, and the wake. DO NOT VARNISH - varnishing will fuck up the Water FX badly, and once it's dry, pulling everything apart is very difficult and likely to destroy your mini.

Oh, and the magnetized bases are for storage and transport, not so much for keeping them in place on the game board.

Does anyone make Dutch M36 or M39 armored cars in 6mm?

>>50025161
there is a german game specifically designed to be played with 1:35 scale kits and miniatures in that scale.

>>50025502
best I could find was shapeways http://www.shapeways.com/product/7YEDQ525W/1-300-pantserwagen-daf-m39?li=shop-results&optionId=40979517

Anyone know of an easy way to get rid of/cover up chainmail on plastic models? There is of course green stuff (and I'm usually not afraid to use it), but for this I would prefer something easier. Perhaps a thick layer of PVA glue would suffice?

>>50026201
A thick layer would suffice at the cost of looking like you've just coated chunks of a model in a thick layer of glue.

Genuinely gotta question why you need to cover up mail though.

>>50026273
>Genuinely gotta question why you need to cover up mail though.
Because Conquest games provide 2/3 mailed riders, while I want a larger part unarmored (for SAGA warriors)?

Hello all, I am looking for a historical wargame to get into. I come from warhammer fantasy backgrounds and have given sigmar a shot but still absolutely hate it. Decided that GW will not get any more of my money and want to make the switch to hwg and would like some recommendations. Would like to stick to 28 mm scale with large armies (squad based seems small but a good start) ww2 and previous interest me. Can anyone give me some tips? Also there is no hwg scene in my area so I will be trying to build it from the ground up. Scratch my brain please!

>>50026446
For WW2, there is always Bolt Action. 28mm, your army consists of roughly a platoon. Somewhat decried by certain grognards as "1940K", but it's not actually that bad from what I've heard.

>>50026201
Get a softer more spreadable paste like Testors contour putty.

>>50026446
Bolt action and Saga a good place to start in getting into Historicals

also a good way of trying to sway some 40k players into it even if sometimes it may feel like banging your head into a wall for trying.

>>50026030
Ah ok. Thanks, that'll probably work

>>50026446
this (>>50026532) and there is also Kings of War (which is a fantasy game where you could use your WH Fantasy armies). But they recently released a new book with historical rules so that might be interesting if you like medieval/ancient armies.

>>50026532
I've heard of bolt action, what is saga?and I assume that any 28mm models are compatible with different systems as long as they are correct nation/time period?

>>50026809
Dark age skirmish
Pretty much any gmodels with beards and chain male will be acceptable for it

>>50026861
Hell, you don't even need chainmail. That said, the models offered by Gripping Beast (who produce SAGA) are quite good in and of themselves.

>>50026861
>chain male
You sure plate females won't do it?

>>50026809
Yep. A 28mm German is a 28mm german

what are the changes on the new armies of germany book for bolt action?

>>50026996
>not wanting the chain male

https://youtu.be/O_SRJHsjHhk

How could you not?

>>50025360
Thanks mate! they look pretty awesome, I've got most of that on hand so should be able to give it a go soon, I'll let you know how it turns out.

File: IRL medium graphics.jpg (63KB, 676x374px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 676x374px

Painted some scotia.
Obviously dont hold a candle to GHQ, but I am quite fond of the chunky, simplified details, and unless you stand them side-by-side they look perfectly nice imo.

Getting the itch for a summer project, got a few things calling, including AK47 Republic. What scale do most people play at, 15mm and 6mm?

>>50028440
>summer project,
Hello my southern hemisphere friend

File: Mk2.jpg (86KB, 800x576px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 800x576px

Some quick WIPs of my models for the community project.

Feedback welcome (and I know that I started getting sloppy on the legs. Brown, brown brown...)

>>50028440
for AK47? 15mm generally, the forces aren't large enough to warrant 6mm really.

>>50028578
that skin is bare shiny

File: Dissapointment.jpg (28KB, 518x311px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 518x311px

>>50029066
You're trying to upset me aren't you?

>>50029138
Not really, no.

They look fine for WIP, looking forwards to seeing them finished, but their skin looks very shiny to me, are you going to dull it down at some point?

Also is the no warpaint a conscious decision?

File: Protection against shaped charge attacks.jpg (396KB, 1279x1600px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1279x1600px

>>50029158
I'm not the anon who painted the injuns, I just hate the word bare, reminds me of London.

For the record I do think the models are shiny

>>50029229
>I just hate the word bare, reminds me of London.
Yeah I just like using the anonymity to type like a retard, I find it funny.

File: Mk2b.jpg (87KB, 1128x600px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1128x600px

>>50029066
Partly from the "power of a thousand suns" daylight lamp, partly paints needing more mixing I think.

>>50029158
I'm relatively happy with this skin for once, and I'm terrified of the idea of painting warpaint - I've never done anything like it before. Any sources you'd recommend?

File: warband.jpg (122KB, 1200x264px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1200x264px

>>50029431
>I'm terrified of the idea of painting warpaint
It's easier than skin imo.
Applied by hand and no set colour makes it more forgiving.

I did some googling and looked at some Ospreys and just went for what I thought looked reasonable, no need to get too caught up on copying designs for something which certainly wasn't uniform.

>>50023403
It's an exceedingly niche game with a very high entry cost, everything they make is going to be limited.

Anyone know of a good ruleset to play with plastic armymen/vehicles you get at dollarstores?

>>50031225
they're mostly 1/72 aren't they?

>>50031252
Nah the cheap stuff is huge, like 2" tall

File: A Wargame for plastic army dudes 1.22.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50031225

Combat Storm is the name of the flagship one. PDFs of it are surprisingly hard to come by, though, and it's rather expensive (~$25) if you just buy it.

Honestly, I play the attached rules with my 6 year old. I wrote them based on the Infinity ruleset, and he can more or less keep track of everything except for listbuilding (so I do that and let him pick which one he plays). It's infantry-only; I never bothered with vehicle rules.

File: IMG_2123_final.jpg (219KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 500x750px

Has anyone made their army great again yet?

>>50032223
What if I play Italians so it was never great in the first place.

>>50032298
Let me tell you about Italians. They're weak. They are low energy. Really low energy. I've heard from a lot of people Italians are the worst. Just the worst. I don't know, but that is what people are telling me. Very very very bad, even worse than China.

>>50032223
All the games I play are from before trump was born

File: Bear.jpg (337KB, 1247x828px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 1247x828px

>>50028237
Wow those actually look quite good. I though Scotia was "into the trash it goes" tier such as in this example: http://warpooch.blogspot.com/2012/11/6mm-moderns-comparison-of-abrams.html

File: clones4.jpg (291KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1600x1200px

>>50031598
>PDFs of it are surprisingly hard to come by,

It gets DMCA'd pretty fast. I have the first edition on Mega:

https://mega.nz/#!Ssl1HIoL!C5bKDnFgInZZ9pkfR_fGMdoeoXeZGjf8LeULur1b3Ok

>>50031598

That is a neat little wargame you've got there. Saved.

>>50033478
Might not actually be scotia in that one

http://themadtinhatter.blogspot.com/2016/06/team-yankee-6mm-heroics-and-ross-vs.html?m=1

>>50026996
This combined with the beards has me picturing a combined unit of lesbians and their gay fake husbands.

