/hwg/ - Historical Wargames General

File: cryslers farm.jpg (492KB, 1600x1062px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1600x1062px

>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: nJWexnC.jpg (107KB, 805x453px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 805x453px

11th of November in military history:

1673 – Second Battle of Khotyn in Ukraine: Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth forces under the command of Jan Sobieski defeat the Ottoman army.
1778 – Cherry Valley massacre: Loyalists and Seneca Indian forces attack a fort and village in eastern New York, killing more than forty civilians and soldiers.
1805 – Napoleonic Wars: Battle of Dürenstein – 8000 French troops attempt to slow the retreat of a vastly superior Russian and Austrian force.
1813 – War of 1812: Battle of Crysler's Farm – British and Canadian forces defeat a larger American force, causing the Americans to abandon their Saint Lawrence campaign.
1831 – In Jerusalem, Virginia, Nat Turner is hanged after inciting a violent slave uprising.
1839 – The Virginia Military Institute is founded in Lexington, Virginia.
1864 – American Civil War: Sherman's March to the Sea – Union General William Tecumseh Sherman begins burning Atlanta, Georgia to the ground in preparation for his march south.
1918 – World War I: Germany signs an armistice with the Allies in a railroad car in the forest of Compiègne, France. The fighting officially ends at 1100hrs.
1918 – Piłsudski assumes supreme military power in Poland - symbolic first day of Polish independence.
1919 – The Centralia Massacre results in the deaths of four members of the American Legion and the lynching of a local leader of the IWW.
1919 – Latvian forces defeat the Freikorps at Riga in the Latvian War of Independence.
1940 – World War II: Battle of Taranto – The Royal Navy launches the first aircraft carrier strike in history, on the Italian fleet at Taranto.
1940 – The German cruiser Atlantis captures top secret British mail, and sends it to Japan.
1942 – World War II: Nazi Germany completes its occupation of Vichy France.
1968 – Vietnam War: Operation Commando Hunt initiated. The goal is to interdict men and supplies on the Ho Chi Minh trail, through Laos into South Vietnam.

File: ZQvOchS.jpg (360KB, 1445x1109px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 1445x1109px

It is 76 years since the Battle of Taranto, fought between British naval forces, under Admiral Andrew Cunningham, and Italian naval forces, under Admiral Inigo Campioni. The Royal Navy launched the first all-aircraft ship-to-ship naval attack in history, with a small number of obsolescent Swordfish biplane torpedo-bombers from the aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious in the Mediterranean Sea. The attack struck the battle fleet of the Regia Marina at anchor in the harbour of Taranto using aerial torpedoes despite the shallow depth of the water. The devastation wrought by the British carrier-launched aircraft on the large Italian warships was the beginning of the ascendancy of naval aviation over the big guns of battleships. According to Admiral Cunningham, "Taranto, and the night of November 11–12, 1940, should be remembered for ever as having shown once and for all that in the Fleet Air Arm the Navy has its most devastating weapon."

Codenamed Operation Judgment, Cunningham and Lyster planned to attack Taranto on October 21, Trafalgar Day, with aircraft from HMS Illustrious and HMS Eagle. This was later changed following fire damage to Illustrious and action damage to Eagle. While Eagle was being repaired, it was decided to press on with the attack using only Illustrious. Several of Eagle's aircraft were transferred to augment Illustrious' air group and the carrier sailed on November 6. In the days before the attack, several reconnaissance flights from Malta confirmed that the Italian fleet was at Taranto.

Given these events, the RAF advised against the raid. They were afraid that a failure would result in the improvement of anti-aircraft defenses of the Italian harbour. But their warnings were ignored and the raid went ahead to devastating effect. Italian anti-aircraft guns were confused by flares set off by two leading planes; these also successfully illuminated targets.

File: 1415398331-03794100.jpg (69KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1000x1000px

>>50179117
Aboard Illustrious, at 2100hrs, 21 Fairey Swordfish biplane torpedo bombers (nicknamed "Stringbags") began taking off. Eleven of the planes were armed with torpedoes, while the remainder carried flares and bombs. The British plan called for the planes to attack in two waves about an hour apart. The first wave was assigned targets in both the outer and inner harbors of Taranto.

Approaching the harbor from the southwest at 10:58 PM, the first wave of 12 Swordfish found 6 battleships, 7 heavy cruisers, 2 light cruisers, 8 destroyers in the anchorage. As they began their attack, the sky was illuminated by flares and intense, but ineffective, antiaircraft fire. Around midnight, the second wave of 9 Swordfish arrived over the harbor from the northwest. Dropping their ordnance, they cleared the harbor and returned to their carrier.

In their wake, the 21 Swordfish left the battleship Conte di Cavour sunk and the battleships Littorio and Caio Duilio heavily damaged. They also badly damaged a heavy cruiser. British losses were only two Swordfish. In one night, the Royal Navy had succeeded in halving the Italian battleship fleet and had gained a tremendous advantage in the Mediterranean. As a result of the strike, the Italians withdrew the bulk of their fleet farther north to Naples.

The Taranto Raid changed many naval experts' thoughts regarding air-launched torpedo attacks. Prior to Taranto, many believed that deep water (100 ft.) was needed to successfully drop torpedoes. To compensate for the shallow water of Taranto harbor (40 ft.), the British specially modified their torpedoes and dropped them from very low altitude. This solution, as well as other aspects of the raid, was heavily studied by the Japanese as they planned their attack on Pearl Harbor the following year.

File: SOM_YEORN_E01542.jpg (96KB, 944x588px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 944x588px

>>50179125
Cunningham wanted to strike Taranto again the next night with Swordfish (six torpedo-bombers, seven bombers, and two flare-dispensers) – one wag in the pilot's room remarked, "They only asked the Light Brigade to do it once!" – but bad weather prevented the action.

Taranto has all the elements of an awesome wargame. The Swordfish were totally obsolete but performed superbly, and the Italian's confused reaction could easily have been more determined if things had gone their way. Most WW2 naval systems carry extensive rules for torpedo bombers, and correspondingly most WW2 aerial wargames include a naval element. This would be a real white-knuckle experience for both players as the British race to get in-and-out before the Italians can organize and fight back. Tally ho!

http://www.mediafire.com/file/3upcfyjs90mtbyt/Osprey+-+CAM+288+-+Taranto+1940.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/k1n7x19o4mxfwky/Osprey+-+ELI+165+-+British+Fleet+Air+Arm+in+WW2%282%29.pdf

File: 04053.jpg (706KB, 1475x700px) Image search: [Google]

706KB, 1475x700px

This month's community project is a recon or scout asset, turnover is the 15th/16th.

Maybe I'm just retarded and I missed it in the OP, but does anybody have Honours of War by Osprey?

File: Barry Lyndon (7).webm (3MB, 688x432px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 688x432px

>>50179249
Sadly not in our collection yet anon

File: Stay off our island.png (781KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 1546x1159px

>>50179148
I made some anti-recon assets: Japanese MG nests. Cost to make: $0 just a bits box and some old flock and balsa wood lying around.

>>50179148
I saw a Swordfish at an air display when I was a child.

The most impressive thing about them is how slowly they move without dropping out of the sky...

>>50181149
you should see a B.E.2
In a strong headwind they dont even move. Excellent for observation but hilariously under-powered for a 2 seater

>>50181174
Biplanes are hilarious sometimes. So much lift that in certain wind conditions landing sideways or even somewhat backwards is no big D.

>>50179101
I really, really like that painting, from an artistic standpoint. I wound up having to look up the painter. Thanks for introducing me to somebody new!

Its coupon time again:

Warlord Games

£10 OFF Discount Code:

ELECTION10-sa9e6d5s

Applies to any single Warlord Games product. Expires 17th November 2016.


Have fun guys. A shame the free shipping ended already..

>>50182656
Do we need any Hail Caesar/Pike and Shotte/Black Powder supplements?

I'm looking at either the Late Antiquity-Early Med army lists or the Germania Book.

Ok it seems we have the Early Med lists.

Here's a copy of Hail Caesar Germania. If someone could upload it to MF or Mega for the OP that'd be grand.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cgwlqhmofivp5la/Hail%20Caesar%20Germania%20PDF.pdf?dl=0

>>50182701
We have the two army books for Hail Caesar and Devil's Playground for Pike and Shotte - thhe Peninsular one for Black Powder would be excellent, tho.

>>50182701
do we have the blucher cards for hidden deployment?

A question for folks who scale games down into smaller ranges: 1:1 representation of figures can be a bit challenging... So where do you draw the line?

My 6mm stuff for TY/FFT is largely 1:1, I want to do some Swedes and Poles for By Fire and Sword and their 1:12 representation is a bit too much.

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

1B, 486x500px

>>50182865
Okay, bought Albion Triumphant vol. 1. Will upload in a bit, but if any anon wants to contribute, don't pick that one.

>>50182898
'ere we go

https://mega.nz/#!vU0lWQbB!tJNBM15ndf8Y626Yru0Aq8AqKZIqF49eMkC_faOAEzc

My FLGS banned a player last night for being gay, which sucks since its the only one that does historics

>>50179893
If I were to buy the PDF, how would I go about uploading it?

>>50182944
Couldn't that player sue them for discrimination?

>>50182954
Upload it to Mega, Mediafire or a similar document hosting site.

>>50182944
What the fuck. Where are you based?

>>50182962
Private institution or something. Probably not

>>50182977
If it's an FLGS, that makes it a business, no?

>>50182970
>Where are you based?
AZ

>>50182984
>US
Well, that tells everything. Banning someone for this is fucking bullshit.

>>50182983
Well yeah it does sell stuff so I guess youre right, I dont have the guys contact information though

>>50182932
>>50182743
Thanks you two!

