/hwg/ - Historical Wargames General

File: Louis_Riel.jpg (21KB, 386x496px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 386x496px

>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 - Rebellion
Rank and File supplements
Harpoon 3 & 4 supplements
Force on Force supplements
Hind Commander
At Close Quarters
War and Conquest

File: Inca-Spanish_confrontation.jpg (949KB, 968x733px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 968x733px

November 16th in military history:

1532 – Francisco Pizarro and his men capture Inca Emperor Atahualpa at the Battle of Cajamarca.
1632 – Thirty Years' War: Battle of Lützen is fought, the Swedes are victorious but King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden dies in the battle.
1776 – American Revolutionary War: British and Hessian units capture Fort Washington from the Patriots.
1805 – Napoleonic Wars: Battle of Schöngrabern: Russian forces under Pyotr Bagration delay the pursuit by French troops under Joachim Murat.
1857 – Second relief of Lucknow: Twenty-four Victoria Crosses are awarded, the most in a single day.
1863 – American Civil War: Battle of Campbell's Station near Knoxville, Tennessee: Confederate troops unsuccessfully attack Union forces.
1885 – Canadian rebel leader of the Métis and "Father of Manitoba" Louis Riel is executed for treason.
1940 – World War II: In response to the leveling of Coventry by the German Luftwaffe two days before, the Royal Air Force bombs Hamburg.
1943 – World War II: American bombers strike a hydro-electric power facility and heavy water factory in German-controlled Vemork, Norway.
1944 – World War II: Operation Queen, the costly Allied thrust to the Rur, is launched.
1944 – World War II: Düren, Germany, is destroyed by Allied bombers.
1989 – A death squad composed of El Salvadoran army troops kills six Jesuit priests and two others at Jose Simeon Canas University.

File: Dankaerts-Historis-9359.tif.jpg (741KB, 1278x1024px) Image search: [Google]

741KB, 1278x1024px

It is 384 years since the Battle of Lützen, one of the most important encounters of the Thirty Years' War. The battle was a Protestant victory, but cost the life of one of the most important leaders of the Protestant alliance, the Swedish King Gustav II Adolf, which caused the Protestant campaign to lose direction. The battle was legendary for the fog, which lay heavy over the fields of Saxony that morning. The phrase "Lützendimma" (Lützen fog) is still used in the Swedish language in order to describe particularly heavy fog.

With the early onset of winter weather in November 1632, Catholic commander Albrecht von Wallenstein elected to move towards Leipzeig believing that the campaign season had concluded and that further operations would not be possible. Splitting his army, he sent the corps of General Gottfried zu Pappenheim on ahead while he marched with the main army. Not to be discouraged by the weather, King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden decided to strike a decisive blow with his Protestant army near a stream known as the Rippach where he believed von Wallenstein's force was encamped.

Departing camp early on the morning of November 15, Gustavus Adolphus' army approached the Rippach and encountered a small force left behind by von Wallenstein. Though this detachment was easily overpowered, it delayed the Protestant army by a few hours. Alerted to the enemy's approach, von Wallenstein issued recall orders to Pappenheim and assumed a defensive position along the Lützen-Leipzig road. Anchoring his right flank on a hill with the bulk of his artillery, his men quickly entrenched. Due to the delay, Gustavus Adolphus' army was behind schedule and encamped a few miles away.

On the morning of November 16, the Protestant troops advanced to a position east of Lützen and formed for battle. Due to heavy morning fog, their deployment was not completed until around 11:00 AM.

File: Battle_of_Lutzen.jpg (959KB, 2143x1421px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 2143x1421px

>>50240855
Assessing the Catholic position, Gustavus Adolphus ordered his cavalry to assault von Wallenstein's open left flank, while the Swedish infantry attacked the enemy's center and right. Surging forward, the Protestant cavalry quickly gained the upper hand, with Colonel Torsten Stalhandske's Finnish Hakkapeliitta cavalry playing a decisive role.

As the Protestant cavalry was about to turn the Catholic flank, Pappenheim arrived on the field and charged into the fight with 2,000-3,000 horsemen ending the imminent threat. Riding forward, Pappenheim was struck by a small cannonball and mortally wounded. Fighting continued in this area as both commanders fed reserves into the fight. Around 1:00 PM, Gustavus Adolphus led a charge into the fray. Becoming separated in the smoke of battle, he was struck down and killed. His fate remained unknown until his rider-less horse was seen running between the lines.

This sight halted the Swedish advance and led to a rapid search of the field which located the king's body. Placed in an artillery cart, it was secretly taken from the field lest the army become disheartened by their leader's death. In the center, the Swedish infantry assaulted von Wallenstein's entrenched position with disastrous results. Repulsed on all fronts, their broken formations began streaming back with the situation made worse by rumors of the king's death.

Reaching their original position, they were calmed by the actions of the royal preacher, Jakob Fabricius, and the presence of Generalmajor Dodo Knyphausen's reserves. As the men rallied, Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, Gustavus Adolphus' second-in-command, took over leadership of the army. Though Bernhard initially wished to keep the king's death a secret, news of his fate quickly spread through the ranks. Rather than causing to the army to collapse as Bernhard feared, the king's death galvanized the men and yells of "They have killed the King! Avenge the King!" swept through the ranks.

File: PC160102.jpg (304KB, 1600x1002px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1600x1002px

>>50240871
With their lines re-formed, the Swedish infantry swept forward and again assaulted von Wallenstein's trenches. In a bitter fight, they succeeded in capturing the hill and the Catholic artillery. With his situation rapidly deteriorating, von Wallenstein began retreating. Around 6:00 PM, Pappenheim's infantry (3,000-4,000 men) arrived on the field. Ignoring their requests to attack, von Wallenstein used this force to screen his retreat towards Leipzig.

The fighting at Lützen cost the Protestants around 5,000 killed and wounded, while Catholic losses were approximately 6,000. While the battle was a victory for the Protestants and ended the Catholic threat to Saxony, it cost them their most able and unifying commander in Gustavus Adolphus. With the king's death, the Protestant war effort in Germany began to lose focus and the fighting continued another sixteen years until the Peace of Westphalia.

Pike and shot wargaming is a very popular subject, and Lützen is a perfect example for tabletop play. It encapsulates all the elements that define the period, particularly glorious floppy hats.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/s5u7aaar2i8ykcc/Osprey+-+CAM+068+-+Lützen+1632.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/d6zjpu68z2cc8z6/Osprey+-+ELI+179+-+Pike+and+Shot+Tactics+1590-1660.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/akq4ub35892q73h/Osprey+-+MAA+235+-+The+Army+of+Gustavus+Adolphus+%281%29+Infantry.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/606fucsxxhrykcf/Osprey+-+MAA+262+-+The+Army+of+Gustavus+Adolphus+%282%29+Cavalry.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/p4me9gtghge5dn1/Osprey+-+MAA+457+-+Imperial+Armies+of+the+Thirty+Years%27+War+%281%29+Infantry+%26+Artillery.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/4ypsjlbdia40ll5/Osprey+-+MAA+462+-+Imperial+Armies+of+the+Thirty+Years%27+War+%282%29+Cavalry.pdf

File: PC160052.jpg (261KB, 1600x1045px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1600x1045px

This month's community project is a recon or scout asset, I think the nominal cutoff date is 15th/16th.

Strawpoll for the next project: http://www.strawpoll.me/11649744

File: Scotsman_3.png (237KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 720x540px

Shilling that Highlanders kickstarter from last thread because you assholes made me excited to paint tartan again, and I ended up backing it.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/940158614/ww2-highlanders-battalion-miniatures

Hope they hit at least the first stretch goal so I can get those bagpipes.

File: c778f95c3a3cabe4d9c9bedc2d429405.jpg (60KB, 564x752px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 564x752px

>>50240184
These are airfix 1/72 WW1 French infantry. Very cheap. Quality is average and its a lucky dip with mold-lines, but the poses are awesome. Airfix do a few WW1 kits in this scale.

Kallistra do some great 12mm in both early and late war uniforms:
https://www.kallistra.co.uk/?page=113

File: 1479179546908692596530.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

Hey guise what do you think of my 6mm French napoleonics? Its one battalion made up of 36 figures + command.
PS. How should I organize my cavalry? I have some Hussars and some chasseurs, should I do 1 unit = 1 squadron or 1 unit = 1 regiment and how many men should I have?

australia please go

File: 20161115_140956.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

>>50242964
well fuck I don't know why they're upside down
anyway here's a close up of 2 companies

>>50242985
wat

>>50242964
I usually do Regiments of about 14 to 16 models and my Infantry Battalions in 24 to 30 including command. I base them with about 4 or 6 infantry per base for flexible formations and I do 2 cavalry per base.

>>50243872
7 or 8 bases for a cavalry regiment? sems like a lot to me.

File: 88s in action.webm (1MB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 600x338px

Bmp

>>50243009
I think anon was joking about how the pics were upside down

>>50242964
>PS. How should I organize my cavalry? I have some Hussars and some chasseurs, should I do 1 unit = 1 squadron or 1 unit = 1 regiment and how many men should I have?
surely this depends on what sort of game you want to play

>>50243910
Sometimes it is but my group plays Black Powder which is pretty flexible.

>>50240891
>>50241396

Connecting the two, Scottish mercenaries were popular with Swedish armies at the time (like elsewhere too) but a fair amount settled on the western coast of Sweden. "Glen" is a very common first name in Gothenburg to this day.

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

121KB, 780x525px

Reposting once per thread.

File: Advanced armour.jpg (816KB, 1600x1069px) Image search: [Google]

816KB, 1600x1069px

Bump with advanced soviet technology.

>>50242964
>>50242996
I have my dudes at 24 guys a stand and I play at corps level so every stand is a brigade.

Are these Adler or Baccus?

>>50246527
I e-mailed you santa anon

Any chance some has a pdf for "Armies of By Fire and Sword"

>>50246527
So, how many have emailed you senpai, and from which countries.

>>50247996
Almost 10 people by now, mostly gentlemen from Britain as you would expect.
/WIP/ in comparison is very "US-heavy".

>>50248224
Considering we average about 40 to 50 posters a thread, 10 sign ups to anonymously send and receive Christmas presents sounds pretty cool

File: h3.jpg (99KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1280x720px

If such a truck were to fall into german hands during ww2, what would they do with it?

Assuming they used it, would they repaint it entirely or just slap a big cross on the top or the sides?