"Oh no, your holiness, we're all definitely properly married."

>>50031225
FiveCore, double ranges (and play on the bed) if you want but it doesn't really matter for funhaving.

File: SF135 Archbaron Drumpf Spaceclad composite.jpg (395KB, 720x800px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 720x800px

>>50032223
Hasslefree do a naked floating Trump/Baron Harkonnen. It's a bit SF/F, because floating, but perhaps he's a spooky ghost.

>>50033791
The first red beret guy on the left looks so incredibly gay.

I mean this in a good way, the sort of Freddie Mercury of commandos way. I like to imagine he's a dashing mercenary or something. The pose, the arms, the facial hair, that left eyebrow...

>>50027571
I hope i get my book in the mail today.

What i picked up on fb:
>new army rules (tiger fear etc)
>Gebirgsjäger for early and late

Aside from that not much was changed/added apparently but once i'll get my book i will provide a complete list of changes.

File: 1400962794645.jpg (152KB, 952x629px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 952x629px

>>50032223
>tfw no 28mm Nigel Farage model to help fight against a German dominated europe

>>50037789
Mr. Fart-in-the-elevator-then-leave. What a shame.

>>50038531
A masterful troll :3

>>50038570
He made ordering from the UK cheaper.

What a magnificent troll!

>>50036683
>(tiger fear)
What does that entail?

Does anyone have a copy of 5 Men in Normandy?

A very noob question: How come Flames of War has its own thread? Isnt it a historical wargame too?

>>50039031
In the folder.

jesus this new theme is terrible, I can barely read anything

>>50039080
FoW is popular enough to sustain its own general, if it were discussed in here it would kind of dominate the discussion and prevent us talking about other games.

>>50039110
2spoopy4u?

>>50038968
Apparently it gives each enemy unit with Line of Sight to a tank with that rule a pin.
Tanks with that rule: Pz 4 (the late ones H/J), Tiger, Tiger 2, Panther and Jagdpanther.

People are already crying about overpowered Pz4s on FB.

>>50039031
You can get it for "pay what you want" (i.e. 0) at the wargaming vault.

File: soviet recon.jpg (534KB, 1686x899px) Image search: [Google]

534KB, 1686x899px

I consider them finished at this point.

How's your projects coming along?

>>50039404
I took a break from /tg/ related stuff for a bit. Finally got started on cleaning things up so that I can prime them later this afternoon.

>>50039391
Fuck that seems OP though. What's the cheapest tank with that rule?
Does it give a pin each turn or only the first time a unit sees it?

File: mqdefault.jpg (9KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 320x180px

>>50039391
That's pretty dumb. Ah well, that's BA for ya.

Tiger fear is a myth, seems like Cavatore is doing his research on the history channel.

There's a thread here discussing it if anyone wants some entertainment
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114066&page=2

>>50039577
Cheapest would be a Panzer 4. 235 points i think (could be wrong, i don't have the book here)

Only one Pin, not one per turn

>>50039604
>Tiger fear is a myth

Says who?

>>50039624
Anon on a chinese image board. He is an expert.

>>50039604
Myth or not, i like the rule.

Its a buff for the german armies (whose special rules are not that great compared with most of the other nations prior to this new book) and at the same time it might encourage players to field more of the heavy tanks (which simply look awesome).

>>50039624
Guys who have read a lot of memoirs and never come across it.

Fear is part of every combatant in war.

>>50039624
Directly from the provided link:

>The 'Lone Brigadier' was Hargest.
He was a NZ 'Observer' and had no command responsibilities..
The date was June 12.
On this date there was not a single Tiger in action anywhere.


On the evening of 12th June, the 8th Armoured Bde in laager on
Hill 10s above Saint Pierre, was approached and attacked by
one German Tiger which settled in a hollow almost in the S.P.
gun line and fired for an hour or nearly so and then drove off
unmolested. Not one tank went out to engage it. At least one
of our Shermans was destroyed. It was about 2200 to 2300 hrs
and not yet dark..


He liked the story so much he repeated it later and changed the details slightly:

On D,+ 6 (12 June) I came across a whole squadron of tanks in
a field supported by S.P. guns. They told me that there was a
Tiger Tank in Verriere about 1000 yds to the left front and in
reply to my query as to why they did not attack they said it
was very powerful.

At the end of the day it, like most of the claims, is a garbled rendition of an initialy incorrect report.

>>50039659
Seems strange that the Germans need to rely on special rules instead of superior weapons, tactics, morale, and (for the most part) vehicles. They should be able to perform accurately (at least on par with other nations) without a single special rule if you simply model their equipment and tactics correctly.

Can you even fire and movement and use smoke grenades in BA like in this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yJ7VlaYwnQ

>>50039757
How would you model anything in any game without special rules? Even chess has special rules for the figures.

>>50039690
This actually reads like a proper spooky ww2 story on halloween

>>50039757
Its a game Anon.

Those rules represent their superior tactics, like the rules help to characterize other nations tactics as well (for example more airstrikes for US air observers)

They got one to reflect better trained officers, their infantry can replace a dead nco because they are better trained and they have a rule which lets their lmgs and mmgs fire faster (one more hit-dice)

Mortars can deploy smoke in BA. If you want infantry skirmish tactics, a in-depth skirmish game might be a better choice.

>>50039798
>If you want infantry skirmish tactics, a in-depth skirmish game might be a better choice.
Any recs for not-garbage ones?

>>50039775
Modeling armor is pretty simple, and thats one of the defining factors of the German army.

You simply give the armored vehicle an armor rating and weapon that makes it behave like it did in real life. If each vehicle is modeled correctly, they will all behave like they did irl.

Modeling the German infantry weapons like panzerschrecks, panzerfausts and assault rifles will also give them an edge, as well as the MG42 having a higher rate of fire than other MGs.

Those are simply modeling the weapons, I wouldn't consider them special rules. A special rule would be something like "All german infantry can re-roll morale checks if they fail"

>>50039818
5 men in normandy/kursk would be my first choice i guess.

I'm not really a skirmish guy though.

>>50039818
You could try Battlegroup or I Aint Been Shot Mum

A few good suggestions here too
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=436135

>>50039821
Avoid special rules if at all possible; 40k has become the bloated mess it is because every unit needs to have some exception to the rules. Don't add a bunch of exception unless the only way to model how a force/tank/weapon worked in real life requires you to do so.

File: __akiyama_yukari_girls_und_panzer_drawn_by_yuuzii__376b6635c60b51f4d5268d63de547d44.png (392KB, 620x880px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 620x880px

What is best game system and scale for ww2 tank battles?

I like infantry/halftracks too but I really want to build tanks.

>>50040199
Battlefront's TANKS! can be just what you want.

Fluffy is cute.

>>50040199
How realistic do you want it?

Tanks is kinda nice, but it might not really be what you are looking for

>>50040236
>>50040282
Are there any realistic games in 15mm?

I watched a tanks battle report. It looks neat but id like to field larger forces.

>>50040320
Then Battlegroup. Or if you want to bog your games further down with tanks doing tank things, check Operation World War 2 where you have to keep track of every crewmember. Who can bail out and fight on foot.