File: Sharpe's Eagle - (1) The South Essex.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>50182743
Thanks anon

https://mega.nz/#!O8MUgYTZ!prH6TF91bSsdvl8d_mvN1B47CZv9uv9MCtV_Jnc-FwI

>>50182932
And a big thanks for this one especially

http://www.mediafire.com/file/0me00a8vhytn9e8/Black+Powder+-+Albion+Triumphant.pdf

>>50182962
>>50182944

Whats the whole story? Why did the shop owner even know the guy was gay?

You could invite him to your house to play.

>>50183067
can we not shit up the thread with some anon's game store dramas
please
go start another thread about it if you have to

File: 14938365_10209718370987975_4071450052708278978_n.jpg (17KB, 588x201px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 588x201px

Here is another coupon. Just in case you want to spend more..

>>50183067
I only caught the tail end of it all, a lot of screaming about "faggots like you will never be welcome here"

Do you know a company which does 28mm butterflies to place on bases, like on a flower tuft or on top of a tree trunk?

>>50183366
I don't know if you've tried making some yourself from card, clay, or plastic?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7h9Wt7cZ_S4

Does anyone have a pdf of Dux Bellorum by any chance?

File: 14787985664831760909245.jpg (1MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1944px

I was reading Stalin's Favorites vol 2 (10/10 book)and what the fuck is this thing? It looks like someone took the gun off a tank and made it an artillery piece.

>>50184243
looks like the 75mm off a StuG or Hetzer

File: 51iuU92UyaL.jpg (51KB, 347x500px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 347x500px

Finished reading this.

Can't say I recommend it.

It's reasonably well written, and starts out with a fairly decent account of the Italian Wars but soon reveals itself to be incredibly generalist in its overviews of everything. It spends vastly more time in anecdotes about individuals than actually describing how warfare changed. It doesn't have any maps, its accounts of battles are Tolkien-esque in their briefness, tactics, logistics and technologies get even less of a mention. It does at least spend a lot of time covering things with Sweden, Russia, Poland and the Ottoman Empire, but things like the 30 years war are somehow barely covered at all.

I'm going to go read some of the books the author continually referenced instead, because I suspect their authors actually did some decent research and I'll learn something from them.

>>50184243
>>50184251

This. 7,5cm gun with Saukopfblende without a vehicle.

I have the desire to buy a cromwell troop

>>50182656
Danke.

File: ab23c80a206961dbd8930b94771d6f47.jpg (71KB, 736x493px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 736x493px

I was fucking around and found this new kickstarter for a line of WW2 era Highlanders. Looks like the company is new too, I hadn't heard of them. The goal isn't crazy either, so maybe they'll make it.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/940158614/ww2-highlanders-battalion-miniatures

What does /hwg/ think?

>>50184302
This was something I had to do quite a bit in college. Most of the time the articles I wound up reading ended up being more of an opportunity to find good sources rather than anything useful on their own.

Footnotes or endnotes? You can tell if an author/editor loves you by which they opts for

>>50184785
End notes, copious amounts of them.

>>50184783
That'd be a pretty fun force to collect. I'd hate painting all that tartan though. Still, 60USD for the whole lot + all the stretch figs is pretty damn cheap for what you're getting. Dammit, I shouldn't have checked the pledge prices, lol.

>>50184815
Hate that shit. It's a pain in the ass flipping back and forth in the damn book. Copious notes are good, but I like them presented where I can refer to them in context.

>>50184852
Painting a tartan might be a fun challenge. I don't get very many opportunities to try something like that. It's got me wondering about color combinations I could try too, pretty tempting.

File: 7722.jpg (32KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x300px

>>50184890
I painted a kilt for my British 8th army recently. I decided to go with my family clan colors - Johnston.
You can't really tell at 1/72 - just looks dark green from a distance.

File: Black_Watch_slim.png (43KB, 201x262px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 201x262px

>>50184890
The Black Watch tartan would probably be a popular choice.

>>50184939
>>50184963
Yeah, those both look pretty fun to paint, even if you could only really see the fine details up close. But I imagine the dark green and black tones would contrast nicely to some of the flesh and the belt colors.

Who's your favourite historian? I'm about to start reading some Jeremy Black(european warfare in a global context). Anyone have some fresh hot opinions for me before I start?

File: macphee_mod_big[1].jpg (41KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 300x300px

>>50184890
I really like that particular tartan. Not a fan of my family tartan (MacPhee).

I posted this last time we talked about tartan, still pertinent as it's a pretty good tutorial.

http://camospecs.com/Article/Details/18/how-to-paint-royal-black-watch-tartan

>>50185018
Jeremy's aight, but Ian Mortimer's pretty sweet too. Avoided lectures by both of them in favour of more Medieval modules when I was an undergraduate. Regret it now.

>>50185061
I'm more partial to the bright Tartans myself. Makes it pop a bit more against the usual greens/grays/khakis of the uniform.

Shit, know I'm seriously thinking about backing that KS.

>>50184963
I'm a Campbell, so this is my family Tartan. Pretty dope.

>>50185185
I'm trying to work out a way to buy more figs that aren't ships or X-wing stuff and not get kicked out of my house. I'm not sure I can manage it right now, but dammed if I don't want to.

>>50185440
I imagine a squad of highlanders wouldn't be nearly as bad as a ship in terms of size. Maybe yeah if you went and got the full platoon tier.

>>50184243
My neck broke.

File: Boatsboatsboats!.jpg (6MB, 4004x2444px) Image search: [Google]

6MB, 4004x2444px

>>50185508
If I were talking large scale models with lovely etched brass and cast metal gubbins, most definitely. My ships tend to be pretty cheap individually. Still, even at the highest level that's still a really good deal. I find myself wondering what sorts of armored cars and other light vehicles might have been attached to Highlanders regiments. Anybody able to shed some light on that?

>>50185814
If they were a recon regiment (of which there were highlanders):

Bren Gun Carriers and light reconnaissance cars, such as the Humber Light Reconnaissance Car. The assault troops were composed of lorried infantry and were called up when enemy resistance needed to be overcome. Later in the war, more efficient and well-armed armoured cars such as the Humber Armoured Car, Daimler Armoured Car, Staghound and Greyhound augmented the light reconnaissance cars in scout troops

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

>>50185440
>and not get kicked out of my house.
unless you can't make rent, or dont have space, whose business is it what you buy?

>>50185921
Basically this. I really don't get people whose spouse or anything dictates what he can buy. Shit, it's my money, rest of my money goes into food and shit, why the fuck can't I spend my money on what I want. Yeah, sure that 30th pair of shoes has much more use than a third Sherman.

do we have army lists for Ostfront?

>>50185921
>>50185962

Mostly significant other, and "space vs how often does it get used". When you don't get out that often to actually push minis around a table, it's harder to justify purchasing more and taking up more space rather than working through your backlog. To be perfectly fair, she talks her self out of buying herself stuff for the same reasons, so it's not like one of us is exactly being deprived of shit we want while the other goes hogwild. I've tried to talk her into buying things before that I thought she would enjoy or look good in, and she tells me no, she doesn't need it.

>>50186018
So because she doesn't buy anything, neither should you.

Great. A life of loneliness, fleshlights and cheap whores look better and better by every moment.

>>50186040
Never said that the two of us don't buy things at all. It's more of a case of not going apeshit crazy and having 40lbs of unpainted metal or that 30th pair of shoes. We just like to enjoy the shit we actually have, rather than accumulating more and more stuff that just sits in boxes. You're misunderstanding the situation if you think it's something that's been forced on me.

>>50186040
You sure sound like a fun and reasonable individual

>>50185995
we dont seem to have the ostfront anything. Which lists were you looking for? The Quick-fire rules have simplified lists for US, German, Soviets and British and they're free

>>50186040
Speak for yourself mate.

>>50186040
We appreciate your "chosen" celibacy. it is probably better for everyone if you don't polute the genepool

>>50186814
You seem to project an awfully lot based on a single comment.

What are the 15mm plastics from PSC like? Looking at grabbing a couple of boxes for platoon level stuff.

So, SLRs and Warrior AFVs together - how improbable would this be? From what I know the SA80 started to replace the L1A1 in 1985, but took around a decade to completely switch over to. The Warrior was put into service in 1988, but some were in testing in 1984, and in case of a "Cold War Gone Hot" scenario I guess it'd have been pushed into service earlier. Mostly asking this because getting Warriors instead of FV432s is much easier and I trust Revell's plastics more than random resins from Britannia that apparently suffers from quite a few bubbles.

>>50186998
really? I thought my conclusions were pretty reasonable.

what was I projecting?

>>50187080
>"Cold War Gone Hot" scenario I guess it'd have been pushed into service earlier.

I never really understand this assertion because it's kinda the exact opposite of what's logical: continuing production of what already works and actually has production lines and spare parts available.

Also yes, Britannia's resin casting is dogshit tier. The amount of work they need to make them not crap is better spent just buying some more expensive die-cast stuff from wherever or tracking down model kits. You will quite easily spend more time filling holes and making stuff presentable than it would to just put together a 1:72/1:76 kit.

>>50187183
Well, the technology was there, they just fucked around for a while till it was pushed to the units. It used the same chassis as the FV432, so had all the spare parts available I guess, just with a turret. Since there wasn't really an actual war, I guess switching armor wasn't as urgent.

File: just line up all the artillery i guess thats fun.jpg (380KB, 947x833px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 947x833px

Going to my 3rd Blucher tournament next month.

Cannot wait for some dickhead who just masses Russian artillery wins the whole thing again.

>>50187063
Infantry is alright, not as good as battlefronts plastic infantry, but the newer stuff might be better.
Vehicles are generally very good, although Id say that Battlefronts plastics are generally slightly better, but for a little extra cost.
Zvezda 15s are also pretty good for the cost.

