/fowg/ Prickly Edition

Starter Sets Announced for MW V4

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

>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.

Tokens'n'shit

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

Looking at TY again, I think the issue with Cross ratings is that lack of rerolls. Reading between the lines cross 3+ is just basic tank cross, 2+ is wide tracks, and 4+ is overloaded... which means there's no difference between wheeled vehicles crossing and heavier tanks.

>>51415746
Divizione Folgore?
My dark skinned brethren

>>51415977
The T-55AMB2 isn't that heavy, though. Even with applique it's about the same weight as the T-72 and has basically the same ground pressure.

Man, there was some really poorly informed panicking about the V4 starter stuff in the previous thread.
The nation-specific boxes and the hardcover version of the rulebook have been announced for fucking weeks, lads.

IMO, having nation-specific starter boxes that get you a basic "tanks plus AT guns" army plus the rulebook is way better than Open Fire, since you're not locked into Grenadiers or Market Garden Brit tanks.

The mini-box with the rulebook and five tanks is a low-cost entry point like in earlier editions: it allows you to explore the basics and do some simple tonk fightan before jumping in properly with an army box or just some indvidual unit boxes that will work together.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the MW rework and how things will be different.
Only thing I'm kinda unsure about is how they'll change the Soviets.

>>51416137
but dood we gotta have 3 for 2 points! Just nerf them to shit!

>>51416137
2bh it's probably just a retarded way of making a horde army's vehicles weaker.
Here we have THE most popular MBT ever conceived and fielded, but it gets bogged down if it tries to cross so much as a molehill?

Honestly it should just behave like a T-72 but with thinner armour and a weaker gun, that's it, no more fiddling needed. No retarded slow-loading crews, no gunner who forgot to turn the stabiliser on, nothing.

from the latest WWPD podcast where they discuss V4, this is what I picked up from the first hour, think it's all correct:

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

>>51418423


- 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 whatever 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

File: is-2m-Berlin1945.png (149KB, 550x247px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 550x247px

After realizing that I'm using some kind of green for three fucking quarters of the surface area of my army: how do I properly do the white stripe and cross as seen here? Also how badly will I want to kill myself if I want to freehand the geometric symbol of the unit I chose plus numbers? I came up with a suitably confusing numbering system to use.

>>51416308
I just wonder if Italians will get a plastic starter, or if we'll just get plastic M14/41s and kindly told to fuck right off.

>51414810
I doubt they'll change stormtrooper. If anything they'll probably make it better.

>>51418953
Micropens are the answer.
At least for the geometric stuff.

>>51418953
To get the stripe you either need to freehand very steadily, or you need to use masking tape. The really narrow kind you can find in hobby stores.

>>51418953
Actually don't worry too much about it being messy; they were hand-painted and often in a hurry, so they're almost never neat and tidy.

Also, some would've been covered in stars instead, since the white crosses were believed compromised and the system was changed.

>>51420236
Hell just look at the one in your picture, the line's of varying thickness at multiple points.

File: IMG_0134.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Tried to night attack as Aufklärungs in Hasty attack against a soviet motor rifle brigade. Everything was going according to plan, I had a ton of firepower on the left flank assaulting an objective.

I have 4 PAH helicopters behind a tree line engaging T-72s out in the open. 4 shots, 4 misses. The rubber ammo my Leo 1s shoot decide to hit the front armor on the turret instead of the flank. His infantry on the objective make every single infantry save they take.

Still had a lot of fun. Love the dynamic that the missions bring to the game. Hasty attack is loads of fun. Night fighting rules really make things interesting. I think night fighting using a prepared attack might be the way to beat the Brits.

File: Capture111 - Copy.png (426KB, 1327x672px) Image search: [Google]

426KB, 1327x672px

send me a C&D

File: 11412292.271c8638.640.jpg (113KB, 593x640px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 593x640px

>>51415977
Any game where wheeled vehicles and tanks are on par off the road is shit design, desu.

>>51420445
ayylmao

>>51420445
It's funny how the only saving grace of the 100 point system, is that it is so fucking clunky fan-made work slots right in.

>>51420445
Shouldn't 4 of the tanks cost 12 points? Anyway, I'm pretty sure that was the version of the T-55 everyone was hoping for.

>>51420533
Not just off road, but in the forest.

>>51420548
The point resolution is 8 bit.

File: RedDawnPistolA.jpg (504KB, 1280x696px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 1280x696px

>>51420733
Yeah, I was generalizing off-road terrain. It's still retardedly poor thought and design tho.

In other news, maybe if I paint my soviets like they're all those near-misses Red Dawn features, it'll take the edge off how bad the mook army is.

>>51420445
if it wasn't for the AT being horrible I'd say that the t-55 was way too fucking strongit could run up, Slav squat somewhere with it's vet hit score and laugh and at 1/2 the price of the chieftain.
those stabbers make it a bit scarier too.
won't ever survive a hit ANY nato main gun but you can spam this shit

>>51420917
Yeah, 10 tanks hit on 4+ sounds horrific to stop. They can just dash up, soak 50% casualties, and side shot everything which is game over.

>>51420848
I was going to pain them all red to do that.
RA helps calm the nerves when i see a Scottish airlanding division

File: Stop+making+me+question+my+prejudices+_032defd9ad03e88386aa08f643f72f22.jpg (7KB, 147x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 147x200px

>>51420976
That'd be awesome, anon. Granted, it's a picture for ants, but I liked the look of pic-related for some red alert guys.

>>51420314
Yeah, some times the dice just let you down.

It's disappointing, but it can happen.

Also, I love the look of that table.

Although I think the trains might have some trouble with that low bridge.

File: SlavabooV.jpg (729KB, 1000x1469px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 1000x1469px

>>51420445

"Imma T55"

"Igonna roll up and fucup yoa shit! Uurah!"


>positive thumbs up

>>51420445

I thought the missile T-55s and T-62s were upgraded with was the Bastion?

File: hqdefault.jpg (17KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x360px

>>51420445
Genuinely now an appealing option opposed to being vomit inducing trash

>>51424008
The Russian anti-ship missile?

>>51424993
>>51424008
>>51420445
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M117_Bastion

File: 1429839322369.gif (1MB, 296x142px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 296x142px

>>51424993

No the 9M117(9K116-1?) Bastion. Actually upon closer inspection they had a 1K13 BOM guidance unit that could be used with the Stabber or the Bastion.
Neat.

I assume from you comment there's a Bastion ASM now too?

>>51425069
Before I became a full autist I never noticed that those are actually pretty good shots; direct hit on the flat hull behind the roadwheels and a near miss on the turret ring.

File: 1458402974889.jpg (136KB, 869x362px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 869x362px

>>51420445
Anon, try to rebalance the cost, atm there's aboslutely 0 reasons to pick T-55AM2B over T-72M
I think 25-30 for 10 tanks should be a good cost

>>51425155

That hit on the hull side probably penetrated, I can't think of any modern MBT with decent protection there - it's all on the hull front and turret now.

