Flames of War SCANS database: http://www.mediafire.com/?8cia

For anyone who has gotten the GHQ 6mm tanks, are they on full sprues like the BF ones or in simple turret body form.

File: IMG_1220.jpg (182KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 630x420px

Reposting from the bottom of the last thread.

>>51330244
aoc924, you're in luck, I'm a Long Islander myself. Nassau County.

I have a small group of Team Yankee players locally that I've been attempting to organize.

Were you look to play Team Yankee or regular Flames of War?

>>51330777
Turret and body, occasionally with a little sprue of accessories like MGs or whatever

>>51330797
>>51330737
>I wanted to confirm some kind of group before I bit the bullet.

There's a Team Yankee group-in-progress.

Myself, two friends, and possibly a former Flames of War tournament organizer from Brothers Grimm.

>>51330983
what I thought, thank you.

File: IMG_0127.jpg (252KB, 990x798px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 990x798px

>>51330944

Still buying Volksarmee next week.

FFS, no title?

SHOOTING:
- Shootingh - either MG or Main Gun
- Shooting at Aircraft - similar to TY
- 8inches for AA safe zone
- Like in TY - LoS to Aircraft can never be blocked
- terrain like in TY - either tall or short
- 2 inches from the edge of terrain you can see normaly otuside but you are concealed
- teams in upper flors of buildings see teams outside in buildings not ceonceald, even in short terrain
- No HE is now +1 to shoot
- After shooting on Aircraft in enemy turn, apart from no def fire and shooting and assaulting turn after, you may NOT be GtG until the end of enemy's next turn
- When you rotate to hit, you can rotate the turret OR rotate the whole tank 90degrees
- shooting through smoke is only +1 to hit
- your hits must be assigned to the same type of teams and 6 inches within hit team
- MAn packed gun teams and light/medium guns are now 3+ save
- Heavy and Immobile guns are 4+ save
- Aircraft has it's own save now - 3+ usual and shooter needs to pass FP test to kill it
- passengers in destroyed transport retain their usuall save - 3+ or 4+
- Everybody get mission tactics
- Warrior save is now 3+
- Unit with 12 or more teams at the start of the shooting step need 8 hits to be pinned
- Commander morale reroll to every unit that is within 6 inches of commander and has LoS
- Flamethrowers do not run out od ammo!
- Breakthrough gun is now reroll to save, not instant fail

>>51332140

- Artillery - you have only 1 Observer, other units may spot depending on army
- May not fire artillery bombardment if you attempted to dig-in!
- aiming point may be on the ground, anywhere observing team can see, no need to put it on
team
- No more double width template
- You only have three range in attempts for one observer team, if you range in on first, you may give the rest of range in attempts to another artillery, with penalites for second and
third range in
- you hit on enemy rating
- 5 or more guns get reroll to hit
- Staff teams are gone, so everybody have all guns repeat!
- Change to Artillery FP and AT rating depending on whetever you hit infantry/gun team or tank:
on Infantry (older FP/newer FP) - 1/1;2/2;3/3;4/3;5/4;6/4
on tanks (older AT/newer AT) - 6/3;5/3;4/3;3/2;2/1;1/0
- Repeat bombardment may be with different spotting team
- Infantry and gun teams need to reroll saves when under Repeat bombardment!
- 1 Smoke bombardment per game per artilery unit
- LoS through Smoke is blocked unless you are within 6 inches, otherwise +1 to hit

ASSAULT
- More or less like Team Yankee
- Teams on small bases got +1 to hit in assault
- Infantry choose how to hit tank - top armour against TA2/FP1+ or side armour against any AT weapon you have.
- Shurzen is now Side armour 5 against At weapon with 5 or 6 FP

>>51331606
me too.

Can someone tell me how team yankee plays before I buy into it with a buddy.

Too me it looks like it goes like this
>Line up
>Throw tanks in line formation at each other
>Kill shit

Doesn't look like a whole lot of movement warfare goes on.

>>51333863
It's like Flames of War but faster and more violent.

>>51333863
Movement, flanking, denying avenues of advance, those are all important aspects of the game.

Things can move very quickly across the board.

But to move while still being able to shoot, that requires shorter, slower movement.

The iconic image may be M1s racing across the sand during the Gulf War, but battles like 73 Easting almost certainly required shorter, slower, more deliberate movement.

And that's what we tend to see in Team Yankee.

Fast speed for positioning, and. slower deliberate tactical movements when engaging the enemy.

>>51333863
Some people play that way, but you can use a bigger table or play with a lower point value. On a 6'x4' I like to play with 80 points. Gives more room on the board for maneuver and it isn't possible to bring literally everything in your list as it is with 100 points.

Asking again because I only got one reply but in TY and FoW you don't need terrain between you to get cover/give cover to aircraft, right? Just nearby?

>>51337469
The terrain needs to be in the line of sight between the aircraft and the unit on the ground. So a tanks has to be within 4" of woods that are between it and the aircraft to be concealed in TY.

>>51337512
Nah, in both game it's just proximity. I forget the page but it's in the bit about LOS to aircraft.

File: 1436239881694.png (29KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 633x758px

>>51330944
t-thanks Phill

>>51337732
The wording is vague, but in both examples they show the concealing terrain between the target and the aircraft. If the terrain isn't in the LOS, why consider it at all? Part of the danger of aircraft is they move around to hit you from any angle.

File: 1474429617318.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>51330944

>>The East German Volksarmee, or Peoples’ Army, has the reputation of being the most well-trained of all the Warsaw Pact armies. It has a high proportion of professional soldiers and is well-equipped. 9. Panzerdivision, or 9th Tank Division, in particular, is equipped with T-72M tanks and BMP-1 and BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicles.


then this>>51330944


Who are you trying to fool Phill?

>>51337953
I think that's just because of the angle they have to fit the terrain in the shot. It's why they don't literally have 4" gaps and stuff.

The thing about "hitting from any angle" is exactly why I think it's probably any terrain nearby, otherwise you'd never get cover from aircraft. I suspect that was the reason why it's like that in FoW, too.

So uhh... next faction they're gonna add to team yankee gonna be Warsaw pact too or are we gonna get something out of left field like the Chinese or say even the french for nato?

>>51339826
we are getting a US and Soviet upgrade book.

>DDR releases for soviets
>Bradleys
>M-60's
>T-somethings...

the like....

>>51338570
I understand the point you making upon rereading the FoW v3 rules, but with the increased range and accuracy of aircraft weaponry in Team Yankee, it doesn't seem that being within 4 inches of any bit of tall terrain should disrupt a shot if it isn't in the LOS arc. In my mind a Cobra with thermal optics firing a TOW wouldn't be effected by a woodline near the target unless it was in the flight path of the missile. I think Battlefront was intentional in the terrain placements in the 2 examples they give.

There are still plenty of ways to use cover with this interpretation of the rules. You can benefit from concealment by being within the tall terrain area. Having a treeline in front of your tanks forces enemy air to come around for an unconcealed attack, potentially exposing themselves to more AA fire.

Definitely worth some more discussion. Maybe we can see what the /fowg/ consensus is. Can any other anons share how they treat this rule in V3 or Team Yankee?

>>51339826
I think for this year we will get:

1) Stripes. a supplement to the US
2) Red Potato[/Spoiler] Banner, a soviet supplement
3) Canadian book
4) Australians with a unit of attached New Zealanders. They seem like a very interesting list. I think we will see Land Rovers with ATGMs.

>>51339868

Please be t-80s...

Please let them be good....

File: rVms4Mzh.jpg (102KB, 855x648px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 855x648px

>>51340077
> two more books for NATO
> a single book for the Soviets/WarPac

Rev up those training exercises.

>>51340005
>I think Battlefront was intentional in the terrain placements in the 2 examples they give.
I think the key thing here is that under "Concealment" TY talks about "imaginary lines" that pass through terrain; there's no similar wording in the aircraft bit, and it doesn't seem like it'd be arduous to word. It doesn't help most of the terrain placement stuff fudges with distances and angles for what I assume are cinematic or space constraint reasons.

>>51340433
There's three; second US, Canada, and Australia, though I believe australia's just a briefing like panzertruppen.

Canada will be interesting since the Leopard is in resin. I guess this is another chance for PSC to eat their lunch again but...

>>51340238
>T-80
Hit on 2+, calling it now.

>>51339868
Pretty sure they confirmed T-64 in the Iron Maiden Q&A. Just the base variant so a functional copy of the T-72A.