File: 1e3e46cbb733e00fe6f1e8c4d97890b5.jpg (64KB, 559x799px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 559x799px

>>50248498
From 1941-43 they would most likely drape a flag over the bonnet and/or the cab roof, but that would stop after the Sovs began to gain air superiority. I don't think they'd be too fussed identifying themselves as prominently as a captured tank, for example. A coat of paint and maybe a crudely daubed Balkan cross would probably suffice.

>>50240798
Lützen is famous here in Sweden and the lützendimma(lützenfog)is an expression for an especially thick fog. I thought it was figure of speech mainly enclosed to Sweden but now that you mentioned it, is it a continental thing as well?

>>50248498
I doubt they'd bother to repaint it. Most likely, slap on big-ass crosses (and possibly a flag), at most. It would soon be buried under the mud and dust anyway.

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

375KB, 711x1004px

BUMP

File: IMG_20161115_140412.jpg (1004KB, 3408x2831px) Image search: [Google]

1004KB, 3408x2831px

>>50249873
Woops.

My Romano-British armoured unit done. I think they're alright although I'm not too happy with the basing.

>>50249888
Whats wrong with the bases?
They are nice.. not spectacular, but not bad either.


Great minis (and paintjob) btw. Where are they from? Footsore?

Would fictional post-apocalyptic futures that boil down to medieval Europe but in America six hundred and fifty years in the future go in this thread? Because After the End is a truly wonderful Crusader Kings 2 mod, and an excellent excuse to play medievals with weird flags and plate-armoured knights of Louisiane defending their Vodun faith against crusades called by the distant Pope Praised-Be from his seat in St Louis.

Plus Rastafari raiding parties terrorising every coast they can reach from the splintering Caribbean Empire, Norse revivalists on the Great Lakes, and a whole fuck-load of angry Aztec and Mayan religions that don't normally get to fight classical knights.

Neat setting, anyway. Some fun flags and themes for an otherwise-historical game, like those weird pick-up games of FoGAM or DBx where it's clear everyone just picked a random army.

>>50249915
Thanks. Yeah they're footsore.

I just dont like how the bases have turned out. I struggle with getting them to a standard I am happy with, not that they're necessarily bad. They either come out too sparse or too crowded or don't gel as a whole.

>>50249977
That's pretty much textbook /awg/ lad

>>50249977
>>50144130

I'm really wanting to try my hand at Modern Warfare minis. I'm looking along the lines of No End in Sight for small infantry or special ops stuff or any of the micro-armor stuff because cheap mass combat seems cool.

I saw the list of modern mini providers but what are the better ones for their respective scales? Mostly looking at the 6mm to 15mm range.

>>50249977
Would be nice to a VBCW-style book for it, tho

>>50247502
>infantry protection

>>50249982
What is footsore's major malfunction in that they sell the dudes without spears?

Man, I wish there were skirmish games that let me use 30YW, WoR or WWI miniatures on 1:1 representation. Luckily, nobody is playing historicals around here

Hey, Westernfront anon, how far along is yer book?

>>50251396
>What is footsore's major malfunction in that they sell the dudes without spears?
Most metal manufacturers do that, fuck if I know why.

>>50241556
Ah, I've tried to find decently priced Airfix shite in Canada, but no luck so far.

>>50251573
Lots used to give you spears. When I ordered them Late Romans(when they were Musketeer) they came with those wire spears.

GB used to (and Perry still do) give white metal spears that just bend all the time. That you'd generally replace with rod or wire anyway.

>>50252052
My Illyrians from Warlord came with metal spears (that I chopped down to make better javelins, and ruined my snips on.)

>>50252091
I have some minis by Black Tree Design and they also came with (really pointy) metal/wire spears.

Would I be correct in assuming that there would be little to no difference between the Greek/Serbian/Bulgarian/Romanian armies of the Balkan wars and the Salonika campaign of WW1?

File: PAW2017 list 2.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Already made a list for a Bolt Action tourney in February. Thoughts?

>>50253859
>Thoughts

First thought: 9 dice is not enough for 1000 points

I'd go for 8 men veteran squads to save some points and squeeze in another squad maybe.

You can use one german unit right? Why not replace one of the veteran squads with a german squad with more weapon options like panzerfausts or 2 lmgs.

>>50254016
How many dice to aim for then? I played a slow grow tournament at a club, then moved, so I don't really have that much experience, especially with Veteran armies.

Hmm, could lose the pintle MMG on the Zrinyi and go:

8x Vets, SMG, LMG
8x Vets, SMG, LMG
9x Vets, 2x SMG
7x Cavalry

Although then I don't think the cavalry would be up to much, although the main plan for them was outflanking onto objectives.

I'd rather not use German units.

What is it cheaper to get starting armies together for Bolt Action or Flames of War? Based on the ratio of what their rulebooks recommend and the cost of the materials of course.

>>50254187
Its hard to say really and without knowing your local scene you can't know how powerful (or cheesy) their lists will be.

Soviets could probably field 15+ dice at 1000 points if they wanted.

But your list looks decent enough and bringing Hungarians will certainly give you the respect of many opponents.

>>50254233
Bolt Action.

>>50254351
Thanks I'll look into it then.

>>50254233
You can get a bundle which gives you 1000-1500 points (your regular tournament size is 1000 pts) for 75 pound on Warlords Website.
With that you can pick what types of infantry and vehicles you want included. (from a couple of choices each). This is exclusive to the Warlord Webstore.

Other 1000pts starter bundles are available as well for 85 pound (Warlords Price) which can be found on ebay, amazon or other retailers at discount prices. I saw the US starter army for 66€ on Amazon the other day for example.

I assume you don't own paint etc, so get a starter paint set for your chosen army, one or two brushes and maybe a can of colored primer and you are around 100gbp (make it 120 if you need to buy some more hobby supplies like glue, hobby knife, cutter etc.


If you don't want to field a tournament-ready army asap, you can take things slower. One box of 30 Infantry already gives you a ton of options and you could field a 500-750 point veteran army with it.
Anon here >>50253859 for example has just above 30 soldiers (+ support) in his list

Flames of War, i have no idea. There is a Flames of War General though, they will be able to help you.

>>50254386
Super helpful! Thanks for all the information.

>>50254423
No problem. Do you already have a faction in mind?

>>50254386
>>50254423
Oh, btw. I didn't mention any books because they are all up in the OP.. so keep that in mind. If you want to have the books in paper the price goes up by a bit.

>>50254441
>>50254501

I'm thinking British Commandos, American Airborne, or something with the Soviets, as the friend I got to help me start up a club is looking at elite German units.

File: CHINESE COVER2.png (403KB, 920x1234px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 920x1234px

>>50251396
>Westernfront anon, how far along is yer book?
Its still a long way off friend. The actual writing needs to be done - the ideas are all there but still will take a bit. I also need to play test it a lot. I did a playtest to see if the basic mechanics would work and they do, but the orders / communication / requests and responses from HQ will take a bit to get right. Will be well worth it through - thats the main "WW1 feel" dynamic

I'm looking forward to making gas mask counters to show a unit is wearing gas masks.

I'm also working on pic related, which just needs the flavor descriptions written and the main blurb about China in WW2, so not far off.

Also trying to get my Italian army ready by sunday so we can do a Brits vs Italian demo Ostfront game at the club
Total Italian Forces:
3 X Autocannon da 90 (essentially a flak 88 on a lancia truck)
6 X Fiat M14 Carro Armato (light tanks)
4 X Semovente da 75 (light assault guns)
10 Bases of infantry in tan desert uniforms
4 Bases of Veterans in grey assault landing uniforms
2 X Autoblinda armored cars

Been attempting to design a Springtime of Nations-era Skirmish Game. Main issue I'm running into is how to represent the volley fire that wasn't from the firearms. Other than that, all seems rather decent.

Unrelated, but I'm probably going to get some Airfix models for WW2 (surprisingly cheap here) and set up some model armies for my first actual wargaming project.

>>50254810
Pics/report after, please?

File: Canteen.png (716KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

716KB, 1546x1159px

>>50256767
>Airfix models for WW2 (surprisingly cheap here) and set up some model armies for my first actual wargaming project.
Airfix 1/72 are cheap everywhere! one of the main attraction of that scale: cheap, widely available and a pretty good range.
Best of luck anon!

>>50256846
Of course. I'll take a photo once all these italians are finished too.

Just finished the supply train marker - its a field kitchen with a guy cooking a massive pot of pasta. Should be hilarious. Always fun scratch building unique little markers like that.

>>50251573
Cast metal spears are shit and historical grogs prefer brass ones, which are cheap and easy enough to make yourself. They should still offer to sell them with the minis though, or at least a convenient pack. Not everybody can be arsed.

It's the 16th so I've added this month's images to an album here http://hwgprojects.imgur.com/

If you know of any missing from this months or previous, let me know.

>>50256939
Fair, it just happens to be that Airfix is the only one with some model armies that won't cost like 4 times they'd normally would (wanna buy something from, say, Warlord Games, just a starter pack? I can expect to shell out R$300,00; Airfix I can get for R$50).

But yeah, one of the reasons I went with 1/72 was with how easy it'd be to find terrain and props.

>>50260649
Good work. What's the Nov-Dec project?

>>50260649
You could take off the second pic with just the two K-class cruisers. I posted that one initially because I wasn't sure I'd be able to get to the others.

File: DSCN1187.jpg (290KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 1600x1200px

>>50261475
Well the strawpoll's pretty conclusive with "something to do with food" as the top pick, so let's go with that. It could be a field kitchen, a looter carrying off a goose, a chuck wagon, a resupply vehicle of some kind, a pagan feast, perhaps even a cantiniere and her wagon of goodies.

>>50261511
Sweet, I'll paint up my hidden movement markers for M&T, since they're delicious woodland creatures.

File: 20161116_010656.jpg (2MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1536px

I recon that it's really a scouting asset. For if even this poor feller in ragged clothes isn't prospector, he's certainly looking for trouble showing to a gunfight with a picaxe like that!

Few things to clarify: I have not painted sides of the base, for I still look for a good way to signal sight arcs on them. It's quick painted, missed two big moldlines (Where the fuck I had my eyes? That is really miserable.) and face is really meh. But it's like 13th figure I painted in last six years, and first in four months, so I hope it only gets better.

Also- beauty of 1/72- I bought box of American Civil War pioneers for like 4 pounds and I have few of most poses to try again, till I get this right.

>>50261511
Does vodka count as food for WW2 Soviets?
:0)

>>50262129
I don't know, but now I wish I knew where all my crates and bits were so that I could put together a pile of pasta rations. I get the chance, I'll have to go dig for them.