File: 1414058629242.jpg (28KB, 400x384px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 400x384px

>>51415815
>open fire starter set
>11 tanks, 2 guns and 27 infantry bases
>el alamein starter set
>4 tanks
what the fuck happened???

>>51425477
*5 tanks but my point remains

>>51425239
Hit on 4+. His T-55s are perhaps even undercosted.

>>51425502
Oh i missed that

>>51425477
>>51425491

Battlefront is switching starter set philosophy to what has worked well in TY. Not sure why the El Alamein box set even exist. The DAK and Desert Rats boxes are the ones you want for a starter set.

Though no, there will never be another box set that is as good as a deal as Open Fire.

>>51425477
>>51425526
I figure it's a couple of these things.
1. people who play LW > MW
2. people who play Germans and Americans > brit players
3. brit who play heavy tank/ calvary tank regiments?
it's a really small niche and while i don't think battlefront is a collection of business geniuses i assume they understood the marginal utility of their box set is slight and thus producing a large block of them and keeping it cheap is likely going to keep it useful to people starting and doesn't really keep anyone locked to any specific army emotionally.
while you can have the other box sets for the DAK and Desert Rats boxes to help those who really do want to get into the DR or DAK or to build of the boxset.
That being said i don't know why the grand total is 6/5 brit combat platoons are 3 a piece and a light cav needs min 8 crusaders and a heavy one needs 8 grants/shermans.

>>51425526
El Alamein is there as a cheap entry point that tries to not scare off the customer with a huge box of minis.

Which I can tell you is a legitimate thing from helping out at the FLGS.

>>51425590
What are you entering? Sure you get a mini rulebook, but when you finish the kit you are nowhere close to having a playable army. I think they should throw in TANKS cards with this set if they want it to sell.

I know it's tough to get people to jump the shark and buy into a game that needs so many models, but at the same time, I don't think a kit with a sprinkle of models is going to really be pulling people into a serious commitment. Maybe the hobby crowd might give it a bit to build the kits, but it's a starter set that doesn't lead anywhere.

>>51425668
would you really want them to make a africa only army box?
seriously crusader 2s and grants don't really have a lot of use outside of it
british mech tends to be ehhh
and as much as i'd like a valentine squadron start set from BF i don't think they are ready for that

>>51425698
No, I think they should stick to the nation specific boxes. I am honestly just questioning what use the El Al box is besides for in store demos or hobbyists that want a few North Africa tanks to paint. Maybe it will just be really cheap?

>>51425756
Consider this: Maybe it's the cheapest way to get a mini rulebook as of now?

>>51425756
that's what i figure is the case.
I'm going to pick up a copy when it comes out myself along with perhaps the DRs because as much as i hate grants i don't think crusaders will do so well without them.
>>51425772
almost guarantee (when accounting for the prince +models)

File: IMG_0137.jpg (95KB, 920x619px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 920x619px

>>51425772
Fair enough. I'll probably buy a hardback but the mini rulebooks are nice to carry around and the new binding doesn't explode immediately upon opening.

>>51425772
Assuming you don't already have a large V3 rulebook, of course.

File: IMG_0138.jpg (59KB, 490x374px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 490x374px

>>51426271
Or mini rulebook apparantly.

>>51422725
Probably the biggest drawback to the PAH flight. Get in a good roll and they've made back their point cost in one swing. Get in a bad roll and they don't do shit and are eating shilka rounds for the next turn. The biggest drawback to NATO choppers is that repositioning costs you a turn of firing. Found out you still have to move. Once you lose gone to ground you are super vulnerable.

>low bridge

>>51426271
That gets you the early/late rulebook that doesn't talk about unit cards etc and is designed to be compatible with the current briefings for Early/Late stuff.
Plus a booklet with the changes to special rules etc.

The mini-rulebook in El Alamein is the Mid-War one.

I'm assuming the box is gonna be pretty damn cheap to provide that easy step-in point where you just have a few tanks battling, Tank Aces style.
It's a decently entertaining and cheap, simple way to get the basics down, after which you can then expand to either an army deal or just a couple of boxes of minis.
It makes more sense than you seem to think.

>>51426777
It's a cheap and easy buy-in, but it's not a representation of the full game experience.

A starter set, even a small one, should give you at least some feel for the full game.

X-wing is a good example, the starter set is small, but it uses the full rules and gives you a feel for how the game will play at full points values.

>>51415815
why are there markers for foxholes/leader/anti-air?

File: dfgfdg.png (25KB, 100x100px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 100x100px

I love Ritterkrieg's work, but man are his men scary when observed close in. Can really see the PTSD roiling beneath their flesh.

>>51428186
>foxholes
the new dug in
>leader
because of mission tactics and the new shooting rules, everyone will experience cases of the title platoon leader jumping around a lot.
>anti-air
firing aa will prevent that unit from firing the same weapon the turn after. That'll need a token.

>>51428232
Nah, that's just a "WTF have you done with V4 Battlefront?" look.

File: IMG_0140.jpg (31KB, 600x300px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x300px

>>51428232
Tried to shortcut painting some faces on my grenadiers. What do you think?

>but seriously I need to change my method because brown with a highlight isn't getting the job done on these plastic faces.

File: Gregory.jpg (23KB, 274x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 274x300px

>>51428386
It's a desire for death.
The two are twins you know

Just bought a West German army. Gonna be doing some East Germans vs Best Germans. I'll let you guys know how it plays out.

>>51429275
>wessis
>best germans

File: i only kill communists.jpg (172KB, 960x925px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 960x925px

>>51429513
east germans aren't even people

I want to play Japan. What should I look for?

>>51431261
Your best bet is to buy the army book Banzai.

This covers the fighting against the US Marines in the Pacific, and has points values for that.

It also lists points values for cross-compatibility with European armies from 1944 & '45.

God I'm dreading V4. I get that V3 was fatally compromised, but they drew all the wrong conclusions. I've been playing FoW since 2003 and this is the first time I've really been shitting on the proposed new rules.

>>51425477
Part of it is that BF doesn't seem to like plastic infantry anymore. And it's pretty unusual across the industry to stick metal models in starter boxes.

>>51431524
What was wrong with V3?

>>51431946
Not *that* much: artillery a bit too good against tanks, particularly the 5/2+ stuff. Too many special rules, particularly for late Late War US which can stack an ungodly number. etc.

By and large it works, but there could have been some adjustments for a proper V4 which would have made a much better game. Instead it sounds like we got Flames of Sigmar.

>>51432219
It more like we got Flames of Yankee, a mix of Flames of War and Team Yankee.

And personally, I actually kinda prefer Team Yankee.

>>51431261
Two books available to you; Banzai for LW, or Rising Sun for EW.

>>51432219
They're mostly making it play like TY, which isn't a terrible thing I suppose. Some things seem a bit weird, but it's nowhere near the derp levels of AoS.

I HAVE THE V4 MW BOOK
WILL UPDATE IF PERMITTED TO POST

>>51432469
You'd better not be joking Anon...

>>51432295
>>51432429

TY does not have stupid shit like "re-roll saves when under repeat bombardment" - For everyone. For free. Mortars much better for no points increases in EW and LW, etc.