>>51340885
I think you mean FA 17 with ERA and basic stabilisers.

>>51341141
Yeah, it's going to be the same goddamn tank, but maybe with optional missile, I really don't know why they picked that and not the T-80U. Or a proper T-55.

>>51340643
I may wait for Canada to come out. I was debating jumping into TY with Brits because sexy Harriers, but if Canadians get their owk book that's awful tempting.

>>51341193
If they didn't give the missile to the T55AM2 (which was the entire point of the fucking upgrade program) it certainly puts shade on GL-ATGM for the Russians.

>>51342066
The Soviet version of the T-55AM2 might have the missile. I don't think the East Germans had them at the time.

What do you guys think of this quick and dirty set of rules for building collapse?

Whenever more than half of a building is under the template for an artillery bombardment, or a platoon hits a team inside a building with one or more Bunker Buster or Building Destroyer guns, the building may sustain serious damage. Roll a firepower check. A passed firepower test causes a hit on the building, or two hits in the case of a hit from a Building Destroyer. After 4 hits, it collapses and is replaced by an equal-sized pile of Rubble.

When a building collapses, all teams inside must immediately save against a hit with AT 3 and FP 2+. Any platoon with teams inside the building when it collapses are pinned. Place all surviving infantry and gun teams touching the edge of the rubble pile.

>>51342974
Well your rule needs some anti-cheesing already, as lightest mortars can bring down a building.

>>51343746
They'd need to pass the 6+ bombardment FP for 4 turns. Or are you saying that was common IRL?

>>51341978
>Canadians
> get their own book
I don't think that's going to happen, if it does it's going to be mostly brit/germans hardware with a couple of our own armoured cars no?

>>51341978
There are people already building Canadian forces using a mix of the currently available US and West German equipment.

I'd imagine a list out of Panzertruppen would do a decent job representing a Canadian force.

The only thing I'm not sure of is what the Canadian used as mobile AA.

I doubt it was the VADS or the Gepard, but I'm not sure what it would have been.

Thoughts on this list?

>Tank Company, 6 Guards Tank Brigade (CT), Support from 15th (Scottish) Division (CT), from Overlord, page 124

Compulsory Tank Squadron HQ (p.125) - CinC Churchill V CS (60 pts)
>Add applique armour to Churchill V CS or Churchill VI increasing front armour to 9 (10 pts)

Compulsory Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VI, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (250 pts)
>3x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (30 pts)

Compulsory Tank Platoon (p.125) - Command Churchill VI, Churchill VI, Churchill III or IV (250 pts)
>3x add applique armour increasing front armour to 9 (30 pts)

Tank Anti-aircraft Platoon (p.126) - Command Crusader A/A, Crusader A/A (85 pts)

Tank Recce Platoon (p.126) - Command Stuart V or VI, 2x Stuart V or VI (120 pts)

Corps Anti-tank Platoon (SP), Royal Artillery (p.158) - Command M10C 17pdr SP, M10C 17pdr SP (130 pts)

Crocodile Tank Platoon (p.157) - Command Churchill Crocodile, Churchill Crocodile (265 pts)

Rifle Platoon (p.144) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (140 pts)

Infantry Field Battery, Royal Artillery (p.156) - 2x Command Rifle, Staff, Observer Rifle, OP Carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr gun (140 pts)

>1510 Points, 8 Platoons

Has 5 points left to buy transports, an ARV, or an AA MG (most likely transports). Always Attacks thanks to the Crocodiles, and has a rather large variety of answers to whatever the enemy can throw at it. Cleans up medium armor, mechanized, and infantry lists quite well, but lists with a bunch of Front 9+ tanks will be a pain to fight. All platoons are CT, though the rifle platoon can be replaced with a RV one from the 51st for the same points.

>>51345835
it should be the LAV-AD assuming it came out around that time... i think

>>51345931

It depends what you're after. You'll do fine for friendly games, and win a good few if you play the list well (although, for my money, you'd be better off with 2x smoke-generating platoons). However for my money you have too many small platoons - 2 and 3 tanks - and will bleed VP in a tourney situation.

Also, consider what your local meta is. Around here, Remagen KTs have been a big thing lately. This would make your Churchills cry. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

>>51345996

>for my money... for my money

God damn, I write badly when I only do one draft of something. Work has given me bad habits.

>>51345996
Outside of making the Crocs a 3-tank platoon and the M10s a 4-tank platoon, I don't really have many options for larger platoons. Being British sucks.

And yeah, I really wanted a 2iC to get me another 95 so I could do a smoke bombardment with my HQ, but that was not to be.

>>51345814
>>51345835
I admit not knowing much of what equipment they used in the 80's, or even now for that matter, but I'd just love to see them get their own book. Even if it's just full of US and West German stuff.

>>51348075
I can feel you but this time period is long past my country's time as a viable military power and my own brit boner has me discard the state of my state.

Out of all things in this hobby, painting tank tracks and road wheels is my least favorite thing. Fuck the tiny road wheels on the Panther. Luckily drybrushing and washes can cover my lack of talent.

Found a batrep someone posted on the forums. Soviets attacking Brits. British infantry seem very tough to dig out of cover. The shit ton of T-72s seemed to not be doing anything thing.

>not bringing any form of missile AA as Soviets

>6 inch command distance again makes things look retarded on the board. Really wish they would change this stupid rule.

http://bede19002.blogspot.com/2017/01/team-yankee-aar-january-21-2017.html?m=1

As someone just looking to start out, can someone give a brief overview how the Midwar Armies (North Africa/Eastern Front) play? I looked up a guide on 1d4chan but its very brief on the factions and doesn't say too much.

If it helps I'm looking for something that goes fast.

>>51351417
I think Mid-war is the most openn with the most options. Most tanks can compete with each other, and most AT guns are still useful(maybe not AT rifles).

I play Italians in MW, and they can go pretty fast. Brits are good for fast as well, if I recall correctly.

>>51351508

So is there no real difference between factions then?

>>51352654
Well sure there is. Each nation has its own special rukes and varied equipment. Germans tend to have heavier tanks than say Italians, but Italians can bring a shit ton more models to the table.

I don't know all the national rules off the top of my head, admittedly, but I know Germans get their Stormtrooper move(after shooting but before assaulting they can move and extra 4 inches by passing a skill check that they'll basically never ever fail), Italians have a similar thing where they give up their shooting to do it(I believe Hungarians are the same as Italians). I know that the Brits have a lot of fast tanks in North Africa.

>>51352875
Note the German one is not "before assaulting", it's "instead of assaulting". The Huns get one similar to the Italians (using skill instead of morale), but it's more restricted in its usage (generally only tanks, cavalry, and motorized infantry).

>>51352946
>>51352875

Ah, I see. So Germans are what you have to do if you want to do a lot of shooting and moving, while you try and ram Italians and Hungarians into the enemy?

>>51352946
Ah, thanks for correcting me there! I was sure I was getting it wrong.

>>51353115
Germans can move more while still retaining their ability to shoot. Italians are what you play if you want a few good laughs and are a glutten for punishment.

Hungarians can bring some nice toys to the fight, but their extra move isn't nearly as good as the Germans.

>>51353144

Well mainly I'm looking not quite for pure speed but something that is maneuverable (moving and shooting) and can handle going through terrain alright. Mobility was the word I was looking for.

>>51353278
As a rule of thumb, US excel at that kind of maneuverability, thanks to Stabilisers. Germans can do something surprisingly similar due to Stormtrooper (and also generally have better guns, especially in MW). A few british tanks can do wonders with that playstyle, but those carry too weak guns (2pdrs, which were decent in EW, but are easily found to be lacking in MW). Otherwise, british tend to prefer more static battles.

HOWEVER: V4 is coming in march, things may change a bit then.

>>51351074
>British infantry seem very tough to dig out of cover.
The brits are monsters in assault, and the soviets are awful at it, and given Breakthrough was nerfed that's as good as it gets.

File: VALENTINE.jpg (58KB, 564x919px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 564x919px

"Forthcoming Releases" SECTION UPDATED FOR PSC

>15mm German SdKfz 231 8 rad armoured car
>15mm British Universal Carrier (and variants)
>15mm Modern Soviet T55 tank
>15mm Valentine
>15mm Sexton

VALENTINES CONFIRMED! HYPE LEVEL CRITICAL

>>51357092
> Valentines and T55s

How can one company be so based?

