Flames of War: REFORGER edition

File: M4A3E2_Sherman_Jumbo_75mm_gun.jpg (157KB, 800x611px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 800x611px

First for THICC tonks

>>50070996
A Jumbo with a 75mm gun?

I wasn't aware of those. I thought they were mostly built with 76mm guns.

>>50071095
You've got it literally backwards, they were all built as 75mms, and were converted to 76s when they could.

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

1B, 486x500px

I just realised this list perfectly fits Kuromormine

>>50071095
>I thought they were mostly built with 76mm guns.
Playing Flames makes you think that, but no. Also IIRC they were normally one per company, not one per platoon.

>>50071639
Yup. I love Desperate Measures.

File: LemanRuss.jpg (32KB, 515x283px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 515x283px

Want to start Flames of War. I am in NJ.

What should I buy if I know no stores or people who play it?

So is TANKs getting any more releases or did it tank?

>>50071885
M10 kits for Brits, Soviets and US (including M36 in the third case) out very soon, Tiger kits already announced.

>>50071852

Buy 'Open Fire' and see if anyone in the store is interested.

Has the game changed a lot? I've wanted to play the game for a long time, but the few times I've played it it put a really really really bad taste in my mouth.

>>50072190
What were some of the problems you had with it?

That could give us a better idea of if it might now be something you'd want to play.

>>50071885
Tanks apparently did well enough to be a victim of it's own success and went out of stock for a while. Hopefully it'll bounce back now they're aware there's a market.

>>50072190
What about it made you dislike it?

>>50072281
I just hope they add enough tanks so I can do a girls und panzer force other than Saunders or Katyusha

Can I just say how shit are the Stug's in the Open Fire box?

I hope the individually packaged ones are better, the two halves of the body don't sit flush.

>>50072305
Buy greenstuff.

>>50072265
>>50072281
I just kept getting steamrolled at the time because only three people played at my shop at the time, and they just kept abusing the rules at the time to stroke their ego's.

For example using a 1944 army against my 1941 army, while telling me its a 1941 army and me being foolish enough to trust them.

The game did nothing wrong, it was just the players, honestly.

>>50072305
Never had a problem with that with the old OF StuGs and the new StuG kit (which is in the newer OF version) goes together even more easily.

What exactly was giving you trouble?
Cause it might just be you misreading the assembly instructions.

>>50072385
Sadly, assholes gonna be assholes.
You told the store owner about them acting like this? Chasing off players with that shit would be bad for his bottom line.

>>50072385
Then the players were dicks.

Playing a 1944 army against a 1941 army is a dick move. Plain and simple. A dick move. The game is balanced around armies from the same era (Early War 1939-41, Mid-War 42-43, and Late War 44-55) playing against each other. Anything outside of the correct era will upset the game balance significantly.

Thankfully this game seems to be relatively free of dick players. At least in my experience.

>>50072534
>Late War 44-55

45, not 55.

>>50072522
No, I just sold my small army and went back to playing a game I'm sick of again, and the game died off at the store.

>>50072534
That's what I figured. I've been thinking about picking up some form of British mechanized army, since I like British tanks of the period so much.

>>50072385
Wooooooooow. Yeah fuck those guys.

>>50071885
It's alive again (after a slow start when they ran out of stock).

In addition to >>50072015, the Germans are getting the Puma. The Sd Kfz 234/2 and /4 will be in the game (the one with a 50mm turreted gun and the pak-wagen).

File: 14718805_10154963971826874_5020009249898040132_n.jpg (139KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 960x720px

I wonder if the M3 and other MW tanks will be in TANKS... and if the M3 will get to fire both guns.

I gotta say, I'm getting excited for Volksarmee. Some warpac veterans will be good to have.

I saw someone call 16C cold last thread. We just had snow here. Like white snow covering everything, not having the courtesy to melt off.

This is bad for my spraying plans.
Do you guys spray in your bathrooms or similar during winter?

>>50075200
What is winter? This is a crazy concept in my part of the world.

I didn't see snow until I was 25 and was visiting Europe

File: tmp_9729-144700d8d166c0c672feb36db745ce4c561901728.jpg (41KB, 500x396px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x396px

awww yissss

plastic italians apparently coming with new midwar. who else is pumped?

>>50075591
Murican player here, anything for me?

>>50075784
Plastic Lees

>>50075930
Oooooo Lee's. I'll take it.

>>50075784
apparently wogs and yanks are less important though. they'll do DAK and Commonwealth hats.

still, i can be patient for fluffy hats

>>50076186
first*

goddamn all i can think about its hats apparently

>>50074594
might get released as a soviet tank for LW, or they could be a dirt cheap tie fighter type of unit for Americans and they just say fuck history.

>>50075200
I have, do not recommend it, you'll be high as a fucking kite for days every time you need to go in it and it's not good for you.

>>50077294
Why? Were there not that many of them actually made?

>>50075200
You want a large mostly empty space that can be aired out fairly quickly.

A garage or an unfinished basement with some windows might do the trick.

But as >>50077294 pointed out, you really don't want to breathe the fumes. You won't be "high for days", but you'll certainly feel a bit light-headed, and get a strong headache.

>>50076186
Say what you will about the war in the Desert, but it is primarily considered a contest between the Germans and the British Empire.

>>50077294
All of the tanks in TANKS are Late War marks.

>>50078394
There were, but the Americans stopped using them once they had enough Shermans and sold the rest to the Soviets as soon as they could. Those things were death traps.

>>50077294
You realize that the next wave of WWII stuff will be for the midwar period, right? They showed off Panzer IIIs, Tiger Is, and M3 Lees/Grants.

>>50078920
They were strongly disliked by the soviets for being so, yes, but were relatively good tanks in the desert. The sherman was just better (and less of a headache to manage). The assumption is that because the soviets hated them they were equally bad everywhere, but the soviets were facing much nastier opposition; panthers, pak40s, and long-barrel Pz IVs were present in abundance, and tigers, panthers, and even later-model panzer IVs all had more armour than the 37mm could handle. Fighting Pz IIIs and 5cm guns, which they often were in the desert, their armour was reasonable, and the 37mm was an adequate AT gun.

Thinking of doing Team Yankee Germans, talk me out of it

>>50072015

>Tigers

Source?

>>50081567
>Tigers
Was originally told at Spiel, then FlamesCon pics confirmed the plastics a few days later, as can be seen in >>50074594

>>50071639
As opposed to the soviets, which hate desperate measures. There's only 2 new lists in it, in which you lose the ability to be soviet for pretty much no gain. T-34's and SMG's without numbers and QoQ.

>>50081668
Don't forget the proper late Tankovy and Motorstrelk also in it.

You lose some of the support options from Red Bear Revised, but you gain some others (such as the excellent 160mm mortars) as well as bedspring armour and panzerfaust-equipped infantry.

Those are actually pretty damn solid lists.

>>50081567
>Thinking of doing Team Yankee Germans, talk me out of it
Do you have no money or no time? If so, you have other priorities.

Otherwise go for it, they're solid.

>>50081567
>Thinking of doing Team Yankee Germans

Depending on the force you field, you'll need to buy a lot of resin and your Panzergrenadier zug's have a small stand count, but beyond that I have nothing bad to say about the Best Germans. Especially now that Panzertruppen is out, you have amazing flexibility to field a wide range of options. Aufklärungs are especially fun, because there is something to be said about being able to cover the board with Leo 1s, Luchs and Fuchs, while still having the best gun AA and MBT all in the same formation.

>>50081567
The biggest issue is that the Leopard 2, while an excellent tank, is extremely expensive points-wise. You will not be able to field many of them.

That being said, they are extremely powerful.

Think of them like King Tigers, and you'll do fine.

Meanwhile Leopard 1s are probably more like Tigers or Panthers.

>>50082523
>Meanwhile Leopard 1s are probably more like Tigers or Panthers.
Except for the bit where they're autopen by every AT asset in the game, you mean? Their AT isn't bad in red/blue matchups, but they also struggle to take out the abrams and the leopard. At the chieftain, because that's a tea-powered terminator for some reason.

>>50082558
I was going for "lighter armor, but still has a decent gun and you can field them in greater numbers", but you make some solid points.

Their AT isn't spectacular by any means against the front armor of other NATO vehicles, but you can say that about all NATO tanks.