File: SAM_4072.jpg (213KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 800x600px

>>50040320
Well, there is Flames of War and Team Yankee (if you want modern/cold war instead of WW2). These games offer a combined force but are often called out for being a "tank parking lot" because of the masses of tanks sitting right next to each other due to the mechanics of the games.

>>50040387
>>50040350
what scale are these?
Is 15mm the most common?

>>50040409
Flames of War/Team Yankee are 15mm (and from the same company as Tanks, so you can re-use the models from FoW in Tanks).

15mm is popular but so is 28mm (although it won't work as good for tank combat because of the bigger miniatures and therefore the need of a bigger table to get realistic distances, but it can work)

A third popular scale is 20mm. Thats mainly because there is an abundance of cheap (and not so cheap) scale kits and plastic soldiers in 1:76 and 1:72 which equals 20mm. Its a really cheap scale to get large forces.

>>50038614
And since he was getting paid in Euros... my god. He just wanted cheaper toy soldiers for himself.

>>50039757
They had largely inferior weapons and vehicles, except the stug, the early panzers weren't great but they made good use of them (radios!), and that one tank design they nicked from the czechs. some of their tanks were good* for a while until everyone built the cheap obvious counters.

basically they should have built more stugs.

and they were shit for tactics and morale, depending on period. and logistics, but that's a universal thing for them - they could be quite high morale and did have great tactics, at times.

>reminder that they were fighting a defensive war at the end and coming in at about 1:1 casualties, on the defense. that's pathetic.

>also eastern front works out to about 1:1.17 kdr if you're one of the wehraboos who jack off to inflated kill counts

>>50040638
>They had largely inferior weapons and vehicles, except the stug,


What are you even talking about?

The stug had the same gun as the Pz 4.

>>50040656
Except cost less and had a low silhouette and better armor.

>>50040770
>and better armor.

Not really.

>Except cost less and had a low silhouette

Just a byproduct from not having a turret. And if they could have afforded it, they would have build more proper tanks.

It was good for a defensive way of fighting, but the Pz 4 was a better vehicle.

>>50040320
FFT3 has guidelines for 15mm play, although it's more of a 6mm game. A damn good game.

Also, (big) coc and i ain't been shot mum.

File: IMG_20161031_100242576.jpg (3MB, 5344x3006px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5344x3006px

WiPs for the Monthly recon asset, still need touchups and basing, for my first foray into tiny ships I'm reasonably happy.

Bonus points if anyone can guess the ships.

File: 1461225437099.jpg (299KB, 1600x1159px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1600x1159px

Bump

Anyone have a pdf of the second (most recent) version of Bag The Hun?

>>50040437
Hmm I still cant decide. I think I may grab TANKS starter set though and give that a shot with friends.

If I enjoy it atleast I can maybe scale it up if I get bigger models?

>>50042263
Should work.

Its a fun game too.
Besides, the starter box is what? 25? Not much damage done if you don't like it.

>>50040890
>Bonus points if anyone can guess the ships.
Fletcher class DDs

>>50042131
Are those Perry Minis?

>>50043042
yes

>>50043059
Which ones?

File: The_box.jpg (169KB, 549x550px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 549x550px

>>50043128
should be the foot knights

>>50039391
>People are already crying about overpowered Pz4s on FB.

Yeaah, the fucking Panzer IV should not have that rule.

>>50043335
It actually should, because thats the entire thing of that rule/phrase.

Soldiers would report "tigers" when there were none.
Panthers shouldn't necessarily have it, and especially not the Jagdpanther, because its shape is entirely different from the Tiger but its perfectly fine for the IV.

>>50043369
If that's the case the Panzer IV shouldn't have it either unless you shoot it and somehow fail to damage it. Which would be hard because even 75mm gun Shermans were capable of knocking them out.

>>50043422
>If that's the case the Panzer IV shouldn't have it either unless you shoot it and somehow fail to damage it.
This has nothing to do with misreporting of tigers so uhhh no?

>>50043462
Well if it blew up it's probably not a tiger is it?

>>50043422
What has that to do with infantrymen seeing a "boxy" tank and reporting it back to HQ as a tiger?

>>50043538
See >>50043476

If you destroyed the thing that easily odds are good that it wasn't a Tiger.

>>50043573
I don't know how you think these things worked in WW2, but not everyones job included weapons to blow up tanks left and right.

>>50043598
>he doesn't take anti-tank grenades on every unit that can take them

More seriously the tiger myth isn't JUST the silhouette though, it's that plus the fact that Tigers were supposed to be bitch hard to kill.

>>50043635
No, its not. But it includes false reports because of it, and therefore the Pz4 (H) fits perfectly in.

>>50043635
>he doesn't take anti-tank grenades on every unit that can take them

>every infantryman in ww2 had an at grenade, was close enough to a tank he thought was a Tiger and had the balls to run out of cover to throw the grenade to check therefore the Tiger false reporting wasn't true

By your logic everything that wasn't a Tiger wouldn't have been reported as such, because it would have been shot at and either destroyed (not a Tiger) or survived (a Tiger) when in reality it was more
>see tank
>tell HQ it's a Tiger, maybe they will prioritize support to our area/not yell at us for all hiding in our safe little spots

>>50043718
I wonder if unit veterancy should play some role in the rule.

>>50043741
make it a dice roll to see if the unit misreports it as a Tiger.

at the moment literally every tank sighting is reported as a Tiger from how I understand it.

>>50043791
something like that. Though I could see people then being annoyed with how many rolls they have to make as soon as a unit with Tiger Fear rolls out into the fuggin' open.

>>50043847
>Though I could see people then being annoyed with how many rolls they have to make
like, 5?

>>50043893
would depend. and god forbid you're playing with Armored Regiments and more than one tank with that rule rolls out.

File: IMG_0110.jpg (53KB, 680x464px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 680x464px

Got my BA German book today

Don't panic tiger fear isnt the fucking god hammer that was promised
It just means units that are already pinned have a slightly harder time (+1) to order checks that don't involve shooting the tank

>>50044329
Just checked my email.. it was shipped today, so i might get it at the weekend.

How is the miniature?

File: wr_16.jpg (57KB, 700x257px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 700x257px

Does anyone know the dimensions of the Perry Miniatures bombard? I want to use it as Mons Meg for Kings of War.

>>50044540
Nice, better quality than most of the BA books minis

Gonna be a bitch to paint tho

>>50042698
I was talking about specific ships based on the Camoflage, but yes, you're correct.

Hoel, Heerman, and Johnston.

>>50047254
That's a pretty diorama, but my goodness would that be cramped to play on.

File: DSC_0012.jpg (332KB, 1600x1074px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1600x1074px

>>50047317
I think it's just meant to display the buildings

>>50047331
The half-demolished one looks a bit too 'clean' IMO. could benefit from some soot and rubble.

File: OSTFRONT QUICKFIRE RULES.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50039983
Exactly my point, you dont need special rules at all to have units act like they did irl. You just need accurate modelling. It can still be very simple, it just has to give realistic outcomes. Like a 2-pdr not being able to penetrate the front armor of a Tiger at long range, and an 88 annihilating every medium tank it targets, provided it hits.