>>51357092
>UCs out soon
well that's ni-
>15mm Sexton
FUCK YES FINALLY TAKE MY MONEY YOU BEAUTIFUL COMPANY

>>51357092
GERMAN SPGS WHEN

Sdkfz 250 NEUE WHEN

>>51357643
Not many people use the German SPGs, sadly. I doubt it'd be economical.

>>51357932
True but isn't that partially since they're still 12 bucks each

>>51357980
Probably part of it but German artillery isn't very rewarding generally, they're in the big camp of people who basically always want to use mortars except they have super-mortars that're cheaper called nebs.

>>51358014
Yea at the moment I have mortars and panzerwerfers, and the next purchase will probably be Nebs

I know the guns are less effective for the points amd bereft of special rules but it'd be nice to have the option so as to build more varied lists

>>51358059
This is pretty much me with the Sextons. They're generally not worth the extreme points increase compared to plain 25pdrs (185->250 for 4), but they'd be nice for the list building options. Would maybe even see use if the local meta wasn't tanks and tank accessories.

>>51358101
It doesn't help british 4-gun batteries suffer from having that fourth gun, which does nothing ruleswise but you can't not-take.

>>51358239
Also that being FP 5+ in bombardment means you need a turn or two of Mike Target repeats to equal the damage of everyone else's 4+ FP mid-sized tube arty.

>>51355269

Hmm, alright, that gives me a decent idea of tanks, though I was more thinking how mechanized units play.

For all /fowtg/ anons loyal to Best Germany (or the enemies looking for free info), Volksarmee is here:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/wr88rp7cx01669q/VolksArmee.pdf

Enjoy, Comrades!

>>51359422
Nice! I shall have to take a look at that.

I'll get it uploaded to the Scans Database soon.

>>51359422
Thanks based scanon

Are Plastic Soldiers' bases the same as Battlefront?

>>51360712
Off by less than 1-2%, essentially the same.

Where can I find some Company/Battalion-level (and below) tactics/drills for Soviets and other armies?

>>51358741
Mech as in infantry in (hopefuly armored) transports, or mech as in armored cars/recon troops?

>>51358101
Sextons are great when you're running Reluctant, since they can't, in any way, be pinned (well, they can, but they ignore it for almost all purposes)

>>51358239
Except that you're a fair bit more resistant to casualties. I've lost count of the number of times I've lost one of my priests (and not always in situations where the artillery was completely dead anyway), and the artillery is suddenly neutered.

File: 24645641280.jpg (91KB, 769x648px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 769x648px

>>51359422
Nice I like it.

>>51357092
Would be perfect if they released the Valentine on Valentine's day.

>>51359422
Have I gone nuts or has the Basic Stabiliser disappeared off of the T-55AM2's card in the book?

>>51363084

yeah, just noticed that too... looks like it's just slow firing penalty now

>>51363084
Maybe they decided it was too good

>>51363084
People with the book had been saying exactly that, but nobody bothered to remember when there was (admittedly justified) complaining to do.

>>51357092
Please have parts for the Archer please have parts for the Archer please have parts for the Archer.

>>51361021
I'm looking through CARL right now. Following links within links led me to this:
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dodmilintel/26/
Also, here is the field organization part of that manual. If there are big errors in here, I would not trust the first link on tactics.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dodmilintel/23/

>>51357932
>yet more tiger 1 Es is economical

>>51365536
Well they're in plastic now.

>>51365571
Yeah, but everyone's all got all the tigers they'll ever want. Fuckin wehraboos man.

My takeaway thought today from facing off against fuckloads of armoured cars is that all-recce lists can go fuck themselves. "They're only FA 1-4!", he says, while I never even get to shoot because they're all rocketing around behind trees every time I declare shots...

>>51365992
Not like he's going to be able to hold onto anything if he's gotta move all the time.

File: Trollenkopf.png (76KB, 830x1000px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 830x1000px

>>51365617
>>51365536
Komm damit klar nerds

File: me.png (11KB, 156x325px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 156x325px

>>51366428
Ich komm damit klar

>>51363482
It was a pointless rule anyway. It already was tagged with slow firing. I doubt anyone would have wanted to take an EXTRA +1 to hit to move.

>>51366341
Yeah, but they don't have to since they project an anti-assault bubble everywhere and are more than capable of nipping around to shoot stuff in the arse if it tries to advance on objectives.

File: abd95dd2fb73f889c5bb0789d872f6701a078642a8ec9576ee51b3ac0ce36a2f.jpg (20KB, 338x310px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 338x310px

>>51359422
> everyone on the side of the Warsaw Pact speaks like a Hollywood Commissar

Team Yankee's story is so terrible I struggle to find the words to describe how bad it is.

>>51367147
I stopped reading fluff desu, lack of it it keeps me in good mood for the game (like describing Konkurs behaving the same as M901 ITV but having none of the perks it has ingame)

File: RA2_Yuri.jpg (20KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 640x480px

>>51367147
I don't, i've glanced through my copy of iron maiden and everything short of the brief unit descriptions are thoroughly unreadable.
The dialogue would be at home in an 80s be movie fanfiction,
It speaks of a bunch of technical writers having to shift gears from historical writing to fiction,
And they often do the historical job quite serviceable i might ad
>>51367245
seriously the lore could be much improved if you like me pretend you are playing RA:2 the miniatures game

File: FUCK.png (321KB, 480x650px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 480x650px

>That feel when m60's wont be out for team yankee for awhile
>That feel when no t-80's
>No poles yet
>Chinese never
>France never

Fuckin kill me sempai.

File: yuri.jpg (41KB, 319x378px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 319x378px

>>51367270
Except no Yuri, or Kirovs, or shock troopers.

>>51367573
That would mean giving the Soviets something good.

>>51367270
>seriously the lore could be much improved if you like me pretend you are playing RA:2 the miniatures game
Yeah, deciding that this is the movieverse version of the game's made me much more content with it.

>>51367147
Let me try my hand at rewriting a section

>His tank might have been older than he was, but Untero zier Meyer was proud of it nonetheless. That made his current predicament even more galling. He’d driven off of the road for one second and the tank immediately bogged down. Worse, he was blocking the road and he could feel the eyes of everyone behind him boring into the back of his head.
‘Dummkopf!’ he murmered to himself as he gestured to his driver to swing hard left.
With a clash of gears and cloud of diesel smoke, the T-55 tank bogged down deeper. After 2 hours, Meyer climbed back aboard, clambering over the ‘eyebrows’ on the front of the turret and swinging back into his position as the tank commander.
‘Meyer, sehen!’ His gunner’s shout drew his eyes up from the road ahead as three Wessi Leopard tanks moved out from the village, positoning themselves to ambush the rest of the batalion as it continued its advance. They immidiate saw the T-55s due the bright neon "Warsaw Pact Tactics" light on their hills.
Meyer smiled. His tank may be old, but they strapped a laser rangefinder to it and the crew was at least one grade above shitting themselves in the tank, like their Soviet comrades.

‘PEW PEW PEW’. His gunner’s glee at getting to shine lazer beems at REAL LIFE TANKS.
‘Focus fire on the first tank,’ Meyer ordered. ‘Maybe when we miss it will hit one of the other two.’
Switching to the platoon circuit, Meyer’s curt ‘Zu Leine!’ quickly had his other two tanks bogged down from hitting a bit of gravel. The Wessies proceeded to blow the shit out of the T-55s.

>>51367147
Well isn't the novel just U.S. Coldwar wank about big evil soviets being beaten by the brave, amazing Americans?

Unrelated; Bartosz you here? Do you use any air support in EW?

>>51367859
Not Bartosz but in EW you get the excellent schwerpunkt stukas that make air support much less of a crapshoot and more prone to doing stuff.

For the germans they're definitely a solid pick.

>>51367657
And we can't have that

>>51367943
He's bringing Brits, I'm bringing Italians.

File: 1485083292681.jpg (77KB, 384x480px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 384x480px

>>51359422
>>51367147
>mfw that cliche as fuck writing

>>51367962
In my experience my italians never need air anything because they have massive redundancy and fast units. Also good artillery.

>>51357092
Holy shit; this all for Salute?

>>51368247
T-55, and either/both the UCs and 8-rads. The sextons are probably a maybe; there's a chance they were being worked on since the 25pdr kickstarter. Valentines can't be that far along unless they've been super under wraps. We know the T-55 is far along though so I'd be surprised if it wasn't a Salute release.