File: Siege of leningrad.jpg (91KB, 600x426px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x426px

>>50261511
>something to do with food

Oh boy, time to paint up some dead soviet peasants

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

534KB, 1686x899px

>>50262006
Revell right?
Its super rare these days.

>>50261511
Reposting my recon vehicles for the gallery.

Finding a mini or something related to food will be quite a challenge.

File: freshen ya drink guvnah.jpg (140KB, 1600x729px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1600x729px

>>50262129
Booze qualifies, yes

File: 20161116_010656.jpg (2MB, 1536x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1536x2560px

>>50262158
Yes. Is it really? I just came into scout gear store (it's kinda traditional here that they sell models) and saw it on shelf. My luck I guess. The Revell Cowboys- that's the stuff I had to search far and wide.

I also tried to rotate the picture. Hope it works.

>>50262295
When i was a child these Revell kits were extremely common in every toy store. I had lots of ACW stuff, but also Normans, Aztecs, 100, 30 and 7-year war minis.
These sets are all gone now and prices on ebay are horrible compared to what they used to cost. I'm not sure if they ever re-release them, but currently revell mostly sells some ww2 sets (most of which are re-released stuff from other companies like matchbox and italeri).

File: 4pnc.jpg (34KB, 425x340px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 425x340px

>>50262153
Friend's grandfather, Polish opportunist who became soviet oficer and then moved to First Polish Army, survived the siege of Leningrad. When he died, like in 2006, they discovered that he was all the time making his own hardtacks from bread, you know ,,just in case".

He elaborated little on the war, and especially this episode. Familly didn't really care as well, my friend was probably one of the first to ask. When my friend expressed some compasion over his senility, his mother told him: ,,Yea, now he is old. But a son of a whore he was his whole life". Live for a better epitaph anons.

He did called after-Lenino period ,,the War", and said it was ,,nice and calm, and no one ever screamed at him". Not hard to imagine as he was part of the regiments soviet-style court-martial, son of a bitch. May God have mercy upon his roten soul.

File: Camo.jpg (51KB, 500x222px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x222px

For those of you following the development of Naval War, I've got some good news:

Version 1.3, which will include a lot of fixes and tweaks, will be released by the end of the month unless things go massively wrong.
This will also include the Italian and French force lists, giving us forces for every major naval combatant at the start of the war unless you count the Soviet Union.

Alongside this release there should also be a proper website.

Personally, I'm quite looking forward to this; a proper naval wargame that doesn't fall down the simulationist rabbit-hole, available for free as a living ruleset.
Assuming we don't end up finding anything seriously broken in 1.3, the only things needed afterwards will be stat cards for later-war vessels/aircraft and fleet lists with points values for them.
Based on how those have gone so far, those will probably be developed 1 or 2 at a time with the priority determined by the interests of the playerbase. Personally, I'm rather interested in getting stuff for Guadalcanal.

Does one of you guys use 1:43 diecast cars/trucks with 28mm minis?

>>50262591
You probably talk to HJS outside of the forum. Got any idea which Italian ships still need descriptions? I'd like to get back on them again, but I don't want to duplicate effort if he's been working on them too.

>>50262823
>>50262591

And he makes a post like 15 mins ago to the effect. Right then. Back to it.

>>50262600
I believe the best scale for 28mm is 1/56 or 1/48

>>50262894
Sure, but i just discovered that there is a company from russia which does tons of different 1:43 diecast trucks and jeeps and military vehicles so i wonder if these might be worth to buy.

http://www.ebay.de/itm/262398897489?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Thats way cheaper than your usual resin kit and its already assembled and painted (it probably needs to be repainted, but still).

>>50263227
1:43 is gigantic compared to 28mm figures, closer to something like 40mm

>>50262600
Leave them unbased and accept that they'll be a bit oversized, but they can work, especially if they're cheap (and your infantry are on thicker bases).

I'm looking to get into Bolt Action. How are the Finns? Are they decently fun to play? Alternatively I was looking to make an SS Estonian unit made up of the German models.

>>50265185
>Alternatively I was looking to make an SS Estonian unit made up of the German models.
I'd say go with that. With the finns you have nowhere to go once you're finished with early war and want to play in late.

>>50265213
Even with the continuation war?

I'm usually not shilling for a company, but in case of Fireforge i'll make an exception because they are awesome guys.

They just released (kinda, its available for pre-order) their Burn & Loot Starting Set.

http://www.fireforge-games.com/webstore/middle-age/unit-deals/burn-loot-starting-set-details

>>50265225
I must be honest, I don't know the Finnish army list that well but do you have any kind of late war tank at all? Or Heavy anti tank guns?

>>50265256
They have the PAK 40 as their heaviest AT, and their heaviest tanks are the KV-1 and the STUG III G

>>50265279
>KV-1 and the STUG III G
I guess I was wrong then.
But another thing. I'm coming from just finishing a rare army and it's models are mostly metal and/or expensive. I'm just starting a plastic army and it feels great.

>>50265308
I hate metal and I come from 40k but I'll have to deal with it. I'm gunna buy a 1500pt army on Skis and a Stug.

>>50265225
>>50265213
>>50265185
>>50265256


Finns have pretty good special rules but most of their infantry choices lack automatic weapons. They have squads that can be equipped with smgs though.

For AT they have Panzerfausts in their Infantry Squads as well as Panzerschreck teams and the Pak40

Tanks are ok-ish too: You got some light soviet tanks (like BT-series and T-26), T-34 (both versions) and KV-1. You also can take a Stug 3 (long barreled version).

They lack armored cars but besides that, i'd consider them the strongest "minor" Axis force.

The only issue i have with them is their limited choice of minis. Warlord sells like 15 different poses and thats it. You have to do alot of converting (which can be annoying i guess, but it can be done. Soviet (greatcoats) and German sprues are plentiful available)

I miss ASL anon

>>50265329

Almost nobody plays 1500pts in Bolt Action. 1000 is the most usual size.

While finns by warlord are 100% metal minis you can probably use german blitzkrieg bodies and spice them up with soviet weapons.
Finns used the Mosin Nagant to equip whole divisions.

http://www.warlordgames.com/hobby-using-plastic-german-sprues-for-finnish-infantry/

Here is an article on how to use german minis for Finns.

Im a new BA player, why do people get upset when I tell them I play Japanese?

>>50265411
Thanks man! I appreciate it.

>>50265601
20 men units that automatically lose all pin markers if you declare charge.

>>50265662
I just bought the 1000 point starter set, so my biggest unit is 13

>>50265674
Also knee mortarts, 3 per unit I think. You can smoke the everloving fuck out of everything.

>>50265601
Never heard someone complain about Japs desu.
Its a pretty rare army to see actually.

File: 15025377_1358006734218647_8608666311706882903_o.jpg (230KB, 1200x940px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1200x940px

>>50265235
Pic related

>>50261511
I don't suppose anyone knows of a manufacturer who makes the US Navy ice cream barges or appropriate stand ins at 1:3000?

File: ad-1945-nat-dairy-war-ice-cream-factory[1].jpg (146KB, 600x884px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 600x884px

>>50265926
>Had to go look it up
Wish I did, sounds like a pretty neat story, but this is literally the only picture I could find of one of those Barge Large Refrigerated that the ice cream barge was supposed to be.

>>50265926
>>50266170

Also had to look this up, thought it might be slang, perhaps related to the Great White Fleet escapade.

Huh.

File: Averof_Today2.jpg (3MB, 2816x2112px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2816x2112px

>>50266319
>>50265926
While we're talking about obscure naval history, does anybody have a good source for the "Blue Cheese Mutiny" that supposedly took place on Giorgios Averoff? I'm stretching here, because I've got no civilian shipping to paint up, and I'm not going to have spending money until after the holiday season. I voted for food, but I had originally planned on sitting it out and seeing what all the land guys did.

File: 20161116212327_1.jpg (433KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 1920x1080px

>>50266319
I bought the early access version of Ultimate General: Civil War, and I can't be more happy about this game.

UG: Gettysburg felt arcady sometimes but Civil War feels next level damn.

>Units are organised by division and understrength divisions can be merged together.
>Brigades deploy skirmishers now with the push of a button, they can also be re-attached to the brigade
>Artillery has an actual impact and does not need to be microed as heavily as in Gettysburg.
>There are Ironclads in the game IRONCLADS!
>There is a fun campaign
>Officers level up, get wounded or even killed
>Brigades can surrender and then the soldiers become POW.
>POW can be commanded around by their captors and recaptured by the original side
>Terrain feels a lot more important than in UGG
>There are Garrisoned buildings, fortifications and terrain pieces.
>Grainfields hide infantry
>There is a campaign system

Hype as fuck.

Also armoured trains

>>50266564
Hey, this sounds neat.

>>50266564
Fuck yeah, is Darth, of DarthMod fame, still involved?

>Also
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37997640
:(

>>50266564
I didnt enjoy gettsyburg so much. Units felt weird and yeah it was very limited and arcadey.

>>50266564
c-can you buy me a copy?

File: 20161116214948_1.jpg (587KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1920x1080px

>>50266704
He is still the head lead.

Also there is a supply system now.
There are different weapons and different cannons.

>>50266766
Well, I'll wait for a sale and try to forget about the two huge armies waiting to be painted in my drawer...

I quite liked the original UG:G. Felt a lot like a tabletop game in that you're mostly directing troops, rather than dicking around with micromanagement.

>>50266785
I think I'll join you on waiting for a sale. Or for it to release fully, UG:G got a lot of patching post launch tweaking the gameplay and scenarios after all.

>tfw also playing UG CW
>don't check what i can take to next battle
>create new division
>can only take the units in my first corps
>horrifically outnumbered because I spaffed all my money and manpower on my other division
wew lads

>>50267084
>>can only take the units in my first corps
meant first division ofc

File: 20161116222342_1.jpg (606KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 1920x1080px

>>50267084
Jesus fuck same thing is happening to me. I am supposed to hold off 4000 union men with 1800 dudes from my first division

I did it anyway, but now they got reinforcement and they are shafting me royaly

Battle for the small town right, the one right after the first mission?

>>50265843
> Crusades ruleset
> No muslim army included

Meh.

>>50267161
I still held the town when the timer reached 0, but has lost more men and it gave me a "loss" result losing me 8 political power, I feel like I got shafted.

Either way this is /v/ material desu, if you are in the steam group I'm in there if you want to talk about it.

File: wrzesien1939.png (318KB, 343x480px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 343x480px

>>50266564
O well! That game looks awesome, thanks for sharing! I have UG:G from some sale and not even instaled it yet, but still I used to murder Sid Meier's Gettysburg! to death.