Just been giving "La Belle Epoque” a quick flick through, how well does the 'Memoir 44'esque with a hex board + 1/72 plastics work for wars such as the Franco-Prussian War and the Russo-Turkish War(s)?

File: clan_murray_tartan.gif (121KB, 699x326px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 699x326px

>>50185061
>>50185272
>murray tartan
>dont know which one
>both rough patterns to paint

shite

>>50187485
>playing games where this can happen

File: 1448325632132.jpg (374KB, 1600x894px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1600x894px

>>50188702
Blucher looks pretty based as a system. Perhaps they just need some army list restrictions.

File: Gordon_tartan_(Vestiarium_Scoticum).png (8KB, 1048x1048px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 1048x1048px

>>50188391
> Gordon
> Mostly just blue with green bits

not2bad

>>50187133
This is not an argument thread or an insult thread

>>50180334

Lookin' fiiiine

File: viva la compagnie.png (1MB, 1545x2051px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1545x2051px

>>50189541
My Poilu are pretty much done too. Just gotta paint the detritus in on the bases and decide if I want to do a gloss coat on the mud or keep it flat.
I like the walking wounded minis, but the star is the pigeon signaler - I named the pigeon speckled jim. The shot of the pigeon guy is extreme close up, so you'd probably never see it that close unless under a magnifying glass - you can see the paint cracking which I'm not sure why that happens. possibly cheap paints, possibly lack of priming.

Whats the correct name for a pigeon signaler guy anyway?

>>50187485
Just counter with British Light Calvary, it will be magnificent.

It technically kind of worked for Light Brigade

>>50189920
Bases could use a drybrush, but they look neat.

Hey guys, listen, I need your help.

Do any of you have links to 1/48 Soviet artillery producers? I've scoured the internet, and the best I can find is a 1/48 UM M1939 AA gun, and a 1/35 ML-20 Howitzer. Everything else is 1/56 or higher, or lighter pieces like the ZiS 3 and M1897.

I'm building a early-war Soviet force for Bolt Action, and I want to make it strict late 1941. I'd REALLY like an A-19 gun.

Help me out brothers.

>>50190716
If you have 1:56 options, why not use that? Since that actually matches 28mm reasonably unlike 1:48 which is oversized.

>>50184852
Depends if it's just noting a reference or the note actually adds some information or is a comment on something. If it's the former dumping them at the end is great. If the author has additional information or comments I like them at the bottom of the page.

For writing I like the format used in most papers such as "blah blah blah (Hutton, 1785)

>>50191070
Chicago/Turabian? I prefer it too, it was a hell of a lot more intuitive to use than MLA or APA.

>>50190749
The 1:56 options are a D-1 gun from Bandai, but it only appears every so often in Ebay auctions, and a B-4 in resin, but I forgot where I saw that.

The reason I was looking for 1:48 for the A-19 is more for the fact that I want it a little bulkier. In real life pictures of men near to it shows it size, while 1:56 scale for artillery isn't 'quite' big enough if you know what I mean. A good example of this is the ZiS-3 from Warlord, that, since I've examined one in real life, is too slim and a little short.

>>50188781
>>50188702
Every bonus or negative in the game adds or removes points from unit cost except, for a reason no one is quite sure, Russian artillery who get a pretty significant bonus and cost the same as everyone elses. I suppose it's also true of the Spanish, who are worse but cost the same, not that anyone uses them anyway.

I've still always had fun at the tournaments, most people make historically reasonable lists, but a Russian has always topped the table and I don't think it's a fluke that the army performing best is the one with a free upgrade so to speak.

>>50189920
What >>50190670 said.

Also, if you need more tanks, Laser Cut Card can do some in 1:72 for pretty cheaply.

Also, I'm really liking the look of figures based together for some reason. I have my WW1 and WW2 figures based together, but they have a strange appeal to me.

File: featherstone-3.jpg (218KB, 840x644px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 840x644px

I've been buying and reading old wargaming books lately. I know there's a PDF, and I'd read it, but it never really sank in for me how much of a goddamn mess Featherstone's Complete Wargaming is. I mean, damn, dude. Editing. Sidebars discuss topics seemingly at random, and even though it's clearly a book with bits and pieces taken from elsewhere there's no excuse to then mix them up quite so badly. Still a neat read.

His older Wargames is a damn good book, though. The Close Wars appendix is a nice little set of simple skirmish rules that I'll have to break out some time.

Brig. Young's Charge! is an interesting old set of Horse & Musket rules, a lot like Grant's The War Game (which has been scanned and posted in this thread). It's entertainingly written, perhaps more so than The War Game, although the rules are understandably pretty damn similar. I'd give the edge to Grant for explaining his reasoning for various things, but I am looking forward to getting hold of some of the later editions and other material he's written.

I also came across https://manoftinblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/26/early-1963-featherstone-rules-update/ and https://manoftinblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/15/featherstone-simple-ww2-rules/ - he's scanned 13 pages in which Featherstone lays out Ancients, Horse & Musket, and Modern (WW2) rules, which are basically as simple as they get but still look fun. Argh, I need to paint my SYW.

I picked up Grant's Programmed Wargames Scenarios, too. It's... interesting. There are a bunch of scenarios. You pick one, pick a map (assuming a 6x4 table, there are three choices for each 2x4 section, so you can randomise it), pick from a selection of force lists for each side, and either Just Play or turn to the programmed section. You can run either or both sides this way - it gives you battle plans, and deployment/formation lines based on the map. Haven't had a chance to play any yet.

File: IMG_0487.jpg (484KB, 1600x1223px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1600x1223px

>>50192527
>but it never really sank in for me how much of a goddamn mess Featherstone's Complete Wargaming is. I mean, damn, dude. Editing. Sidebars discuss topics seemingly at random, and even though it's clearly a book with bits and pieces taken from elsewhere there's no excuse to then mix them up quite so badly. Still a neat read.

I most definitely know what you mean. At the time it attracted a certain amount of criticism because it really is just a sloppily edited compilation of his old articles, complete with original spelling mistakes. As it happens his only son was killed in a motorbike accident shortly after it was published, and negative reviews of it were sort of muted at the time, but later appraisals were pretty unimpressed. The random siderbars bothered the hell out of my autism too. Those "down at the Wargaming Club" stories are supposedly totally fictional, although some of the people and anecdotes are real. Despite all that it was perfect for a budding teenager gamer like me when it came out. Now we have the Wargaming Compendium, which is a superior successor, but Complete Wargamer is still definitely worth a read as part of the "canon" of wargaming literature.

>>50190749
>Since that actually matches 28mm reasonably unlike 1:48 which is oversized.

If you were to use true scale 28mm minis, then yes. Otherwise that statement is just bullshit.
1:56 tanks are look like toys driven by children next to bulky miniatures (like the warlord plastics) which wouldn't even fit their steel helmet through some of the hatches.

Sticking to that joke of a scale makes me sad. You just have to compare one of the crew minis from the Warlord halftracks with an actual infantry mini to realize that it can't be the right scale.

>>50190716

The options for soviet artillery are limited in 1/48 (same as with all the other nations sadly)

http://www.heer46shop.de/49233/russian-b-4-howitzer-156

http://trenchworx.com/product/122mm-howitzer/

Both are 1/56 though (and therefore kinda tiny).


What you could do is trying to get it printed on Shapeways in the right scale if you find or create a 3d model.

>>50192527
I love Featherstones approach - I remember reading Wargames as a teenager and loving it. I've tried to maintain his design approach of minimal complexity and having some kind of "period feel" for each system I write.

Its surprising how few pages you really need for a comprehensive system that gives fun games.

>>50192740
>Now we have the Wargaming Compendium, which is a superior successor,
Henry Hyde does good work. Bought that when he originally released it - it's a big lump in hardback! - and plan to do the same with Wargaming Campaigns or whatever he's calling the sequel.

>>50191345
Maybe you can work with this?
http://www.madbobminiatures.co.uk/shop/4587330663/canon-de-155-mle-1917/9065553

>>50186205
I'm looking for Germans and one of US/Soviets/British.

I have the quick-fire rules and I like what I've seen, but I need the full lists to plan my purchases before committing I'm a bit of a poorfag

File: VW.jpg (319KB, 1245x660px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 1245x660px

Any ideas on how to paint the windshield?
I primed the car like 2 years ago without thinking to much about it.
I've seen pics with soft-skin vehicles with blue painted windows but that kinda looks silly and to cartoony for my taste. What colors could work?

>>50193910
Paint it a light gray that has a very small hint of blue to it, then go over it with a very light coating of a muddy dusty color in places except maybe where the driver has tried to clean it some to be able to see.

>>50192527
Interesting summary, thanks anon

>>50193910
Put a grey wash on the tire on the hood too. Decent overall though

File: JFS1940.png (2MB, 1342x954px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1342x954px

A little something for our naval anons: Jane's Fighting Ships from 1940:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/nm1i325duosagoz/Janes+Fighting+Ships+1940.pdf

>>50194953
>THREE GUINEAS

fuck me lads that's a pricey book.

Been looking at the independence of most of Latin America, can't quite find the right units for this slightly post-Napoleonic period. Lots of interesting stuff, especially San Martín's wrok in Chile. As a result I've two questions:

Which would you lot say is the best ruleset for this period?

Where would you buy minis of that era? Price is definitely something I'm considering here.

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

1B, 486x500px

I randomly found these, they seem to be complete, can any anon verify that?

>>50194953
Nice! I'm already finding those side by side silhouettes useful for finding standins for destroyer classes that don't actually have models. Thanks for posting this!

>>50194984
I think the Balagan guy did some gaming in that period? His website's full of useful bits.