There is a ton of stuff that is going to look extremely good/bad for the points in EW and LW thanks to no re-pointing andmassive rules changes. While the new MW lists should work with the new rules, I'm not convinced EW and LW will work nearly as well.

>>51432469
The overworked special rule is for combined commander/loaders and gives +1 to hit when moving. A version of the Crusader has it. The 6pdr is also only at9.

>>51432568
Lots of stat changes.

>>51432615
Stormtrooper is two movement orders in a row. Most special rules are just stat alterations. Only German and Brit rules included.

>>51432699
>Stormtrooper is two movement orders in a row.

V4 has orders like in TY?

>>51432699
>Stormtrooper is two movement orders in a row

What?!?...so,move 4" then another 4" potentially?

>>51432568
>The 6pdr is also only at9.

Is the Sherman's pathetic 75mm still AT10?

>>51432429
Problem is that some stuff that makes sense for modern warfare doesn't make sense for WWII. And a lot of that is being dragged over.

>>51432568
>Need 3 men in turret or you're suddenly as bad as only one man in turret
>AT 9 6pdr
Well there goes my last hope for V4.

>>51433187
Not going to say more.

>>51433255
>>51432568
[Doubt]

>>51432950
Except looking at the range finder tool infantry move 8" a turn. So Germans will move 16" every turn?

>>51434489
This one actually makes sense, if they do this everything moves in 4" increments.

File: IMG_0082.png (97KB, 500x562px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 500x562px

>>51434487
This is very good game comrade. Trust me I am high ranking NKVD officer. IS-2 is going to be best tank. Named after Comrade Stalin! Very stronk!

>>51432950

what?

either scan or close-photo pages or GTFO....

we want action....
or clarity.

>>51435995
Stormtrooper is two movement ORDERS. As in the ones in Team Yankee. I don't think there are any differences.

New to Flames, still building my armies.

Currently working on German halftracks, what paint do I need? I already have the yellow (Dunklegelb?) which I've painted my Stugs, and soon my PzIVs, but I know the inside of the halftracks is generally painted a creamy white color. Which one is generally considered the best?

>>51436358
German camo beige might be what you're after.

File: IMG_0001.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>51436358
You may also want some reflective green if you wanted to put any camo on. I did a really quick technique with a foam brush to mimic a speckled camo. Just dab any excess off the lightly dab the foam over the body. The lighter you dab the smaller the specks.

So I'm at cancon atm and the owner of BF is going to do a QA. Any questions you want asked, sing out.

>>51437595
Now that Volksarmee is out there's nothing I really need to know. Ask about the T-64 maybe?

>>51436296
To someone who doesn't play TY, can you explain what that means?

>>51433187
It's statted appropriately is comparison to other atgs.

>>51437788

Not all AT guns are created equal though, some are in fact better than others.

>>51437595
The T-80.

>>51437670
Orders are special things you can do with your unit if you pass a die roll.

Stormtrooper would probably be best covered by either the "Follow Me" order or the "Shoot and Scoot" order from Team Yankee depending on if you just wanted some extra movement, or if you wanted to stay still to shoot and then move away afterwards.

>>51438018
Both WWII and cold war versions, please.

>>51438075
Ah, thanks.

File: 1459267776039.png (64KB, 264x221px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 264x221px

>>51420445

>>51437875
Yeah, hence the different stats. Like I said, the Sherman's 75 is represented well.
>inb4 muh doctrine

How's this list?
West German Panzerkompanie:
HQ Leopard 2 (11)
3x Leopard 2 (33)
3x MG3, 2x Milan, 3x Marder (7)
2x Gepard (5)
2x Redeye (2)
2x Luchs (1)
3x M109G (7)
1x M113 OP (1)
Marder Panzergrenadierkompanie:
HQ G3 and Marder (1)
3x MG3, 2x Milan, 3x Marder (7)
3x MG3, 2x Milan, 3x Marder (7)
2x Gepard (5)
2x Redeye (2)
2x Luchs (1)
3x Jaguar 1 (6)
2x Tornado (4)

14 platoons, 100 points. Whaddya think?

Alright, so many things were said.

To sumarise:
>most of our customer base are at best minutes from going into the light, and retailers hate the sku levels, and new players are spooked by the rulea, and complexity of the list structures.
Also
>death to snowflake lists
It's TY all the way, as far as list composition is concerned, with a very broad high level formation structure. There was a slot for allied support, an extra other German or Brit formation core platoon, and a "wild card" slot. Warriors and special stuff might be released in the wildcard slot. Diana's were explicitly mentioned. Also, Italians by the end of the year, an osprey book for Great War by the end of next. T-64s have better missiles and a point more front armour. Bradleys, Warriors, BMP 3s with next years TY composite rulebook. Red Lightning and Stripes will effectively replace the lists in the core TY book

More than half of the national special rules are still there. Orders exist like TY, Germans can execute 2, Yank TDs can execute 2 and get a bonus to shhot and scoot. Tally Ho gives a bonus to tactical movement but a penalty to tactics rolls. Germans get better last stand rolls, Bulldog and Deadly reduce tns for counterassault and assault respectively.

No sign or indicted intention of SS, FJ, or March Konpanies, and no colonials. All SKU snowflakes will be retained for special order. Eastern Front next year, Russian future apparent too undecided for casual spoilers. HnC still as it was, but TNs greater than 6 are hittable. Artillery now ranges in by skill, but hits by target, modified by visibility. 25 pounders now 3/4+ bombardment, little mortars 5+ fp for bombardment. Infantry now speed 8, truscott trott modifies. Guns save on 4+, man packed gun teams on 3+. Transport teams launched into sun, stuff like 88s just have no tactical move.

T-80s maybe next year.

Also, the Maus will feature in the Berlin compilation.

>>51439918
>No sign or indicted intention of SS, FJ, or March Konpanies, and no colonials

Concern.

>T-80s maybe next year.
Wait what the fuck, Red Thunder is out this year innit?

>Maus
Oh. Well.

>>51439969
>Red Thunder
Yes, and t64s will be added. It seemed like more of a compilation book than a major push. Lessons learned and all that. Next year iirc was when the unified modern period would be completed.
>concern
Like I said. Death to snowflake lists.
He explicitly said that the command slot might well be used for that sort of thing, though, just as it presently modifies TY statlines.
Interestingly, the To Hit numbers have an extra label. Cautious or aggressive, for 4 and 3+ respectively.

>>51439918
> no sign of SS, FJ, March Kompanies, and no Colonials

I really hope this doesn't end up happening to late war - unique lists are a nice element in the game bringing a genuine degree of flavour to some armies.

>>51439930
> Maus

Why do Battlefront have to indulge fantasists with a non-vehicle that may or may not seen combat once at one point near a factory where it was likely used as an unmoving artillery piece?

>>51439918
So... death to snowflakes, here, have a maus?

>>51440531
My thoughts exactly....we have top people working on this. Top people I tell you!