File: Crusader Cleaning.jpg (115KB, 600x594px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 600x594px

>>51367962
>>51367859

brits have fuck all for EW air support

would love to bring Hurr'canes, but, for what purpose?

>>51367657
While we're on the subject, didn't some crazy guy paint up a huge MW soviet army in Red Alert colours?

>>51367787
my side armor's been penetrated

>>51368247
>>51368315
>May
Damnit, I want those UCs and Sextons now.

>>51368397
Alrifht. Because I can drop my air support and AA, switch my howitzers to the bigger ones and save myself some cash.

>>51369046
EW brit air can't even do ground attack, it's interception only.

File: IMG_1224.jpg (112KB, 640x385px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 640x385px

>>51367787
>‘PEW PEW PEW’. His gunner’s glee at getting to shine lazer beems at REAL LIFE TANKS.

That's just cheesy enough to be believable.

>>51369104
Good to know.

File: Into the Valley of Death rode the 600.jpg (75KB, 888x446px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 888x446px

>>51369046
>>51369836

i wasn't shitting you when i said "BRING THE GUNS!" because the Italian artillery is par for the course...

your finest men are artillerists, and in EW, having a ton of ROF 1 yet AT 7-9 weapons in a trench is fucking fantastic....esp. if they have FP 4+ or better in direct fire...

oh what i wouldn't do for Air with just MG's in EW......

File: smug anime face fractal.png (566KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 640x480px

>tfw when picked up more Milans

>>51370384
Well I guess I'll drop that air support and AA from my liat then. Bring some bigger howitzers. Give myself some AT 9 along with 30 AT 7 shots available.

Will need to pick up some AA trucks for MW at some point, assuming BF doesn't totally fuck over my lists.

File: image1.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

question for list building. looking at the HG Panzer list and trying to figure how to set up the platoons.
Thinking of making them 1 3M, 2 3N and 1 4H, giving me 2 tanks that can easily match range with Shermans, and 4 smoke rounds for 600 points total making the required platoons.

Team Yankee Drama Alert

Apparently one guy from Armies Army, a small model manufacturer which is making a few resin models to compete with Battlefront, posted some fan made Canadian cards on the unofficial FB page. Well that made Pete awfully butthurt, as they used a similar format (though not the same fonts) as Battlefront cards. Pete sent a cease and desist and the cards were taken down Meanie Petey's cease and desist got posted on the unofficial group.

I bet if anyone but the Armies Army guy had posted the cards it would have been fine. Makes me wonder how successfully Armies Army has been able to eat into Battlefront's market.

>>51373936
Not that I'm terribly clear since I haven't been following it, but I think that Battlefront might have been well within their legal rights on that one. They where marked unofficial, but they where being sent out to people who paid money, so then it gets complicated Legally.

>>51374035
Interesting. I thought they were free for grabs and Battlefront was mainly worried about people building Armies early with models from other manufacturers, like Armies Army.

Any cheaper alternative for Spandrel unit?

>>51374148
Command Decision from Skytrex. Old Glory also sells these.

>>51373936
My two cents is that they're going after the unofficial cards for significantly copying the actual layout and format of their own cards, and directly copying special rules and such from the Team Yankee rule book.

And yes, the fact that they were being hosted by Armie, a man who is also a miniatures manufacturer, probably doesn't help.

>>51374196
Thanks!

>>51374382
There might also be problems if these unofficial cards were to be significantly similar to the eventual official ones. People might accuse BF of blatant copying, or wondering why they should have to pay, or all kinds of IP conundrums.

>>51374616
No problem. I will probably be ordering some too. The command decision BRDMs are resin, like battlefront's, and actually have the retractable wheels in the center modeled, unlike battlefront's model. Only issue is they sell them in units of 3, whereas battlefront is selling them in a pack of 4. But for the Spandrel both options are a pack of 3, so you save $12.

Are there any conscript light tank platoons in late war? Or are the cheapest tanks still trained russian hordes?

>>51375709
There's only a couple Conscript forces in late war, and even then the tanks are support units with Trained skill.

>>51374833
That's a possibility.

The unofficial cards and the official cards being for the same force, or having the fan-made stats the same as the eventual official stats.

I didn't even think of that.

File: angry-gordon.jpg (370KB, 3200x1800px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 3200x1800px

>yfw some idiot says the G3 and MG3 are the same

File: eP8mjLn.gif (2MB, 280x202px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 280x202px

>>51377534

>>51340077
Recoiless rifles, actually.

>>51379365
I've seen examples with Milans as well. Perhaps we will get both.

>>51340077

>4) Australians with a unit of attached New Zealanders. They seem like a very interesting list. I think we will see Land Rovers with ATGMs.

I'm all for different lists, but Australia &NZ in Europe?

Fuck French or Poles or Czech or maybe third party like Yugoslavia... God forbid some elite Soviets as well...

>>51381600
It's not going to be a full briefing. We're talking Afgansty or Panzertruppen. And there where actually units of the Australian and New Zealand Armies on drill in Europe at the time and we did have agreements that our troops would fight the Soviets if called to.

Fundamentally they won't even be much different from the British, hell there probably won't even be different infantry models for them. The Uniforms where basically the same (Except that my Step-Grandfather informs me that they where much better quality and cut. I assume because it was the sixties/seventies and Literally everyone in Britain was on strike.)
The most different models the Australians will have will probably be the Land Rovers and everything else will be recycled.

>>51381600
It's supposed to be an alternate British list.

But yeah, more actual European forces would make more sense.

At least we're getting expanded Soviets and Americans first.

>>51361972

Either or, but dudes in trucks or transports sounds good to me.

Is going infantry heavy/primary feasible for a Team Yankee USA list?

>>51382295
Explain "Infantry heavy". Motostrelk and airlanding brits are amazing, and the brits and germans can get decent mechanised lists (the US is hampered by how comically awful the Dragon is). However, there's no light/unmechanised infantry in TY so far, so if you want infantry you'll also need their APCs, IFVs or helos.

>>51375709
Cheapest options are going to be either Romanian, Italian, Japanese, or Russian. For Italy, it's a swarm of little tankettes. For Romanians, it will be whatever garbage they scrounged up, likely from the Germans. Both Italy and Romanians will likely have randomized skill/motivation. For Japan, it's the Pacific list, running Late War points, and you'll have swarms of the shitty tanks. For Soviets it will be CT Tankovy with either Matildas, Lees, or T-34-76s. Although you can run 21 SU-76s, for less than 700pts, and have enough room left over for... everything...

>>51383199
I think LW Italians aren't randomized. I could be wrong as I only ever played them once in LW.

>>51383323
Road to Rome isn't, but iirc their other list(s?) is/are.

>>51383427
Yeah, but they don't have any other LW lists.

>>51373936
Pretty ballsy of that guy. I just want his VDV models tho.

Okay, so, help me out here:

Luchs is half a point each. BRDM is half a point each.

The luchs has:

Thermal instead of IR
Scout
+1 front armour and +2 side
+2" terrain and cross country dash
+2 AT
AA MG instead of MG
+1 skill, +1 assault
4+ to hit

And loses
4" of road dash
-1 counterattack

So... what? Is losing 4" of road speed really worth all the upgrades on top of being 4+ tohit?

>>51384725
yea we went over this a few threads ago

it's a major failing of the low points resolution. The BRDM is way overcosted if you compare it.

4" of road speed is nothing, the Luchs can extend your deployment zone and is gonna just work better in any situation you'd want it

>>51383454
They're also in Fortress Italy, but I don't recall them being random.

>>51384771
4-car platoons are something, at least, but at Tohit 3, MG-vulnerable, and without Scout they're going to be dead faster.

>>51384725
They should have just made a unit of 3 BRDMs equal to one point. Even then, I'd still prefer the 2 Luchs. "Warsaw Pact Doctrine".

>>51384725
I just want to know why the scout units don't get scout rules.

>>51385336
>"Warsaw Pact Doctrine"

>>51385377
it's not a good answer but it's the only one we've got

File: Concern.jpg (38KB, 305x308px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 305x308px

>France not in team yankee yet

Cool. Thanks guys.

File: phil.png (192KB, 692x609px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 692x609px

>>51385377
>yet it's fine when the Brits and Americans in FOW rush guns blazing recon in force

>>51385511
To be fair, there was some doubt about whether or not France would come to the aid of NATO if the Soviets ever got to the French border.