>>50195037
Very old version of the rules, but pretty much everything is there. This is what we played from for years (although constantly updated as things needed clarification or additions)

>>50193417
Well the army lists cover pretty much everything, you can see the previews on wargame vault, they have the contents so you can see which vehicles are covered, there's a few extras on the forum like the goliath tracked mine.

We have a system of converting real life attributes into ostfront which is applied across the board, so no faction really gets special treatment, but they all handle as they should in real life.
For example all the move distances are just the real life speed in km/h divided by 10.
Armor is handled similarly - 1-19mm is Light 2, 20-44mm is Light, 45mm-79mm is Medium, 80mm-99mm is Heavy, 100mm-119mm is Heavy2, etc.

No faction has any special rules, and all the infantry are identical across the board - its more about how you use and support them rather than any special rules. The main point of difference between the factions are the vehicles.

The Japanese do get one special unit - the machinegun nest - but we felt that was necessary for pacific style battles, and only really effective against infantry. Plus its something they used a LOT, so figured it was important to include.
I was going to give Japanese infantry special rules like being fearless, but I decided against it, as they still took cover and got pinned like regular infantry, and you dont need any special rules to suidically charge your infantry at things!

Anyone got some good relatively light naval rules?

Victory at Sea seems fun but it has some odd issues. Like adding odd special rules here and there but missing some of the more important things that should be modeled. Like Germans get good optics for some reason but the Japanese don't. Also no proximity AA for the US, which bothers me a lot more than it probably should.

Also like half my ships aren't even statted.

File: Guess how many hit here.jpg (275KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1536x2048px

>>50196496
Try taking a look at Naval War:
>http://navalwar.boards.net/

It's a free living ruleset that's still in development.
The aim is to deliver something that's clearly at a game-level of detail (not an actual simulation) while providing a bit more crunch than, say, Axis&Allies naval.

I personally quite enjoy it, especially since the main dev is a pretty cool guy who will quite happily work with people to deliver the things they're interested in next.

File: Marine Nationale.jpg (391KB, 1200x433px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 1200x433px

>>50196496
Extra VAS stats:
>http://www.ibisfightclub.co.uk/vaswiki/viewer.asp
Also has a fleet builder and printable record cards.
>http://www.ibisfightclub.co.uk/

Also some counter sheets I'd made a long, long time ago to help with record keeping.

>http://www.mediafire.com/file/ki0h4flghof5dkr/VAS+Counter+Sheets.pdf

For another quick playing set of rules, you should go check out Naval War. It's a living ruleset that's currently in development. It's fast playing and cinematic like VAS, but handles some things a bit better. If you want to check it out, you can go here and make a forum account for access to the current iteration.

>http://navalwar.boards.net//

But you should also be aware that the next version is going to be releasing towards the end of November or early December, and along with it is coming a new website and public access to the rules and stats. Also going to be included are an Order of Battle for the Marine Nationale and an Order of Battle for the Med up through Calabria which means Regia Marina as well.

>>50196623
>ninja'ed

>>50196623
Downloaded it and it seems interesting, are these datacards the only source of unit stats though? They're a bit inconvenient to use on a tablet.

Also am I an idiot or are there rules for B-25s and B-17s but not Avengers, Corsairs, or Hellcats?

File: afsfhte.jpg (310KB, 962x633px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 962x633px

F

>>50198075
The Orders of Battle have a sample of each particular unit within that order of battle along with a bit of description, sometimes it's easier to refer to things and compare that way. I think there's going to be some quality of life issues like that addressed with the new website too.

The OoBs are structured around particular battles, so if it wasn't at that battle, it doesn't appear, and there hasn't been any late war Pacific stuff done yet. However, if you ask nicely, the designer will run the raw stats through his formula and post cards for you. He's done it for other on request before.

>>50198146
Has he posted the formula? I wouldn't mind making them on my own

File: kubel.jpg (121KB, 667x469px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 667x469px

>>50193920
Followed your advise and it turned out nicely. Thanks.

Now i just need a driver and maybe a base.

How does bolt action deal with effective ranges? Do they scale anywhere near what is proper? Many field guns had range that could go quite far even at 28mm scale. How does it work out in game?

>>50198591
Bolt Action ignores reality in favour of giving things defined roles with set ranges scaled for a 6'x4' table rather than a specific groundscale or anything like that.

>>50198591
Ranges are shit. Standard "rifle shoots 24", with a -1 beyond long range which is half the weapon range".

>>50198591

Weapons either shot at "long range", normal, or "short range" and get a +1 or -1 (or no change) to their hit roll.
Howitzers can shot across the whole table like you'd expect if they fire indirect. For direct fire you need a LoS obviously which limits the effective range on most tables since you probably want to hide your guns behind some cover.

>>50198636
Would it be difficult to scale things up? I mean I know playing on a larger field gets tricky itself but does it throw things out of balance?

>>50198673
Probably not. If you have a big table.

If you increase everything x2, the scale stays the same, only the distances get bigger.

>>50198717
>If you increase everything x2, the scale stays the same, only the distances get bigger.
>my infantrymen can walk 12" and run 24"

Shooting distances, not everything.

>>50198823
We were talking about shooting ranges, so thats what i meant with everything.

File: Title and Contents.png (337KB, 1306x918px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 1306x918px

>>50198086
I never thought I would do a WW1 system - beyond Dogfight!, but it looks like I have the outline of one pretty much done.

Worked out a cool recon dynamic where you can get a feeling for how many trenches and machineguns you're going to be up against before the game starts (with a degree of uncertainty), and also came up with an orders matrix where a single playing card generates the orders for both players. Each player has a cypher number they roll in secret and so a single card could have 6 potential orders - that way you wouldn't know exactly what your enemy was up to even if you had memorized the system. As the designer I still want to have no idea what my enemy has planned until they start doing it.

The main rules are essentially Ostfront with a few additions for deeper trenches, poison gas / gas masks, and a few others period things.

Communication will be another important aspect of the game. Units outside your deployment zone have to send runners back to report on the situation and request help from HQ, random events during the game will include things like being cut off from HQ and having to send pigeon messages and the like. Things like random howitzer bombardments (potentially on friendlies...), units getting lost, tunnelers appearing, aircraft strafing and blunders will also occur.

I've just finished Norma Stone's "The Eastern Front 1914-1917" so got some good ideas about some Russian-specific rules. Pre-Brusilov Russians will have little to no recon, ineffective artillery, no combined arms tactics between artillery and infantry, and extremely poor communications, not to mention sometimes conflicting orders. Often the artillery would withdraw long before the infantry were done fighting, leaving them high and dry. Post-Brulisov Russians will function about the same as everyone else - utilizing creeping barrages and generally doing shit rite.

>>50198845
Shit Ostfront-anon, don't make me want to base my WW1 figures on unit-bases.

What's the minimum recommended army size by the way? Once I actually bite the bullet and buy the game, I might make dedicated armies for it. Have shitton of leftover 1:72 plastics anyways.

>>50198878
A couple of platoons would probably be the minimum size - say about 4 bases (each representing about 25 men). I probably wont go much larger than a battalion, because thats a shit ton of men (about 20 bases). I get 12 bases out of a regular airfix box or minis, and Ideally people should be able to play a good size game with just 2 boxes of infantry - one for each side. The rules will accommodate any size engagement though, just not down to skirmish size.
Saying that I have a box of french and british, so thats 24 bases total - so I will be able to field an entire battalion on the allied side!

I just found this site that does really nice 12mm WW1 figures:
https://www.kallistra.co.uk/?page=130

I'll be including the map campaign system too, the usual europe/north africa/balkans/middle east map and I plan to do an east africa map too. Gotta have some KAR vs Schutztruppe!

>>50198545
Nah, I think he'd like to retain at least marginal possession of it, even if it is becoming somewhat crowd sourced. Doesn't much bother me, because he's actually quite responsive to input or requests.

If you like WWI and the interwar period, check out Grand Fleets in th OP. It actually does include conversion rules, unlike so many other sets.

>>50179107
>File
Rank & File ACW Book for those who are looking for it:
https://mega.nz/#!ndkgkRaY!vq5OdMTMg7DtMuIFpURLm5mAHd-cGQypOBVDEkcxSJo

>>50200440
Also the March Attack Rules from Crusader:

https://mega.nz/#!CdMSjajJ!PD9ZfUJEVzWrt-WTl4-rmiFlQTn6VKmfXG-7fQDwgAM

>>50184145
Here's One:

https://mega.nz/#!3EEHFQaI!A8CBzSMPxUpp7PQUUCPzu8mVWOIjxY_omcYttMT_rEc

>>50200440
Thanks anon! And as for something similar, with the coupon posted yesterday, I also bought Glory Hallelujah! for Black Powder:

https://mega.nz/#!bRtSDRrb!M3xfAX1hs8sY62Iha_mKNnD_Hj0A1HNGaDroYhcmoKI

File: Gods and Generals.webm (3MB, 950x400px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 950x400px

>>50200440
>>50200465
>>50200584
>>50200611
Wow early Christmas, thanks anons. I'll add them all to the Mediafire when I get home tonight.

>>50198673
Apparently the Bolt Action rule transfer across nicely to 15mm if you keep all measurements the same. Really want to try that out.

>>50201568
Good to know. I was thinking that 15mm or maybe even 10mm would be a fun scale to try it out in.

>>50201043

I hated that movie so much, and that scene in particular (although I'm not sure why this and not any other scene).

>>50183101
this still work? UK lad here.