Blue on Blue is a clang-fest of shells bouncing off the front armor of Abrams, Leopard 2s, and Chieftains.

>>50082523
>Meanwhile Leopard 1s are probably more like Tigers or Panthers.

Tiger: More fucking armour! Hugeass gun! Continental drift will get us there...

Panther: Let's try to make it somewhat balanced.

Leo 1: fuck armour, go faster! Faster! FASTER!

>>50082650
Honestly, they're Panzer IVs; armour is adequate against dual-purpose guns and is going to get ignored by anything with serious AT, and their gun is good but ultimately still a dual purpose gun that's not ideal to tackle heavy armour with. And they're dirt cheap compared to leopard IIs but pay for being veterans.

>>50071852
Where in NJ are you? Every Thursday we play at Time Warp Comics in Cedar Grove from 5:00 to whenever if you want to make the drive. I can give you my email and we can talk about it there.

Apparently I was wrong about the assumption that the resin T-55 is a stopgap; the statement from BF is that "it's hard to justify a plastic kit when a resin kit is in the catalogue already"... So, nobody will ever be playing a T-55 company.

>>50083138
It'all come out eventually.

The current plastics available for FoW used to be resin kits.

It might not be soon, but it'll likely happen eventually.

>>50083174
People are going to have written off the T-55 lists, and probably most of the warsaw pact, if it takes the ten years it took BF to get around to making their WW2 tanks in plastic.

Honestly, it's maddening, NATO is flush with options and cool stuff, while the entire warsaw pact is basically two tanks, three kinds of APC, and a helicopter, and we're going to be missing huge chunks of it for years.

>>50083138
Source? Just curious.

>>50083224
Right. Warsaw pact is looking more like the tan army man OPFOR with each NATO release.

>>50083224
They're pushing things ahead on the schedule due to their own success and overwhelming demand.

Do you want more WarPac now, or when they can actually do it justice?

If they do it now, you complain about the lack of plastic kits.

If they do it later, you complain that WarPac is getting idnored.

It's a no-win scenario.

Right now they made sure they had the Cold War Big 4 (Soviets, Americans, West Germans, and British) ready and mostly in plastic.

And now they can move on to the other nations. Maybe in plastic, maybe in resin.

There's honestly nothing wrong with their resin kits 95% of the time.

You just want plastic because all the major nations have plastics.

>>50083317
>Source?
"Info on next year!" thread on the forums, specifically the first few minutes of the video.

And yeah, it's getting increasingly harder to maintain a red/blue parity with every further NATO release. We've got eleven NATO plastic kits now. They have three books. Warpac's getting a rushed east germany release that's going to cost us T-55s, and soviet book, and then we're getting two more western armies including one that wasn't even in the theatre. It's getting ridiculous.

>>50083436
>You just want plastic because all the major nations have plastics.
Well noted. Yes, it's nice when factions have kits that're cheaper, easier to build and better detailed.

Seriously, this has to be a troll question.

>>50083455
Key words being Major Nations.

The T-55 is a Second-line or Third-line tank.

Much like the Leopard 1, which you'll note is also in resin.

>>50083536
It's a front-line tank for every other warsaw pact nation.

Does your club have endless lines of people going "Man, I'm really happy about yet another NATO release, now I can buy more soviet stuff to fight them with!", or something? Because ours doesn't, we lost a couple of soviet players to the Leopard and BAOR releases and now there's two guys left who main soviets here. It's just a NATO wankfest.

>>50083436
>There's honestly nothing wrong with their resin kits 95% of the time.
Did you actually see the Leopards? Because they're really bad. I was considering panzertruppen but eeeesh...

>>50083708
Because the main combatants are 3 NATO nations and the Soviets.

Those had to be ready before moving on to any of the secondary nations.

Yes, there are East Germans, Poles, Hungarians, Romanians, French, Canadians, etc that could all be put into the game.

But they aren't the main combatants. Which for better or worse are 3 NATO countries plus the USSR.

That would be like complaining about the lack of plastic kits for Italians, Romanians, or Hungarians in normal FoW.

The main nations come first, and they get the plastics.

The secondary nations come later and are typically done with resin and metal.

>>50083776
BF can't rely on wehraboos for the soviets though; the germans had loads of super prototype stuff that give them one of the most varied ranges. There's no equivalent for the soviets, they're actively fighting red hordes mythology for them.

Also I'm pretty sure Battlefront's said the intent with every faction is to give them a plastic helicopter, plastic transport, and plastic tank, and the GDR's resin one is because it was rushed. If it's true that having the resin means they're not looking to upgrade to plastic for many years that's really unfortunate and it would've been better to wait.

>>50083776
Also also I thought the italians were getting plastics in the mid war update?

>>50083730
Can confirm I've been trying to fit the tracks properly all morning. The right side ones are sort of curved and don't fit in properly.

>>50084025
Best solution for that is to boil some water in a pot. Take it off the heat for a minute and let the track sit in the hot water for a few minutes. Then take it out and slowly bend it a little bit at a time. Still probably won't fit perfectly, but it will help.

>>50083929
I agree. It would have been better to wait. I imagine they are trying to capitalize on the success they have had with the other nations. I honestly wouldn't be so salty if they had given the brits the standard 3 plastic kits.The confirmed plastic T-64 will be nice when it comes out with the next Soviet release.

>>50083929
Are the east Germans getting a new helicopter? A hip maybe? That'd be exciting

>>50084149
No, it's a hind variant. They don't have current hip plans; it seems they're focusing on hunter-killer/assault helicopters first.

>>50084224
>no hip plans

FUCK

File: 14456_0.jpg (42KB, 800x465px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 800x465px

>>50078580
>All of the tanks in TANKS are Late War marks.

That's true, but it might be because TANKS is plastic-only and the only BF plastic WWII tanks so far have been LW. We'll see - I think there's room for MW tanks in the game.

>>50081567
The attached pic was taken from an online store that jumped the gun.

>>50083224
>>50083436
The problem is that Americans, Brits, and Europeans play these games and want to build armies that they're familiar with. There's demand for all the NATO countries. Demand for Warsaw Pact countries isn't as enthusiastic - it's from Westerners who want to play the other side.

And there really wasn't as much variety on the other side.

>>50083941
Are they?

I'm a bit behind on the news from Essen.

>>50085434
That's what I mean. It's bizarre to hamper the little bit of variety there would've been. It's no big deal for NATO if it's awkward to put together a Leopard list, since you have tons of variety on the same side, whereas when your choices are T-55 or T-72 and one of them's a pain in the ass to make you've cut off half the tank companies.

File: Devon 750.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Who likes battle reports? Nobody? Too bad.

This was one of two games that we did over this weekend, this one being a 2v2 British vs Soviet game (750pts per player), and the other being Shtraf vs Jap infantry (2000 per player).

First up, the forces:

>British
For the brits, we have an airlanding company and supporting Shermans.
The airlanding list was designed to handle most opponents: Two full infantry platoons, some 6pdrs, and some MMG carriers (see PDF).

The Shermans were constrained by the points limit, and ended up being about as plain as you can get them at CV:
2 HQ shermans - 295
2 Shermans and 1 Firefly - 295
2 Shermans and 1 Firefly - 295

The airlanding were being played by a veteran player, while the Shermans were handed to one of our friends that was interested in maybe starting (after the game he expressed an interest in US Marines).

File: Sov2.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50085510

>Soviets
For the Soviets, we have Hero Rota Razvedki (ie: one of the hero lists worth playing) and Hero Heavy SPGs (ie: one that isn't).
The rota had two mechanized platoons, some cheap SU-76Ms (represented by T-70s), and a Spetsnaz platoon to infiltrate up some of the infantry (see pdf).

The SPGs were, similarly to the shermans, constrained by the points limit:
HQ IS-2 obr '44 with bed springs, .50 cal, and SMG escorts - 170
3 ISU-122 with .50s - 370
2 ISU-152 with .50s - 220

Similarly to the brits, the Rota were played by a veteran player, while the SPGs were handed to another one of our friends (he expressed an interest in japs after the game, leading to game 2 and much proxying). In both cases the vet gave a lot of advice, but final decisions were left to the newbie.