File: 1474221510406.gif (942KB, 500x269px) Image search: [Google]

942KB, 500x269px

>>51386263


Give me my fucking 80's baguette tanks anon.

>>51386263
>>51386370
So we have a choice between Communist French Forces supported by I dunno, Spetnaz or some shit, or NATO loyalists.

>>51386499

If we go by the book french forces fought in the south and we're even reserves for CENTAG.

France will be in team yankee. It's only a matter of when.

>>51386499
I thought it had more to do with them being the battleground of two world wars already.

If they could spare France by strikeing a deal with the Kremlin, they probably would.

File: more then the blood french.jpg (66KB, 500x510px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x510px

>>51385511
>>France not in team yankee yet
I am perfectly fine with this

>>51382252
Mobile dudes in transports sounds like you want Gepanzerte Panzergrenadiers to me. Those are the most mobile of the armored infantry, mostly because the german halftrack was treated like a fighting vehicle, and not just an armored taxi.

>>51387625

Why you gotta hate on the frogs anon?

>>51386370
I just want a duck tonk.

>>51388138
Those paints need to be thinned. Badly.

>>51388459
Indeed. Even if red is a difficult color to paint.

Also, who does a whole literal red army?

File: CNCRA2_Install_GWW2.jpg (201KB, 457x433px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 457x433px

>>51388519
A fan of Red Alert. To re-indoctrination with you.

File: Nachtjager - UK Airborne armoured recce squadron.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

So I'm playing in a 2v2 game tomorrow night, with each player having 1k points. After much deliberation, I am sorely tempted to take this list:

CiC White Scout Car, 2iC White Scout Car - 70 pts

4x Locust - 160 pts

1x Universal Carrier, 1x Dingo - 70 pts

2x Churchill VI with Applique armor, 1x Churchill IV with Applique armor - 335 pts

4x M10C - 370 pts

Total - 1005 pts

I think I can probably convince them to let the 5pts slide because motherfucking Locusts. If not, I can just remove a bit of applique, drop a Locust, or swap the M10s for more Churchills.

File: hey faggot, yuri.jpg (5KB, 256x192px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 256x192px

>>51388233
> To re-indoctrination with you.
>not liking RA

>>51388539
Or someone who really likes Advance War.

>>51388669
>Advanced Wars

My fellow negroid brethren

Pretty sure those GBA games are the reason I'm so into wargaming in the first place. Put hundreds of hours into those games as a kid

>slight mention of France
>butthurtness and bitter tears

How a nation can be so based?

>>51389248
>How a nation can be so based?
You mean debased?

>>51381922
It's not an alternative British list. It's Aussie with British Div Support.
Source: I have the list, have not signed NDA.

File: e32.gif (3MB, 600x300px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 600x300px

>>51389280
Thanks for proving my point

File: Bings.jpg (50KB, 346x480px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 346x480px

Anon, I think you've got that backwards.Your waifu ain't selling her old crusty croissant to nobody, (especially Phil).

File: pain.gif (1003KB, 380x278px) Image search: [Google]

1003KB, 380x278px

>>51388669
>>51388760
>no release since ds.
>resent fire emblem releases are trash.
>the newest paper mario is trash.
>Intelligent Systems Co is fucked.

File: Hungary is of great again.png (315KB, 680x319px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 680x319px

>>51389761
I know, it really sucks.

Thankfully the two DS ones just have so many missions and levels I'm able to get my strategy fix for the most part.

I just hate that fucking nobody makes handheld strategy games that are worth a damn anymore. They're such a natural combo but they've pretty much completely disappeared.

>>51388639
>If not, I can just remove a bit of applique, drop a Locust, or swap the M10s for more Churchills.
Well, then drop a fucking bit of applique. The points limit is a LIMIT. Triply so when you have 5 and 10 point upgrades in your list.

File: rufus what am i reading.jpg (8KB, 226x223px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 226x223px

>>51389506
who and what are you talking about

>>51389845
Sorry something crawled up your ass and died, you don't have to be such a cock about it.

>>51388639
Two revised lists to satisfy >>51389845

>CiC White Scout Car, 2iC White Scout Car - 70 pts
>4x Locust - 160 pts
>Universal Carrier, Dingo - 70 pts
>2x Churchill VI with Applique armor, Churchill IV with Applique armor - 335 pts
>2x M10C - 185 pts
>Limited Typhoon - 170
Total - 990 pts

>CiC White Scout Car, 2iC White Scout Car - 70 pts
>4x Locust - 160 pts
>2x Universal Carrier, 2x Dingo - 140 pts
>Churchill VII, Churchill VI with Applique armor, Churchill IV with Applique armor - 380 pts
>Parachute platoon with Panzerfaust SMG, PIAT, 6x Rifle/MG - 240 pts
Total - 990 pts

>>51389943
>you don't have to be such a cock about it.
Since it's apparently such a hard concept to fathom, yeah, I kind of do. Otherwise morons like you will continue to ignore it and wonder why nobody likes their lists (or them).

That said,
>>51390129
Second list, I think. Hardass paras are always fun. And I'm dubious about the utility of 2 vehicle TD platoons, as well as air.
(Or you could just drop one of the applique armors from the churchill platoon)

File: 3036_135_376-tank-firing-main-gun.jpg (283KB, 2572x1286px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 2572x1286px

>>51389930
>croissant
Probably the salty frog the post above, anon.

>>51388669
My first thought was Advance Wars, yeah.

>>51385084

I was waiting to use the cost of BRDM's as a test to see if Battlefront really understood what they were doing with this new points system.

Basically, they don't, this stuff must be discussed internally but there isn't anyone critical enough in the final part of the decision making process to counter these half-assed decisions.

The only sensible reason I can think of is that they've realised Luchs are undercosted by a point and that's going to be fixed in the future. Absolutely disgusting vehicle for what the points get you, almost single handedly killed my desire to play the game.

>>51389943
He's right though.

A points limit is exactly that. A **LIMIT**. The maximum number of points your list can have.

It is not a difficult concept. You can be over the limit by 5 points, 10 points, or 100 points, it's still over the limit.

>>51392048
>It is not a difficult concept.
Yes, hence
>If not,
in the first post.

But now that I know this triggers people so hard, and that they can't understand that people might understand the concept already and are just spitting out silly lists, I think I'll make sure I have a pointless 5pt upgrade to take me over the limit in the future.

>>51391996
Precisely why I have 8 of them in my Aufklärungs list. They punch above their weight which allows room for me to pay for the expensive Leo 2s and the overcosted (at least in the current meta) PAH.

>>51392594
The PAH is overcosted..? It's a HK with AT 23, that's seriously nasty. Straight through on T-72s is nothing to sneeze at. Especially given with how many T-72s there are, there's almost certainly one that's too far from woods to be concealed.

>>51392510
Look at it this way, what happens when you go over the speed limit?

You get pulled over and given a ticket.

If you were playing at a tournament and tried to use a list totaling 1515 points at a 1500 point tournament, you wouldn't be allowed to play because you don't have a legal list.

>>51392819
I get the concept. Note how there was a sentence in the first post about how to make it fit under, and that the second post had two both under the limit. I made one mistake, you don't have to act like I'm a retard that doesn't understand because of it.

>>51392736
Overcosted in the current meta.

No weapons to engage lighter vehicles effectively. In a AA heavy meta, especially missile AA, you have to really pick your shots carefully. In many cases you are probably better served with more Milans or the Jaguar. Since I am running a full recon list, air support is my only real option for adding to my AT ability.

It's still useful, but I'm not sure that I often end up trading them efficiently from a point basis. Doesn't help that every soviet list I face seems to have 4 gophers and frogfoots to worry about.

>>51392903
Yes but there was also a bit about letting it slide because it's "only 5 points".

And some more laid back people might not care in a casual game. I doubt 5 points will make or break the balance.

It's just the attitude of "it's only 5 points" that comes across as not caring about the rules of the game.

It may be a bit silly to get this worked up over "only 5 points", but agreeing on a points limit is part of the game.

>>51392927
Admittedly I'm not sure what your local meta's like; do you play lots of blue-on-blue or have loads of BMP-hordes? Gophers alone should be a relatively minor threat, getting something like half a kill if they fire in the enemy turn. Firing in the friendly turn, after they've shot, their odds are a bit better and you're probably on hook for a heli, but there should be a 2-3 tank hole in the T-72 platoon at that point.