File: DB.png (544KB, 706x943px) Image search: [Google]

544KB, 706x943px

>>50201043
Everything now added to relevant folders

Medieval:
Dux Bellorum
http://www.mediafire.com/file/b3i5awkxj83tky9/Dux+Bellorum.pdf

ACW:
Black Powder: Glory Hallelujah:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/uy6g8ynr77lvuuh/Black+Powder++-+Glory+Hallelujah.pdf
Rank and File ACW Supplement:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/7dy6zdhkho61pqe/Rank+%26+File+ACW.pdf

Napoleonic:
March Attack:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/hmi4b9f8orm4hiq/March+Attack.pdf

File: battleship row.png (487KB, 733x952px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 733x952px

Yet another score, and once again something for the naval scene:

>Naval Thunder: Battleship Row brings the majestic battleships and powerful carriers of World War 2 to your tabletop! Features an easy to learn surface combat system with seamlessly integrated aircraft and submarine rules. Naval Thunder: Battleship Row allows you customize the level of detail and pace of play to your personal preference using dozens of modular options.

>Naval Thunder provides countless hours of enjoyment while you focus on commanding your fleet, instead of wading through rules! Combat is fast, exciting, fun, AND historically accurate based on hundreds of hours of research.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/rnncqo1pjv9720d/Naval+Thunder+-+Battleship+Row.pdf
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/60076/naval-thunder-battleship-row

>>50204236
And another one, Bood on the Nile:
https://mega.nz/#!SA9AAAqL!8tSrZJMLsKL34tpqbN0mktXSdvwTvj9pE6LG8UAJTDo

It's written mostly like the Zulu supplement, ie. not that great, but at least there's a list of units throughout the book.

>>50204548
Thanks anon! Always nice to have some more diversity in the MF. I'll have to give it a read through, because I'm unfamiliar aside from being aware of it's existence.

>>50204236

Anyone have this?

https://us-store.warlordgames.com/collections/thirty-years-war-1618-1649/products/european-weapons-warfare-1618-1648

File: SAM_6532.jpg (147KB, 800x1003px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 800x1003px

since we are exchanging rulesets do anyone have warhammer historical: gladiator?

I've decided to get myself a winter themed Russian army for Bolt Action.
Is the build an army set useful and worthwhile? Am I better of just buying the soviet winter assault box? It's on sale.

>>50205227
>Is the build an army set useful and worthwhile?
You get a free tonk.

>>50205254
that is a god damn good argument.
But I can't use the 10% off coupon on it.

>>50205291
But you get a free tonk.

>>50205317
I do get a free tonk.
Since I'm doing mainly early war I'll pick a T34

File: The_war_in_the_Soudan.jpg (211KB, 1024x764px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1024x764px

>>50204727
We sure are spoiled today

http://www.mediafire.com/file/cb787icx9k9coyd/Black+Powder+-+Blood+on+the+Nile.pdf

>>50205424
Great free tonk.

>>50205291
>>50205227

Its not a 10%-off coupon, its a 10GBP coupon.

The build an army deal is the best deal they offer.

Just break both sets down:

59 (now 52) for winter assault:

1x box of 40 plastic soldiers (winter)
1 x Soviet Assaut Engineers SG43 HMG Team
1 x Soviet82mm Mortar Team
1 x Gaz 67b Field Car

75 for Build an Army

2x box of 40 soldiers (they also offer the siberians there, but they come with less minis)
1x HQ squad (3 metal minis)
1x weapon team
1x Soft skin vehicle of your choice (including a armored car)
1x Tank of your choice

You get 1 box of Infantry (32gbp) and 1 tank (20gbp) more, but 1 weapon team (mortar or hmg etc for 7GBP) less.

I'd buy the Build an Army, add a ZIS-3 gun to the basket and apply the coupon.

>>50205485
>I'd buy the Build an Army, add a ZIS-3 gun to the basket and apply the coupon.
I'm leaning towards this but isn't the A-19 a better choice for sheer versatility?

>>50205535
There is no A-19 miniature though and the ZIS gun isn't bad at all. Maybe your opponents allow you to use/test it as A-19.

>>50205543
>Maybe your opponents allow you to use/test it as A-19.
Perhaps. They're real grognards though.

File: africa307.jpg (115KB, 560x745px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 560x745px

November 12th marks 76 years since the Battle of Gabon (also called the Gabon Campaign or the Battle of Libreville), which was part of the fighting in French West Africa during World War II. The battle resulted in the Free French Forces taking the colony of Gabon and its capital, Libreville, from Vichy French forces.

On the evening of 28 August 1940, Governor Georges Masson had pledged Gabon's allegiance to Free France. He met immediate opposition from much of Libreville's French population and from Gabon's influential bishop, Louis Tardy, who favoured Vichy France's conservative policies. Facing pressure, Masson was forced to rescind his pledge. Free French sympathizers were arrested by the colonial administration and imprisoned on board the auxiliary cruiser Cap des Palmes.

On 8 October, General de Gaulle arrived in Douala, in French Cameroon. On the 12th he authorised plans for the invasion of French Equatorial Africa. De Gaulle also wanted to use French Equatorial Africa as a base to launch attacks into Axis-controlled Libya. For this reason, he personally headed northward to survey the situation in Chad, located on the southern border of Libya.

On 27 October, Free French forces crossed into French Equatorial Africa and took the town of Mitzic. On 5 November, the Vichy garrison at Lambaréné capitulated. Meanwhile, the main Free French forces under General Leclerc and Battalion Chief Koenig departed from Douala, French Cameroon. Their goal was to take Libreville. The British expressed doubt in De Gaulle's ability to establish control over the Vichy territory, but they eventually agreed to lend naval support to the Free French.

File: 1re-compagnie-de-chars-pendant-la-campagne-du-Gabon-octobre-1940-1re-DFL.jpg (3MB, 3062x2440px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3062x2440px

>>50205850
On 7 November, the Shoreham-class sloop HMS Milford discovered the Vichy Redoutable-class submarine Poncelet shadowing the Anglo-French task force and gave chase. The sloop was too slow to intercept the submarine, so Admiral Cunningham ordered his flagship HMS Devonshire to launch its Walrus biplane. The aircraft straddled the submarine with two salvos of 100 lb depth charges as it attempted to dive, damaging it. It was then scuttled off Port-Gentil. Koenig's forces landed at Pointe La Mondah on the night of 8 November. His forces included French Legionnaires (including the 13th Foreign Legion Demi-Brigade), Senegalese and Cameroonian troops.

On 9 November, Free French Lysander aircraft operating out of Douala bombed Libreville aerodrome. The aerodrome was eventually captured, despite stiff resistance met by Koenig's force in its approach. Free French naval forces consisting of the minesweeper Commandant Dominé and the cargo vessel Casamance were led by Georges Thierry d'Argenlieu aboard the Bougainville-class aviso Savorgnan de Brazza in conducting coastal operations. De Brazza attacked and sank her sister ship, the Vichy French Bougainville. Libreville fell on 10 November.

On 12 November, the final Vichy forces at Port Gentil surrendered without a fight. Governor Masson, despairing of his actions, committed suicide. Total casualties from the battle are unknown.

This is an extremely obscure WW2 clash which has definite appeal for wargaming. There are air and naval elements on top of the ground campaign, and you have the fascinating case of French fighting French (albeit many of them colonial troops).

http://www.mediafire.com/file/47q3513621mwd2z/Osprey+-+MAA+315+-+The+French+Army+1939-45+%281%29+The+Army+of+1939-40+%26+Vichy+France.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/e6lzzac5y3eazv5
/Osprey+-+MAA+318+-+The+French+Army+1939-45+%282%29+Free+French.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/l821g5ctqigahfa/Osprey+-+MAA+325+-+French+Foreign+Legion+1914-45.pdf

File: OW050.png (368KB, 705x953px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 705x953px

The Mosin-Nagant Rifle (Osprey Weapon 50)

The Mosin-Nagant is the world's longest-surviving and most widely distributed military rifle, having armed the forces of Russia and many other countries for more than five decades. It has seen action from World War I to the present day, but is most famous for its role during World War II when it proved to be an excellent sniping weapon in the hands of marksmen such as Vasily Zaitsev and Simo Häyhä. This study covers the rifle's entire combat history, from its early development through to its service in combat and the impact it has had on modern firearms. Dramatic battle reports and specially commissioned artwork complement the meticulously researched examination of the Mosin-Nagant provided by author Bill Harriman as he delves into the history of one of the most iconic rifles of World War II.

https://mega.nz/#!H883DKqJ!FrfxelI_F2Dj4VClZ8pH_fUswU2Z484L8bRNVvhhcFg

>>50205864
>dat broken link
bugger, just join it back together if you need it

>>50205685
Then they might know that there are no 28mm howitzers for the soviets.

Actually, with like 15+ companies out there doing 28mm resin/metal ww2 kits, i wonder why none of them is trying to fill that gap.

>>50205872
Because the world needs more Germans.

And artillery in 28mm games is like...tactical bombers in a dogfight game.

File: rude_legion_2A_2048x2048.jpg (268KB, 1800x788px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1800x788px

> Dammit Gaius, what did I tell you about painting dicks on your shield?

File: gHJD2Vw.gif (1006KB, 480x252px) Image search: [Google]

1006KB, 480x252px

>>50206326
Do you find it...wisible?

>>50206326
Why not add a 'bro' after?

>>50206545
bro, bros, brot, bromus, brotis, bront?

I did a few years of latin in school and remember nothing

>>50206326
tfw 10yrs of Latin study and I can only understand one of these shields
(but they are a bit "romanes eunt domus")
should one be "vos et cuius exercitus?"

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-12 at 14.01.05.png (96KB, 1047x470px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1047x470px

>>50194971
Janes' still are pricey.

File: acucharacha.jpg (133KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 450x600px

BUMP

>>50207168
A dead Cuban soldier's skeleton found in Angola? I'm guessing that's the background behind the pic.