In Poland we have some 10 mm ACW wargame system in preparation. Guys who made it prepared nice Napoleonic ruleset before, so I'm full of hope for the moment I welcome rebs with whole canister of Uncle Sam.

I thought about getting 1:1200 ACW naval sets from Navwar, but their order system is right from the beggining of the previous century and I don't even know what those 15 pound sets consist of.

<pic- another wargame being sold right now. And Tanks! Polish Ed. kickstart ended yesterday with a big victory, despite a bit half assed campaign, for it seems that English developers want to keep translations one step behind, so WAAC faggots bought their stuff first instead. Anyway, what a time to be alive.>

Have you guys been hearing about the situation with ship wrecks in the Java Sea?

The wrecks of several sunk cruisers (with over a thousand lives lost during their sinkings), multiple destroyers and at least one submarine have essentially been removed from the sea floor, most likely by people looting them for scrap.

>>50267433
Yeah, I saw that. really pretty fucked up.

File: Bombed.jpg (126KB, 650x472px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 650x472px

>>50267433 here, just saw >>50266704

Bloody disgrace, especially since those wrecks are war graves and there's no word on what happened to the bodies still in them.

Is C&C: Great War any good?

Nev3er played anything C&C before.

>>50267191
It's not a crusades ruleset.

>>50267631
But..."Deus Vult"

>>50267657
That's the main ruleset, this is a derivative of that.

>>50267527
Not as good as C&C: Generals.

>>50267657
The ruleset and their miniatures range started with Templar and Teutonic knichts, but it evolved to a generic medieval ruleset.

>>50267453
Also 70m is impossible to dive to on recreational kit - you're looking at Trimix tech diving shit there. Not to mention the sheer scale of nicking several fucking battleships. This isn't some dodgy beach shack dive center nicking a ship's bell...

I'd guess an international salvage operation that already has the infrastructure. Doubt that Indonesian industry has the capability... Chinese or Filipino would be my guess, as I'd hope that Western Countries wouldn't dare do it (and the Aussies have a fuck ton of metal anyway)

>>50241556
>Contains 48 unpainted figures
>$7.99

If I wasn't already so cheap that I play wargames on tabletop simulator because the models cost $0 I'd be tempted even if the quality is only OK.

Weird idea... would I be able to modify ak47 republic to play at 3mm?

>>50267925
I only read the first edition book but I don't see why not. Just keep in mind unpainted minis lose morale so get your tiny brush ready ;)

>>50267954
Haha Ill see what I can manage. Compared too many other modern rulesets the group nature lof AK47 Republics units could work well at 3mm without turning it into an entirely tanks game like most other 3mm moderns

painting a perry pikeman for a contest, no ideas on the color scheme for him. any suggestions?

File: Shoulder-yr-Pike.jpg (64KB, 800x927px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x927px

>>50268936
What kind of pikeman? Period? Country?

>>50267726
I'd bet red china is behind this one.

>>50268963
15th century
italian maybe, the theme is winter

File: italian wars.jpg (40KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 400x400px

>>50269062
The osprey archive in the OP should have something useful for you

File: gruyeres 235.jpg (537KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 1200x1600px

>>50269062
Rust and green are good colours for hose and doublets, if in doubt just go with common natural plant or sheep colours.

>>50266170
>>50266319

Eh, figured it was a shot in the dark, the idea behind having a concrete boat, let alone a concrete boat full of ice cream trailing behind my Essexs and Fletchers seemed too amusing to resist.

And probably too shit at scratchbuilding to do it.

Oh well, there's always next month.

>>50266552
No, but having not heard of this, if you find anything let me know. I'm curious now.

What company has 20 mm affordable napoleonic Saxons?

There is a Zvezda Curassier set, a Hat infantry...

Where I can get other stuff like command and artilery?

>>50262424

Hell, I grew up in a small Swedish town and right nextdoor there was an old coot. I found later after he died in 2002 that he was a volunteer in the SS Wiking Panzerdivision.

I knew a guy that repaired his TV a few times, and that old guy had any crazy stories to tell. I read up on him and he deserted in Estonia by basically he and 5 or so other guys killed the crew of a fishing trawler and sailed to Sweden.

>>50265662
>>50265697
this is pretty much how the japanese operated in real life though. Grenade dischargers (knee mortars) were extremely common and they had a very high rate of fire. Us forces attacking a Japanese infantry unit expected to come under pretty much immediate fire from grenade dischargers.

>>50253264

yeah, the proper brass wire spears are reputed to be lethal (I haven't used them yet myself), most seem to just file them down a bit to blunt them

>>50265235
>>50265843

That looks pretty cool desu. I've been thinking about fireforge stuff for a while, I'm in the midst of an ancients project so probably the first thing I'm gonna get from them is mongols to kitbash into Scythians (head-swaps and file off stirrups, mostly).

If I have $130 burning a hole in my pocket at some point I might just get that set though... Any idea what the rules are going to be like?

>>50267925
Each base of figures represents a platoon of guys or so, as I recall, so yeah.

>>50267925
"modify"

O8 make 3mm technicals, infantry, and export model soviet armour. You're not going to be modifying much there, just putting 2-3 vehicles on the bases. Try basing technicals as 2-4 with some dismount infantry - bright colours, of course. You might get away with 1-2 tanks per base if you're stingy or just want the lonely look, which I'd say could work pretty well.

>>50269808
The Newline Design figures are a wee bit smaller, but can be used in their own units. Other than that, I'd say search for minis that are close enough and use those, ie.: I use the 1806 Prussian Artillery as Peninsular Spanish Artillery because they are similar enough.

>>50267799
Know a good source of models for use with Tabletop simulator? I've been thinking about this for awhile to play with a long lost companion.

>>50267799
>>50274879
Serious question, how can you guys enjoy playing wargames in tabletop simulator?

Something about the physics and the fact that I can't reach across the table and slap my friends seems to really weaken the game

>>50274906
For me it's both a cost and distance restraint I live in the middle of cow tipping country and am dirt poor but have a mighty need to be an Armchair general with friends. Unfortunately all my old high school buddies have since fled our dying town. So we use the power of the internet to do shit.

File: 51IPPaMmETL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (55KB, 333x499px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 333x499px

>>50274906
The whole joy of tabletop is getting away from the computer and moving some physical units around, rolling some dice, checking line of sight by stooping down and for a moment experiencing what the tank commander or cavalryman can actually see.

I just ordered some Vickers 6-tons for my WW2 Chinese. So far I have 80 Infantry figures from Caesar miniatures (makes 20 bases of infantry for Ostfront) and an SDK 222.
Kind of at a loss as to what other stuff I could get for them. No one really makes Chinese stuff at 1/72. Might scratch together some mortars and maybe a field gun or two. Ordered 4 Vickers 6-tons so thats a start for armor. Dont really want to focus on armor too much with them, could go for T-26's or some captured Chi-Has or Ha-Gos, but Chinese cavalry would be ideal as they used a lot of them.

Almost finished these Italians too - vehicles all painted, infantry on their final highlight only 5 bases to go before I can base/finish them.
Listening to pic related in audiobook form as I work. Very interesting! Audible give you a free audiobook if you sign up for the free trial.

>>50275020
>checking line of sight by stooping down and for a moment experiencing what the tank commander or cavalryman can actually see.
True line if sight is not part of the joy of wargaming.
It's a pointless argument starter in the heavily abstracted world of wargames .

>>50275313
Sounds like you've just had a bad experience, just saying its part of the joy for me - putting myself in the shoes of an actual unit on the tabletop and working out what they can see. I often do it during deployment to make sure my field guns have good arcs of fire because definitely dont want to move them later on if I can avoid it. We thoroughly enjoy TLOS and it forms the basis of determining cover and line of sight in our wargames. Never had an argument over it, and its particularly important if you play with more rolling, organic terrain rather than a flat tabletop.

If there's an uncertainty with line of sight or exact range or something we just 4+ it. I think arguments tend to boil down to who you game with. Some people have trouble with compromise and take it personally. Better to 4+ something and look it up later to keep the game rolling.

>>50275395
I'd say TLoS is fine unless it's not overly complicated crap like "if half of every figure has half of it covered behind a cover the get a cover modifier, but only if 75% of your figures have LoS to them...". Overall I'm indifferent to it, tho it's usually better than the overcomplicated crap some manufacturers use.

And TLoS is fucked once prone and kneeling figures come into play.

>>50275464
>TLoS is fucked once prone and kneeling figures come into play.
yeah fuck that. Thankfully we just give infantry a blanket benefit of the doubt (and they're usually in stands instead of individual) - if there's anything in the way, they get cover.

We mostly use TLOS to work out the simple yes/no of can a unit see another unit? Sometimes whether a vehicle is in cover (50% of silhouette obscured), and very rarely whether a vehicle is in heavy cover (80% of silhouette obscured - essentially just a small part poking out of cover like the turret)
With these abstractions in place it helps keep things simple. Fuck having to work out TLOS for every single infantry miniature - that would be a nightmare unless a very small skirmish game.

File: vikings-silverdale_hoard_group_shot.jpg (44KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x426px

I'm not sure if this is the right thread, but I do not know where to ask it.
Do anyone of you lads have any books or links with historical (ancient rome and dark ages would be best) jewelry? Maybe something with lots of drawnings and photos?

>>50276180

Frankish Art in American Collections
https://www.dropbox.com/s/az3um6qej64mg33/Frankish_Art_in_American_Collections.pdf?dl=0
From Attila ot Charlemagne
https://www.dropbox.com/s/69bb353pq8j3kf7/From_Attila_to_Charlemagne_Arts_of_the_Early_Medieval_Period_in_The_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.pdf?dl=0

I'm sorry anon I did have more but I can't seem to find them. Hope these help.

File: Giorgios Averoff.jpg (65KB, 800x607px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 800x607px

>>50269251
Basically the story goes: Giorgious Averoff is received and commissioned by the RHN, and sent to Britain on her shakedown cruise to participate in KGV's coronation ceremonies and to receive a load of ammunition. While there, she runs aground, and has to spend extra time in Britain for repairs. There were fights between sailors and locals. At this point, supposedly there was a mutiny or attempted mutiny that took place because Greek sailors were unfamiliar with blue cheese and thought they were being served food that had gone bad. After this, the brand new captain was replaced with a more popular figure that brought back order to the ship. I can find something about everything that happened, except the actual part about the blue cheese. So it's kind of in the territory of "did it happen, or is it just a fun story people enjoyed telling?"