>>51393165
It's also silly for me to get worked up over this, but when someone gets this picky because of one sentence and I get all of one post actually giving feedback on the fucking lists, I get pissed as well. I wouldn't care if the pedantry was at least combined with feedback on the lists I asked about.

>>51392819
What happens is you get pulled over if you're going 10 or 15 over

They don't give a shit about 5 over unless they're assholes who need to meet their quota

The Plastic Soldier Company's plastic T-55s are up for pre-order at a discounted price.

£19.35 for 5 tanks, regularly £21.50.

That's $24.37 US discounted, and $27.08 normally, at the current exchange rate.

http://theplasticsoldiercompany.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=93_94_95&products_id=1336

>>51393296
I've been playing against Soviet motor rifles or Afghansty supported by T-72s and lots of Hinds and Frogfoots, as well as shilkas and gophers.

Typically I will split my helis up into 2 groups. I try to focus their shots at T-72s because that is what they are there to kill. I typically don't have problems getting my initial shots off, though occasionally I have lost one to a golden bullet/missile. Usually after I shoot the Gophers will unleash hell on me killing one and forcing a morale check.

Maybe I should just keep them all together so I can absorb more losses without checking for morale. It may be worth losing flexibility.

>>51393427
>It may be worth losing flexibility.
Oh, absolutely. You should generally only be losing one PAH to Gophers alone, and three left is still going to knock out two T-72s on average.

In general in TY you NEVER want two of anything unless you're fine with losing it (so generally stuff like Luchs, maybe BMP recon).

Also remember you can always have them loiter, if you want to wait until Luchs or Marders have made the airspace a bit safer. (Heck the Leos might be good here, too, since 40" range might let them get some clutch shots off from half the board away).

>>51388138
I was thinking about doing the Allies with the Abrams, Bradley, Apache, M113 and M107. But my East German force comes first.

>>51388669
technically should be painted Blue then if using AW colors on the armies, as Blue Moon was the Russian looking ones, Green Earth being the Germans, may end up using that.

>>51393547
The Red Alert 1 Allied Medium Tank is almost certainly an M1 Abrams with the 105mm cannon.

The Light Tank in Red Alert is a bit unclear what it is supposed to be based on. But the Nod Light Tank in Command & Conquer is definitely a Bradley.

>>51393705
I think in cinematics the Light Tank was depicted as the M41. But the sprite is still the Nod Bradley from Tiberian Dawn. And the Bradley has more chance of actually being added.

>>51393521
I'll give it a go. I've got a game tomorrow night and I will try to run this list.

HQ Leo 1- 3 pts
3 x 3 Leo 1 - 27 pts
4 x 2 Luchs- 4 pts
2 x 3 Luchs w/ grenadiers- 8 pts
4 Gepards- 10 pts
4 Fliegerfaust teams - 4 pts
4 LARS w/ minelets - 7 pts
OP - 1 point
4 PAH - 16 pts

For a grand total of 80 points. Last game my 3 Leo 2s cut through an entire 10 BMP-2 motor rifle platoon and some T-72s with a little help from some Luchs. I want to change it up a little bit, to see if I can get the job done without the Leo 2s. I may also opt to try a night attack to get into position with my tanks.

>>51393426
Man.... the sheer amount of winning at the moment: it's.... beautiful.

File: 1453072017416.png (807KB, 1792x1080px) Image search: [Google]

807KB, 1792x1080px

>>51393426
>april

>>51394108
>2 x 3 Luchs w/ grenadiers- 8 pts
Fuchs, surely?

Have you used the fuchs teams before, and if so, how're you finding them?

>>51394444
They did say it would probably take until March or April before they'd be available.

It's better than nothing.

Or do you want to pay $72.50 for 5 resin tanks?

Hell, this is a better deal than comparable plastic tanks from Battlefront(Abrams, Leopard 2, T-72) that all cost $45.00 for 5.

I'd say the 3 month wait is worth it for savings this significant.

>>51389761
I heard the newer Fire Smblem games were pretty solid.

>>51389797
Yeah, which sucks. My main vice is startegy games or RPGs(although I'm extra picky about my RPGs).

I need to get me a copy of Feont Mission for my 3DS. Fucking loved that game.

>>51394893
Derp, yes I meant Fuchs.

I really miss having the second (or third) Milan. Honestly that's the biggest weakness of the Fuchs platoons. If I had the option for Marders or M113s I'd take it. After I get my WARPAC ready I might buy a couple of boxes of M113s for Panzertruppen. 3 Milans for 7 points is a good deal.

As for the vehicles themselves, their armor isn't amazing but they can bounce some light machine gun and sometimes Shilka fire. The MGs are pretty effective against Soviet infantry in the open, and most people don't want to waste their fire of them unless they have nothing else to shoot at.

The road dash is amazing and seems to be the best reason to bring them. One match I was able to zip a unit of grenadiers across the board for an assault the next turn. They are also amphibious, which I am sure will come in handy sometime.

>>51395122
As weird as it sounds, the best fix I've gotten out of the new generation so far is Pokemon Moon.

When a pokemon game is the closest thing you can get to a proper strategy game, something has gone horribly wrong with the game release window. That being said, it's everything a pokemon game should've been from the beginning.

I tried the Tom Clancy game, it was garbage. I've got codename steam because it was two bucks but it doesn't look that great. Other than that it's pretty much down to hunting down the old Age of Empires games on the DS. I remember the historical one was pretty fun but a bit glitchy, the mythological one was pretty garbage though.

I just don't understand what is so hard about releasing another game. Did Days of Ruin do that poorly? I thought mechanically it was the best Advance War. Sure, the characters were pretty dull and the third act was really fucking stupid, but the tactics were solid and you really felt like you had a lot of flexibility in approach. Especially since Dual Strikes were gone and CO powers were no longer giant "fuck you I win" buttons.

>>51395257
>I really miss having the second (or third) Milan. Honestly that's the biggest weakness of the Fuchs platoons.
The thing that made me gape was that there were only four stands, which seemed like a great way to run off the second someone pointed machineguns at you.

>>51395689
That's why I leave my guys dug in on the objective and if I lose one I am praying for a 3+. They are still serviceable for screening the enemy from an objective and buying time. The panzerfaust sucks, but the MG3 is pretty nasty in defensive fire against infantry. Though I am sure Brits would kick the shit out of them in assault.

>>51395506
>That being said, it's everything a pokemon game should've been from the beginning.
Yes, Sun and Moon were great. Well balancedfor casual but not super-easy play with the xp share on, and suitably challenging with it on.

To keep on topic, anyone played with/made a full bocage table? Any recommendations on making one, aside from using a smaller board (was thinking 3'x4' like recommended in the rulebook)

>>51393426
I bet Battlefront are kicking themselves for not having a Plastic T-55 to market now.

File: IMG_1227.jpg (115KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 400x400px

>>51398217
>Phil right now to whoever decided the T-55s would be $72.50 per box, in resin, for a spam tank.

>>51398217
>>51398693
Pete doesn't care. He is swimming in a tub full of plastic pumas, scimitars, and Spartans.

>>51398217
They don't fucking care. It's not like they want to see badly spray+dip T-55 swarms in the game. They added them as a suck-tastic armor unit to complement the usual T-72 swarm. This is the same reason why there aren't SU-76s in plastic format.

>>51399221
Same with Valentines. Thankfully based PSC shall deliver us from BF's greed.

>>51399221
Counter point: It's money that's going to PSC instead of into their coffers. And they'd hate that, a lot. Su-76s are meme tanks deal with it.

>>51399221
So you're saying Battlefront don't want to see something but made it entirely possible within the games rule set when they could've avoided this issue very easily by just making the rules different?

Are you saying Battlefront is mentally deficient?

>>51399320
Are you saying they aren't?

>>51398693
But if they had made it affordable then people might PLAY the commies, and Phil wouldn't want that.

>>51399221
> It's not like they want to see badly spray+dip T-55 swarms in the game
Why bring up the spray+dip thing?

>>51399735
Because grog is a little prideful of the time he puts into miniatures and can't bring himself to rush out a spam horde, which is your only option as a WARPAC player.

File: image.jpg (545KB, 2047x1380px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 2047x1380px

>>51399735
>dipping
>dipping VEHICLES
It takes all of 25 minutes to pin-wash a tank and sponge some chipping and weathering around the edges, and you can do them in batches.

Dipping makes baby Jesus cry.

>>51400513
>25 minutes
You realise this is about 4 hours for ten tanks, which is basically the minimum for a 1.6 point vehicle, right?