File: Battlefield1.png (1MB, 1080x608px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x608px

>>50085534
We rolled up Surrounded for the mission, with the brits defending. Unfortunately I forgot to grab pictures until the end of the first turn, so here's the battlefield.

The Brits put a platoon of airlanding infantry on each objective, with the MMG carriers placed to react to whichever objective needed HMGs for defensive fire. One platoon of Shermans was placed on overwatch in the wheat fields, while the other was placed centrally to counter-attack as needed. The 6pdrs were in immediate ambush.

The soviets decided to form three prongs:
>Rota, Spetz, and the IS-2 in the northeast
>Rota and ISU-152s in the southeast
>ISU-122s and SU-76Ms in the northwest
Overall russian plan being to push the north hard and surround the brits, while having an opportunity/diversion attack in the south. The infantry were all mounted up at the start.

The 6pdrs responded by placing themselves up on the central hilltop, from which they had a commanding view of the north objective. The Rota and Spetz infiltrated forward to the northern woods, preparing to make a daring assault before the British HMGs were in play... But the brits rolled a 6 and caught onto the Russian plan. Brits have the first turn.

File: BvS Turn 1 End.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085557
The first turn was pretty calm.

The British moved the sherman reserve (the HQ shermans and one platoon) to protect the south flank, judging that they'd have time to respond to the north attack due to all the fields. The HMGs moved up to cover the infantry, but no shots were fired.

File: BvS Turn 1 End_2.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085575
The Soviets responded by dismounting the rota platoons, then retreating on the south flank while advancing into cover in the north. The soviets misjudged the fields, and the IS-2 was unable to move at the double or even clear the field. This was met with much complaining from their vet.

>>50085510
>Who likes battle reports? Nobody? Too bad.

Who ever said we don't like battle reports?

We don't tend to see to many, but we do love seeing them when people post them.

File: BvS Turn 3 mid.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085606
Sadly I also forgot to get a picture of the second turn, only remembering halfway through turn three (when this pic is from).

Turn 2, the Brits move their shermans in the south up more, trying (and failing) to get LoS on the 152s. The MMG carriers duck off to the side and mass-fire on one Rota team sticking out of the woods, killing them. Otherwise, the british stand still and hold their fire, hoping the combination of concealment, gone to ground, and enemy RoF 1 will protect them.

The Soviets decide that now is the time to rush the north objective with the Rota. They move the Spetz around the corner in their halftracks, but hold fire so they can attempt to disengage if shot at. The north Rota break the tree line, while the 122s and 76Ms agressively move up on the Shermans (one 122 bogging in the process). The 152s, having drawn more than half the british armor well off the fight in the north, fall back behind the trees. The 76Ms miss the Shermans, as does the opportunity shot from the IS-2 at the carriers, but the Rota get a murderously effective flame off, hitting with all 4 flamethrower shots and killing half the airlanding platoon.

The Soviets then decide, since they're already past the treeline and out of cover, to assault the abandoned positions. Both MMG carriers are in range, as well as one 6pdr and the remaining airlanding troops. The result is sadly predictable: Two dead stands, and the unit is forced to fall back into the woods.

Turn 3 rolls around, and the Shermans realize that the south flank doesn't need 5 shermans to support it. They move up the road, trying to flank the 122s. Up north, the MMG carriers relocate, but otherwise everyone sits tight and opens up. And open up they do: The Shermans kill one 122, smoke another, and the platoon command ices both 76Ms. The 6pdrs open up on the Spetz, and after a failed disengage roll they lose all their transports (though they pass all but one 5+ save during the explosive dismount).

File: Secret Weapon.png (1MB, 1080x608px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x608px

>>50085679
Soviet losses mounting, the game was paused for food at this point, and the British unleash their secret weapon: A giant housecat. However, it does nothing more than sniff everyone.

>>50085644
Was more a sarcastic saying than real expectation people hate battle reports.

File: BvS Turn 3 end.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085706
After food, the game resumes. The Soviets regoup and dig in their infantry in the north forest, and the IS-2 finally reaches the front lines. The Rota in the south and the 152s move up to tempt the Shermans back, while the 122s disengage (one bogging on a stone wall, again). The IS-2 misses the one shot it can take.

File: BvS Turn 4 mid.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085722
The British open turn 4 by moving the main body of Shermans out of the town, while the shermans in the north field move to try and cover the firefly. The airlanding troops relocate troops out of the Church, deciding not to have them pummeled by the 152s with the Shermans no longer covering them. Shooting results in the bogged 122 being bailed and smoked, but alive.

File: BvS Turn 4 end.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085739
The soviets respond by mounting up the south Rota to protect them as they close range against the infantry, as they and they 152s advance into the town again. Up north, the IS-2 takes potshots (and misses), while the 122s retreat further.

File: BvS Turn 5 end.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085760
Turn 5 sees the Shermans once again dash back into the town, and destroying one of the Rota's halftracks. Up north, the Shermans reposition to try and get out of the IS-2s LoS and tempt it into the firefly's.

File: BvS Turn 5 end_2.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085781
The soviets once again fall back in the south, with the Rota moving at the double to behind the woods, while the 152s carefuly back in so that the shermans need to get within 6" to see them. The 122s move at the double (the bogged and bailed one managing to fix both) in the north to get around to the other side of the farm complex. The brits failed to break the IS-2s LoS, but it misses again.

File: BvS Turn 6 mid.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085796
Turn 6 comes around, and the Shermans decide to detach the CiC up north while the other four hold down the town. The brits decide to go for a daring infantry switch, moving the 4-team platoon from the north into the town while the reinforced platoon from the south move to replace them on the northern objective. The north Shermans finally move so that the IS-2 can only shoot them if it gets in the Firefly's LoS, while the MMG carriers and 6pdrs cover the objective.

File: BvS Turn 6 mid_2.png (2MB, 1426x803px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1426x803px

>>50085823
Missed the end of turn 6 in my pictures, so here's the other midpoint shot.

The Soviets decide to do one last desperate gamble. Clever positioning can get one of their Panzerfaust teams hidden behind the Firefly after a charge, leaving only its MG to stop the assault as long as the other teams stay back in the woods. If they can kill the Firefly, the 122s and the IS-2 can safely advance and start pounding the infantry next turn. It was not to be. The Panzerfaust team is hit only once by the Firefly's co-ax MG, but fails his 3+ save and dies. The Soviets concede the game at this point.

>>50085844
USA USA USA USA USA USA

FUCK YOU RUSSIA, WE GOT TO THE MOON FIRST

>>50085844
Total losses:
>British
3 Rifle/MG teams
1 Panzerfaust/SMG command team

>Soviet
5 SMG teams (3 Rota, 2 Spetz)
3 Captured halftracks
1 M3A1 halftrack
2 SU-76Ms
1 ISU-122

Soviets pushed too early in the north, and while the south diversion worked well it left them short on infantry on the flank where they needed them. That turn 2 charge was a massive mistake, and when it was followed up by the murderous turn 3 shooting from the Brits the game was basically over. The soviet infantry player didn't use his Recce as effectively as he should have, as lifting G2G on the Shermans would have given the 122s a chance and made one of the SU shots hit on side armor. The brits should have attached the command PIAT to the north platoon to bulk them up more, as any tanks assaulting in the south would have had to deal with bogging in the buildings.

List composition wise, the only really horrible one was Hero SPGs. I have no idea why the soviet vet thought that would be a good list to start someone with.

Shtraf vs Hohei battle report later today or tomorrow, depending on when I have time to write it up. I took way too many pictures of that one...

>>50085901
Yeah, and they did pretty much everything else first.

First artificial satellite, first animal in space, first man in space, first woman in space, etc.

>>50085901
>>50086244
First, Brits, not US, in this game. So on the subject of British space program: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miPCcpzRaPE

On the actually important ones:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_space_exploration
USSR led till the mid-60s, then it was fairly even on important firsts, 69-72 72 the USSR declined, and after that did little to stop the tide of US firsts.

>>50086385
And now NASA astronauts ride in Russian rockets...

But back to FoW... What is the best rocket launcher in the game?

>>50086936
Raw stats or point effectiveness? And we talking artillery or man-pack rockets?

Panzerfaust and Nebelwerfers are probably the two best, effectiveness-wise.