>>51440436
He said that they loved the richness of ew and lw, but the bloat was a major problem. He said that changing the points of lw and ew would result in some sort of cyxlopian ur~spreadsheet that would decour worlds. Not worth it, and time better spent on periods that aren't effecfively finished. When pressed on speecifix major operations like crete, he conceded that there might be some exceptions, but that the primary goal was to have one big formation for each nation. One with lots of battalion options like TY, but ultimayltely a far more constrained and manageable situation.

>>51440531
A last hurruh of the old paradigm.

>>51440436
He didn't say you could drive it. For all i know, it could be a audie murphy style objective replacement or 'turret'.

>>51439454
It's hard to build a bad list for Team Yankee. Though if I am counting correctly you are actually at 11 platoons. Redeye teams are attachments and deploy along with the Gepards (similar to infantry and apcs you don't have to deploy them in the same place). Your OP counts as an independent team for deployment.

You may want to combine your Gepards and Redeye teams into one group of 4. Then you will have an even number of platoons. They can be on opposite ends of the board, and a well positioned Redeye group can cover the entire board with aa. I usually keep my Gepards close to the Leo 2s. I personally prefer the LARS with mines to the M-109G, but their are pros and cons to both.

>>51437788
>>51437875
>>51438696
I think the point is the 6pdr was a better AT gun than the M3, not a worse one, at least in the arena of penetration.

>>51440771
>One with lots of battalion options like TY, but ultimayltely a far more constrained and manageable situation.

I hope they do something along the lines of what they did with Leopard and Panzertruppen. The two books model two different Panzer Divisions and thus have different formation and divisional support options that somewhat constrain the lists. We need multiple division "trees" per theatre to:

1) Effectively model the structure and equipment of different fighting units.

2) Prevent cheese lists from shitting up the meta. Think about the massive Matilda II LW spam that the Soviets are able to use. With freedom to pick formations, I hope Battlefront put in enough hard limits to prevent shit like that from happening. A Team Yankee example would be "Kampfgruppe Gepard", a list that uses Panzertruppen to field 18 Gepards with enough Milan, Leo 1, and Jaguar support to cover its weakness against tanks. Realistically speaking though, there would not be 18 Gepards committed to the same battallion level engagement.

I like the flexibility of the Team Yankee system, but I also think list building is a lot of fun for Flames do to all the different lists with pros and cons.

>>51439918
>Transport teams launched into sun, stuff like 88s just have no tactical move.
The first part has me concerned, the second part seems good.

Presumably they mean lorries and horses, and not things like hanomags and M3s?

>>51441025
I imagine they are just trying to get rid of models that don't stay on the board. I imagine the M3 will be able to fire its 50 cal even when everyone is disembarked much like the Hanomag.

>>51440771
Okay but what about platoons with SS, FL, etc, are they just going to become generic infantry modes for list so and so or what? I'm fine with formations for each nations but I'd like some individuality.

Bloat's an issue - but going to the other end of the spectrum in destruction of simplification, resulted in severe messes in other games, such as the 4th Edition Chaos Space Marine codex.

I'm hoping this change doesn't badly impact Late-War too much. It'll irritate me a lot if Mid-War loses genuinely historical options in favour of a poorly, over simplified system.

File: 1485582723240.jpg (38KB, 500x353px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x353px

>V4 is coming, and you know its coming without snowflake lists

What does the Breakthrough Gun rule do?

>>51441516
Christ, sometimes you really forget so many of these guys were just kids.

File: 00beria1.jpg (22KB, 300x416px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x416px

>>51441516
Another solid image for the 'Wehrmacht apologia" folder.

>>51441586
In V3 infantry do not get an infantry save when hit by a breakthrough gun or a bunker buster. Infantry dug in or in other bulletproof cover will still force a firepower check (generally 2+). Furthermore bunker busters hit every team in a building if they hit one team in the building, though if they move, they cannot fire at vehicles that moved the previous turn.

In V4 it seems breakthrough gun will be replaced by the brutal rule. A brutal gun forces infantry to reroll infantry saves when they are hit.

>>51441910
DERP. Sorry. Messed up the bunker buster bit.

>Furthermore bunker busters hit every team in a ROOM if they hit one team in a ROOM OF A BUILDING.

>>51441910

So, can you kill everyone in a bunker with the breakthrough gun, or do you have to use the bunker buster?

>>51441997
You have to use the bunker buster. If you hit one team in a bunker with a bunker buster (assuming it's just one room) every team inside dies (1+ firepower).

The breakthrough gun would just be able to hit one (or possibly 2 if it has RoF 2) teams and go straight to a 2+ firepower.

File: CBT22.jpg (771KB, 916x962px) Image search: [Google]

771KB, 916x962px

Panzergrenadier vs US Armored Infantryman 1944 (Osprey Combat 22)

During World War II, the two pre-eminent mechanized infantry forces of the conflict, the German Panzergrenadier arm and the US Army's armoured infantrymen, clashed in France and Belgium after the Normandy landings. These engagements went on to profoundly influence the use of mechanized infantry in the post-war world. Drawing upon a variety of sources, this book focuses on three key encounters between July and December 1944 including during Operation Cobra and the Battle of the Bulge, and examines the origins, equipment, doctrine and combat record of both forces. With specially commissioned full-colour artwork and maps, this study sheds light on the evolving nature of mechanized warfare at the height of World War II.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/j17j6lcdzk5i3nx/Osprey+-+CBT+022+-+Panzergrenadier+vs+US+Armored+Infantryman+1944.pdf

>>51442148
Thanks! Looks very interesting, will have a read later.

>>51441910
>Infantry dug in or in other bulletproof cover will still force a firepower check (generally 2+).
Actually it's always 2+, breakthrough only ever goes to guns over 100mm calibre, and FP 2+ is 100m+ guns. Same for bunker busters and 1+ FP.

So, I've bought a set of American Mechanized Infantry, and it seems that one of the Command teams is missing a base. What are my best options?

>>51442034
I really hope there's some other recourse to infantry in buildings, then, because TY's a nightmare if you have infantry in buildings without any of your own.

>>51442794
Hell, honestly, 90% of the time even if you do have infantry it's a nightmare, given NATO platoon size.

>>51442809
Agreed. Especially if your opponent dice are hot for infantry saves. I was shooting the hell out of dug in Soviet infantry with 4 Leo 1's and 4 Luchs for multiple turns and didn't kill a single stand.

Next time I am just going to roll up the West German secret weapon.

>pic related
>Weapon Codename: "Fuck Everything"

File: IMG_0143.jpg (55KB, 736x491px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 736x491px

>>51442869

>>51439918
No FJ? The fuck? BF, what the fuck?!

>>51442913
I doubt they're dropping them entirely.

FJ and SS are hardly what I would call snowflakes. They're separate parts of the German military, but hardly snowflakes.

We're not talking about KG Von Swoboda or something like that, which is certainly far off the standard army list.

I fully expect FJ and SS to still be there, as well as paratroopers for the other nations as well.

>>51442913
>>51443802
because they're entirely separate they'll probably have their own template.