>>50040199
You could try Ostfront, quick and simple to play.
Quick Fire rules and army lists are free to download so you can try it out. Aimed at 1/72 which is cheap as hell.
full rules and lists here:
http://www.wargamevault.com/product/191978/Ostfront--Main-Rules

>>50040638
>basically they should have built more stugs.
It was already the most produced german armored vehicle of the war...
I did say (for the most part) superior vehicles. Obviously polish tanks early war were better than pz.Is and Pz.II, and T-34s / KVs were in many ways better than Pz. IIIs and Pz. IVs, but it was their superior tactics that allowed them to overcome these obstacles. No one was expecting Blitzkrieg, it really caught the french, polish, and even the Russians with their pants down.

Does anyone have a pdf of Dux Bellorum?

>>50048073
>you don't need special rules at all to have units act like they did irl.

Whilst I fully agree as simply having the combat model be able to take account of any peculiarities is just outright better game design, it does seem that systems that focus on giving special rules seem to be the most popular. Now there's a lot of factors behind that but as to why the special rules thing keeps happening I put it down to the special part of special rules, letting a player know immediately that they have something their choice of army can do that perhaps their opposition cannot. It's a lot more immediate and easy to comprehend (even though it's harder to track, balance or just remember) than what numbers alone convey unless you're into understanding how games work rather than just playing them.

They're ok though, necessary even, in moderation.

>>50048235
I disagree, Systems like 40K, WHFB, and BA are popular because they are widely marketed and have a large company supporting them, allowing writers, artists etc to create high quality -looking- work that appeals aesthetically to people.

Special rules are a very poor game mechanic imo, it means you have even more to keep track of than just your units stats. This is the reason why Ostfront has no special rules at all. Less to keep track of, keeps things simple and you know straight away what your units and the enemy units are capable of simply by looking at the vehicle roster.

From what I remember BA models all infantry weapons the same, so special rules like German MGs firing slightly faster is fine, its realistic.

I dont believe special rules are necessary though. Games like FoW, 40K, WHFB really suffer from all the special rules you have to keep track of, especially if they change every couple of years with new versions.

>>50048337
So you're saying you're stupid?

>>50048356
I played WHFB and 40K at tournament level for many years, you just have to learn a lot of special rules and practice against as many different armies as possible. Its perfectly do-able, it just takes a whole lot of effort in order to get a balanced game, and often balance is ruined by specific special rules, or combinations of them. Often each WHFB army has a mega unit of death that with 3 or 4 special rules and magic items become almost unstoppable. We just wanted to eliminate all the unnecessary special rules and have something that was inherently balanced, and promoted historical lists and tactics rather than powergaming.

Is there a good book I can read that is just about tanks?

I want something that will give me all the tanks/destroyers from ww2 and their varients with pictures and brief description of development.

>>50049051
Check this out anon:
http://www.kssk.sk/download/pdf/encyklopedia_zbrani_2stet_vojny.pdf

>>50048337
>I disagree

...you basically agreed with every point I made except that they are necessary. And they are because sometimes units, terrain or scenarios have things that can't reasonably be covered by regular rules.

>>50049440
Ah I was disagreeing with the idea that rulesets with special rules are popular because of the special rules, wheras its marketing that makes something gain popularity.
Units and terrain can easily by covered simply with their stats. Terrain should be covered along with the rest of the rules.

Scenarios are essentially entirely special rules, but they're more of an add-on to a rule set that gives you some interesting battles to play instead of a basic pitched battle with even forces. You can still have all the units and rules done without any special rules.

Someone used chess as an example before, and its a good one - there are no special rules: the units of both sides act exactly the same. The only real special rule is "white goes first"

>>50049497
I didn't say they were popular because they had special rules, but that popular games use them. And they do. A lot of them in some cases (Bolt Action wisely keeps the amount to a bare minimum to add flavour though, unlike pretty much every other big game).

>>50049598
Those popular games are also widely derided for their over-use of special rules, and often a reason why people stop playing them.
Popular does not usually equal good. top 40 music is a pretty good example of this

>>50049732
I never made a statement regarding their quality. I can think of some pretty highly regarded systems that make use of special rules, for good reasons too. Not sure if any of them would count as popular either, if it mattered.

>>50044782
The miniatures are 28mm - you can calculate the rest.

Anyway, if you can get some artillery crew from somewhere, the Zvezda 1:72 bombard is much better as it's aboout the same size.

File: IGT.jpg (522KB, 992x617px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 992x617px

>>50049051
I'll have a look around for some things, but for now here is Salamander's Illustrated Guide to WW2 Tanks. Posted the contents page to give you an idea of what's featured.

https://mega.nz/#!ix8EDBqA!znvRGvFifhWHelrc3ayTXOH5Og6KWwpVJSTdPjcTMOg

>>50049789
Why bring up their popularity at all then?

Extensive special rules tend to be crutch for when the core gameplay isn't well balanced.
If BA had balanced and accurate German armor they wouldn't need special rules, and people would be able to take heavy armor without it hampering the balance like >>50039659 suggests is the case.

Reading through the BA rules, it seems we need to define what special rules actually are - each unit has something called "special rules" which I would consider more of the modeling of the unit. Things like Recce or Slow aren't really special rules as such, more universal rules. Some of the "special rules" are more ways of modelling the armor, like the Panther having extra armor to the front.

Actual special rules would be things beyond the modeling of the unit, like the Army Special Rules or the tiger fear rule for example. I didn't realize BA used the term special rules so extensively... no wonder it seems so integral to the game. I would probably term these individual unit special rules "notes" rather than special rules.

Pardon my ignorance of BA I hope we can still be friends

>>50039080
FoW is the most popular historicals wargame out there. A lot of nerds like to hand wave it off as the 40kek of the genre.

>>50050599
>A lot of nerds like to hand wave it off as the 40kek of the genre.

Ironic, considering Bolt Action is far closer to 40shit than anything else in the genre.

>>50050599
>A lot of nerds like to hand wave it off as the 40kek of the genre.
that's bolt action

People wave off fow as a tank parking lot.

>>50049732
>Popular does not usually equal good. top 40 music is a pretty good example of this

>all top 40 music is bad
>all popular wargames are bad
>m...mine is good because I've only sold 100 copies and there are no special rules
I think you are underestimating that maybe some people actually think special rules are good or that pop music is good. You thinking that it isn't is not proof that it isn't.

Either way you are just using this to shill Ostfront as always, I wonder what you would do if it became popular (and therefore was bad)

>>50050807
What part of "usually" you don't understand?

>>50050813
you think that being popular makes something usually (aka more often than not) bad?

If loads of people are doing it, and they are enjoying it, usually it IS good.

>>50050826
>Justin Bieber

File: IGTb.jpg (593KB, 700x965px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 700x965px

>>50049051
>>50050440

Back with two more titles, which will interest serious tank buffs as much as newbies: first Salamander's Illustrated Encyclopedia of Tanks and Fighting Vehicles, which is considerably broader in scope and more detailed than the pocket version I just posted:

https://mega.nz/#!30UDSYZb!_jQreq9yXyR7HVlTlZcrlMXbdkeg9ampPTbyy8NFzXU

The other one is PSL's World Encyclopedia of the Tank, which looks at their development one type at a time from WW1 to the present.

https://mega.nz/#!TlFkzTIK!3uYRiRT6U0HJUbM5DbeAP4QQGZgSuLUC2HVhbzbxYuw

>>50050835
I don't like him either, but he's doing a great job.