>>50083536
>Much like the Leopard 1, which you'll note is also in resin.
Not to harsh on you too much but the Next Year thread video also says the US is getting M60s in plastic, which seems a clear analogue to the Leopard 1/T-55. It's obviously not the intent that main line tanks are plastic and second lines are resin, it's probably just because the T-55 had to be rushed.

>>50087204
Huh. I did not know that. I was kinda assuming M60s would be resin since Leo 1 and T-55AM are both resin.

So I guess it is just a question of moving the East Germans to the front of the release schedule for Team Yankee.

>>50087012
Don't forget about availability. There are some lists in Late War that basically give every American and every German an anti-tank rocket.

>>50087409
Well, with the Americans it's "basically". With the Germans it's "literally". Fucking panzerfausts everywhere, as if assaulting infantry wasn't risky enough with tanks.

Anyone play the WW1 FoW rules? I watched a brief demo game, looks pretty interesting.

How accurate are they to actual WW1?

anyone have a PDF?

>>50087409
M60s with Stripes, apparently. Also Humvees.

>>50087790
I saw it played. The rules actually feel right for late WWI - they did a great (war) job. The game never really took off, though. (Which makes it surprising that they released the French and Americans.)

File: image.png (118KB, 500x641px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 500x641px

>>50088004
You're surprised they released the french? Why?

>>50088126
Probably because the game was pretty much dead, so why pour more money into it?

>>50088148
They were probably already mostly done before the game was released.

Has anyone actually used one of the mechanized companies where everyone rides in softskin transports?

>>50088303
I run Lorried Rifles, so sure. What do you want to know? How to use the lorries? Think of them like a Fast Tank movement for infantry, basically. Say your opponent's ignored a flank and you've got some infantry 24" out from the fighting, might be worth popping them in the wagons and double timing them over behind a wood to move through and get stuck in the following turn, for example. But yeah, 99% of the time it's as useless as fast tank for the same reasons; you don't want to use them anywhere near any actual fighting.

>>50088374
Gotta say the more I play with infantry the more I feel like having trucks would help out every now and then. Sometimes you just have a flank get completely ignored and you just really need them to rocket up the side of the board so they can help out.

>>50088433
Yeah, that's basically the use case. It's a little more useful than Fast Tank, since infantry are much slower, but it's pretty specific to situations where a flank's being totally ignored.

>>50088374
So basically ignore them outside of the rare situation where they can be used without getting fucked by any and all guns? That's a bit disappointing, but not surprising.

>>50088478
That's how they worked... they were mostly about strategic mobility, not tactical.

>>50088478
Yeah, honestly the trucks stay in the boxes in 90% of games. OTOH they're only 5 points.

>>50088486
And strategic mobility doesn't really factor into it. Lorried rifles, on the scale battlefront works at, are just infantry. They're there for the same reason your 5.5" guns are close enough to fire over open sights: battlefront's persistent scale issue.

>>50088478
well, trucks are 5pts for a reason.

>>50088478
>>50088541
Honestly the real killer is usually being basically-infantry but rated mechanised. You end up doing a lot of painful charging into machineguns.

>>50088687
Yeah, being mechanized-but-not-really means you can't count on defending most of the time like you can with infantry companies. So you end up an infantry company that expects to attack half the time, and you don't get something like Night Attack to help you out.

>>50088687
My feeling is that infantry lists that get softskin transports should still be infantry. Armoured transports and light armoured vehicles are very different beasts. Besides, it's not like motorised infantry would be more likely to attack than normal infantry; as stated, their mobility is primarily strategic.

>>50088767
They generally are, I though? I know kfz 70 equipped panzergrenadiers and their ss equivalent from grey wolf are rated as infantry. The gepanzerte pz grens are when you see mechanized rating

>>50088932
Don't know about others, but the British and Hungarian ones are Mechanized. Which is especially odd for the brits, since they have infantry companies that can get Kangaroos and defrocked priests.

>>50088932
Motostrelk are mechansied, at least. They don't even get trucks
>qq

>>50089005
Yikes

>>50088986
Depends where the brits are, actually. Africa they're mechanised, overlord they're not, market garden they're mechanised again.

>>50089053
Checking, they're mech in nachtjaeger. Desert rats infantry (who can take lorries) in BotB are mech, motor companies are infantry. It's kind of a mess for the brits, honestly.

>>50089092
IIRC it's also about if they doctrinally performed night attacks or not.
After all, infantry companies can do that, while mech cannot.

>>50089499
Yes, but they could easily fix that by adding a thing saying "This company cannot perform Night Attacks".

>>50085480
In the long run USSR is gonna end up with the most variety. The game is just at the stage where BF is rushing out the things that will build the playerbase (NATO nostalgia stuff).

>>50090047
...How so? Cranking out T-72s and T-55s for everyone was efficient but it certainly didn't lead to the variety half a dozen countries individually chasing their own holy grails did. And I do think there's an issue with red vs blue getting harder while everyone jumps on nato stuff.

File: panzerlied_by_joruto-d5yyk46.png (915KB, 1600x452px) Image search: [Google]

915KB, 1600x452px

>>50071639
>achtuallee...

KMM used Henschell KT's...otherwise, you are spot on.

The Bridge at Remagen Book has a few ringers, as well as a few new lists from The Ardennes Offensive.

File: 1425742001610.png (72KB, 200x299px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 200x299px

>>50072385
>bringing LW versus EW
>LW vs. EW....
> pic -so- goddamn related

dude, that is utter shit.
you poor guy.
and those fuckers.
fuck those guys. FUCK!!!!

dude, tell me where they live. those fucks gotta roach! AAARRRGGH!!!


if you really want to, let EW have 2100pts for every 1000 LW gets, or 1500 per thousand for MW....
be sure to bring artie and Tank Assault, just to rub it in...

they are NOT balanced to play each other....

>>50087959
Stripes, heh?

do tell more...

Assuming they come out with FoW V4, it would be a good bet that there's gonna be a new boxed set huh

>>50090081
T55, T62, T64, T72, T80 + possible variants with ATGM or ERA

strela 1, strela 10, osa, shilka

various BMPs including BMD, series of BTRs, MTLBs

No one other country fielded as much stuff as USSR. They're gonna end up with the most versatile arsenal, while nato minors are gonna end up within niches.

>>50090447
Stripes is the working title for the US expansion book, late 2017/2018. In addition to humvees and the M60 we might get apaches. Someone's also said we might get the Sgt. York, which would be interesting. I'd have thought stingers/chapperals would be easier.

>>50090502
New Plastic boxes. Tigers, Lees, Crusaders, FlaK 36 AA guns. Infantry etc. But yes, new Box Sets.

I have thought though about Team Yankee.
The Soviets and a few others, modernised old WW2 tanks like the ISU-152, T-34s, Panzer IVs etc. If you were going mildly ahistorically, could you not have Modernised King Tigers?

Mostly because I got a very good game in Warthunder and blasted three Leopard 1s in three consecutive shots.

>>50090617
I think all the KTs were museum pieces pretty much directly postwar, let alone in 1985.

>>50090502
>>50090617

I mean like a new Open Fire starter set with rules and so forth

>>50085434
>And there really wasn't as much variety on the other side

So why kick it in the pants? Seriously, Warpact's the bad guys, so let's not even bother to give them their due, right? Where's the T-55, or the T-62, or the T-64, or the T-80, etc etc.? This "lol one tonk for you, try again later in 2018" shit is stupid. It's just going to intentionally fall into Vietnam's hole again. "Do you want gooks in black, or gooks in straw hats? Disregard all the cool shit the 'good guys' get." Except, intentionally. Nam is limited because Nam, the USSR is not.

>>50090509
Well gee, let's hope, given BF's track record.

File: 106SovietTanks.jpg (131KB, 1024x517px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 1024x517px

>>50090384
2100 to every 1k... Hmmm this has Possibilities...
>i play russians
>already double the models, tripple the german count
>goes up to 6 or 10 stands to 1 against the german players
>now we approach truely russian levels of play
>let us rejoice this glorious battle, as they litterally cant roll enough dice to stop me.
>so many units on the table, that my comissars kill more than the germans
>even the tigers cannot move due to the courageous clogging of the wonderful men of the motherland.
And when the smoke clears, aznd you can see clear spots on the table
>then come the tanks

>>50091463
You still get to enjoy penalties to hit giving you 6's at close range against concealed Veterans on turns you move; and they're looking at 3's to hit with full ROF before scooting away on a 3+.