What I assume they're removing is that there are like 5 LW FJ lists with different orgs.

>>51440901
Fair point, maybe this?
Leopard 2 Panzerkompanie:
HQ Leopard 2 (11)
3x Leopard 2 (33)
3x MG3, 2x Milan, 3x Marder (7)
4x Gepard (10)
4x Redeye (4)
2x Luchs (1)
2x Tornado (4)
Marder Panzergrenadierkompanie:
HQ G3 and Marder (1)
3x MG3, 2x Milan, 3x Marder (7)
3x MG3, 2x Milan, 3x Marder (7)
3x Jaguar 1 (6)
3x M109G (7)
2x Luchs (1)
M113 OP (1)

10 platoons, 100 points

>>51443830
I'd imagine this is the case.

Dropping FJ and SS entirely makes no sense.

>>51445090
Looks solid to me. My only word of advice is to use Gepards to dig out infantry. Start with the AT assets then you can charge in the Leo 2s to force them off the objective.

>>51431397
Which lists are the most fun? I like the idea of lots of infantry. I am totally new to this game.

>>51439918
>HnC still as it was, but TNs greater than 6 are hittable.
So... End result is 7s or 8s become damned near nothing, instead of auto-fail. Still trash. In any game where you can hit with 7s or 8s, you still generall don't.

>>51446559
In Banzai or the game generally? There's only really one infantry list in Banzai (and one Fortified) so you should just take that one.

Japanese infantry are great because they will 100% always get in assault and you can add human bullet teams pre-game to deal with tanks proportionately. You also have the option of night attacking, so feel free to just fucking run at someone and nuke their tanks. Japanese vs heavy tank lists is just unfair.

>>51446840
I meant with Banzai or Rising sun. In general I am curious at what makes a list good or bad though. That playstyle sounds like what I'd like though.

>>51446840
>Japanese infantry are great because they will 100% always get in assault
I wish that was true, but the second round of defensive fire if you Banzai after the first failed charge can very much shove you back a second time.

>>51447513
Yeah, but this relies on them getting two lots of 6 hits on veterans, possibly at night. I can maybe see trouble if you're launching assaults at big, well-placed groups across open ground without pinning anything but what the hell are you doing doing that? Japanese infantry are very forgiving assaulting other infantry (and human bullets always go in, so against tanks it's literally certain).

>>51447746
Three attached HMG teams on a platoon defending a building. 22 shots in defensive fire (With the rest of the platoon, naturally). Quite possible to pin even concealed vets with that much weight of fire.

>>51447850
To clarify: series of buildings lining a street, and assaulting straight across was the only way I could get to the objective in time (no time to reposition around the flank and take less shots.)

>>51441220
Like i said, if they're anywhere they'll as likely as not be a command or wildcard unit. A million minor variations was sometging to avoid. And in later books, who knows? But reich divided is explicitly no longer a rule.

If you want to run a specific army, then just do it. The foemations are ty like, so they're almost all encompassing beyond the core battalion.
>>51441025
Exactly. And i quote "half the time the trucks never even left the draw". Halftracksand the like are similar, although i didnt think to check for mounted assault changes.
>>51441023
Thats exactly whay they have planned. There were half a dozen core formations for Brits and Germans.
>>51442794
Arty. Remember even crappy mortars are 5+ bombard, and all arty, mortars included, have reroll saves on AGR. Skill matters more in surviving though, so veterans will weather arty better
consistently.

>>51447850
Yeah, fair, that'll be an issue (but no pinning?), but if that's rough for Japan nobody else is getting that one.

>>51448960
That's with pinning, damned germans. 6 MG teams, 3 HMGs, and an SMG command. Less than that was in LoS, but their half-tracks made up for that.

>>51449009
Christ, that's rough. Guess the only option there is soften them up with cannons and prioritise gun teams.

>>51448274
>Halftracksand the like are similar
In my experience half-tracks are much more usable since they don't get everyone inside immediately killed if something shoots at them and they can weather some small arms fire to get where they're going. Likewise, having some armoured MGs or .50 cal passenger MGs is great fire support.

>>51449190
Yeah, this. There's a reason softskins are 5pts for a platoon, while armored transports start at 5 per transport.

File: 1yRDOFX.gif (2MB, 400x302px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x302px

>>51441025
I'm not fond of them axing the vehicles just because, given that's how you're moving a lot of weapons around, *if* you want to move them. Naturally, motorized rifle units should always be dismounted from their trucks on the battlefield, unless you're doing an ambush sort of scenario or something.

I have to kek at them axing snowflakes, while giving the wehraboos the maus. Personally I'd say, if they're going to put that in, why not the SU-100Y? Heh.

File: What the fuck.png (66KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1000x1000px

>China will never feature in team yankee
>France won't show up for a long ass time
>Poland not even on the horizon
>No superior Czechnology released yet
>No Nork and Sork models

Fucking kill me.

File: 1442675892640.gif (1015KB, 400x240px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 400x240px

>>51450153
You will take your wessi and brit yank, and you will enjoy it!

>>51450153
In all fairness, the USSR and US each deserve their own book.

As long as afterwards they look to do a more balanced Warsaw Pact roster to go with their ANZAC/Canada pet-factions

File: 1454271379391.png (140KB, 1734x910px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1734x910px

>>51450153
There is always Wargame Red Dragon

>>51450215

NO! You... you can't make me.

>>51450303

>In all fairness, the USSR and US each deserve their own book.

That they do. Also fuck canada. India is where it's at.

>>51450304

What you think I'm playing right now anon?

>>51450585
What's you current deck?

>>51450585
I don't really think the India v Pakistan thing really belongs thematically - neither does the jew v arab thing.

In my opinion the focus should be Europe first, East Asia second.

>>51450651

Currently running red dragon tank spam because fuck it 10v10's don't gotta try hard.

>>51450682
the good old 10vs10 clusterfuck

>>51450670

>India v Pakistan thing really belongs thematically

Nor do I anon. I just like india as a former british colony more than canada.

Plus I don't even wanna see the east touched personally until the european theater is covered.

File: image.jpg (122KB, 845x758px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 845x758px

>>51450153
>>51450585
Remove rice

>>51450710
>Margaret Tacher simulator/10

>>51450705
Yeah, I'll be mad if they throw china in before poland or the dutch or something, even if we get a belgian version of panzertruppen.

>>51450750
I am sure they'll cover the European conflict in full before going East. It's sad though, because I want Best Korea and China NOW. Ah well, I think I am going to make some stats for an Iraqi tank unit for shits and giggles. Need motivation to build WARPAC armor.

Also, can anyone point me to a link to 1/144 aircraft bombs or a 3D printable model? I bought some academy Tornados, and despite the box art showing some bomb heavy tornados, they only come with missiles. Bonus points if I can buy or print an Mehrzweckwaffe 1 cluster munitions dispenser.

File: 1454179997608.png (707KB, 1162x850px) Image search: [Google]

707KB, 1162x850px

>>51450215
How about no

>>51440436
>to indulge fantasists

describe team yankee in a nutshell.

>>51441516
saved.