He's sold 45 million albums in the USA alone, I bet some of them might think he is good. Does the fact we don't determine whether he is or isn't?

Like with every discussion which starts with Bolt Action we are back to "people aren't allowed to like what I don't like"

>>50050807
I never claimed my rules were good, just an example of not needing special rules to be balanced.
With enough marketing, anything can become popular.

I personally do consider all top 40 music to be bad, but thats more a subjective thing. I'm a classical fag - mostly renaissance, baroque and 20th century, so top 40 is about as far from what I would consider good as possible.

>>50050826
countless trillions of flies eat shit, so its good?

>>50050866
>countless trillions of flies eat shit, so its good?
>another species eats shit
>therefore bolt action is bad

I don't even play BA but it's like half this thread hates BA for basically no reason other than it's popular and they wish it wasn't.

>>50050889
>therefore bolt action is bad
Not really what I said, there do seem to be a few here who dislike it though. More to do with the rules than the popularity from what I can tell. ex GW designers doing a WW2 reskin for 40K doesn't really bode well for people who like historical accuracy. Seems popular though, so its a good way to get people into historical games. If anything the popularity should be a reason to like it for that very reason.

>>50050914
>More to do with the rules than the popularity from what I can tell.
Oh yeah, they dislike it (which is fair enough) because of the rules or the lack of historical accuracy (also fair enough) but there's at least one person here who then HATES it that other people like and play it.
Thought you were him tBh, sorry senpai.

From what I've seen, BA is a bad system for playing WW2 toy soldiers.

And that isn't the end of the world, but even in the comfiest of threads some 4channers are social retards.

>>50049051
Just read wiki

>>50022563
My friends and I play it a bit. Post a message on the steam group.

>>50050534
>I didn't realize BA used the term special rules so extensively...

It doesn't actually. There are the army/nation special rules which are different for each of the armies/nations.
Germans got 2 new of these with the new book in addition of what they already had (mainly because the Assault Rifle, which has been an indirect special "rule" for their infantry units, was nerfed with V2 and had its range reduced).

In the end i think this is very much needed to keep the game simple (by not bloating the rules with different stats for each unit or weapon) but it still adds a bit of flavor to it with the rule for the machine gun fire rate or the free squad of russian conscripts for example.

Then there are the unit rules like which can be positive like "Stubborn", "Recce", "tough fighter" or negative like "catches fire easily", "Shrinkers" or "Slow".
But these are not really special rules since they are equal for every faction even if the book lists them as such. They are the "normal" rules for the game.
My stubborn Fallschirmjäger unit works exactly the same way as your stubborn Airborne unit.

>>50050835
Assuming you are, like myself, a around 30-year old guy, then you are certainly not the target audience of Justin Bieber.
Why should you like music aimed at little girls?
Barbie dolls aren't necessarily bad either, are they?
That doesn't make it bad though, and girls love these things.

>>50050914
>a WW2 reskin for 40K

This is just a meme.

Bolt Action plays entirely different from current (and previous) 40k. 40k never had a random turn sequence being the biggest difference right from the start.
The size of the armies is somewhat comparable (i.e. a few squads of infantry and 1-2 vehicles) with older versions of 40k but thats it.

File: Mk I male and female tanks.png (854KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

854KB, 1546x1159px

Painted up my Mk.I male and female tanks. Next step is to add the transfers, and build up some mud along the bottoms and the rear wheels.

Solomon Camouflage seemed to be appropriate for Mk.I tanks, the later tanks can get the regular green with the white and red stripes at the front.

>>50051160
>It doesn't actually
The term "special rules" is in almost every unit description. We seem to agree they're not really special rules, as they are either the same across all nations, or part of the modeling of the unit, like the panther front armor. The true special rules are the ones specific to each army, which are relatively few.

I dont generally agree that special rules make things simpler, you have to remember which units have which special rules, then remember what those special rules do, as opposed to having a single stat line to check for your unit or weapon.

>>50051343
they dont look very good anon... sorry

File: 94-British-Tank-Mark-I-1915-18-Tank-Museum-Bovington-B.jpg (471KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1920x1080px

>>50051357
Mud will tie them together.... honest

>>50051357
>>50051343
I don't think they look bad. I think part of it is a function of taking the picture on your painting surface instead of a uniform surface. I think the other part is needing a little bit more of washing and highlighting, and some little details like blacking the bores of the guns, that sort of thing. The camo itself looks pretty spot on.

>>50051192
No, Bolt Action really is the streamlined 40k that Cavatore wanted to write.
He even left in 40k 2e's overwatch, but renamed it "Ambush." He's also obviously cribbed the shooting to-hit modifiers from earlier editions of 40k and WHFB as well.

Mind you, I don't think this is a bad thing. But Bolt Action is what 40k could have been but bought by Osprey and given a ww2 coat of paint.

>>50051343
I disagree. If every unit in every army has 'special rules' then that's just shit game design, and things like that should be covered in the core rules. Why have an 'assault rifle' special rule when it could just be an item? Why have special rules for front armour rather than just a good armour system?

>>50051758
Bolt action is the dirrection that 40k should have gone

I'm loving bolt action dispite some of the none historical quirks like the grant being the best tank in the game for the brits

File: a somme 4.jpg (175KB, 800x359px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 800x359px

>>50051779
>I disagree
It seems you agree with me completely though. Less special rules is best. Unit stats, points and weapons should cover everything needed for balance and historical accuracy.

Pic: Nice WW1 table and minis:
http://scarabminiatures.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2258

>>50051852
I think this comes down to personal preferences:

I'd rather have one stat line for every lmg in the game and the special rule that "german lmgs get +1 dice to represent their fire rate" instead of having a stat line for each different lmg in the game with marginal differences.

This might not be the most accurate solution, but its makes thing simpler.

>>50051868
>I'd rather have one stat line for every lmg in the game and the special rule that "german lmgs get +1 dice to represent their fire rate" instead of having a stat line for each different lmg in the game with marginal differences.
Me too

>>50051758
>He even left in 40k 2e's overwatch, but renamed it "Ambush."
You mean the action a fuckton of games used since named exactly as Ambush?

Any rulesets for small modern skirmishes using lego? Might have one or two vehicles total on the board

>>50052193
>using lego?
Just use rules that aren't for Lego but Sub in Lego pieces

>>50052193
brik wars

>>50052299
Don't forget to equip your spec ops with the OTC!

>>50052286
Scales dont usually match and im unsure of a good system

>>50052299
You can play historics using that?

>>50050846
Encyclopedia of German Tanks of WWII is also a handy reference. There's a PDF of it out there; the paper version is out of print so costs like $80

>>50052332
>You can play historics using that?
You can play anything with BrikWars, friendo.

>>50052332

28mm wargames should work well, 28mm is somewhere near 1/48th right? LEGO is 1/48th iirc

File: 1442326586383461.jpg (1MB, 1500x1001px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x1001px

>>50052332
>You can play historics using that?

Why couldn't you?