>>50072566
>45-55
>55
For some men, the war never ends...

>>50090509
Not likely. We may see the kit, but it will all be shit-tier skill levels, and built to be spammed in mass. All the Warpac stuff is just going to be various shades of horde, with more horde added in. Whether you want to run garbage T-55s, bog standard T-72s, or -slightly- better T-80s, isn't going to change much. It'll be like picking between Soviet M4 76 list, or T-34-85s, or Matildas.

>>50085434

>And there really wasn't as much variety on the other side

That smacks of did not do research.
We've got the TR MBT series built in Romania, the Czech and Polish upgrades of the T-55AM, the BMP-23 and BMP-30 IFVs, DANA SPGs, etc.

Warpact equipment isn't all just repainted soviet stuff.

>>50091625
The T-80 should be a really big jump up from the T-72. T-64 will likely be a disappointment if you were expecting anything more than missiles, ERA, and maybe better stabilisers.

I'm hoping the soviets get some elite armies with hit-on 4+, at least, and that NATO gets some hit on 3+. I think we need the variety.

>>50091523
Eventually, they run out of room. And i can tank assault any and all vehicles. Also if the infantry soaks, the tanks can move balls out because they wont need to shoot.

>>50090502
Here's hoping for one with a more versatile allied list.

>>50082893
Sadly you guys are almost 2 hours away. I am in Burlington county.

Know any other groups in the state?

>>50093508
Why don't you go ahead and join our Facebook group? Type in "North Jersey Flames of War" on Facebook. We have lots of guys there from all over the state!

>>50093563
Ill take a look. doesn't look like theres a south jersey group on facebook tho.

>>50093725
I'm on Long Island if it helps, but I doubt I'm actually any closer.

>>50093769
I am near philly. I hate cities though so fuck going to philly.

File: Panzer-88-Poster.jpg (224KB, 600x678px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 600x678px

>>50090617
if you utterly re-designed the KT with 1970's tech, and gave her a new engine, the answer is ....yes.

Panzer Tiger II M
IR, Bazooka Skirts
--tac 10" --ter 14"--crs 20" --rd 24" --cross 3+
16--8--2
40" -- 2 / 1 -- AT 18 --FP3+ Stabilizer,
7.62 MG yadda yadda

i don't care about points right now.

>>50091827
French will hit on 3+
i'd say

>>50091827
What're east germans to-hit numbers, do we know?

>>50094186
wait what they're turning that madness into a movie???!

>>50096666
Looks like fanart.

>>50094972
sadly, we do not have previews yet....

i think those are december slated...

File: IMG_2834.jpg (26KB, 224x225px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 224x225px

>>50087012
>Panzerfaust best rocket launcher
>Rocket launcher

>>50090581

I'm curious about how they stat apaches. Will they be hunter killer with a 4+ aircraft save, 30mm cannon, rockets, and TOWs? Seems pricy but punishing if they can Alpha strike the enemy AA with their TOWs.

>>50093725
Like I said, we have guys from all over the state. I can think of 5 that are in the group that are in middle and southern Jersey. My brother and I could even take a trip down to a shop to play with a couple guys down there.

>>50098890
>hunter killers with 4+ save
Plz no

Also Sgt York seems pointless, the reason it was needed irl is that the VADS had something like a 1km range outside a hind's firing range. In TY it has 32" like all AA so it doesn't matter

>>50099803
What is the Sgt York? I must admit I've never heard of it before.

>>50100983
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M247_Sergeant_York

>>50103497
1. how did the germans get out
2. how did they fuck up so bad

>>50103662
That picture might be from Operation Cobra, which included carpet bombing by B-17s.

>>50103662
>how did they get out
They probably didn't.

>>50103701
then it's afe to assume the answer is
"they didn't"
>>50103708
horrible

>>50103701
Not Cobra, but around Caen (I think). Naval artillery is a hell of a thing.

>>50101070
>only 50 produced

Seems like an odd choice to include in the game.

>>50103662
Bombs mang. I have a picture on my home computer of a king tiger that got flipped

File: Die Gefahren der weiblichen Autofahrer..jpg (127KB, 779x406px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 779x406px

>>50103662
Nevermind got it off my Google drive

>>50103973
Yeah, not sure why there's chatter of including it. As I said, VADS already does it's job in TY.

>>50103973
>>50104189
I think it'd be safe to assume that if the war went hot, certain projects that in real life never really went anywhere mightve ended up being massed produced due to lack of an alternative.

Not necessarily because they were good/bad but because "oh shit WWIII actually broke out, what the fuck do we have ready to go right now?"

>>50104013
>no muzzle brake

Huh I didn't realize they made King Tigers without them. I knew there were StuG's and StuH's made without them into 1945 but had no idea that that practice continued to other vehicles.

>>50104369
Or maybe it came off when it did the flippy flop, who knows

>>50104352
I can believe they might get rushed to the front, sure, but the VADS already does what it does; IRL it was meant to be a longer-ranged anti-copter weapon, because the VADS didn't have the range. In game the VADS has the same range as everything else.

More midwar plastics and TY resin models (from a previous thread, I think).
http://wargamerontour. (blog_spot) .co.uk/2016/10/mid-war-plastics-at-flamescon-2016.html?platform=hootsuite&m=1

>>50104584
Pretty sure we've already seen all these?

>>50085434
>And there really wasn't as much variety on the other side.

well of course the USSR doesn't offer as much variety as three major NATO powers combined - still it does have a fukchuge arsenal if you don't artificially reduce it. But honestly, neither side is even remotely close to having its whole arsenal released so that's kind of a moot point anyway.
The variety of the current NATO releases could be easily matched by the USSR alone even without the other Warsaw Pact powers taken into account.

I really don't understand why they didn't give the Soviets a second MBT option straight off the bat, or at least before releasing two full NATO nations, just to keep things a bit more varied and interesting.

>>50104895
Hopefully, Volksarmee will give a few new options and will be higher-skill; an elite-horde would be really interesting.

>>50104895
Because the 4 major factions of Cold War Europe are:

Americans
West Germans
British
Soviets

Three NATO countries, and the main WarPac country.

Maybe add in East Germans as the 5th major faction.

>>50104895
>The variety of the current NATO releases could be easily matched by the USSR alone even without the other Warsaw Pact powers taken into account.
Please tell me more. I honestly don't know much about Cold War stuff.

>>50105263
"Three allies and one enemy" is okay if the opfor side has loads of special snowflakes to keep releasing and, ideally, a pop-culture reputation as badasses that make people want to play them, both things the Germans benefit from. The soviets are pretty uniform and their pop-culture rep is "cannon fodder", so they really need more love to keep the side numbers even. As I said, there's now only two people who main soviets here, red vs blue is almost impossible to maintain and a lot of people are drifting back to FoW.

>>50105263
yes exactly, these are the main factions.
So to avoid another FoW Vietnam where nobody wants to play Opfor because it is boring and Blufor has all the interesting stuff.

so instead of releasing
US+USSR -> WGer -> Brits
do
US+USSR -> WGer -> more USSR -> Brits

as I said it's not like the Soviets offer to little to do that.


Doesn't matter much now, because we are past the Brits now anyway, but I think it would've been a better approach to build more continuing interest in the USSR, which will have to be -the- main Opfor as you rightfully noted.

>>50105401
well there's too much equipment to list it all of course, the Soviets had a lot of stuff going on, especially once you you consider varaints (just as there's quite a bit of difference between different Marks of German Panzers, the different models of each of the Soviet MBTs matter).

What I think would've made a good second wave for Soviets would've been a second MBT model and BTR-series based infantry.
Alternatively an airborne wave with VDV and BMD-series vehicles aswell as a second helicopter or plane.

Doesn't really matter now, because the opportunity has passed and I just hope their decision to do 2 big Blufor releases before giving Redfor another one didn't hurt the game too much. Also as >>50105014 noted Volskarmee looks quite promising, so there's that.