Even without that bit, it's a pretty interesting ship, and it's pretty damn sexy to look at.

How should I base my 10mm ECW infantry? I'm thinking of doing 4 wide 3 deep for both pikes and shot but I'm not sure if that would limit the games I can play with them.

>>50265371
Im still around. I poke my nose in on occasion, but not much for me to comment on. everyone is more in the minis game mind set around here. which is ok. not much call for hex and counter stuff. Im still gaming but most of the stuff I do i just post on my youtube channel now.

but im still around.

>>50276752
This is just me speaking for myself, but I like games. There's plenty of boardgames I enjoy, and the most complicated figures they employ are meeples. Besides owning what I understand is Omega's worst game, I haven't really gotten to mess around much with hex and chit, but that doesn't mean it doesn't still appeal to me.

Since you're around though, are there any good hex and chit naval games you could recommend? Really doesn't matter what era to me, I like it all.

>>50275313
This.

If your're playing a wargame, you're already running a game that has to abstract the shit out of everything; why suddenly pretend that your toy soldiers, locked rigidly in whatever pose they have, amongst terrain that misses key features of reality, elevated unnaturally by bases, unable to use their surroundings as an actual human being could, should be used to determine if one unit can target another rather than something that actually fits the nature of the game in assuming the figures are representative of the combatants and not the actual combatants?

True line of sight is bad, lazy game design..

>>50276956
ton of them out there really.
"wooden ships and iron men" for age of sail
"Iron Bottom Sound III" for WWII smaller ship engagments tactical
the Fleet Series from Victory games for modern Strategic
Avalanche Press series of WWI and WWII games-"Great War at Sea" and "WWII at Sea" for both tactical and operational

all depends on your era and what scale.

good complicated modern systems for 6mm?

File: IMG_0654.jpg (525KB, 1600x1185px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 1600x1185px

>>50277828
Fistful of TOWs
http://www.mediafire.com/file/9xxzdx9568ga3gj/A+Fistful+of+TOWs+3+v01-20.pdf
Cold War Commander
https://mega.nz/#!jwcXSY6Y!_jMaHQU9JEnPvrNp54ZOtF5SdQnp8aNb9o4nmUOMCFk

>>50277907
Cheers, I get at 6mm theyll mostly be vehicle based but are these playable with a fair amount of infantry too?

>>50277922
Sure thing, you could cram a whole division on the table if you like anon

File: Cxeo9MdXAAERt4E.jpg (176KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 888x1200px

finished my airborne 17pdr.

File: Cxeo7XGXEAAgZYL.jpg (223KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 888x1200px

>>50278371

>>50265601
>Im a new BA player, why do people get upset when I tell them I play Japanese?
because their shitty people?
Japanese are great, as is ANY OTHER nation in the game.

>>50278371
>>50278387

Looking good!

I've got a PaK 38 for my Hungarians and I'm wondering how I base it? Is it normal to fully do the base, make and paint that, then just glue the gun on top after?

File: CxeudN1XEAIE9Fa.jpg (182KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 888x1200px

>>50278442
I do sand, then glue the gun onto that and then start painting the gun and do the base afterwards.
so I have the base to hold onto while painting the gun.

Hanomag I'm working on right now. dunno why but I'm not satisfied with the weathering...

>>50278528
Ah right, that makes sense. Cheers!

Weathering I find to be one of those things which it's hard to tell how its gone until you let it all dry and come back to it with fresh eyes.

>>50278528


I like the weathering but i think the "problem" is that you didn't used a green for the camo pattern. (which is totally fine, don't get me wrong here) but without it the whole truck is just light and darker browns without much contrast.

Personally i'd add some chips with a blister foam to some of the edges with a very dark grey, just to add some more interest there.

File: IMG_0365_resize.jpg (407KB, 979x1306px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 979x1306px

>>50278648
I wanted to go without green this time.

okay, more chipping then?

File: Deployment02.jpg (898KB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

898KB, 2560x1536px

It's now official: Naval War 1.3 (including its new website, which will have background for various ship types etc) has the 25th as its intended release date!

I'll try to get some test games in once it's out and deliver batreps where possible.
Out LGS might also start stocking 1/3000 naval minis, so I might actually be able to build up a decent little community here.

>>50278823
I remember the Stug with the nice stowage.

In case of the Sdkfz, yes, a bit more dark/non-brown chipping would probably help.

>>50278830

*rubs hands together excitedly*

Oh, good. I've been meaning to take a look over this ruleset for quite a while.

Crossposting from /awg/:

Oh, and Wargames Foundry are doing deals until the 22nd of December.

On their main site, it's buy 8 standard £12 packs and get 2 free, or buy 16 and get 6 free. Apparently it's not done in the cart, just mention what you want in the order notes. "Regrettably, you can’t combine offers, or count packs that are bought as part of a deal such as a collection."

Over on Casting Room Miniatures, they're doing 20% off (code: 20%CRMDISCOUNT) but only on historicals.

>>50278910
Just out of curiosity. How is their casting quality? How do they scale with other companies? Foundry is one of the last companies i never bought from.

>>50278937
They're good, casting-wise, and their stuff is mostly... ok? scale-wise? Some of it's bigger and chunkier? It really, really depends on the range, especially with their ex-citadel stuff.

Some of their stuff is pretty tall, the bits of the 2000AD ranges I bought were giants among my warhams, but the Rogue Trooper stuff I bought was more exhibition pieces - they never did a full range of them. Besides, GIs being tall works fine.

>>50278937
Having just ordered from them, their casting is fine. In terms of scale they tend to be on the smaller side as most are quite old sculpts.

HOWEVER it depends on the range, the old Perry sculpts are relatively small (by modern standards) but some of the others can be a little larger. Foundry being relatively popular means that there generally comparison shots for their figures.

>>50278980
>>50278967

Thanks guys.

>>50278854
alright, I'll give it one more chipping.

>>50278415
>their
theirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheir

>>50279501
>>their
>theirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheirtheir
yeah right. めんごめんご

English isn't my first language and sometimes it happens....

File: Napoleonic-Wars-Old-Guard-1920x1200.jpg (952KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

952KB, 1920x1200px

Can anyone recommend a good game for 6mm Napeolonics?

>>50279713
Blucher seems to come well recommended.

>>50279713
Blucher, Volley&Bayonet, Grande Armee.

>>50262161
Qualifies for present day russians, too

>>50280102
Qualifies for Russians of any time and age. From stone age Russians to Space Russians with Space AKs.

>>50276180
Found another
https://www.dropbox.com/s/i72qjo20sx0ghto/Guide_to_Provincial_Roman_and_Barbarian_Metalwork_and_Jewelry_in_The_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.pdf?dl=0

>want to use fistful of tows to play moderns
>want to do modern arab imaginations + insurgent type stuff vs murricans
>every army list that isnt america is poor quality troops
>america is all excellent troops

this is stupid it wont be balanced at all

>>50280622
Can't you just give the non-americans more troops?

>>50267433
Fun story; there's actually a huge demand for pre-1945 steel, especially old Krupp steel because it's of very high quality and lacks radioactive contamination.

>>50280622
There's a reason why there are points costs and plenty of unbalanced scenarios in the game. Managing poor quality troops is also an art of its own in FFoT.

But yes, you have encountered the core problem of gaming anything recent where a 1st world military meets 3rd world armed gangs. There's good reason people say that if the Gulf War was replayed and both sides swapped equipment, Murrica and it's allies would still have trounced the Iraqi army. And the Iraqi army in quality was several steps above a lot of the armed forces in the area these days.

>>50240798
hi guys, i am trying to gewt a friend of mine started on wargaming and he wants to play alexandrian macedonians, do you have any suggestions or comments on the various possible systems?(1 56 or 1 48 scale preferred, but 1 72 is ok too)(i do have experience in hystorical and not wargames if this is a factor)

>>50281136
This. Modern guerilla insurgencies don't make laughing stocks out of professional standing armies because their troops are good enough to win stand-up fights with their enemies. They do it by using superior tactics that prevent them from ever NEEDING to win a stand-up fight with their enemies.

>>50281145
also he is kind of a bad player and a crybaby so overpowered macedonians in the system would actuallly be a plus

>>50281136
why do you sya that scenario would still be a loss? do you mean itraqis were too badly trained or they would lose for other factors?

File: Cxffs7qXgAEd1p9.jpg (193KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 888x1200px

okay done, I think

>>50281175
>he is kind of a bad player and a crybaby

>pandering to this kind of behaviour
"no"

File: CxffrjeXcAA2q0p.jpg (168KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 888x1200px

>>50281213

>>50281212
Poor training, low morale, bad commanders. Their best of the best is a barely a first world average. Still a threat but horrifically outmatched by forces that actually train all their troops because they're not constantly in fear of a coup.

>>50279713
Volley and Bayonet

>>50281234
>>50281213

Nice.

Do you play a certain unit or just "generic" Germans?

File: IMG_20160612_194012.jpg (2MB, 3286x2432px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3286x2432px

>>50281497
>Do you play a certain unit or just "generic" Germans?
"generic" Herr and Fallschirmjaeger, so I can use my armies on as many fronts in as many scenarios as possible.

>>50281325
thank you

How would I make army lists for the syrian civil war for fistful of tows

Which ruleset would suit playing the Korean War better? Battlegroup or Force on Force?

I plan on grabbing the big Imex set and I have a bunch of WW2 tanks and other vehicles anyway, so I might just go for it.

>>50278902
It's not as crunchy as what you're typically accustomed to, but the little bit I've gotten to play has been quite a bit of fun.

Looking for some BA2 tips on my 500 escalation army. I am considering one of the following options.

500 list
HQ 1st lt + 1 man 2xAR 85
Infantry squad: 8men 3xAR 2xPf 105
Infantry squad: 8men 3xAR 1xPf 100
Infantry squad: 8men 3xAR 1xPf 100
Engineers: 6men 4xSMG 1xPf 1xFt 109

500 list
2nd lt + 1 man 2xAR 60
Infantry squad: 9men 3xAR 1xPf 110
Infantry squad: 9men 3xAR 1xPf 110
Engineers: 6men 4xSMG 1xPf 1xFt 109
SDKFZ 251 84
Heavy field car 27

>>50282264
Battlegroup, Force on Force is more for skirmish stuff, and tends to get bogged down when there's too much reaction stuff happening.

>>50282607
Seconding this. Korean war I think needs to be able to lay down a company of troops per side at least to get the required combined arms feel, or just have enough stuff for a suitable attack/defence scenario. And mechanically there's not really that much different to deal with at the small scale that'd make it seem any different to late WW2. At least at the company+ scale you can reasonably add in some combined arms stuff to give more flavour.