>>51442781
WWII?

well, they do have spares blisters...

call customer service?

>>51450304

>Falschirmjager

i'm triggered.

So, I just bought the Atlantik Wall book, not having anything else to really go off of.

The army I currently have is a German armored rifle company (So three platoons with halftracks), a unit of Stugs, a unit of Panzer IVs, and two Pak 40s.

The issue is, in the Atlantik Wall book, every Armored Infantry company I find is composed of all MGs. My models are all built as Rifle/MG units.

What are my options?

>>51452496
Literally no one will care that they're built as Rifle/MGs mate. They're infantry teams in the right uniforms on the right base. That's pretty much the only criteria. So field them as MG teams.

>>51452603
Awesome, thanks mate.

>>51449190
My bad, i meant to say that they were similar to existing rules.

>>51450143
Reread the post. The maus is for LW, where the usual circus still rules. MW is the future.

>>51453034
One day LW is going to be part of that future, as such, making crap that's going to be phased out in the near(ish) future is kinda retarded, business wise. (Not that BF makes good choices ever)

>>51452496
Notionally, the type of team a given infantry stand is is pretty abstract. It's based around the number of mgs per man/battalion. To an extent, MG teams have 2 mgs a squad, or 1ish per base. Rifle MGs have 1 per 2. An assault and fire element, so to speak.

Anyway, nobody cares about the small stuff. Medium regular dudes are just that. Provided they don't have flamethrowers or Panzerschrek, nobody'll know the difference.

>>51453087
Considering it's literally the Berlin compilation book, that would be ridiculous.

>>51453164
The maus is pretty ridiculous, you're right.

>>51453218
Yep, but far from out of the question with the old system. Particularly as an extra for the Berlin Desperate Measures compilation.

>>51450585
>India
v
>canada.
I'm orn between two homelands.
in all earnest I'd choosethe one with less shitting in the streets but gurkhas sounds fucking awesome.
And there is a Mulroney is a short hand for Independence

>>51454942
>Independence
incompetence
I am sorry, tired night

File: 1469042116749.png (321KB, 480x650px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 480x650px

>>51450153
> when every 'Communist' faction will just be "hordes lmao" with little to no differences except for increasingly expensive resin vehicles

>>51455148
Has it been explained recently that Volksarmee was originally a magazine release like Afgansty bumped to full book? With Version Four on the way and the Mid War revamp, they where saving their limited plastic production slots for stuff that was going into Mid War. However they realised "Wait fuck, we've got three NATO factions and only one Warsaw Pact faction, fuck shit fuck." and bumped up Best Germans.

>>51439918
>T-64s have better missiles and a point more front armour.

Is the missile AT 23? I am guessing they are leaving fire rate potato slow and it will be 3+ to hit. I guess with the way Volksarmee went we should feel thankful if it has a 3+ cross.

Has anyone pre-ordered PSC's plastic T-55s yet?

As much as we love to bitch about shitty spam tanks, I'm severely tempted to buy shitty spam tanks now that there is a cheap option in plastic.

>>51455329
This just bumps up the issue to being an ineptness at strategic planning, though. "We made volksarmee a spot-the-difference clone of the soviets and couldn't do plastic because we're incompetent" isn't better than "We did all that stuff because we're malicious". They're still in a situation that the backbone of the warsaw pact is going to be resin for the forseeable future, despite that being insane.

>>51455521
>T-64 with ERA making it 4+ cross
Oh god it's going to happen isn't it?

>>51457652
Surely not... but then again we didn't think turret brow armor would make the T-55 cross on a 4+.

>>51457639
You kidding me? It's not ineptness. Think of how much money they made with the West Germans and Brit releases. Volksarmee was just thrown together to try to throw a bone to WARPAC players. Sure they bungled the book and not planning a resin T-55 were a bit boneheaded, but the release order with the big 3 NATO teams out was calculated.

>>51458041
Getting the big four in first is maybe defensible. Getting three NATO releases in and then going "Oh, shit, was there another faction in this game? Man we just plumb forgot, guess we need to fuck up probably the second most important tank in this game!" is incompetent.

So if I play Brits in TY will I be seen as a powergaming cockbite, or is that only if I do Milan spam?

I really like their tanks, but I don't want to been as "that guy" for playing a specific army.

>>51458288
Having played against British infantry with my Soviets, I wouldn't say they're a power gamer's choice, but they are damn strong.

The Milan spam is where things start to get cheesy.

But yeah, Brits do seem to have the most "codex creep" to borrow a term from 40K.

>>51455148
>>51457639
th-thanks Phill

>>51458288
I say play what you want. I haven't had a chance to play yet, but there is a lot of things you can do with the British without being powergamey. The best part is that so much of their options are in plastic. Far more than the other factions.

Where it gets dicey is with the air mobile Milan spam. The Mechanized infantry is solid enough but basically making people buy the expensive helicopters to be able to spam insane amounts of Milans seems like bait to ship helicopters.

>>51458288
Their infantry is strong, but they can be countered by artillery.
That's presumably why they have chieftans rather than challenger 1s, because then they'd be too strong.

>>51458504
>>51458803
Figures that the thing attractive about TY is OP, so if I did them I'd look like a power gameing faggot. If only the hind was 1/144 and so not large mcfuckhuge, or we has US airborne...

>>51459231
They're powerful. I wouldn't call them power gaming faggot levels of overpowered, but they are strong.

The choice that seems like overpowered faggotry is the full Milan platoon. But I haven't played against it yet, so I can't fully comment.

The comparison I keep making is that the Brit mech infantry in TY is like US Armored Rifles in regular FoW. Strong and solid, and difficult to shift off of an objective.

>>51459125
Artillery really isn't that great of a counter for dug in NATO infantry, especially if you are soviet. Typically you are hitting on 5s and 6s if they are gone to ground and usually my opponent can't seem to fail an infantry save.

>>51459460
Even if you can pin them, what then? You're not going to shoot them off an objective with six shots at a GTG NATO unit, even if you're Brutal. You can assault them but you'll get a couple of swings on 5+ and maybe kill a stand, then they'll rally and wipe your front rank completely. If it's tanks you're even more buggered because you'll have less swings and carl gustavs are going to pop your BDD tanks like paper.

The brits feel like they showcase problems with infantry rules in TY in much the same way that soviet mech inf showed the problem with morale rules.

>>51459582
I can't really find a way to get rid of infantry besides gepard fire or massed fire from like half your army. You can try to pick off the AT assets then assault with a tank like the Abrams, Leopard 2, or T-72, but anything with just bazooka skirts is screwed.

File: 16asPS9.jpg (34KB, 700x370px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 700x370px

>>51455329
But man, best Germany's stats suck, that's the problem. The resin really isn't so big of a deal, (and would be less of one if they weren't so low skill zergling rush material). Besides, PSC's got our backs.

>>51458288
I won't blame you for one of the designer's cheese fetishes. Hell, I wouldn't blame you if you actually went full retard on T-55s, or gepards, or whatever. Do what you want, man.