>>50105401
Well, there's three MBTs serving in 1985, the T-64, T-72, and T-80. Though they look more or less identical and only the later T-72 and T-80U are substantial upgrades. You have the BMPs but also BTRs, and MTLB. The Airborne get the BTRD and BDM. There's the BRDM armoured recon cars. There's half a dozen 2S(n) vehicles in various calibres. The Tunguska AA system was also being produced by 85, as was the Buk. They did have a shitload of stuff but I'm not sure if enough of it would grab interest. It's certainly no dozen marks of panzer, tigers, and panthers.

>>50105591
Oh, and of course the T-55, but we know we're not getting those in plastic.

>>50105619
also for the Soviets themselves the T-55 is not really that relevant except for Morskaya.

>>50105409
Yeah, good points. Same reason it was hard to get anyone to play an Arab side - and in both cases the added cost is another factor. Afghatsy should've helped but it didn't seem all that interesting.

Plastic T-55s are a must but that's still pushing towards a horde army. To what extent would the USSR have used T-64s? Would a T-80 make more sense for a third Soviet plastic tank?

>>50105433
Then you get Brits (and players waiting for West Germany) complaining that, hey, BF already gave Soviets an initial release - can't the Soviets wait for the UK and West Germany to get some basics first?

>>50105433
Battlefront had a huge Brit-boner and couldn't keep it in their pants. It got so bad that Britbong recon vehicles were higher in plastic priority than one of the most prolific MBTs in history. Granted the Brits turned out really, really nice: nice models, nice lists. But the Soviets (and Yanks) need that kind of attention before they run off throwing people innthe conflict who were never stationed in Western Europe.

>>50105591
well I think even to non-rivet counters the visual difference between ERA-equipped MBTs and earlier models should be quite evident, so there's room for at least two variants of each MBT.

>>50105591
Buk is a strategic weapon so I don't think we'll see it, I'd be pretty confident on Osa though.

>>50105697
if they don't give us Osas eventually I will be quite mad. I love these things.

>>50105582
They got an air-mobile list in the form of the Afghansty booklet.

In that case the release schedule looks more like:

Team Yankee (US & Soviets)
Afghansty (More Soviets)
Leopard(West Germans)
Panzertruppen(More West Germans)
Iron Maiden(British)
Volksarmee(East Germans)
Stripes(working title, upcoming, More US)
Title Unknown(upcoming, More Soviets & WarPac)

And I wouldn't be surprised if we see a British booklet like the Afghansty and Panzertruppen.

Also, I'm surprised by the lack of a US booklet.

>>50105736
We got Afghansty because they realised it was wall-to-wall NATO, so I guess they didn't feel the need for something for the yanks.

>>50105736
>>50105764
also Afghansty was relatively lackluster imo

>>50105671
>British
>not stationed in Europe

Have you not heard of the second British Army of the Rhine?

>>50105764
True, but it still feels off.

Like, they could have put together something using mostly stuff from their Vietnam range as a US reserves or US air-mobile list for Team Yankee.

>>50105736
>Stripes

There had better be a Bill Murray and Harold Ramis with the Assault RV objective marker.

>>50105794
They mean the ANZAC and Canadian units.

>>50105736
You've got it the wrong way around, it's soviets before Stripes, and the soviet book is Red Thunder (also working title).

>>50105934
ANZAC I agree is stupid, but let the Kiwis have a bit of national pride in this fictional setting they created.

As for Canadians. With a mix of American, West German, and British equipment you could easily put together a Canadian army list.

>>50105950
Ah. Thanks for the info and the correction.

I wish we could get weird ineffectual stopgap stuff in ficticious WW3.

You know, like a unit of M60A2s. Starship Squadron. Or perhaps a MBT70 type of some kind, if we're seeing Sgt. Yorks.

Soviet side could have half of Kubrika come out to play.

>>50106021
yea I mean, they're starting with stuff in 1985 but if they advance the timeline they could definitely introduce stuff that didn't appear historically, as there was no open conflict

>>50105777
Afgansty might see some new life against British lists. The grenade launchers and PKM teams can throw out a lot of firepower against infantry.

Whats going on with Team Yankee?

There are quite a few guys at my lgs playing this, getting into it.
I have looked it up and there are not a lot of units or factions out, not like WWII.

Are they going to be adding more factions and units? More NATO and more Warsaw nation units?

Just curious because no one plays WWI, israel, vietnam, and barely anyone plays WWII around me. But for some reason a lot of guys are coming out to play Team Yankee for some reason.

I think I might want to try it out.

>>50106225
>Whats going on with Team Yankee?

See >>50105736

We just got Iron Maiden, with Volksarmee coming in January.

>>50106225
It's doing well, and I'd say it has a lot of factions for how briefly it's been available. As you can see from our conversation, NATO's pretty well represented with US, UK, and West German forces. The USSR stands alone for now (including a snowflake but uninspiring Afghatsy list) but will be getting East Germans. If it continues to do well, they'll probably release other Warsaw Pact nations and France.

The current source of controversy is that the East German release will not include a new plastic tank kit (T-55s will remain resin+metal). Khurasan has one too but it isn't any cheaper.

>>50106312
Much thanks.

So no warsaw pact countries other than USSR and East Germany?
NATO is West German, US, and UK.

I just hope they expand in the future.

>>50106225
It's a cleaned up version of the WW2 system. There's more stuff coming, east germans next, more soviets towards the end of the year. Canada and ANZAC are coming after the GDR. It seems to have the twin appeal of being good for modern-warfare kids and retired army guys from the 80s.

>>50106384
>Canada and ANZAC are coming after the GDR.
Good to hear.
I am hoping for some proxy war stuff, or at least NATO vs warsaw pact wars in various third world areas.
Hoping for US and maybe UK against USSR in south america and maybe cuba.

>>50106384
What equipment did Canada and ANZAC have?

File: kawaii Hitler.png (98KB, 426x600px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 426x600px

Plastic US Paratroopers when?

Does Team Yankee have rules for US Paras yet?

>>50106590
Mix of US and German. Both used Leopards as MBTs and M113s for APCs.

>>50106374
I think Red Thunder, the Soviet book planned to be released near Stripes might have some Non-Soviet Warsaw Pact forces, but that hasn't been confirmed yet.

>>50106591
No US paras yet in TY.

Besides, an air mobile force in transport helicopters is more likely.

Is it me or is the M113 PzGren team a bit better than the Marder one? The Marders don't have integral AT which limits their usefulness, but worse they have five goddamn stands. Having the sixth stand, and a strong AT stand at that, seems the much better deal.

>>50106978
>might have some Non-Soviet Warsaw Pact forces

I don't think so, they said a pretty explicit "no, nothing's planned" on the Poles.

how do you guys paint infantry? because even following all the wip guides my dudes still look almost as bad as when i first started and its super discouraging

>>50105663
I wanted to play afghansti until I realized command distance meant I had to field these absolutely massive hind models with the blades OVERLAPPING which annoyed me to no end.

I think my biggest issue with team yankee is scale. The vehicles are just too big and too crammed in to make it really all that interesting to me. It looks even worse than Flames of War can get. It'd be like if you had two king tiger armies facing off against each other at 4k points.

>>50107456
Are you doing

>Basecoats
>Wash
>light drybrush highlight

or are you doing something different?

Also, getting good at basing your models is key. Nice bases make mediocre models look great just like a bad base drags down a nice model.

>>50107436
Right, but that could just be because they were specifically asked about Poles.

Other stuff could be in the work, but Poles would make more sense.

Keep in mind the map on pages 4 and 5 of the Team Yankee rule book does list Soviet, East German, Polish, and Czechoslovakian forces arrayed against NATO on the borders of Germany and Austria.

We could be seeing Czechnology first and Poles later.

Reading the forums looks like the T-72 is AT 17, which is weird. There's someone point out that it might be because they have the HVAP round and not the APDS, but it's still kind of bizarre because 'nam T-55s used BR412D shell (175mm @1km), and BM8 HVAP is 318mm at 1km. Almost double the penetration is only +1 AT. That feels screwy.

>>50108111
Fuck me, that's a mess. The T-55 is AT 17.

>>50107786
Yeah, they said they wanted to do all the forces arrayed on the map, which means French, Poles and Czechs. But judging by the release schedule we already know they're a long way off.

>>50108400
>want to do all the forces on the map
>quick detour for canadians and ANZAC

Anyone got any of the Leopard 1s recently, by the way? I want to know if them being shit was just because of a rush job to get them in stores or if the models are just awful from the ground up. I'm considering the panzertruppen Lep 1 briefing.