>>50052353
>>50052352
>>50052376
O-ok. Will look into it. A friend also suggested fivecore too. Im unsure if that will work. Im mostly looking to play something along the lines of a handful of nato/american guys going up against insurgents/sepratists/undercover russians in a modern city setting.

>>50051815

Tanks are actually what bug me the most about BA.

They're just too simplistic, as you point out the Grant has been simplified to such a degree that it's a better tank than it should be.

File: 140106838095.gif (2MB, 371x500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 371x500px

>>50052450

I've never played BA, why is the Grant the best in BA?

>>50052450
IIRC it has the same problem in FoW too.

>>50052462
One forward facing howitzer, one light AT gun that can pin regular tanks, one or two MGs...and no particular downside to it.

>>50052462
It's armour like a medium tank but has an turret auto cannon,hull mounted howitzer or meduim anti tank gun and two machine guns that can all be fired

File: 9ca47a5d85a9662f5f9f4f1a7e541af8.jpg (148KB, 601x185px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 601x185px

Does anybody have pdf rulebook of Ogniem i mieczem (By Fire and Sword) in original Polish language?

I know there is english version in OPs, but I'm trying to make my brother interested and there's too much to translate.

>>50052462
>>50052483
Not really

The Grant (and the Lee) has a hull mounted medium AT gun and a light AT gun in its turret.

Depending on which version it has you get as downside either "Easily catches fire" (extra pins if on fire) or "Vulnerable" (shot to side and rear get +1 to penetration). The cheapest version has actually both of these negative rules.

No version has a howitzer though.

>>50052725
they still don't hampen it enough to be closer to it's real life version.

>>50052725
>No version has a howitzer though.
It has the american 75 which does D6 HE like a light howitzer.

>>50052725

The M3A3 Lee doesn't have either of the downsides.

Did the Germans ever try putting a 105mm in a turret i.e. a Pz4 equivalent of the StuH42?

File: sRYhebZ.jpg (5MB, 5344x3006px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5344x3006px

>>50051343
You know those little shitty artists pens? Try using one of those for the lines.

Pic related is an extremely shitty russ I've since repainted, but it gives an idea of how easy it is to get narrow lines with the pens.

File: Grasshopper 004.jpg (110KB, 1024x546px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1024x546px

>>50053088
Of course:

10.5cm le.F.H.18/1 L/28 auf Waffentrager IVb Heuschrecke 10

http://panzerserra.blogspot.co.ke/2014/09/105cm-lefh181-l28-auf-waffentrager-ivb.html

>>50051357
If you're going to shit on someone's work that's fine, but at least provide why you think it's shit.

Feedback, even negative or being a douche about it is acceptable but at least give him a working point.

>>50053125
... Is that a historical Leman Russ?

File: IMG_20161029_141801_resize.jpg (776KB, 1216x1643px) Image search: [Google]

776KB, 1216x1643px

got to play a Bolt Action game after quite soem time. 101s Airborne vs. German Grenadiers

File: IMG_20161029_141827_resize.jpg (985KB, 1643x1216px) Image search: [Google]

985KB, 1643x1216px

>>50053642

File: IMG_20161029_144747_resize.jpg (943KB, 1643x1216px) Image search: [Google]

943KB, 1643x1216px

>>50053678

File: IMG_20161029_145541_resize.jpg (901KB, 1643x1216px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 1643x1216px

>>50053688

>>50053678
That's a nice terrain setup, but anon, please clean up the side of that howitzer's base.

File: IMG_20161029_154534_resize.jpg (824KB, 1216x1643px) Image search: [Google]

824KB, 1216x1643px

>>50053741
will do.

>>50053125
That pic isn't it though.... whatever that is is based on a Pz III chassis.

Any idea what its designation is?

>>50053125
>>50053836
Never mind, it's a Sonderkraftfahrzeug 165/1.

>>50053855
Gesundheit.

>>50053125
>The Heuschrecke featured a removable turret which could be deployed as a pillbox or towed behind the vehicle as an artillery piece.

German over-engineering: the tank

>>50053906

Not really.
Over-engineering would take a simple problem and solve it with an overly complicated solution.

This tank is pretty simple in what it does.

>>50051934
Yes, but once you have two separate rules for LMGs getting bonuses you should begin to reconsider, and you should not have three. At that point, special rules are... not good.

Although if it's multiple units getting the same benefit, just class LMGs as Regular and Superior and give Germans and whoever else superior ones, for example. Don't need a full statline.

>>50052404
FiveCore will work perfectly, and really you shouldn't stress too much about scale and precision.

>>50053906
>Hans our turret fell off again
>can we tow it and say we meant to do that
>at least our tank hasn't caught fire yet

Why do I get sidetracked with other projects. Help me lads!

>>50054556
Why what are you doing?

>>50054556
It helps me to regularly clean my table and only put the "right" stuff back onto it, so all the side projects are out of sight for the time and i can focus on my main stuff for a couple of evenings.

>>50054587
I read the Sutdio Tomahawk bits about their late Roman/Romano British expansion for SAGA. I don't really care for SAGA it's ok but the problem is Sub-Roman Britian is my JAM. So now I've got those out and bought a new box of the GB plastic late Romans.

>>50054625
They were all away in their nice boxes. It's just I read too much and get ideas for things. It's awful.

>>50054432
Ultimately this is a case of personal preference, some people just like complicated rulesets with lots of special rules to learn.

Could someone upload Check Your 6 WW2
There is Jet age one in archive
But I have more interest in ww2 era air warfare
Google for a while seem some anon upload it before
But the file is down

Also find Bag the Hun rule in the same site
http://www.mediafire.com/download/y2cvxqns9h082a2/Bag+The+Hun.pdf

>>50054625
Also try giving yourself a rule like "I won't order more guys until I have X number of guys painted" or "Iwon't work on my Napoleonic side project until I finish this platoon" etc

>>50040638
>reminder that they were fighting a defensive war at the end and coming in at about 1:1 casualties, on the defense.
It was a fucking miracle they managed to not get steamrolled in 1943.

>>50048337
>Games like FoW, 40K, WHFB really suffer from all the special rules
WHFB player here. Not to shit on your parade but I got into warhammer partly because of the special rules. I bought models for their special rules. When I read and bought other army books and codices it was for the special rules.
They're fun and it adds a lot. Some systems need it more than others, such as Warhammer. Some don't need it at all. I think they're great though, but wouldn't want them everywhere in Bolt action.

>>50054556
Just don't be weak willed.

>>50054684
>It's just I read too much and get ideas for things. It's awful.
we all do this, just force yourself not to buy new things until you finish your current project. It's simultaneously the carrot AND the stick.

>>50051142
What steam group?

>>50056014
Theres a hwg steam group that no one posts in or looks at.

To be honest I wouldn't bother.
I did play Pike and Shot with an anon from here about 2 years ago though, that was pretty fun.

>>50056035
Just joined and you're right. It's dead.

>>50056139
The problem was most of us all had different games so there wasn't much overlap in what was playable. I did get some rather good Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm games out of it though.

File: $(KGrHqF,!qsE+oVyuLSMBQ(MSodGZQ~~60_57.jpg (235KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 1280x960px

>>50040804
Tanks are better on the attack since you can skew the gun around quickly to engage targets without having to turn the whole vehicle. An assault guns work best when used defensively where they start pointed towards suspected enemy avenues of advance.