File: 500.jpg (258KB, 1006x889px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1006x889px

>>50282441

I'd suggest something like pic related.
If you play germans, you want to make use of those 6 dice lmgs.

>>50280622
That's why they call it asymmetrical warfare. The "inferior" troops usually have excellent guerrilla warfare tactics and know the land inside out, allowing them to strike from unexpected areas, and retreat into caves or mountains and lay low.
For example: US or Soviet armor in Afghanistan it seems overpowered compared to a couple of infantry guys with RPGs, but the insurgents would usually attack from steep canyons, above the elevation of the tanks guns, and strike with RPGs before the US or Soviet knew what was happening. destroy a few tanks, then retreat into the mountains before air support shows up, taking no losses and chalking up another victory.

>>50281136
I dunno, iraqi's with TOWs, bradleys, M1A1s and Air superiority vs US/Brits with T-72s and infantry wouldn't end very well for the Allies.

>>50277712
Its fine for vehicles, where they aren't able to use the surroundings by crouching. No system really bothers to represent line of sight change for crouching, they tend to just give the figure a bonus to cover or damage reduction for crouching. Pretty sure all systems assume the miniature is a real combatant, making use of cover as much as possible, and in fluid stances like prone, crouch, full run, etc. You can still have TLOS and represent the abstraction of what a miniature represents.
if TLOS is bad game design in your opinion, what are the alternatives? just top down line of sight, where hills and dips in the land no longer count? or just ignoring line of sight altogether and blatantly targeting someone behind a massive concrete wall, when they wouldn't even be visible?

>>50283209
>I dunno, iraqi's with TOWs, bradleys, M1A1s and Air superiority vs US/Brits with T-72s and infantry wouldn't end very well for the Allies.

The tech advantage is pretty much entirely neutered by the Iraqi army tactics having a lot more in common with a WW1 force than one suitable for use with modern equipment. T-72s with crews that are trained for high speed mobile warfare are more than adequate against armies that dig in and barely move unless they're fleeing.

>>50283209
I think it's about air superiority. Works wonder for quickly fucking up forces that are armed in outdated stuff.

>>50283209

TLoS is specifically drawing line of sight using the figure's point of view (distorted by attempting to position one's head to match, or attempting to position a laser pointer if feeling modern about it).

Basically anything else is better. Drawing from base edge to base edge, Infinity's columns, drawing from centre of unit to unit Force on Force style, anything that isn't a literal interpretation of a miniature's viewpoint is more appropriate and generally less work to deal with.

>Pretty sure all systems assume the miniature is a real combatant, making use of cover as much as possible, and in fluid stances like prone, crouch, full run, etc

Not if they're using TLoS they're not. Because if they are abstracting that out, then it's not TLoS, because the figure and it's line of sight isn't 'true' - a literal interpretation of what that miniature could see.

>>50283470
If we're swapping equipment, it means the Iraqis would have AWACS and a large network of recon and FAC aircraft. So they would know whats going on and would see an allied invasion with T-72s coming, allowing them to get their TOW operators ready and waiting, and then its just a matter of blowing up enough T-72s until the allies abort the operation.
Tactics are important, but with a massive technological and materiel advantage, you can still do pretty well with poor tactics, provided you still know how to use the equipment you have.

>>50283604
Base to base only really works on flat tables, if you have dips or rises in your terrain, it means things like hull down positions or trenches become useless - quite unrealistic.
TLOS is fine for vehicles. I dont really play any skirmish games, but it works fine for infantry in stands too. You can still have a level of abstraction and use TLOS. You get down to about ground level, see what a unit can see, and decide yes/no if they can see a target, and if something is in the way you give the target cover. I dont think any system takes TLOS "literally" as you seem to think is the only option. You have to assume that you can't see exactly what a soldier can see and just use TLOS as a general indicator of what your unit can see and what kind of cover to give a target.

>>50283470
Iraq had basically 8 years of modern warfare experience against iranians. Their air force and armored troops were good.

>>50283734
Hardly anyone has anything but a flat table. Undulations unbalance miniatures so are typically ignored unless covered by tiered hills. And hardly anyone has appropriately sized hills either because they'd be gigantic outside of the smaller scales used are played at. So base-to-base works perfectly for hundreds of games, because it can be assumed that anything featured on the table that might completely block line of sight to a target can actually do that, and is not rendered pointless by a figure being visible via the TLoS method of directly targeting the miniature itself.

>You can still have a level of abstraction and use TLOS
I don't think you understand why it's True Line of Sight and not just a line of sight.

File: IMG_20161117_234148.jpg (564KB, 1955x2144px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 1955x2144px

WiP ROMANES

>>50283908
8 years of mostly static warfare with such fun features as using tanks as if they're artillery pieces rather than actually conducting the sweeping advances they were designed for and crews abandoning their tanks in combat so frequently that a noticeable amount of each side was composed of looted vehicles from the other.

No, they were only good in the context of their neighbours being as bad or worse, excepting Israel.

>>50283637
Having the equipment has no guarantee that they're going to use it properly. The Iran-Iraq war is full of examples of using modern equipment in ways that just baffled those who sold it to them. Sure, giving them TOWs is gonna net them a few extra kills, but those units are still going to run like they did when given any stiff opposition that actually knows how to use their gear to full effect, and co-ordinate between the forces arrayed to make use of the support available. In the end, the quality of the troops is worth a lot more than the gear they're carrying, as long as they're still capable of harming each other at least. And the Iraqi army by all metrics available, was shit.

>>50242996
Ah yes, judging from the picture, obviously an Australian regiment!

>>50281653
When were pallets invented?

>>50285193
1950 I think, good eye.

>>50284112
>those units are still going to run like they did when given any stiff opposition that actually knows how to use their gear to full effect.
Morale is often based on your equipment - if you know you have superior vehicles and air power, you may well have good morale. Iraqi's in M1A1s would be feeling pretty safe, as opposed to running when their tanks start exploding from long range TOW hits.

If you're assuming the Allies know how to use their T-72s to maximum effect, then the Iraqis' would also be competent in their usage of AWACs, TOWs, M1A1s, bradleys, etc. and would be more than capable of defeating an even sized force on the defensive.

>>50283974
>Hardly anyone has anything but a flat table
We play exclusively on rolling terrain so TLOS is pretty important for determining if something is actually visible to the firer. Hull down positions and undulations in the terrain feature prevalently.
Abstraction is part of wargaming. TLOS is never exactly "true" its a rough estimate of what a unit can see, from their point of view.

This conversation seems to boil down to:
I like thing
>stop liking thing that I dont like
but thing I like is important in our games, and adds realism
>games aren't realistic and no one should use realistic terrain, let alone rules that account for realistic terrain

I said I like getting down to see what a unit can see, it adds immersion, and you guys have started foaming at the mouth about TLOS. Its a system we use, we like it, it works well in our games, makes sense, and is simple to implement. Is there a particular game that gave you a bad experience with this kind of thing? Or is it more of a "i dont like X mechanic, so no one else should" kind of thing?

>>50285227
I dunno mang, Iraqi's in Abrams were abandoning their tanks when ISIL were zerg rushing them with molotovs.

>>50285340
Thats understandable in close quarters if infantry are rushing you, but if you're defending an area with a very open space in front of you - as often happened in the gulf war, you'd have a lot more time to take things down before the infantry get anywhere close.
It would certainly be an interesting scenario, but my money would be on the Iraqis. I think you guys underestimate their capability. They weren't shit, just mediocre training and low morale. Given excellent weaponry, air power and recon their morale would improve - they're told that nothing the enemy has can take down their tanks, instead of seeing their tanks blow up before they even know what was happening.

>>50285402
Except the scenario is simply swapping equipment, assuming the exact same training levels each had with their own equipment in reality, which for the Iraqi side was fuck all, and for the coalition side, was an absolute fuckton.

Because an army that's trying to fight like a pre-WW2 force despite having 1970s+ tech, does not automagically become way better at using 1980s tech just because they have that instead.

They barely had capability, their army was crushed in hours, it'd take maybe a few more hours in the given scenario, but their army would still lose horrifically because swapping their mediocre '70s tech for mid-late 1980s tech is not enough to overcome very low quality training, morale, unit cohesion, command structure, command capability, lack of initiative. The coalition could have rode out in 1960s gear (and parts of it did) against what the Iraqis fielded and still won with a large margin of success because they would have used what they had like it was supposed to be used, and skillfully so.

File: bashi-bazouks.jpg (125KB, 374x244px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 374x244px

>>50280622
The best part is, up until after they got their shit packed in in Afghanistan and Iraq cumulatively, the US army and marines were kinda really crap, with poor decisions all around, and throwing all those lard-assed reservists into there only made it more saucy. But 'MURKA bias is never going to admit they are less than stellar.

Biggest war budget doesn't mean it's being spent well.

As for what everyone else is talking about, with the assymetric war stuff. TL;DR: world's most advanced army spends trillions of dollars fighting, and losing yet another war. (Because going nowhere fast is not winning, sorry guys.)

inb4 you take this way too seriously. :^)

>>50281145
>>50281175

I don't know of any ancients ruleset with OP Macedonians but you can check out warhammer ancient battles which has an Alexander the Great supplement/army book.

Hail Caesar and Kings of War Historicals also cover ancients, although I actually feel that they both make Macs slightly underpowered in the name of streamlining (particularly the phalanx)

All of them are designed for 28mm (1:56/1:48) but you can use 1:72 for HC and KoW, WAB uses individual basing so it's harder to work with smaller scales.

I would suggest downloading all three and reading through them yourself, I did when I was first thinking about starting a Macedonian Successors army. Ended up deciding none of the three were perfect, but all had elements I liked, and started working on my own ruleset combining the elements I liked the most from all three.

>i do have experience in hystorical and not wargames if this is a factor

Do you mean you are familiar with history but not wargames, or vice-versa?

File: Somali Hostile Mob (3).jpg (448KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 1600x1200px

>>50285227
>This conversation seems to boil down to:
>I like thing
>>stop liking thing that I dont like
>but thing I like is important in our games, and adds realism
>>games aren't realistic and no one should use realistic terrain, let alone rules that account for realistic terrain
>I said I like getting down to see what a unit can see, it adds immersion, and you guys have started foaming at the mouth about TLOS.
I was not previously part of this conversation, but can you project any harder? If you're using TLoS, your figures better have kneeling and prone versions to swap around with, and better hope your foe has more guys waving their rifles overhead like plastic army men thank you do. (Which is a noticeable shortcoming of TLoS gameplay.)