>>51400648
That's why I am just doing a full wash followed by a drybrush method. You get a similar effect to pin washing and weathering, but it takes far less time. I would only reserve spraying and dipping for miniatures of another game system, like bolt action, that I want to just get finished.

>>51400796
Yeah, same. Full wash, drybrush, and a little weathering and you've got some pretty acceptable tanks. The actual painting is probably half an hour in total but there's a gap between the base layers and wash and the wash and the drybrush/details.

>>51400513
I get that, but why bring it up in this context? Something tells me BF doesn't give two shits how we paint our stuff.

File: PzIV_pic3.jpg (68KB, 640x308px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x308px

>>51393705
The sprite looks like a T-62. In the cinematics it was kinda all over the place, with a walker bulldog-thing, and such.

>>51399221
>SU-76
Don't remind me, anon.
>>51399279
In game, yeah, but historically, the most common vehicle zipping around with the strelkovy. (Not that BF cares about historical accuracy, I will note.)

File: FB_IMG_1485397276872.jpg (148KB, 1440x810px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1440x810px

Not sure if you guys saw this yet, but here's a picture of the new starter at London Toy Fair.

>>51402152
The North Africa stuff looks really nice, but it's going to be a hard sell for me. You can't really use any of it for other theatres and I have too much to work on as it is.

With plastic valentines, I am tempted to make an infantry tank list, but I will most likely paint my valentines up as soviets because I am a filthy Easterling lover.

That said, I can't wait until we get the Eastern front books.

File: 1390488888200.jpg (41KB, 570x370px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 570x370px

>>51402152
>not only has BF not sent the customary preview yet to us, but they've told the owner literally nothing
>even the shit on the website
For fuck's sake how do they expect me to houserule out of V4 all the shit design decisions if I don't yet know them?

>>51402917
Well considering one of my armies really only fights in North Africa I'm okay with them focusing on it.

But it's also that theatre that I never knew I'd love until I started playing FoW because the American public school system basically acted like that whole part of the war didn't fucking happen.

>>51403201
Oh yeah.

It jumps from Pearl Harbor straight to fucking D-Day.

> The roof mounted launch system meant that the vehicle could hide its bulk, only exposing the launcher and gunner’s sight on the top of the roof to the enemy making it difficult to kill or suppress should the enemy even see the weapon firing.
>http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=5454
Battlefront are indulging in some weapons grade trolling again.

File: brutal.jpg (8KB, 236x177px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 236x177px

>>51402152
>It's 5 fucking tanks
>5
>tanks
>tanks that aren't even worth that much points wise
>releasing this shit after having Open Fire, which was considered a pretty good starter set in it's own right

Oh my god they're actually going full retard. I didn't think it was possible but by god they've done it.

I was just trolling before, but goddammit Battlefront just keeps shooting themselves in the foot more and more every day. I'm getting legitimately worried about the state of this game going into V4. They've not quite hit "Age of Sigmar" level idiocy yet but sure as hell they're workin on it.

>>51403201
>But it's also that theatre that I never knew I'd love until I started playing FoW because the American public school system basically acted like that whole part of the war didn't fucking happen.

Can't have us burgers losing, you know that. America only kicked the maximum amount of ass at all time as Clint Eastwood strolled down Omaha beach with a thompson firing from the hip in one hand and the good ol stars and stripes in the other. Anything else is just bullshit and heresay made up by the commies to discredit Reagan, god bless his freedom loving soul.

File: oh no a lee.png (101KB, 124x357px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 124x357px

>>51403641
I don't think it's just gonna be those tanks. That just looks like the shop's hype display. Hell, the Open Fire one's cover illustrated the contents pretty well. Prolly another Yank vs Germany wank set.

>>51403684
from what i remembered it was going to be a handful of panzer 3s and a couple of crusaders
fuck yank wank it's limy time

>>51403404
Pearl Harbor to D-day and then right to nuking Hiroshima.

>>51403641
>Anything else is just bullshit and heresay
I believe the term you're looking for is "alternative facts."

>>51403721
Yeah, I just noticed the brit helmets too, heheh.

>>51403723
>Pearl Harbor to D-day and then right to nuking Hiroshima.
same here, not knowing what the actual british did during ww-2 was weird especially because we were and are technically still a dominion.
fuck until recently i knew nothing of the eastern front
>"alternative facts."
what now?

>>51403838
Yeah man, we basically got told the Brita got bombed and that was their contribution to the war.

The alternative facts thing stems from the cabinet of one Donald Trump. Google "trump alternative facts" and prepare laugh.

>>51403838
America is going for "hold my beer, 2017 edition"

>>51404427
Oh god that was good!

>>51403838
"Alternative Facts" are the newest part of the "Fake News" phenomenon.

Dont like what the other side has to say? Call it "Fake News" and offer up some "Alternative Facts".

Pretty much nothing but confirmation bias by another name. Reinforcing things you already believe by using only information that supports your message.

>>51402152
>4th Ed display

That can't be everything, can it?

5 tanks?

>>51404632
That's it. Five tanks and the rules according to their website.

>>51404944
That's like the old old 1st or 2nd Ed starter set, which I think was 5 resin tanks split between StuGs and Shermans.

>>51404632

Only the MSM creates fake news.

They do it because they've lost control.

Just bought a used scout car off a friend, how do you strip paint off resin and metal?

File: DieTotenAfrika.jpg (402KB, 1000x1058px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1000x1058px

>>51402152
>>51403641
>>51403684
>>51403721

uhm, yeah...
it is 5 tanks. 5 fucking tanks.

and i just had a really bad hunch: is this how we are supposed to get our hands on the rulebook?
....is the starter going to be the rulebook release?

i hope for seperate rules...i really do.

...

why five? can it at least be 14 so we can get a minimal '3 and 3 w HQ' versus game? please BF? is 136 USD of plastic too much for a 100 USD starter set?

Can we not talk about Politics? Everything is shittier when the Americans talk about their failing wretched country.

>>51405113
They'll probably have a separate rule book mate. They've done this to decrease the entry cost to Flames of War.

>>51405004
I'm not here to talk politics.

I'm here to talk to other grown men about toy soldiers and the games we play with them. :-p

>>51405113
I'm sure the book will be available otherwise. They already said something about a trade program.

But do we know what the new start'll cost? If it's only like $40-50USD that's not an awful deal. Still not great, but I guess that's why we're getting two nation specific starters alongside it.

>>51405149
Sorry, I just couldn't resist the joke.

>>51405149
>>51405262

yeah, but no mention has been made besides the free Not-MW books.
and we know BF can derp....
i just want to hear for sure it's a separate item...no biggie, i'm 80% you are right.

>>51405210
because toy soldiers are like breasts...

>>51405369
They were originally meant for kids, but grown men end up playing with them?

>>51405040
Let it soak in Simple Green or a related cleaning product for a while. Then give it a good scrubbing with a toothbrush.

File: IMG_0131.jpg (78KB, 920x612px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 920x612px

>>51403641
>>51405113
>uhm, yeah...
>it is 5 tanks. 5 fucking tanks
>>51405149

Not really even sure why this El Alamein box is a thing. They just threw in one of each plastic tank. Maybe it's for tanks? But... they are including a mini v4 rulebook. Huh?

>El Alamein (FWBX07)
>contains one mini-rulebook, one Panzer IV, one Panzer III, one Grant and two Crusaders.

Why would you not just buy one of the two nation specific starter boxes.

>Monty's Desert Rats (BRAB09)
>contains one mini-rulebook, five Grant tanks, three Crusaders tanks, and two 17/25 pdr guns.

>Rommel's Afrika Korps (GEAB14)
>contains one mini-rulebook, five Panzer III tanks, three Panzer IV tanks, and two 8.8cm FlaK36 guns.

So Battlefront isn't exactly derping... they are just going into bizarro territory. But umm... at least it's an option in case you want one of each of the new plastic kits for TANKS... without the TANKS cards... uh yeah I give up. Maybe it's just a store demo thing.

>>51406423
>So Battlefront isn't exactly derping... they are just going into bizarro territory. But umm... at least it's an option in case you want one of each of the new plastic kits for TANKS... without the TANKS cards... uh yeah I give up. Maybe it's just a store demo thing.
the clue to them going off the deep end is mid war
if it is actually 40bucks though, that's 20 bucks for 3 brit and 2 panzers - the cost of the rulebook.
not bad actually

>>51406462
That would be a good deal, but it still doesn't really get you started. Unless you just want to play around with paint schemes on each of the tanks.