File: aust2_0048.jpg (142KB, 607x820px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 607x820px

>>50052584
Probably gonna need to ask on a PoleChan

>>50056370
Don't you feel a bit dumb that assault guns were used on attack as a support for infantry?

>>50056433
That they were used doesn't mean they were better than tanks at it. There's good reasons why they all-but disappeared after the end of the war.

>>50056487
>There's good reasons why they all-but disappeared after the end of the war.
Yeah, that everyone switched to the MBT doctrine.

Plus interestingly, the Western allies did not have any assault guns. Would have liked to see a Sherman-based one.

>>50056508
The 105mm Sherman?

>>50056535
Had a turret, ergo was a tank

>>50056553
I mean sure, but it's the same role. I'd almost say something like the priest is close enough.

>>50056572
That was self-propelled artillery.

File: carlos.jpg (19KB, 500x367px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 500x367px

>>50056508
>Plus interestingly, the Western allies did not have any assault guns.

The Brady Campaign got them banned

File: chloerambo.jpg (11KB, 203x262px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 203x262px

>>50056599
You cheeky cunt.

>>50056535
Doesn't quite fit. If we assume an Assault Gun is a turretless tank with a hull-mounted gun primarily for flinging explosive rather than AT shells, then no. If the Assault Gun is simply an infantry support tank, turreted or otherwise, then all Shermans and Churchills count too.
If the definition it muddies further to mean turretless but overlaps to Tank Destroyers, then fuck this I'm out because my head hurts enough already.

Definitions are an arse for that era because of everyone working on rather different doctrines and requirements. Great for wargaming, crap for trying to pidgeonhole armoured vehicle types into classes.

>>50056370
Even in defense a turreted tank is superior to a vehicle without a turret though.

Yes, the stug was a nice vehicle, and the Jagdpanzer 38t was nice too, but in the end, these were built because they were cheap, not because they were better than medium tanks.

>>50056487
>mean they were better than tanks at it.

If they were proper assault guns (i.e. with howitzer) then they were better. The Stug became a tank destroyer after its gun became the L48.

>>50056508
Wasn't there a Stuart with howitzer in the turret instead of a at gun?

>>50056874
Still had a turret. M8 Scott.

>>50056658
An assault gun is a enclosed vehicle with howitzer. At least if you follow the germans designations.
Their open topped infantry support vehicles weren't assault guns, even if they carried an howitzer too.
For example the SiG33 on various chassis wasn't an assault gun. Only the enclosed version of it was called that way.

File: stug20.jpg (408KB, 1000x562px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1000x562px

>>50056850
Not just cheap, but easier to mount a large gun on due to not needing a suitable turret-ring with powered rotation.

Which leads into them being comparable with turreted tanks of the same era due to slow traverse turrets on ones mounting the large guns of the time, so lack of turret, not so much of a problem in that, though it has other problems like increasing the overall length of the vehicle significantly.

>At least if you follow the German's designations

And there's the problem with trying to determine if other nation's vehicles count.

did fallschirmjager brigades have different uniforms between them during the last years of war maybe for shortage of resources? I'd like to try 2 or 3 different schemes on my units...

Guys I need your help. In my huge ignorance of militaries and being unable to find anything in the rulebook.

In Next War Taiwan I've been setting up for my first full standard game (Red Dragon Rising) and noticed the PRC being reinforced with full divisions each turn.
The problem is I have no fucking clue how many regiments are in a division since that's the size of their units. Do I just pick all of the same colour/organization and that's it?

>>50057776
Towards the end they could end up with just regular wehrmacht equipment and not necessarily with FJ jumpsuits or helmets.

>>50052404
There is a FiveCore supplement that deals with exactly that setting, it's called Sandbox.

File: 1280px-Stridsvagn_103_Revinge_2013-1.jpg (208KB, 1280x867px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1280x867px

>>50056487
> disappeared after the end of the war.

Sweden notwithstanding.

Yes I know it's a tank technically, let me have my fun.

>>50022585
How do you handle movement within buildings in Ostfront? Movement is halved iirc, so unless going flat out you can pretty much only move from room to room it feels. Does positioning in a room matter? When entering or throwing grenades into a building, do you need to be 6 inches from an extrance or just from the building or room? Are the rules a little 'light' at times or am I just retarted? So many questions.

Is there a pdf version of the Bolt Action Armies Of Germany 2nd edition yet? Is there even a legal one yet?

File: SU-122-54.jpg (43KB, 700x304px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 700x304px

>>50058243
I almost put in a disclaimer exactly for that Main Battle Tank because someone was bound to post it.

The SU-122-54 would be a more appropriate example.

African Commonwealth troops in Burma- Where the fuck do I read about them?
Indians are neglected but at least there's a historiography around them...

File: 16.jpg (72KB, 1024x662px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1024x662px

ASU-57 a cute

File: IMG_20161101_173027843.jpg (429KB, 1800x1019px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1800x1019px

First of 3 for my Destroyers

Fairly happy with how it turned out

>>50059959
Looking good anon!

>>50060303
Thanks, for my first boat ever, I'm reasonably pleased. Uncamoflaged fletchers unfortunately lack too much detail.

So what systems do people recommend for boats doing fights?

I used to play Victory at Sea and always enjoyed it.

So happy I found this place, I'm anon jumping in from WHFB. Looking to get into some late crusade era stuff and just expanding from that chronologically in both directions. I have a lot of history to learn. What is a good ruleset for the time period?

>>50061341
Also to whoever does these and does the "this day in history" commentary is awesome and don't ever stop

>>50061244
That's my plan, but I'm meaning to try all sorts of systems.

>>50060498
It does look kind of rough but at that scale it likely can't be helped. All that disappears at arms length anyway

>>50061341

Depends on what style/scale of game you want.

I really like SAGA: Crescent and The Cross.

>>50061341
>I'm anon jumping in from WHFB.
Enjoy it while you can, I'll never go back to individual casualty removal

>>50061409
Saga looks cool, I have a couple questions about it.
Does it cover the crusades? I thought it was more dark age period.

im also thinking I would like a larger scale battle than just a skirmish, which is part of why I'm jumping ship on GW's AoS.

Can I use square bases in SAGA to keep bases compatible with other games?

>>50061464
Care to elaborate a bit? I played 7th edition war hammer. I have no experience in any kind of historical

>>50061465

Regular SAGA is dark ages The Crescent and The Cross is Crusades era with a few updated rules.

You could do square bases in SAGA no problem.

>>50061486

A great many historical games don't bother with casualty removal and just have minis mounted on multi bases, similar to Kings of War if you are familiar with that.

>>50061486
You know in Warhammer how you remove casualties one by one, and have to do that for large blocks even though only the first few ranks fight?

Well what if you abstract the unit as a single model and put a few tokens down instead?

So much faster, does not ruin immersion (morale would usually shatter long before you get down to small numbers), leaves you more time to play.

>>50061538
>Well what if you abstract the unit as a single model and put a few tokens down instead?
That wasn't really clear.

What if you abstract the unit into a single statblock, the unit rather than individual models are the smallest level of granularity on the table?