>>51459740
>I can't really find a way to get rid of infantry besides gepard fire
I'm not sure even Gepards are that good at removing dug-in infantry, though they're looking at more like a kill a turn, which is something.

Honestly, NATO are generally decent in assault, you're probably going to kill a few guys at the very least. The soviets are just almost farcially bad at expelling enemy infantry from things. I've had at least half a dozen games where I've thrown in a half or full company of motostrelk at a dug-in platoon, gotten into assault, and then been driven back with 5+ stands missing having killed like one or two guys.

>>51459582
>he brits feel like they showcase problems with infantry rules in TY in much the same way that soviet mech inf showed the problem with morale rules.

Care to elaborate on both points for someone who doesn't play TY (but wants to do Volksarmee)?

>>51463295
Dug-in veteran infantry in a world without lifting GTG or flamethrowers/breakthrough are really hard to shift, which isn't too bad normally but the brits also bring shitloads of potent ATGMs and are really good in assault which makes them super obnoxious to deal with, especially as redfor as your usual tool for pinning hard to hit platoons (arty) is unreliable and the soviets are inexplicably shit in assaults and will often lose 2-3 times the stands of the other guys even under perfect conditions.

>>51463295

As for the Soviet motor rifle company and Morale, Infantry need to be down to 2 teams to be in "bad spirits". Soviet motor rifles companies can have as many as 22 teams. That means you need to kill 20 of them to force a morale test... oh yeah they also get 11 BMPs and with BMP-2s that's only 25 points.

They are easy to kill in the open, but a bitch to dig out.

>>51463861
Thank you. What about the morale issue?

And how well would a "pure" infantry force from Volksarmee do? I was thinking BTR60 infantry and airlanding with artillery and AA support and a platoon of tanks (numbers adjusted for points, obviously). Something different to the T-55 spam is the idea.

>>51464122
Ah, roger that. Thank you.

WWPD episode out fuck me.
>Detroit's Finest adds to DASH movement
>Duckbills is now a national special rule, not list, and gives 2+ bog
>use of stabilizers MANDATORY
>at this point I skip to the Soviet rules because I don't care anymore
>infiltration=spearhead but two inches closer
>each artillery battery is a separate unit now
>H&C now applies to MGs too
>if I did not mention a specific rule I don't care

I don't know if this is in the podcast but there's a mission in the rulebook that all of my friends agreed must never be played because we couldn't figure out how to break an army in 2.5 hours.

File: mfw v4.jpg (127KB, 736x1000px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 736x1000px

>>51465305

>Version 3 has too much special rules bloat!
>V4 makes little tweaks and twists to every special rule causing even more confusion.

File: 1350865860110.gif (1010KB, 233x226px) Image search: [Google]

1010KB, 233x226px

>>51465305
>H&C applies to MGs

why

>>51466505
I love the PSC gun teams. Really nice painting.

>>51465305
WWPD is full of shit. I saw the books. HnC is unchanged. It explicitly mentioned main guns.

>>51465305
I listened to most of it as well.

Germans
>Stormtrooper: All German units can now attempt a second, different movement order after succeeding at their first one.
>Tiger Ace: +1 bonus to Last Man Standing and Remount tests; the remount bonus stacks with protected ammo; Formation Commander tank team w/ Tiger Ace rerolls all failed to hit rolls with main gun
>Protected Ammo is now just a +1 bonus to remount checks (remount 4+ becomes remount 3+, etc)
>Begleiter tank escorts now add +1 to vehicles machine gun ROF when target is within 8"; reroll missed hits in assault; get defensive fire against infantry teams sneaking up against tank.
>Stuka zu Fuss: fires like heavy rockets (has to skill test to get full salvo markers or wait a turn, etc); fires large templates
>Reich Divided and Kampfgruppe are gone.

British
>Bagpipes: designate unit in company command that is not 1iC; all units w/in 6" of bagpiper require an extra hit in the shooting step/assault step to become pinned down

>>51458803
Sorry that real life British organisation doesn't fit your budget. Mech Soviet was stupid as well. Man, all those crappy bmps. BF jews strike again.

>>51465562
V4 for ew and lw. MW, using the new list design paradigm, is very special rules light, if slightly more textured than ty.

>>51466505
>>51466571
Yeah, that airbush lighting looks great.

>>51466736
WWPD retains the guy who thinks History is boring to do their FoW coverage. That says everything you need to know.

>>51466767
And the tigers get the german bonus to last stand checks. So snake eyes to remove tigers if they,re bailed.

>>51466767
British (cont'd)
>British Bulldog is just a +1 bonus to counter-attack now
>Mike Target: if you successfully range in one the first attempt, you can attempt to bring in a second battery/unit with your remaining range-in attempts; no -1 to this attempt.
>Night Attack: Can only night attack in missions where the defender has minefields; if so, "Night-fighting: Dawn" rules are in effect. Units from the CORE formation may move freely from the start of the game; units from support or secondary formations may not move beyond deployment zone until morning breaks.
>Tip & Run now gives a +1 bonus to shoot & scoot maneuver
>Tally Ho increases score needed to pass tactics test (whatever that is) by 1; tactical speed is now 12" for tank teams w/ this trait.
>Semi-indirect unchanged.

>>51466909
Tactics checks are for the movement special rules. So crusaders are great mobile fighters, but they're not great at high precision shuffling. They also have an aggressive to hit number.

>>51466736
In another recent episode, they were hung up on aircraft and if using the artillery templates for aircraft attacks somehow makes planes into artillery.

WWPD are a bunch of morons. They're spreading half-truths, confused misunderstandings of the rules, and blatant theory crafting as if it was Gospel Truth just because they have a podcast.

At least Panzerfunk openly admits they're just some shitheads from /tg/ who talk about Flames of War and Team Yankee.

>>51466851
That's Warren from Beasts of War that you're thinking of.

>>51466975
>shitheads

I prefer the term chucklefucks. Because we can openly chuckle about our fuck-ups.

Also, I openly admit I'm just some schmuck from New York.

>>51466975
Having said all that, i can confirm most of>>51466909
And
>>51466767
The american TD rules are a bit different as well. IIRC you can spearhead the tds, but the security section remains. TDs also get an improved sns roll. Some of the short 75mm German guns fire heat rounds as well, so no armour bonus at long range.

>>51466909
Soviets
>Commissar: allows a reroll of Last Unit Standing, Rally Tests, and Counter-Attack tests as long as the Commissar is w/in 6" of the unit leader. Still has to destroy a stand of infantry to work. This reroll can happen even after the formation commander reroll. Roll of 1 on this test destroys commissar team.
>Infiltration: Soviet units w/ Infiltration are spearhead units. Can get to up to 14" of an enemy rather than 16".
>Steel Wall: Each soviet battery in an artillery battalion operates as a separate artillery unit.
>Volley Fire: Soviet units w/ VF that did not move in the movement phase may reroll failed to-hit rolls when shooting main weapon and w/in 16".
>Shtraft companies can't dig in, ever, and can't benefit from foxholes; pass motivation tests on 2+.
>Cat-killer and Roll up the Guns are unchanged.
>Tankodesantniki: now add +1 to vehicles machine gun ROF when target is within 4"; reroll missed hits in assault; get defensive fire against infantry teams sneaking up against tank.