Otherwise, that's fine. It's all plastic and shiny metal men on a table somewhere, somehow.

>>50286174
>butthurt yuropoor whose country can barely scrape together 2% of GDP for defense but it's cool because America defends them from Putin whinges about how world's lone superpower didn't win a counter-insurgency in Afghanistan fast enough for his liking
>not like Bongladesh and Slaviet Union, they did great there :^)

>>50286364
>If you're using TLoS, your figures better have kneeling and prone versions to swap around with
I'm not even sure I'm using TLOS the way you guys seem to think it should work. We use it as a rough guideline for what a unit can see, and indications of what kind of cover a target should get. I never mentioned the words "True Line of Sight" in my original post about liking getting down to miniature level and seeing what they can see. If thats TLOS, then I like it. If thats not strict TLOS as you guys see it, then I use a much more relaxed version of it.

Abstractions of things like crouching are usually reflected in the rules rather than the line of sight. if you can see a stand of infantry that are counted as crouching by use of a marker and saying "this unit is crouching", you get a negative to attacking them, but you can still see them. The actual pose of the miniature should never matter, you simply get down to *about* their height and make the judgement of what they can see. A few mm of crouching vs standing isn't going to make a difference, especially if you're targeting infantry in stands instead of individually based.

These ideas that TLOS needs crouching and standing figures and that it causes constant arguments between players seem to be based on assumption. Is there some game that actually requires you to swap figures depending if a unit is standing or crouching, and that it has an actual impact on line of sight? Usually crouching or going to ground is represented with a marker, making the exact stance of the miniature unimportant.

>>50286561
Good try, but I am closer to home than you think.

welcome to 4chan

>>50286649
There's LoS, and then there's TLoS. Some game systems give a very clear breakdown between the two to avoid butthurt in-game. This conflict between you and the others seems to stem from not quite knowing the difference.

In TLoS, if the edge of a figure's elbow is sticking out from behind cover, it's visible to its foe. In other systems, this doesn't matter, because the base itself is not visible, and the dimension of the base exists to illustrate the spacial boundary the character(s) takes up.

>>50280622
The book has a big chunk on calculating points costs. Just downgrade america from america fuck yeah to america kinda decent if you want a closer game, or upgrade your other forces. Nothing wrong with tweaking things for a more fun experience.

>>50283604
>distorted by attempting to position one's head to match, or attempting to position a laser pointer if feeling modern about it
>not using a reverse periscope

TLOS can be cool for certain types of old-school grog gaming, with fairly simple rules and a friend or three playing. You use it with cluttered streets and rolling landscapes, to make slight dips in the terrain more useful and get a closer experience.

But making it a core part of a modern game is a lazy failure to design.

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

943KB, 1643x1216px

>>50285193
In the 60s.

we needed a mission objective and dumped some stuff in the middle. that's why it's all unpainted too.

>>50284112
>In the end, the quality of the troops is worth a lot more than the gear they're carrying
Force on Force uses the same mentality - it's the man using the gun that's important, not the gun itself.

>>50285227
>If you're assuming the Allies know how to use their T-72s to maximum effect, then the Iraqis' would also be competent in their usage of AWACs, TOWs, M1A1s, bradleys, etc. and would be more than capable of defeating an even sized force on the defensive.
But that's the problem, the Iraqis didn't know how to use their equipment properly, and it wouldn't change if they had different equipment.

>>50286649
That's not TLoS then.

>>50288225
>>not using a reverse periscope
You know what, that's a decent idea. I had one as a kid, it might be time to get one again.

>>50282607
>>50282854
Thanks folks. I was looking at the Korean War stuff to expand my Vietnam War forces (US and South Koreans make nice ARVN with US gear, or can be simple Koreans, while the North Koreans and Chinese would be great for NVA, VC or even Khmer Rogue), but there'll be enough leftovers to build a platoon for basically every force involved. With some Revell/Airfix Aussies thrown in I can make an ANZAC force as well.

File: ancients 05.jpg (287KB, 1195x893px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1195x893px

The real old grogs used to wear out the knees of their impeccably tailored trousers by insisting on determining LoS at literally table level. Here is Tony Bath (in front of Charles Grant) doing just that from a 1961 game. The mirror off to the side was supposed to create the impression of the table/scenery continuing off the edges.

File: young_bill_don_stan.jpg (60KB, 600x426px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x426px

>>50289074
Don Featherstone and Brigadier Young at the same game, again with chin on table

>>50289074
>>50289086
based grogs, TLOS strongk

>>50289018
>the Iraqis didn't know how to use their equipment properly
[citation needed]
They had extremely poor equipment compared to the western allies. T-55s from the 50s and old chinese MBTs, and Steel rounds which would have no chance against chobham armor. No Thermal or night sights, but they still knew how to use these things - they weren't clueless civilians, but the equipment was so inferior to the western allied equipment that they didn't stand a chance.
Reverse the equipment and I think the Iraqis would easily be able to win a defensive battle against inferior T-55s with no air support.

>>50289074
Who are you and what is this arcane knowledge?

>>50289074
That bent book shelf.. i were scared for my minis underneath it.

File: bb_krusevo-1991-_matko-biljak.jpg (443KB, 699x1024px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 699x1024px

>>50286649
>Is there some game that actually requires you to swap figures depending if a unit is standing or crouching, and that it has an actual impact on line of sight?
Yes, actually. Like TLoS, it's mostly just a dying trope of older grognard games. Using a marker to denote a prone character is abstracting, and defeats the point of TLoS. Off-hand, a game I personally own that requires crouched and prone figures is WRG's Infantry Action 1927-1975. I've seen other games that require this as well, which given when they were made, and the scarcity of miniatures in 15mm scale at the time, was rather confusing. It's an old trope for a dying breed of game.

But yeah, totally get the reverse periscope. Might as well do it proper.

I imagine your friends are good sports, because that's the biggest clincher with TLoS. It can be very ambiguous at times, and just one more potential argument over nothing. (Not unlike this topic generator we've got going)

File: heknewthewholetime.jpg (291KB, 592x1141px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 592x1141px

>>50240798
I followed up on some of the pictures above and found this charming article. I will now post it here.

>>50290086
To be honest, he is actually right.

Yes Games Workshop did go on to dominate the industry, but its certainly caused growth in the hobby as a whole.

I can say that I probably wouldn't be posting here if GW didn't exist.

>>50290140
I think as long as GW isn't just buying other, smaller, companies just to close them down they are helping the overall hobby more than they hurt it.

>>50289951
Firstly I think we have an issue of definition. There doesn't seem to be a solid definition of TLOS beyond "checking line of sight from the miniature in question" If you can direct me to a wargaming dictionary with a commonly accepted definition I will gladly take that into account. The method we use - which is checking what a unit can see by looking from where the unit is at roughly ground height I would describe as TLOS, but >>50289018 doesn't seem to think so. I'm not too worried about the exact definition, but If we're not using TLOS then perhaps you guys would have less to sperg about.

>Like TLoS, it's mostly just a dying trope of older grognard games
40K and fantasy brought in TLOS. This article from 2010 says TLOS "seems to be the new up and coming thing". Its not restricted to older games, and seems to be just as common as other methods.

>Using a marker to denote a prone character is abstracting, and defeats the point of TLoS
Wargaming abstracts a lot and you seem to be under the impression that abstraction and realism cannot co-exist. They can. You use LOS to check if a unit is visible, and then when you go to attack you take into account any modifiers for stance, cover, range etc.

>TLoS. It can be very ambiguous at times
No more so than any rules, and is actually a lot clearer than other methods requiring firing lanes to be drawn or bases to be viewed from directly above with no parallax error. With TLOS your unit either can or cant see another unit. The target unit either does or doesn't get cover. Its fairly simple to implement especially once you get down to miniature height, it becomes very clear what is visible and if any cover should apply. Like any rules, if there's an uncertainty, you just randomize - roll a 4+ to determine if a target is actually in cover or not, for example.

>>50290140
>growth in the hobby as a whole

You know, considering that the materials to make a wargame have existed for most of civilisation, I am surprised they did not appear sooner. I wonder where things would be without GW and whether they are a quirk of historical factors to do with WW2 and paper back fantasy resurgence in the 70s or a natural kind of hobby if you see what I mean.

>>50290147
>I think as long as GW isn't just buying other, smaller, companies just to close them down they are helping the overall hobby more than they hurt it.
A thinly veiled swing at Warlord?

>>50290752
Not really, since Warlord took the Bolt Action minis into their range.

If they would now buy Artizan, Black Tree and others just to shut down their WW2 ranges.. then it would trouble me.

>>50274906
I don't have to paint shit or leave home

File: 8.jpg (169KB, 1280x721px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1280x721px

>>50290858

I just finished building all of my dudes from a Warriors of Carthage Victrix set- pretty well priced and ready to fight (once painted in a KoW historical.

What are the best Napoleonic ship minis readily available to somebody that does not own a semaphore tower, carrier pigeon or a UK address?

>>50291781
GHQ has some 1/1200 available. That would probably be the easiest, and generally GHQ stuff tends to look pretty nice.

The Langton stuff is probably nicer, but requires arcane summoning techniques as do most naval ranges.

I'd take a look at the GHQ stuff if I were you.

>>50291876
Surprised to see Langton have entered the new age with payment by Paypal available, rather than credit card details by post or other absurd method.

>>50292053
With most of these more specialist websites I'm happy if they don't ask to be paid in shillings.

File: 20161118_161259.jpg (2MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1536px

My wild west project begun, about hundred figures keeps waiting for their turn. I have much sentiment for two figures on the right, as they come from Airfix 60's ACW sets (which, truth to be told may be one of their most potato ranges, and is discontinued for decades).

I know they are ugly but I take consolation in fact that it probably won't get any worse.

Anyone has good Old West rules recomedations?

>>50289074
Eh, Lionel Tarr used a periscope, and his modern warfare rules (the modern war being ww2) were published in featherstone's first book in 1962, and he'd been using them since 1959.

>The periscope (see separate note) must be used at all times to obtain vision from the actual model height on to all troops, vehicles, etc., possibly hidden by undulating ground, trees, etc.

>>50289951
>I imagine your friends are good sports, because that's the biggest clincher with TLoS. It can be very ambiguous at times, and just one more potential argument over nothing.
Yeah. This is why, before breaking out the periscopes, it's good to get the measure of your club by playing one of the Lardies sets that requires the players or umpire rate each shot. You look at the firer, you look at the target, you look at the terrain, you decide whether it's a good shot, a poor shot, or some other rating, then roll the dice based on that. If you can have fun doing that without an umpire, you're ready.