>>50207597
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJej6kCgxVM

>>50207618
Oh I get the Mask reference. Thanks anyway.

File: pino.jpg (46KB, 466x466px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 466x466px

Bim Bomp

>>50208120
yOU'LL NEVER GET RID YOUR COUNTRY OF MARXIST THE FUN WAY

>>50204727
I own a physical copy of Blood on The Nile. It's quite poor desu. The report in the back of the Black Powder rule book does a better job for the Sudan Campaign.

However The Rebellion AWI book is miles better and rather good. It's a shame the supplements are so hit and miss.

>Be Italian
>Learn about Italy in the World Wars
>Mostly an army victim of its own inadeguacy, to be quite honest
>Still, lots of respect for the heroism shown by the troops
>See that Warlord Games has a range of Bersaglieri
>Never played historicals
>Or painted anything, for that matter
>Gonna buy a whole army.

I hear the call, guys. I'll thin the paint with grappa.

>>50209298
Even better Anon.. there are rumors that they want to release a box of plastic italians soon-ish.

File: tmp_19866-14741469356345420810.jpg (36KB, 216x351px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 216x351px

>>50209312

File: Italian North African Uniforms.png (331KB, 1262x822px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1262x822px

>>50209298
Nice, I'm just about to start a bunch of 1/72 Desert style Italians for WW2. The osprey pictures are hilarious... for some reason the artist always uses the same face with that exaggerated nose. I'm going to go for the 3rd from the left for my regulars, and the 4th from the left for my veterans / assault infantry

>>50209444
The artist uses that nose for all his art.

>>50182656

Did this already expire? The store isn't recognizing the code.

>>50209444
I'd rather mix different uniform styles than painting them all the same way.

>>50209718
It should still be valid.

What item did you try to buy? It only works for Warlord stuff, no 3rd party items they might sell (like Perry or Frostgrave etc)

>>50209739

Trying to pick up a nebelwerfer, mates trying to grap a soviet army.

File: e41aceaf83900b1ac7c440f1e4a5248c.jpg (67KB, 564x473px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 564x473px

>>50209723
Fair enough, I'm going to try to keep things uniform

Just talked myself out of ordering some bersaglieri, as cool as they would be to have.
Sadly running and playing brass band music isn't implemented in the game I play

File: works fine.jpg (28KB, 479x408px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 479x408px

>>50209771
>>50209718

Just gave it a try and it works flawlessly.

>a soviet army

The "build an army"? I think you can't add coupons to things that are already marked as "deal".

>>50209816

That might be it, thanks for the replies!

>>50209816

Still nothing, is it region specific?

>>50209865
I have no idea. I'm from Germany if that helps.

>>50209878

USA. Thanks again for the help

>>50209611
they all have pretty bad case of severe sameface.

>>50200389
That seems a bit problematic as both my fleets are leyte gulf themed.

So late 1944 units will be present, it looks like he's at somewhere like 1942.

Maybe a different ruleset I don't want to request something like 15 odd units.

>>50209771
>mates trying to grap a soviet army.
Is his buying 'build an army'? I am the anon who've been talking about it in the thread and bought it a couple of hours ago. It doesn't work for that deal, but buy something other than that and it should work.

>>50204548
This actually seems pretty good for what I'm looking for in terms of naval rules, thanks anon!

>>50209298
Avanti Italia!

File: Secret Santa 2015.jpg (723KB, 1812x1436px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 1812x1436px

Hey /hwg/ i organzied the Secret Santa for the nice Anons over at the /WIP/ thread last year which was kinda successful (and nobody got a box full of shit or anything like that, see pic related).

I created a poll and people seem to be very interested in doing it again this year.

Since this thread is my favorite in all of /tg/ i thought this could be a nice idea for /hwg/ too.

Would you guys be interested?
/hwg/-only?
Or combined with /WIP/? (since the number of people in here is limited)
Bad idea?

http://www.strawpoll.me/11637238

Please let me know what you think.

File: 1477613530290.gif (1MB, 400x315px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x315px

>>50211139
you have all my yes

>>50210302
You could always just pick a particular battle and ask if he would consider it for the next OOB. He'll be wanting to pick one soon, and that would be a nice difference from all the European stuff that will be coming out soon.

>>50211139
I am way too much of a poorfag right now for this.

Does anyone know of any practical manuals that talks about the training of artillery officers right around the years before the french revolution, alternatively talks about the operation of artillery in that era?

>>50211458
I will always recommend Military Experience in the Age of Reason, by Christopher Duffy.

From what I can remember, the engineer/artillery corps tended to be professional and middle class in origin, with schools and orphanages set up around Europe (often by absolutist monarch patrons).

>In France the militarisation of the gunners was a gradual process which began as far back as 1695. It was interrupted by an ill-concieved union with the engineers (1755-8), but the work was nearly completed by Jean-Baptiste de Gribeauval in the 1770s.

File: uominicontro.jpg (375KB, 711x1004px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 711x1004px

I watched Uomini Contro lately. Great movie. Best one on WWI I have seen, and truly one of best anti-war movies in my opinion. Way better than A Very Long Engagement for example.

It kinda makes me want to make some WWI forces and throw in-character Leone/Cardona quotes as they get whipped.

File: German Coin.jpg (46KB, 405x406px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 405x406px

If you need something to listen to while painting/modeling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkHsnP-27C8

WW1 from a German soldiers view, starting with the invasion of Belgium. Interesting stuff.

I've found audio books great to have on in the background while working, you learn something, as opposed to music, and you dont have to look to pay attention, as opposed to movies.

>>50212460
Yes, Audiobooks are really awesome.

>>50211139
certainly could be, but im not really interested in wip.

>>50211139

I am frighteningly poor after just purchasing both a roof and new transmission. However, I'm still interested in such a thing. Voted.

LAV-75

Might actually be able to take part in the next project, when does that all get decided?

>>50217502
Turn over date is normally the 16th.

>>50211139
I could do that, got some blisters of bits and bobs I'm not using, so if I grab something more thoughtful as well they could be good filler.

File: hwg-secret-santa.jpg (121KB, 780x525px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 780x525px

>>50218083
>>50215015
>>50214092
>>50211198

Great. With 9 votes for "yes" and 3 for "yes, but.." i think it should work.

For the guys who voted "Yes but with WIP" you can choose between the two (or just participate in both if you want). /wip/-related infos are at the /WIP/-thread.

I'm going to post this pic once per thread until the end of the month, so everyone has the chance to join in. i hope that is ok.

File: Mk3.jpg (143KB, 1024x944px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1024x944px

>>50218266
Schweet.

>>50179148
For some reason I'm up early on a Sunday morning. Here's a better illuminated picture of my unit for the project. There's plenty that could still be worked on, but for me it's now at "Good enough" quality.

Is it just me or are Vallejo metallics to be a bit... lacking?

>>50218295
Vallejo has several metallic ranges actually.
Which one are you talking about?

>>50218295
>Is it just me or are Vallejo metallics to be a bit... lacking?
I have a pot of their Chainmail Silver but I rarely use it as it's really shit. Crap coverage and density. Tho I liked their copper even tho it's a bit too thich regardless of thinning, and the golds are usually good too. VGC all of them.

>>50218318
I was working with Natural Steel 70864 (Model Colour) and Gunmetal Grey 863 (I think Game Colour, it came in a FoW box). Maybe I've just been spoilt by Citadel metal paints.

>>50218336
vallejo air have best metallics, except from 066 gold but it may be that i have stale bottle or something

>>50218336
I rarely use real metal colors these days, but if i do, then its from the Model Air range. These are great.
I also have a Ammo of MIG "gunmetal" which is very good too. A little dark maybe.

I had alot of Game Color back in the day, but i can only recommend to pick "Air" instead if its available in the same color. The Air-ranges are way better.

>>50218370
>>50218357
Thanks for the advice anons.

File: Arti.jpg (180KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 800x600px

>>50218266
sent ;)

File: oakleaf test.jpg (509KB, 1549x686px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 1549x686px

My first attempt at oakleaf autumn camo.
Does it look ok?

I'm thinking about applying a sepia wash on top of it.

>>50218702
It looks nice. Don't put a wash on it.

>>50218726
Thanks.
You think it will get to dark?

I'll paint the other parts of the mini first and see how it all looks together first.

>>50218702
How'd you do the base? Is it a technical paint?

File: vallejo-stone-brown-earth-500x500.jpg (43KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x500px

>>50219460
Yes, its vallejo texture paint (it will look better once i applied a wash and some light drybrush).

Honestly, that jar was my best non-miniature purchase this year. I really like it.

>>50219471
I have the Desert Sand one and I love it - sadly it's almost out and I can't find it in my country.

>>50219494
Could you post a pic with a mini where you used it? I'm curious.

File: DSCF4164.jpg (3MB, 3648x2441px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3648x2441px

>>50219514

Finally decided to re-check the local wargames club after two years of my previous visit. Last time was a bit of a disappointment, but now it seemed promising: New premises much closer to the city center, some people I already knew by name, and some recent online activity. At around 1 pm they announced the club would open at 2 pm, but when I got there at around three, no one was there. I guess it's a common problem with small clubs.

File: hitlerfeels.png (5KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 225x225px

>>50219840
>The gaming club has no players
i know that feel

>>50192810
>>50192761

Thanks for the help guys. I may order one and see how it stacks up next to my BA Soviets, hopefully it doesn't look too small. So long as its bigger than the ZiS-3 they make (as I mentioned, i've examined one irl and its much larger in scale than how it appears in Warlord form. The gun shield was probably 5-6 feet tall, the barrel was easily 8-9 feet long. The bastard is actually quite beefy) , I guess its alright.

I'll see if I can get some pics up when I get one and finish it.