>>50061564
>>50061538
Makes sense, I have read about that in kings of war. So which is saga? Because I know they are one model per base

>>50056508
>the Western allies did not have any assault guns
How about the A39 Tortoise? Only a few prototypes made though so probably doesn't count. Thing was a beast though.

The Allies generally used tanks in the assault gun role - 105mm Shermans, 3" gun Churchills, Cromwells with 95mm, etc. Even matildas and Crusaders were armed with the 3" howitzer at some stage.
Dont really need a casemate gun mount when you can put the gun you want in a nice turret and not have to worry about turning the entire vehicle every time you want to shoot somewhere that isn't to your front.

>>50061699
I haven't played SAGA, only seen it being played, but stuff at that scale, or Muskets and Tomahawks (a quite fun French and Indian War ruleset) individual casualty removal doesn't matter, it's only the massed battle stuff where it's a PITA

File: Anglo-Saxon Warriors.jpg (369KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 1600x1200px

>>50061465
>Can I use square bases in SAGA to keep bases compatible with other games?

Absolutely. I actually prefer them. Mainly because I run Angry-Saxons (horde army) and they like to rank up closely, so square bases makes that work better, but you can run square bases with pretty much any faction.

A buddy runs Normans, and all his horses are on Warhammer cavalry bases, so his infantry are on squares as well, because having them on circles next to the cavalry squares/rectangles looks really goofy.

>>50061868
How much would someone need to pay you to get a video of you hotgluing that castle?

nice minis though

>>50062122
It is

File: Anglo-Saxon Warriors2.jpg (343KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 1600x1200px

>>50061892
>>50061892

Uh, it's not designed to be glued together...it's modular.

that sounds like a fetish question. Please don't be a fetish question.

Can anyone here recommend me a good Beer and Pretzels Black Powder era game? I'm already probably going to try and get into Warlord's Black Powder but I'm just starting up a club at my college and want to try something introductory.

>>50062151
>that sounds like a fetish question. Please don't be a fetish question.
You may not wish that it be like it is, but unfortunately, it do

>>50062449
black powder is introductory

>>50062449
If you can parse it, they don't really get more beer&pretzels than Black Powder.

>>50062751

Is there anything more introductory than that, perhaps?

>>50062797

Um, you can line up your opponent's minis and shoot rubber bands at them from just above your own mini's heads. If the band knocks them over, they're out.

That's about the only thing I can think of which is simpler. Which, in fairness, worked as a system for people like HG Wells, so it's likely not ALL bad.

>>50023356
>>50023403

The designers are a bunch of business-illiterate art students, so they design a beautiful product and utterly fail to satisfy demand, while dozens of games that look like a human anus get mass-produced and sold by the thousands

c'est la vie

>>50026446
>I come from warhammer fantasy backgrounds and have given sigmar a shot but still absolutely hate it. Decided that GW will not get any more of my money and want to make the switch to hwg
>Also there is no hwg scene in my area so I will be trying to build it from the ground up

I'm in the exact same boat. I settled on the Hellenistic/Macedonian and Punic Wars era because A) I think it's cool, and B) there's a ton of different armies to choose from (as opposed to, say, Imperial Roman era when it's basically Loricamarines vs Barbarian hordes) and a wide variety of unit-types within armies.

Warhammer Ancient Battles is an obvious suggestion, it's basically WHFB but without the dragons, magic items, and spells. I've tried Kings of War and Hail Caesar, both had some things I liked and some things I didn't. KoW is pretty close to a streamlined Warhammer, but imo there's not enough distinction between armies and I don't really like the "charge-bounce-charge" melee combat. HC has a somewhat more involved combat, but the command rules are kind of meh.

I've heard a lot of good things about War and Conquest and To The Strongest but have spent my money on figures instead of books, so haven't tried either. WAC is supposed to be the great successor to WAB (which GW have, characteristically, kicked to the curb, after Cease-and-Desisting authors for uploading PDFs of never-to-be-published supplements), TTS is more of a streamlined/simplified affair.

All these systems can support any pre-Renaissance armies, which is another neat thing about them.

Not to say that you wouldn't be interested in later periods, but for me 1500s AD and earlier comes closest to filling the hole left by WHFB's ugly demise.

>>50062151
Please, Ill pay you

File: 00d02b7a02d3b666ddce96b43ef8a950.jpg (22KB, 343x280px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 343x280px

>>50062940

File: War Thunder 7.webm (829KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

829KB, 1280x720px

Damn this thread moved so fast, it wasn't even 200 posts when I checked last night.

>>50055076
>Could someone upload Check Your 6 WW2

https://mega.nz/#!vwMngZbR!91OrqgI5u2imvHC6h-8IgHkHyHmXZ997crB9O6tXhqw

File: Into Glory Ride.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50062797
>Is there anything more introductory than that, perhaps?
Really basic playsets like pdf related I suppose

>>50062992

do you have Phalanx? never heard of it until I clicked on that pdf but now my interest is piqued

>>50062891
>WHFB's ugly demise.
9th age exists anon

File: Phalanx (Alienstar).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50063091

I know this isn't the right thread, but since you have Osprey stuff here, does anyone have the supplement for Tomorrow's War?

>>50063110
>9th age exists

As the man said, "WHFB's ugly demise."

File: sarissa phalanx is best phalanx.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>50063112

thanks m88

>>50063110
It's an extremely tournament oriented ruleset which is basically "no fun allowed".

>>50055814
That's the power of panzerschokolade, mein freund.

>>50063177
>>50063518
Its the spiritual successor to WHFB - most of the fantasy players I know play it, or the generic KoW which I dont really rate. Seems like 9th age kept everything from WHFB and balanced things out a bit.
Most WHFB players played tournaments, so I dont see what the complaint there is - of course its tournament based - thats the final goal for high end players - heading to tournaments to test your list and play a shit ton of games. Any system can still do friendly games, but having a system thats nicely balanced for tournament play makes it that much better.

>>50026446
You might want to look at Impetus.

>>50061341
It's recent, but To The Strongest! is one of my favourite rulesets in recent years.

It's grid-based, and the author makes some strong arguments for both using a grid, and using a square (not hex) grid, which quiet my natural grognard urge to use hexes for everything.

It also uses cards (just the number cards) as a randomiser, the author's explanation being that a set of, say, two decks worth of number cards is just like a d10 but faster in play, and you can leave the card out if you need to remember the score while "rolling" something else.

http://bigredbatshop.co.uk/

Unfortunately you have to "buy" the army list PDFs. They're free, but there's no direct download available. Worth a look, though. It's a nice satisfying large-battle game! Also, since it's on a grid, you don't have to worry about basing much as long as it's clear what a unit's meant to be.

>>50062449
DBA/HotT.

seriously.

But lol being able to parse that shit if you're having trouble with Black Powder.

>>50063987
>Most WHFB players played tournaments
flase

>>50064105
True where I live, certainly all the high end WHFB players played tournaments. Playing casual games is fine and its how you build up your skills, but the tournament is where you really get to show off your painting and gaming skills, and get to see a lot of extremely well painted armies and play against a lot of skilled players using lists you may not be familiar with. It really is the end goal for high end players.

Might depend on the country you live in, and your exposure to the tournament scene. If you've never been to a tournament you might believe they dont exist and that all games are casual games between friends.