File: newimppike1.jpg (281KB, 750x492px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 750x492px

http://deltavector.blogspot.co.nz/2015/02/game-design-27-true-line-of-sight.html

I'll just leave this here. Dude's pretty good at this whole talking about game design thing. The comments section is also worth a read.

>>50292340
I wish I could get/run more umpired games. So much potential.

>>50292917
>deltavector
yeah, that guy's always a good read.

>>50292917
>I wish I could get/run more umpired games. So much potential.
It's such a pain, but sometimes things just come together right and you get one organised.

Or a random club game turns umpired because a few people turn up without a game scheduled and you play all night and it's great.

>>50286561

>explicitly told not to take it too seriously
>take it too seriously and get butthurt

Marvelous.

>>50292917
>where models are assumed to have a modicum of common sense, and are treated as being in some cover as long as they are within a few inches of cover. In fact this could even be made the 'normal' to-hit roll

oh, what. that's a cool idea.
what (not-terrible) games do this?

File: imageforants.jpg (20KB, 360x286px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 360x286px

>>50293284
Force on Force immediately comes to mind, because the figures represent the area the fireteam is operating in, not the the specific locations. To quote the exact section:

"LINE OF SIGHT (LOS)
All infantry units have a 360 degree line of sight. Figure facing is irrelevant.There is no “maximum visual range” unless a scenario or Fog of War card states otherwise. The boards on which the game is played are small enough that figures can see (and, indeed, fire) from one side to the other. LOS can be blocked by terrain features, such as buildings, high walls, deep trenches, etc. LOS is not determined on a per figure basis. LOS is traced from the rough center of the firing unit to the rough center of the target unit.
If half or more of the firing unit can see the target unit, it may fire. If less than half the target unit is visible to the firing unit, it cannot be fired upon.
Example: Six Iraqi soldiers are moving around a building. Two come into LOS of a unit of US soldiers. Since the Americans cannot see half or more of the Iraqi unit, they cannot react to it. On the other hand, since less than half the Iraqis can see the Americans, they cannot fire at them, either.

When we look at the example above, it may at first seem odd to say that the Regulars can see two out of six figures in an Irregular unit but cannot shoot at the unit (or at the two exposed individuals, for that matter), but it is our intention to represent a fluid combat situation.
Models on the table delineate the area controlled by a unit, but do not specifically represent the static location of individuals. Figure placement simply indicates that the unit is exhibiting some control of the area they are placed in.
When you embrace this idea, you’ll discover it opens a wide array of tactical options and provides a far faster, smoother game than those that depend on checking line of sight for individual figures."

For reference; guns tend not to have limited range in FoF.

Who supplies good Vietnam War miniatures?

>>50295583
What scale do you want?

¿Quién pierde?

>>50295777
28mm, just want some americans to paint.

File: Queeny.jpg (75KB, 550x408px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 550x408px

>>50295794
Spanish get out Reeee

>>50295921
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETUTWROZvYw

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

122KB, 1200x264px

>agree to meet guy to talk about commission painting some guys for him
>he brings them loose in a cardboard box so over half of them are broken
>haphazardly some are (poorly) primed, some have basing material and some don't
>doesn't want to pay much

We agreed for me to paint 8 and see from there (after which I'll probably stop if this is what I can expect) but I feel like if you want someone to paint your models, and for cheap, at least bring them in a way which doesn't require me to reassemble them.

on the plus side he had FIW models so my Indians will probably get a run out in the coming months

>>50295823
The Assault Group.

welp commited and bought a bunch of 3mm shit for peshmerga vs isis using Fistful of Tows

Now just to figure out some rules for SVBIEDs

>>50296698
>but I feel like if you want someone to paint your models, and for cheap, at least bring them in a way which doesn't require me to reassemble them.


I'd say.. it depends. If the guy is a good friend and i know he is not as skilled then i'd do it for him.
If not, you should obviously charge extra for that time.

File: 1468234233008.png (149KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 700x700px

>>50296698
Pic

>>50297575
What'd you buy?

>>50297689
Bunch of humvees, BMPs, MRAPs, Technicals, civvie vehicles, t55s and t72s and ofc infantry

>>50295823
Baker Company

File: P1020667.jpg (596KB, 1022x1367px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1022x1367px

>>50297613
>I'd say.. it depends. If the guy is a good friend and i know he is not as skilled then i'd do it for him.
Transporting them is not part of being skilled at miniature making 2bh

>>50297689
here you go

>>50297791
Nothing wrong with transporting minis in a box like this.. if handled with care.

I mean, if i put them in there upright, then carry the thing carefully to my car, place it on the seat next to me and then at your house i take them inside. Nothing bad would happen to them.

This guy did something pretty wrong and apparently doesn't cares about minis at all.
Honestly, i wouldn't waste to much time to do super nice paintjobs for him. Simple tabletop standard would be enough if he handles his stuff like that.

>>50297836
Sure I know theres nothing inherently wrong with transporting them loose* if you care for them, I just think you should care for them!
Especially as this guy is a club regular and has literally thousands of figures.

Either way I'm actually fairly excited to paint some of these because I've not done 28mm Napoleonics before.

*I prefer magnetic basing for my own because it's an extra safeguard against heavy-handedness etc.

>>50297893
>*I prefer magnetic basing for my own because it's an extra safeguard against heavy-handedness etc.


At one point i will do this for all of my minis too... one day.

>>50297710
Is that even accurate?

>>50298032
lol no humvees are american vehicles and isis sure as hell dont have tanks

File: dd16ef3b1c94fee2ed287f51e732ee1f.jpg (41KB, 500x370px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x370px

>>50295823
Eureka

>>50298032
From what I've seen, reasonably, though anything american is gonna have been looted from Iraq, and that tends to stay in the area if it's not just destroyed. ISIS/everyone else in the area have been seen using anything/everything the Syrian army used to have including tanks in very limited numbers.

>>50298459
Shot does get captured, you know. especially when it's more expensive to ship everything back home than it is to just buy new toys and leave the old stuff to the people who's country you just got done trashing.

>>50289637
>they weren't clueless civilians
Don't assume too much in the way of training/familiarity with issued equipment

http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars

>>50298459
> isis sure as hell dont have tanks

They have (or had) a small stock of captured T-55's at the very least.

File: t55.jpg (59KB, 780x520px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 780x520px

>>50298612
Taliban had some too at one point

>>50298595
>http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars

tl;dr: A tribalistic and top-down authoritarian culture makes for soldiers who have shit morale, distrust for anyone outside a roughly "familiy-sized group, and who are singularly unable to adapt to changing battlefield conditions. It's not going to change until Arab culture (and probably their religion) changes.

File: Cuirassiers_1887.jpg (813KB, 1024x807px) Image search: [Google]

813KB, 1024x807px

>>50298637
Other points:
1. a fear of losing face if the underling you train is better at something than you.
2. Risk of a coup from well trained/equipped soldiers outside trustworthy units like Republican Guard and the like

>>50298459
Everyone in middle east has american equipment. Iraqi soldiers had a lot of it, and once ISIL wrecked the Iraqis they took their equipment.
Everyone in Syria has tanks. Mostly shitty T-55s and T-62, but there are some more modern russian tanks around which could well have been captured at some stage.

Here's some ISIL guys fixing up a humvee and even with an M1A1 Abrahms:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKcRugWtcbk

ISIL with a T-62:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ImZo6MuTyQ

More tanks in syria:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BojxIALX8YM

Do your research son before assuming you know about stuff.

File: johnny frost.jpg (4KB, 144x195px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 144x195px

i'm looking for some good 28mm ww2 british minis any good websites?

>>50298996
Yeah this. Before i bought anything i did research on both what equipment both sides have and what is more often used. Both sides have at least some of the same of each vehicle but isis tends to use humvees and more technicals. As well as the odd BMP.

YPG however tends to use MRAPS/armoured trucks more often with only the occasional BMP/Humvee

>>50298595
they still new the basics of how to use their gear. If you look at TOW usage in syria, even the most uneducated conscript can competently use a TOW after a few days training. Iraqi army would have had much more training than that.

With TOWs, good recon, a good defensive position, and up against an unsupported T-55 and T-62 force, with the odd T-72, The Iraqi's would easily be able to win a defensive battle, even without M1A1s and Bradleys. Add those in, and air strikes, and the Allies dont stand a chance.

>>50299045

When specifically during WW2? The African campaign is adequately supplied by using Perry Bros Desert Rats plastic box. Miniatures for the European theatre are going to be different, and would thusly need a different supplier.

Additionally, are you trying to match existing miniatures? Warlord's Bolt Action stuff, for example, is "heroic" scale and therefore quite chunky when put next to several other miniature ranges. Not all ranges play well together.

File: isis hummer.png (1MB, 1024x580px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x580px

>>50298459
The government military over there has a shit ton of imported US kit, and being the bitches they are, let ISIS capture a fuckload, including, yes, hummers. Never mind a pile of T-55s, T-62s, and T-72s too, though those are few and far between. They also have shopping cart tripods.

Have a painted example from Tacobat.

File: Italians 1.png (1MB, 2576x1075px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2576x1075px

Seeing as we've reached bump limit, going to post some of my completed Royal Italian forces for Ostfront.
1/72 - airfix for the infantry, Italieri (surprise surprise) for the vehicles. All fast build kits, except the autoblinda. The carro armato and semovente were 2 per kit.

File: Italians 2.png (783KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

783KB, 1546x1159px

>>50300258
Close up on some of the infantry. My painting isn't perfect but I'm getting better. Actually priming the minis helps a lot. Followed by base coat, nuln oil then highlight on the shirts, faces and helmets. Simple process for mass production.

File: Italians 3.png (696KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

696KB, 1546x1159px

>>50300281
Side shot, showing the vehicles in a bit more detail. Hoping to blow up some British tanks with them autocannone tomorrow.

File: Field Kitchen.png (922KB, 1546x1159px) Image search: [Google]

922KB, 1546x1159px

>>50300290
And this was the most fun to do: the Field kitchen.
This will be my supply train marker, so I must defend it at all costs and not let enemies get close. defend the pasta! All'attacco!

File: IMG_0149.png (105KB, 500x483px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 500x483px

So, I've been combing the mini provider list, but I can't find anyone who has Irish Volunteer / Original IRA minis. Should I just use Australian or British WWI troops?