Osprey - NVG 239 - Nile River Gunboats 1882–1918 (2016).pdf
http://www83.zippyshare.com/v/KDEcYf4m/file.html

File: NVA 239.png (2MB, 1290x959px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1290x959px

>>50220275
Gosh, beat me to it by literally five minutes

Nile River Gunboats 1882-1918 (Osprey New Vanguard 239)

For more than 30 years the Nile river gunboat was an indispensable tool of empire, policing the great river and acting as floating symbols of British imperial power. They participated in every significant colonial campaign in the region, from the British invasion of Egypt in 1882 to the Battle of Omdurman in 1898, when Britain finally won control of the Sudan. After that, the gunboats helped maintain British control over both Egypt and the Sudan, and played a key role in safeguarding British interests around the headwaters of the Nile - a region hotly contested by several European powers. Featuring specially commissioned artwork, this comprehensive volume offers a detailed analysis of the Nile river gunboats' entire career, from policing British colonial interests along the great river to defending Egypt against the Ottoman Turks in World War I.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/nxlekyjibbkai8y/Osprey+-+NVA+239+-+Nile+River+Gunboats+1862-1918.pdf

>>50220275
Thank you! I was vaguely interested but not enough to buy it, or bother searching for it.

File: ultimate genreal.jpg (273KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1000x563px

>>50218266
I´ll have a little think about joining but I think I´ll do it!

Also, there is going to be a sequel to Ultimate General Gettysburg!

Ultimate General: Civil war

>>50218295
I bought their model colour silver and gold, both are pretty shitty. GW gold is a lot better

It's not over yet!

Last Argument of Kings
https://mega.nz/#!DZ1FULyQ!MZyVacyF51LHuYKKjpSwpN_SOdKGlmbM-oAjtQzdWwc

>>50221148
About bloody time too.

>>50221479
Sweet, this covers the good horse & musket period.

>>50221565
Now only the Albion Triumphant Vol. 2 and Rebellion are missing from the Warlord books I think.

Hey all, I'm doing a college report on the US WWII campaigns of June-late December, 1944. Specifically focusing on Operation Cobra, Operation Forager and the Hurtgen Forest. Anywhere I should look for primary or secondary sources? I've checked out some of the Ospreys, but cant find much about those specific campaigns. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

>>50221630
Not to be a smartass, but you really ought to be looking through your college's library. Most Unis have access to a shitton of scholarly journals and sharing agreements with other institutions regarding physical copies. Go speak to the research librarian there, and they will get you started. If you're at a community college you may have access to some of the same resources as well, depending on how good that system is where you live.

>>50221762
Forgot to mention: Look for articles that deal with your topics. You don't necessarily need the articles themselves, because they will typically have a narrow focus and it was always rare in my experience to find one that had the particular conclusion you hoped to draw. Instead use them to find names of good primary or secondary sources.

>>50221808
And if your school has absolute shit resources, you can start with Wikipedia, and look at the sources cited in the articles on those battles.

>>50221829
Yea, I've been looking through much of what you suggested. What I really meant was if there is somewhere in particular to look for things such as after action reports and analyses. From what I understand the US Army in WWII made it a point to document in detail combat actions. Thanks for the suggestions though.

>>50221880
Is this the sort of thing you were looking for?
http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/utils/getdownloaditem/collection/p4013coll8/id/2896/filename/2885.pdf/mapsto/pdf

>>50221978
That's exactly what I'm looking for, thanks. Where did you get that from?

>>50222091
http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm/landingpage/collection/p4013coll8

>>50221630
Isn't college supposed to teach you how to do research?

I mean I did ancient history at uni and the first thing they do is teach you how to find and evaluate sources.

>>50219996
I have a canon de 155mle and it looks great I feel.

>>50221630
>Ospreys
While they are fun you really shouldn't be looking here for aid. Check the library

>>50222227
Don't get me wrong, I know how to do research. I was just asking for something specific.
>>50222267
Agreed, I felt they are useful for the works cited.

File: IMG_20161113_200031.jpg (2MB, 2336x4160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2336x4160px

>>50221630
I have a nice book about the hurtgen forest. Its in german though.

pumb

>>50221148
>Ultimate General: Civil war
I really liked Gettysburg and this new one looks great.

>>50218266
email sent friendo

>>50206681
>bros

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvQTTA9raJU

File: ss.jpg (129KB, 1126x483px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1126x483px

Made some progress with my half squad of ss soldiers.
Flesh and Field grey still needs some highlights.

>>50205543
>>50205685
>>50205872

Yee, I was asking about it above and I'll certainly confirm that. I've scoured the internet and I've only found a few sources. The A-19 simply doesn't exist in mini-form, minus a single 1/256 scale 3-D print guy. I wish there was one for it, since the A-19 was a significant piece of artillery for the Soviets in term of usage and its impact on future anti-tank design (that and the D-2 led to the IS2's gun design).

Not to mention its rule in BA is very useful.

File: laok.png (796KB, 666x954px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 666x954px

>>50221479
Good stuff

http://www.mediafire.com/file/4682zhya51zgd17/Black+Powder+-+Last+Argument+Of+Kings.pdf

>>50226498
Search for 122mm instead of A-19?
Its quite common in 1/72 - zvezda do a field gun in that scale.
There's a Trumpeter and a Zvezda 122mm A-19 field gun in 1/35 scale, although might be a bit large for 28mm:

28mm does kind of suffer from lack of variety and lack of some rarer units, or less publicized ones.

Its like they make A-19s in every scale except 1/48, 1/56

Played my first game of Victory at Sea. Was a lot more fun that I expected. Despite forgetting rules and the destroyers turning into a beehive of torpedoing each other.

Naval Wargaming is really fun, reminded me of Battlefleet Gothic, which is pretty nostalgic.

Looking forward to trying out Battleship Row next week, see which system is better. Also it doesn't have the retarded balance of Victory at Sea which puts a North Carolina equal to a Yamato.

>>50223901
It's honestly not that great, very very arcadey.

>>50228461
>Also it doesn't have the retarded balance of Victory at Sea which puts a North Carolina equal to a Yamato.

I still kind of find it hilarious that the Yamato has the Agile rule in VaS.

>>50228461
VAS is an adaption of the B5: A Call To Arms rule set, which is itself heavily inspired by BFG. The priority level system is also s carryover from the B5 game, which worked marginally better when you weren't talking in terms of real life ships. You'll note that in subsequent ACTA versions the priority level system was replaced with a point system, and if Mongoose would quit fucking around trying to find someone to make miniatures and just release VAS 2, you'd have a point system for that too.

>>50228638
Me and my gaming group agreed that other systems will have a roughly comparable ability for each ship, so we can steal the points from that.

Or just use the other systems.

>>50228559
>puts a North Carolina equal to a Yamato

That's probably because it was, Anon ...

http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm

Sure, this site lists South Dakotas instead, but it's such a close 'relative' to North Carolinas that the difference is just a few points ...

>>50229127
I was referring to the game, in which the North Carolina is for some reason easier to hit than a South Dakota and is objectively worse than a Yamato. Though even historically, not sure I'd argue they were a better in a one on one ship fight than a Yamato as a strategic asset though, yes, definitely

But yes, radar/decent AA/better damage control is nice. I do like Nodaks, they're neat,

Also I like that that site states that the Bismark's displacement is a good thing. Because not using "All or Nothing" is a positive aspect apparently.

File: __fletcher_helena_william_d_porter_yamato_and_yukikaze_kantai_collection_and_zhan_jian_shao_nyu_drawn_by_y_ssanoha__7b60a39c1ccce27ee99cb802304c18f6.jpg (975KB, 800x3784px) Image search: [Google]

975KB, 800x3784px

>>50229127
>That's probably because it was, Anon

Yeah, Yamato-class were very much paper tigers.
>subpar ammo that made their guns barely more effective than american 16-inchers
>questionable boiler design
>used lower quality armor plating than their american counterparts
>worse fire control than american ships
>radar of questionable quality
>aa-suite so pathetic that it might not as well been there

>>50229358

Surely you're not going to argue that <American> ships were good, though? Nothing American is actually good, least of all their ships. They just had more of it, largely because they sat back have a wank, and build shit while we fought the Germans for years like a damned real country.

>>50229392
>
>
>

>>50228490
You can't enjoy an arcadey game?
I enjoy my sims like Scourge of War as much of the next guy, but that doesn't stop me also thinking UGG was good too, you don't always have time or inclination for the former.

Whats your guys thoughts on using 1:76 scale vehicles alongside 1:72 scale infantry and vehicles?

Is the difference really noticeable?

>>50231203
Sometimes, but it's not a big deal. Basing makes a bigger difference when comparing infantry and vehicles, and vehicles are really a matter of taste.

>>50231203
Enusing real life difference for a man is about less than 10 cm. People come in that sizes. Apart from really long vehicles (none of those in 1:76, if I recall correctly) it won't be noticeable as long as you do not mix the very same type of vehicle next to each other on table.

>>50231203
Works fine. no one will notice from a distance. Might be slightly noticable if the exact same tank is side-by-side with a smaller or larger scale version, but we use 1/72 and 1/76 interchangeably. So close as to not be a problem for wargaming uses.

File: Cheers lads.jpg (4MB, 3600x2400px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3600x2400px

>>50231235
>>50231375
>>50231391
Cheers lads, looks like my range of plastic vehicles has dramatically increased.

>>50231399
1/72 and 1/76 is really a based scale. pretty much every vehicle is available and many of the more common ones in fast build kits with a few to a box. Italieri, Pegasus and PSC are great for that.

These were the runner-up ideas for the last community project, I thought we could consider one of them for the next one.

scenery piece/objective marker
"Combat Support Units"
banners/flags for something?
a non-line foot unit
something related to food

>>50232161
I still reckon food is best. A cart full of bricks for a napoleonic oven! A field kitchen! A couple of returning soldiers, on foot or mounted, carrying foraged provisions (up to and including a small pig tucked under one arm).