>>50107544
yeah i have been doing that.
my models faces and colours still look flat. also battlefronts guide doesn't use washes but i have tried them and it looked better but not great.

as for bases, do most people use flock or static grass? im told the later looks out of scale but seems fine to me.

sorry about all the questions. being an perfectionist autistic sperg and a noob is not a good mix

>>50108400
Dutch and Belgians are on the map as well.

>>50108457
>quick detour for canadians and ANZAC

Canadians are a no-brainer since they already made the kits necessary to build a Canadian force.

Hell, I've seen people on the Facebook groups already painting M113s and Leopard 1s as Canadians.

>>50108493
>being an perfectionist autistic sperg and a noob is not a good mix

Do what you can now to the best of your ability, and know your skills will improve if you keep using them.

>do most people use flock or static grass? im told the later looks out of scale but seems fine to me.

I've seen both, and they both look good to me.

>>50108485
The only place I ever here complaint about them is here on /tg/.

I've never seen complaints about them on either the official or unofficial Facebook pages for Team Yankee.

That being said, I don't own any, so I can't fully comment.

>>50108485

Safe to assume that they haven't sold out of the release run because everyone who has bought a box has realized they are shit. QRF's Leo 1 seems of similar quality for nearly half the price.

>>50108754

>I've never seen complaints about them on either the official or unofficial Facebook pages for Team Yankee.

I haven't seen any comments about them good or bad on any source outside of /tg/. WWPD and Breakthrough assault certainly aren't in a hurry to review the models.

Haven't seen anything on Panzertruppen either... Maybe people aren't excited for it, or maybe the Leo 1's kind of put a damper on the big draw of the book.

>>50107176
Speaking of Panzertruppen, I was thinking the same thing. The extra Milan is worth losing an autocannon. The west germans have plenty of autocannon options between the gepard and the luchs.

>>50103497
Wasn't that from Goodwood?

So I've currently got the following:
15 Cromwellls (11 IV, 4 VI)
3 Challengers
4 Dingoes
8 Open Fire Shermans (6 V, 2 Firefly V)
8 Churchills (2 each of IV, V, VI, and VII)
3 Airlanding platoons
4 Airlanding support weapon platoons
8 25pdrs+required teams
3 Wasps
2 Bofors SP
1 Infantry platoon
1 US Para platoon

If I wanted to expand this to do the most companies possible once I finish painting all these, what would be the most efficient way to do so? Ideal goal is to have both a normal and airlanding infantry company, and then Churchill, Cromwell, and Sherman tank companies.

File: IMG_0249.jpg (78KB, 640x424px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 640x424px

>>50107456
It's all about the eyes - they tell the story. Not that you'll have yours anymore after doing work like this.

just bought a box of german infantry to get started playing against a friend.

its a company sized box, with 108 men. following the basing guide things seem off. i have enough bases to fit 72 men... only 2 small command bases and 13 that hold like 4 to 6 men (i think).

its enough to make 2 full platoons and no company HQ. am i missing something here. basing shit of irl army experience a company is at least 3 platoons. are jerries different? do i need to buy company HQ seperate?

>>50111307
which company did you buy the box from? Most game companies, if they're selling you a company box, have 3 platoons with platoon command and a company command section as well.

Is the PSC US armoured company good for starting a US force?

>>50111380
battlefront. got it off ebay though. unopened

>>50111455
Could you check what product code it has? Probably something like GBX##. That way, we can easily check what it should have. Might be things are missing, if it's plastic (and most likely GBX81), it's supposed to only contain enough bases for two platoons and an HQ with a PanzerSchreck (so 13 medium bases, and 4 small). Presumably because that's how much most people would use.

>>50111492
aight i checked. im missing two small bases goddamn it

>>50111644
Send an email to battlefront (and pretend that it was you who bought it from them initially), and you'll most likely get replacements. Or you could check if any player in your viscinity has two spares (odds are that they do)

>>50108485
Anyone who has them have any pictures? Also where is the model bad, exactly; front, turret, tracks? I'm wondering if it'd be the kind of thing that'd be fixable with some judicious camo-netting to cover the flaws since looking, Leo 1s often had pretty heavy camoflaging.

>>50112639
Aparrantly I deleted the pictures from my phone. The first box of Leo 1s I got had a lot of junk I had to sand down on the lower hull where the tracks needed to be glued. Even then the tracks did not fit well. The mold lines on the barrels were bad and some of the IR sight was misshapen. Tracks had broken/missing track pads and the mudflaps were damaged. On a couple of the models there were defects on the body.

Emailed Battlefront and recieved a replacement box. Most of the metal pieces were much better in this box. No hull defects on the upper part, but there was still a ton of excess resin to sand down on the lower hull. Tracks fit poorly abd still had broken mudguards and missing trackpads. Had to bend some tracks after soaking in hot water. Emailed Battlefront again to tell them I was grateful for the replacement, but their Leo 1 kit was still poor quality and needed to be fixed. No response after that.

No issues with any other West German resin kit I have bought, besides gepards being tacky.

File: IMG_2835.jpg (256KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1024x768px

>>50112639
Bumping with pic of the Battlefront Leo 1.

Hey anons.
I'm trying to get into late war and i heard PSC was a good idea.
I've picked up their late war panzer division
and i was wondering what would be the best book/army to make use of
6x Panzer IV's, 4x Panthers, 4x SdKfz 251/D Halftracks, 2x Tiger I's
And what i could add to my army

>>50114685
Can't go wrong with Desperate Measures

Look into some rocket artillery like nebelwrefers for dat smoke

>>50114685
Also I'm not sure if that set come with infantry or not but some mans to go with the halftracks would b gud

>>50110195
Look at the Market Garden book.

That should allow you to make several different companies based on what you have listed there.

>>50115484
Was mainly thinking along the lines of what boxes to expand that with.

Overall thoughts:
Shermans need 1 Sherman box and Stuarts to complete (bulk, recce)
Churchills need 1 more Churchill box, Stuarts, and M10s to complete (bulk, recce, anti-cat)
Infantry need 1 infantry box, at least 4 6pdrs, a support weapon box, M10Cs, and carriers to complete (basic troops, basically required support, Anti-cat, Recce)
Stuarts and M10s can be shared between lists, as can carriers to some degree. Cost-effectiveness wise, I'm thinking M10 Box (useful for airlanding, infantry, Churchills), Churchill box, Stuart Box (Useful for Churchills, Shermans, Cromwells), Sherman Box, three infantry boxes, Carriers (useful for infantry, Shermans) would be the way to expand them out. Main questions are if to go PSC or BF for the infantry and Shermans, and if the order there seems like it needs revising for maximum usefulness.

Not that I'm going to plop down over $200 on all this anytime soon (though I might get a box or two for myself for christmas), but planning ahead saves a lot of grief.

If I wanted to build two WW2 small armies to run demo games for my community, what lists would you suggest?

>>50116700

Literally Open Fire!

It's got two 1000ish point lists of differing but basically matched natures.

>>50114982
They got mans. Like at least 3 full grenadier platoons ... I think. Either way German armour has me in a good mood. Except the Augsburg unreliability. This is why the Nazis lost the war. Everyone knows you have to hold Vienna. Works against Turks commie filth would be no different

>>50117989
Neat, you probably already did this but just take a look at battlefront infantry platoon assembly instructions so you can get an idea on how to properly base them

So yea sounds like all you need is some rocket artillery, and maybe some anti-air vehicles if you think you'll run into planes

If you want to run an infantry company look into getting some mortars (p sure psc makes heavy weapons too)

>>50116163
>planning ahead saves a lot of grief.

And a lot of money.

Know what you want to include in your army and buy that first.

Add more stuff after that when you can afford it.

File: 1515 Guards.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Thoughts? 1515 points because that seems to be the tournament size for this coming year.

File: locust-10.jpg (156KB, 928x590px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 928x590px

Microtank bump

>>50124090
>tfw no rules for it

;_;

>>50124109
Yeah there is. In the Crossing of the Rhine stuff on FoW Digital.

>>50122164
Seems pretty solid to me. Nothing immediately jumps out at me as being obviously wrong with it.

>>50124109
>tfw no rules for it

The tank or the plane it landed in?