File: 0a51437cebccca1084f5ce7b4f0afb6fc5749f1ce6aae1e5b319da1474d74156 (1).jpg (60KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 850x400px

> first Volksarmee is something of a total disaster but that's kind of to be expected because it's Communists and FoW needs us to remember they're the bad guys in more ways than one
> now mid war is looking like a total fucking disaster

Hopefully Late-War will be safe for a little while longer.

>>51406693
How is mid War looking like a disaster? There are 2 solid starter army boxes and the bizarre El Alamein box. We are getting some nice new plastic kits. Hell even Italians are slated for some plastic.

If anything it looks far more promising than the EW/LW conversions to V4. Completely redoing everything will lead to a much cleaner and hopefully more balanced game. Who fucking knows what we are getting in EW/LW with the conversions. Having to read through the conversion book is going to be a mess.

Once we get the Eastern Front books, I will be playing a lot of Mid War.

So, what all new plastic kits are we going to see for MW?

File: i have no brain but i know that is stupid.png (287KB, 540x489px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 540x489px

>>51406827
>plastic 25pdrs
>plastic crusaders
>plastic grants
>plastic german, artilery don't know which one but i hope it's an 88 (it won't be)
>plastic 3s and mid 4s


>>51406693
anon examine the above, mid war is objectively better off

>>51406827
Crusaders, probably in 1, 2, 3 marks.
Grant/Lees
Panzer IV Earlys.
Panzer IIIs, probably early.
17/25pdrs, probably some 25pdrs because they'll share similar elements.
FlaK 88s.

File: ROCK HARD.jpg (20KB, 408x553px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 408x553px

>>51406846
shit it's 88s

>>51406853
Kampfgruppe Von Swoboda Spam soon comrades!

File: 13183471_128142610926163_87621425_n.jpg (63KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 480x480px

>>51406843
>>51406846
Rockin'

Wonder if they'll have more slated for 2018ish, or even earlier. But I suppose with TY's Stripes (and maybe Red Banner?), there'll be a lot of new plastic this year. I'm so excite. The plastic german stuff will be a godsend for my interests in doing Stalingrad stuff, (besides the fuckhuge pile of Soviet stuff I already have for that).

File: 1484341646720.jpg (49KB, 750x180px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 750x180px

Reminder

>>51408021
Feels like a post on Shit Wehraboos Say.

>>51408021
It's one of those moments where personal fallacies translates into game design fallacies and you have potato charge army...

>>51404944
ahahaha what?

You're kidding me. Five tanks? Are there even infantry?

>>51408534

No infantry, it's a tank game. They don't seem to be prepared to put the effort into making plastic 15mm infantry for North Africa. I doubt Open Fire will stay in print, but desu it's the only thing keeping FoW in the public eye atm. If you just liked tanks you'f just play scrub tier WoT.

>>51408772
Infantry are going to have some additional challenges killing tanks in V4 since projectile AT weapons hit side armor in assault now instead of having a tank assault value. Repeat bombardments of artillery will also be devastating against infantry. This is what bothers me most. Instead of finding creative ways to assault dug in infantry, the game has been nerfed to WW1 level tactics of just dropping more artillery on them. Guess we will have to wait and see how it plays.

>>51408772
I heard somewhere that the plastic infantry they have made is significantly harder to make, and costs more to make, than plastic vehicles.

As for FoW being a tank game, I wouldn't say that just yet. But tanks vs tanks use fewer rules than infantry vs infantry or infantry vs tanks, while still teaching a lot of the core concepts of the game.

On top of that, the old starter set from 1st or 2nd Edition was also only just 5 tanks. Split between StuGs and Shermans.

>>51408846
>projectile AT weapons hit side armor in assault now instead of having a tank assault value.

You get to choose one or the other.

Tank Assault value against Top Armor, **OR** Anti-Tank value against Side Armor.

>>51408900
Right but the Tank Assault value for an AT rifle team or panzerfaust team is likely going to be 2, unless they are pioneers.

That being said I am really curious what the two conversion books for EW/LW look like. Seems like a tall task to retcon a bunch of special rules in an organized manner. With all the screwing with artillery, morale, and mission tactics, I imagine there will be some balance issues, since they have no way of changing points. That and I am curious why they felt the need to change Hen and Chicks again, when it works really well as is.

>>51405369
You can never have enough?

>>51406843
But anon, rejoice, for it is the 88s.

>>51408900
>t26s laugh all the way to the bank.
1,1,1 masterrace.

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

156KB, 928x590px

>>51410051
I hear you, brother. Though you could probably stand to put in a bigger engine.

http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=5456

So, no bogged down tokens... is the rule gone from V4?

>>51410245
That's weird. Tanks can still bog, but will automatically unbog at the beginning of the next turn. Tanks also no longer check for bogging at each "swing" of an assault... and if I remember correctly bogged tanks can't be captured after an assault, only bailed tanks. So maybe they didn't feel the need to have tokens for it.

>>51410245
Well, the new rangefinder looks more convenient than the old one since it actually has an 8" side. Otherwise not very impressed, though if that artillery template is still transparent it'll look pretty cool.

>>51406693
Oh is MW looking like a disaster? Glorious plastic Italians, new plastic tanks for Brits and Germans.

I hope they do EW next and leave LW for the very end, considering how much of a LW wank-fest v3 can feel like sometimes.

Sure some of the new rules in v4 are suspect, but if they plan to focus on the fun, and glory, that is MW then I'm totally down.

>>51410948
I think people are reacting to individual things in the discussions of the new rules without seeing how it all comes together as a whole.

Only BF's play testers have any actual experience with 4th Edition, so everyone is just theory crafting.

I actually want to play a few 4th Edition games before I say anything about whether or not it is a good game, or how it compares to Version 3 or Team Yankee.

>>51411239
>how it compares to Version 3 or Team Yankee
How is it different from Team Yankee? Serious question, the only alteration I've seen is 8" coherency in certain cases.

>>51411257
From what we've heard on the WWPD podcast, (God, I hate listening to them), there is a lot of stuff that will be familiar if you play Team Yankee, but I don't think it's a complete Copy-and-Paste job.

Is there a cheaper way to buy tank stowage, than $6 for 5 pieces of stowage, from BF?

>>51411349
I know the BF US/UK stowage blister is like $12 for 12 metal sprues with 6-7 pieces on each. Total contents are 6 single bags, 6 multi-bags, 6 pouch rows, 12 Sherman tracks, 6 road wheels, 6 US helmets, 6 UK helmets, 18 jerry cans, 6 drums, and 6 ammo boxes.

Can't say about any others they offer.

>>51411349
Bitz Box at the FLGS

>>51411349
Buy some oyumaru and recast them out of greenstuff, most stowage is a one-sided mold so it won't be difficult.
Tarps especially are a piece of piss, because even wonky miscasts are fine, and GS's flexibility let's you wrap them around and over turrets somewhat so they are actually better than metal in that regard.

>>51411468
Link?

File: IMG_6559.jpg (401KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1600x1200px

>>51413013
It's the US670 stowage pack, can find it on Battlefront's site and Miniature Market but neither has a pic of the whole blister. Found a pic of the contents on the net, though.

>>51413079
Thank you!

sorry to crash your thread, but is there any chance of Eastern Front WWI models?

I do love the Volksarmee and Brit team yankee stuff.

>>51414350
I think WW1 is pretty much dead in the water at this point. It seems like BF has zero real interest in it.

>>51410245
So looking at the rangefinder notice how it says "infantry movement" on the 8" part? So are infantry now going to move 8" instead of 6?

>>51414479
I'd certainly imagine that is what that means.

>>51414567
I wonder if tanks will likewise see a speed increase.

Of course this also means that fucking germans can move a foot each turn.

>>51414619
Actually tanks are being slowed down.

>>51414619
Assuming Stormtrooper works the same way.

And Tanks I believe will have several speeds:

Tactical - How far they can move and still shoot.

Cross-Country Dash - move faster across open terrain, but can't shoot after moving.

Road Dash - an even faster on-road move, with the same restriction on shooting.

I believe, but am not 100% sure, that Dash moves also mean no assaulting.

>>51414619
From what I've heard, they're going full TY on tank speeds, including the entire disposal of Light Tank. If true, RIP all the fun British tanks.

>>51415746

New Thread