>>50222261
Well I hope so friend, I just ordered one from the link provided! Lol.

>>50226899
Oh? I hadn't found any of the 1/72, but then again I hadn't really looked for any. I wasn't aware of the Zvezda one either! Thanks for informing me, I may use those someday.

Well, even then its only a few manufacturers. What surpises me more is that there are ZiS-3 Guns in EVERY scale, yet several of the larger guns were made in numbers almost equal to the ZiS.

File: IMG_1651.jpg (303KB, 1600x1145px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1600x1145px

I wonder, since gaming with plastic army men is a thing, could you play an aerial wargame using those old polystyrene model planes you used to be able to get?

Dunno if they still sell them these days, but they were my shit when I was a kid.

File: 1461269293174.jpg (168KB, 1033x679px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1033x679px

>>50233171
I fucking loved those. I bet you could find them online somewhere.

>>50233171
Sure, why not.. i hated them as a child because they broke so easily.

>>50232161
Might as well do it proper like with a strawpoll
http://www.strawpoll.me/11649744

>>50233431
Bring on the food stuff, found a box of IMEX Pilgrims with some hunters that could pass as foragers for various armies.

It's going to be Thanksgiving here in the States during this project. Of course we have to celebrate gorging ourselves into a stupor with modeling something related to food.

>>50233699
Tusk or another dino-hunting game, using a giant toy turkey as a t-rex.

File: hoo.jpg (171KB, 799x754px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 799x754px

So who, in this thread, has never played Hook's Farm, the battle written up in Little Wars?

I haven't. Really should set it up one of these days - it doesn't demand anything too fancy, and seems pretty adaptable to any game.

>>50234172
probably everyone

>>50234172
>"The affair of Hook's Farm was one of those brisk little things that did so much to build up my early reputation. I did remarkably well, though perhaps it is not my function to say so. The enemy was slightly stronger, both in cavalry and infantry, than myself [Footnote: A slight but pardonable error on the part of the gallant gentleman. The forces were exactly equal.]; he had the choice of position, and opened the ball. Nevertheless I routed him. I had with me a compact little force of 3 guns, 48 infantry, and 25 horse. My instructions were to clear up the country to the east of Firely Church.

>"We came very speedily into touch. I discovered the enemy advancing upon Hook's Farm and Firely Church, evidently with the intention of holding those two positions and giving me a warm welcome. I have by me a photograph or so of the battlefield and also a little sketch I used upon the field. They will give the intelligent reader a far better idea of the encounter than any so-called 'fine writing' can do.

>>50234197
>"The original advance of the enemy was through the open country behind Firely Church and Hook's Farm; I sighted him between the points marked A A and B B, and his force was divided into two columns, with very little cover or possibility of communication between them if once the intervening ground was under fire. I reckoned about 22 to his left and 50 or 60 to his right. [Footnote: Here again the gallant gentleman errs; this time he magnifies.] Evidently he meant to seize both Firely Church and Hook's Farm, get his guns into action, and pound my little force to pieces while it was still practically in the open. He could reach both these admirable positions before I could hope to get a man there. There was no effective cover whatever upon my right that would have permitted an advance up to the church, and so I decided to concentrate my whole force in a rush upon Hook's Farm, while I staved off his left with gun fire. I do not believe any strategist whatever could have bettered that scheme. My guns were at the points marked D C E, each with five horsemen, and I deployed my infantry in a line between D and E. The rest of my cavalry I ordered to advance on Hook's Farm from C. I have shown by arrows on the sketch the course I proposed for my guns. The gun E was to go straight for its assigned position, and get into action at once. C was not to risk capture or being put out of action; its exact position was to be determined by Red's rapidity in getting up to the farm, and it was to halt and get to work directly it saw any chance of effective fire.

>>50234196
Yeah, probably. But it's a neat piece of history that looks like a fun scenario.

File: littlewars008.jpg (94KB, 800x647px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 800x647px

>>50234207
>"Red had now sighted us. Throughout the affair he showed a remarkably poor stomach for gun-fire, and this was his undoing. Moreover, he was tempted by the poorness of our cover on our right to attempt to outflank and enfilade us there. Accordingly, partly to get cover from our two central guns and partly to outflank us, he sent the whole of his left wing to the left of Firely Church, where, except for the gun, it became almost a negligible quantity. The gun came out between the church and the wood into a position from which it did a considerable amount of mischief to the infantry on our right, and nearly drove our rightmost gun in upon its supports. Meanwhile, Red's two guns on his right came forward to Hook's Farm, rather badly supported by his infantry.

>"Once they got into position there I perceived that we should be done for, and accordingly I rushed every available man forward in a vigorous counter attack, and my own two guns came lumbering up to the farmhouse corners, and got into the wedge of shelter close behind the house before his could open fire. His fire met my advance, littering the gentle grass slope with dead, and then, hot behind the storm of shell, and even as my cavalry gathered to charge his guns, he charged mine. I was amazed beyond measure at that rush, knowing his sabres to be slightly outnumbered by mine. In another moment all the level space round the farmhouse was a whirling storm of slashing cavalry, and then we found ourselves still holding on, with half a dozen prisoners, and the farmyard a perfect shambles of horses and men.

>>50234197
>>50234207
>>50234220
H.G. Wells would've been such a cool grandpa to have.

File: Comfortable-War-Gaming.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50234172
Related.

Of the four scenarios Asquith likes (Hook's Farm, Sawmill Village/Chance Encounter, Blasthof Bridge & the Battle of Sittangbad), I've played the latter two several times (well, Sittangbad twice, Blasthof a few more times) - they're good, fun battles.

And iconic for the old school wargame nerds, but I'm not quite one of them.

>>50233171
>>50233211
sheeiitt I remember those. They had them in a big rack with all different kinds of planes

>>50233431
Voted for food. Should be pretty interesting.

>>50199507
>airfix
What airfix box?

>>50211598
Thank you anon!

Does anyone have experiance with Dreamforge Games minis? Im looking at their Russian infantry for Bolt Action.

http://dreamforge-games.com/collections/infantry/products/wgf-w2003-wwii-russian-infantry-28mm

>>50236513
I have the set (as well as the US and Germans), any questions in particular?

They look good on their own, but also mix well with Warlord plastic parts and Minis.

>>50236513
>Dreamforge Games
>not knowing Wargames Factory

Bruh.

File: this kills the order.jpg (19KB, 610x187px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 610x187px

>>50236579
Wargames factory sold the molds to Dreamforge when they made their deal with Warlord.
So Dreamforge has their WW2 minis now.

For $15 per box this is an awesome deal... sadly there is pic related

>>50236553

Do they have any major issues with pits or loss of detail? From their pictures they seem to look pretty fantastic, especially in the face. Also How tall are they compared to other companies' minis?

>>50236579
fuck, I cant read

>>50236626
I don't like some of their faces and poses, but overall i like them.
I haven't touched the US box yet, but i would consider the soviets to be better minis than the germans.

I'll take a pic with some minis in comparison. Give me a sec.

File: comparison.jpg (106KB, 1006x307px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1006x307px

>>50236626
>>50236661

Pic related

>>50236800
>>50236626

Things to consider are that their guns (the smgs in particular) are smaller than the warlord ones, so these don't mix all to well.
Rifles have less detail, but sizes are ok.

The most important thing is that you should base them on Warlord bases, because the bases they come with are more like the typical GW bases, so they would raise the mini by a few mm.

Heads and bags and other equipment pieces are pretty much interchangeable. You might have to scratch around their necks a bit if you want to use Warlord heads on WGF bodies, but thats no big issue.

>>50236863
>>50236800

I think a lot of the warlord heads look too goofy for my taste. The main thing I would pair them with is the field guns from PSC and whatever tanks I pick out.

Also any opinions on who to buy tanks from?

>>50236908
>I think a lot of the warlord heads look too goofy for my taste.

True. Especially their older ones. Luckily they improved and their new german plastic heads are nice.
The WGF heads are nice too.

> the field guns from PSC

A nice set, but their minis are kinda weak. Maybe you want to replace them with re-posed infantry from one of your infantry sets. (They also offer a support weapon set with mortars etc, their crews are especially weak. There are 15mm minis with better detail)

>tanks

Personally i use 1:48 tanks made by Tamiya almost exclusively. The 28mm/1:56 tanks just feel way to small and they cost around 5€ more than a way better detailed tamiya kit.

If you were to buy 1/56 plastic tanks go for Rubicon. Theirs have better detail than Warlord/Italeri. Price is around 20€ same as Warlords.

>>50236998

>A nice set, but their minis are kinda weak
Yea I was definitely going to toss the crew, they would look strange next to the wargame factory dudes.

Another question, what are some good winter uniform Russian minis?

>>50237086
Warlords Set comes to mind, but if you don't like their heads that might be not a good choice. I like it (especially because the bodies with the greatcoats work for germans too).

There are no other plastic sets and the only ones in metal i know about are made by Westwind, but they look kinda bad on their pics.

http://www.westwindproductions.co.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=76_161

>>50232161
I have a brand spanking new banner bearer in the mail so something concerning that would be great

>>50232791
I've ordered several times before from him and never been let down. Tell us of your experience

File: WW1 airfix.png (864KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

864KB, 1546x1159px

>>50234767
all the airfix boxes

File: 1384941828581.png (352KB, 1152x864px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1152x864px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mV1aDWjpHg

UNF
N
F

>>50189920
Where did you get those minis anon? I've been looking into this period.

>>50233171
I remember getting these in the toy chest at zeddies restaurant in zellers back in the 90s. Good times.