File: Nachtjager - UK Airlanding company.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50124109
Cheers M8. Page 6 for the platoon entry and page 18 for stats.

Summary if you don't feel like peeling through this:
40pts each at FV, 2-4 in a platoon.
Armor:
Front 1, Side 1, Top 1. Co-ax MG, Wide Tracks
Gun: M6 37mm.
24"/60cm range, RoF 2, AT 7, FP 4+

>>50124090
>>50124109
>>50124172
>>50124183
>>50124311
Is there any reason to use them aside from being a rivet counter that wants a perfectly accurate force organization? They seem pretty shit.

>>50124469
Well A: Some people do play Themed Missions with the actual forces involved in battles. Like D-Day or shit. German Captured Panzer Company might not be great against the Stealth Canadian Tournament List, but they're pretty great in a counter attack against some lightly armed Paratrooper gobshites.

B: 160 points for four light tanks that could potentially kill Panthers. There's worse things to spend 160 points on.

>>50124755
>B: 160 points for four light tanks that could potentially kill Panthers
If you're going to use them to kill stuff, StuGs/Panzer IVs and such are a better target. Comparing 5 to two cromwells...

Locusts get 5 shots on the move, cromwells get 2. Croms go straight to 3+ FP tests after hits, so assuming vet Germans that's 0.67 dead and 0.33 bailed. Locusts they have 4+ saves against the average of 2.5 hits, so .63 killed and 0.83 bailed for the Locusts. Not bad. Against stuff like Halftracks or armored artillery the Locusts are actually pretty good. Just don't actually get shot at, and they'll do fine.

File: tonk.png (365KB, 700x466px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 700x466px

A friend and I just bought in to Team Yankee and hope to have things painted and ready to play in a week or two. We were looking for other people to play with in our area, but none of our local stores seem to have a scene. We hope to change that. Until then, is there anyone on here playing in Raleigh, NC or the surrounding area?

File: Damaged_Iraqi_BMP-2.jpg (337KB, 1720x1160px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 1720x1160px

Dead thread.

>>50132328
Forgive me, I've been editing the next Panzerfunk episode for the past few hours.

>>50132328
Waiting for the game tomorrow. Will have commentary later.

>>50132328
While we're posting excuses, I've been watching the GuP movie and haven't had a chance to type up the Shtraf v Jap battle yet.

>>50132328

yeah, I'm out of the country at the moment. I'll bump the thread with actual content when I'm home.

FWIW, I'm expecting to come home to ~£150 of Team Yankee stuff.

>>50075591
I am. Really wanna do an Italian lost!

>>50133814
Oh goddamn, nice. What're they running? Just straight infantry?

>>50135296
Almost, the shrtaf had 3 SU-122s and a full Katy battery. I'll upload the lists when I finish sorting out the 30 pics of that mess.

>>50135637
I more meant the Japanese guy.

>>50135671
he had some arty and AT guns, but most of his points (all but like 400) was in his infantry.

>>50135637
>>50135861
Got the pics sorted, but I'm not sure I'll get them posted before the end of the thread, as I still need to get the actual batrep written up.

Desperate measures German recce options: Luchs, 38t, or halftracks? I suppose it really doesn't matter that much, but I am curious about what others think.

Who in the actual fuck approved the Sturmtiger?

>>50138539
A dead man.

File: f39a0c6998ec21c5e5aca5c49c760aa5.jpg (42KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x400px

>>50138539
Hitler.

Based upon experience in fighting French fortifications and Stalingrad street fighting.

What is the best cheapo primer for minis?

Would a plastic use camo spray paint work (Krylon or Rustoleum) in od for US vehicle undercoating.

Also did all german vehicles have camo? I feel like in movies they are all solid colors but I was looking up guides on how to paint StuG and I have neve rpainted camo before.

>>50139844
Check out the books in the mediafire, most of them detail the camo schemes pertinent to the forces involved

But for the most part, yea, they'll have camo

>>50139844
>What is the best cheapo primer for minis?

On plastics the black walmart primer for 98 cents a can is fine, since plastics hold it better.
For metal and resin I use Duplicolor sandable primer I get at Pep Boys for $5.88 a can. I've found the Walmart primer rubs off metal too easy even after a full day of curing. Duplicolor is like the exact same as P3 primer for half the cost. Do several light coats with it.

File: pertaburo.jpg (57KB, 414x446px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 414x446px

>>50138539
>>50138662
>Sturmtiger
I like that design
now if only it was bigger

my mother in law put together my panthers while i was at work...
im not sure how to feel about this.

Also is it just me or are tamiya paints way fucking over rated? their primers are the worst shit i have ever seen too.

>>50133979
>an Italian lost

guiseppe where are we?

Also yeah they really need to redo their models. their faces are a mangled mess. the bodies look like they are doing yoga and their are random bits of metal everywhere.
my italian paras look pre-flamethrowered

File: Test minis.jpg (236KB, 1589x501px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1589x501px

Bit of a change in topic: who's already prepping for Mid War here?

>>50140410
>Duplicolor sandable primer

This. I use Duplicolor for most everything. I am especially liking their red oxide primer for basing late war german armor.

>>50139844
For my desperate measures panthers and stugs I am priming in red oxide and masking off a camo pattern using blue tack/sticky tack then spraying middlestone. I am hoping that will let me bang out a softer edge camo reasonably fast. When you mask the camp pattern roll the tack into long little snakes and gently set it one the tank. If you press down too hard you will get more of a hard edge effect.

>>50143007
>When you mask the camp pattern roll the tack into long little snakes and gently set it one the tank.
My gramps used to tell me this all the time.

>>50138374
Luchs are best, the Aufklärer 38t, then HT IMO... The Puma Pak patrols are also great, but require careful use.

File: bmp2.jpg (291KB, 740x491px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 740x491px

morning

File: IMG_0530.jpg (298KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1200x800px

>>50144244
Gutten tag. Wie gehts?

>>50142876
Nice paint job on those.

File: Test PanzerIV.jpg (68KB, 541x363px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 541x363px

>>50144763
Thanks. They were the test minis for my NA project, which got kinda shelved but will probs pick up again with the stuff coming up next year.

So what should I get in addition to the Rommels wolves set?

Some infantry or artillery or more tanks or what? Just getting into game and decided on Rommels wolves for starter box.

>>50147503

15 cm Nebelwerfers
Some Recon: Pumas or Luchs
Maybe some Stugs or Pz IVs for some cheaper armor to fill in the gaps.

>>50147503
Certainly not more tanks. That set overloads you on Panthers as it is.

Infantry and maybe some nebelwerfers are good follow up purchases.

>>50147503
Artillery (panzerwerfers or nebelwerfers are good) and some reconnaissance options should be the first things you get, maybe followed by some cheaper tanks (Panzer IVs, StuGs) for when you don't have the points to use all those panthers.

>>50147700
>>50147704
>>50147719

Much thanks, Nebelwerfers it is it seems.

File: 100_1687.jpg (2MB, 4608x3456px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4608x3456px

>>50142876
I'm already prepped for mid war

>>50142876
Waiting for the plastic M3s, then it's british armoured ahoy. I hope we get plastic Honeys later, as well.

>>50148162
I need plastic Valentines.

>>50148206
Supposedly early next year from PSC, my friend.

>>50148488
I hope so. PSC has updated their coming soon page since January so where do you find your information?

>>50148077
Sexy

>>50148829
Emailed them about it.

>>50148077
The symbol on the top of the tanks, that's what, Romanians?

Game result: Called due to time. I had lost a T-72 platoon, he has lost a Chieftain platoon. I will call it a win, since he only had the one and I had two. 50 points definitely feels too small even for quick games of TY; I'm leaning towards 60-75 being the "quick game" point level.

>>50150806
Not him, but yes, those are Romanians.

File: 1476630765918.png (181KB, 720x495px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 720x495px

>>50142876
I'm getting ready for Mid War. I'll be ordering up the beginnings of a Bersaglieri list when Black Friday hits.
>mfw retaking Roman clay

>>50152897
Speaking of Black Friday have we heard any thing yet about what websites will have good deals?

>>50152897
>Roma a shit

>Pax Mongolicus

we need a new thread, guise.
gona make un

>>50153385

new bread, guise.