Italians and minor nations are not included.

>>51467188
Also, apparently the WWPD guys think that H&C applies to MGs because the language doesn't specifically say "main gun". Cannot confirm that because I don't have a copy of the book.

>>51467018
>>51466975
I prefer the term Wanker to either of those.

>>51466736
Do the books mention Romanians at all? Please god I'm dying here.

>>51467188
>>51466909
>>51466767
>Let's remove re-rolls, they make things to complex!
>Now lets leave re-rolls in and also add modifiers to rolls, this is totes simpler!
utter fucking garbage.

>>51467250
No mention of minor powers, just as there are no Italians presently in the German NA book. They're coming this year though. Hungarians and Finns were basically confirmed, and nobody asked about romanians. Can't imagine they'd be ommoted, though.

>>51467188
Mostly mixed on this myself, but I'm kinda happy that the bullshit "lol infiltration fail" is gone now.

>>51467285
You dense motherfucker. There's EW and LW. A massive amount of stuff already in place. They weren't going to radically change that. They got updated, and that's about it. MW is where the real rebild is happening.

>>51467318
And less teleporting tank companies in. That's nice.

>>51467238
Have I ever mentioned how hilarious I find it that you are literally calling someone a masturbator when you call them a wanker?

Granted, jerk originally had a similar meaning but it has since become just the generic and non-vulgar word for an unpleasant person.

Looking at how shitty BF makes the Soviets and Best Germoney in TY makes me wonder how they think anyone was remotely concerned about the Soviets rolling through the Fulda Gap.

i'm gonna save all these V4 spoilers...

y'know, i will give it a try.

a try, good sirs.

a try.

>>51467637
Play some games. You'll see how nasty they are in practise. Crappy is a very narrow and deeply flawed interpretation.

>>51466505
Really noice modulation m8

>>51467637
Spammy doesn't mean they are bad. All the scenarios I have played have been fairly even besides dice screwing me over. Use the additional missions off of the TY website to choose a scenario. It lets you have some flexibility with how you want to play your list.

>>51466975
>if using the artillery templates for aircraft attacks somehow makes planes into artillery

I remember them going full retard about this last episode. Eric is a fucking retard. Mitch is and mini michael chiklis are powergaming armchair general shits. Sean seems like the only likeable one out of the bunch, but it's not enough to save the podcast from being a wreck.

>>51466826
I'm interested to see what special rules stick for MW.

>>51470547
Mitch Reed @ WWPD is a fucking imbecile.

>>51470547
We know whats in MW, though. To an extent. Simply put, most of the time if there was the possibility of replacing something unique and exceptional with a modification to the TY style stat array, they did it. There's a lot less complexity, and a lot more sophistication.

>>51466956
>They also have an aggressive to hit number.
What does this mean?

>>51465305
>>51466767
>>51466909
>>51467188

USA:
> Automatic Rifles - no changes
>Detroit's Finest - adds 2 inches to dash movement
>Dismounted MG remains the same
> Duckbills - turn cross to 2+ but it's slow tank
> Hedgecuters reroll unsucsesfull rolls to cross hedge and bocage
>Jumbo lead the way - swap hits using mistaken target rule on 2+ (rather then 3+)
> Smooth ride - give cross 2+ to veichele
> Stabiliser now MANDATORY
>TD - Security section and TD are separate units, no ninja decloaking TD :)
>Seek & Destroy - TD may use shoot&Scoot order after another sucsessful order
>ToT - remains, works only on infantry and gun teams
>Truscot Trott - infantry cross country and road dash is +2 inches
>Under command - Leader of unit may act as spotting unit, just like company commander
- Rest is gone - Tank Telephones, Hit em with all you got, Column Security, Excellent Comunication

I'm not trusting any more 'Spoilers' from WWPD unless it's an actual photo of some rules.

>>51467637
I think they under-egg a lot of soviet stuff but remember that in reality the degree of outnumbering was going to be even higher than what's actually in game, given the soviets had both absolute numerical superiority and were also aiming for localised numerical superiority to make their ratio even greater; assuming the forces in TY are "forward edges", isolated groups, or something like that is probably accurate.

>>51471447
3+ to hit them. 4+ is "cautious".

>>51471592
Can confirm most of this. What I can't, I didn't look at closely. The TD rules are definitely real. No more eyes and ears, though. Recce teams aren't really a thing anymore.

>>51472889
> Recce teams aren't really a thing anymore.
Guess my Flames group's sticking with V3 then. 3 of the 6 of us are Armoured Car fetishists.

>>51471690
Why is every wargaming website literally cancer

>>51472852
>3+ to hit them. 4+ is "cautious".
So Ze Germans are going to be 3+ to hit for EW, half the eastern front, Wach Am Rhein, and so on, right?

>>51472889
>No more eyes and ears, though. Recce teams aren't really a thing anymore.
Christ, I was just saying how hard infantry get to dig up without those above. At least we'll still have flamethrowers in WW2, I guess.

Am I the only one that didn't think the Version 3 Recce rules to be that realistic? A regular trained infantry dude can probably spot an enemy better than a guy sitting in an armoured car, even though he is in the Aufklärung.

I look forward to Version 4 and getting into Mid-War again!

File: IMG_0151.jpg (132KB, 800x400px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 800x400px

>>51473340
>I look forward to Version 4 and getting into Mid-War again

V4 Optimist!! Get him!!


On a more serious not, Recce works fine in Team Yankee. While spearhead is more or less worthless in some missions, it is a game changer in others. Especially on maps with roads. They can still be used to threaten soft support assets, spot artillery, or deny enemy infantry and light vehicles certain parts of the board for maneuver.

>Signed, An Anon with 8 Luchs in his West German force.

>>51473258
>So Ze Germans are going to be 3+ to hit for EW, half the eastern front, Wach Am Rhein, and so on, right?
>Implying Germans hit on anything less than a 6+ base

>>51473570
Agreed, recce units now expanding your deployment zone can be a massive game-changer.

>>51473340
Recce realistic? No, but a necessary abstraction where you can dig-in remarkably quickly and killing GtG Vets is very difficult thanks to the spotting & shooting rolls combined into one.

>>51473570
Seconding this.

Expanded deployment zones and harassment of enemy light vehicles are both very good things.

>>51473570
Yeah, basically lost my game today from recce spearheads.

The other major lesson is you NEED those light armoured vehicles to knock out support assets. I used to think marders were kind of shit but having essentially disposable light tanks that can drive around shooting up anti-air, artillery and threatening objectives is fantastic. I really need to get the BMP-horde since I can see that being hell to deal with.

>>51479702
The only disadvantage to fielding lots of Luchs recon is that unlike Marders, losing a Luchs Zug counts as a lost platoon... which in a tournament situation costs as many points as losing a 33 point Leo 2 platoon or a 10 tank T-55 blob. Why won't they fix this?

>>51479857
It's literally the only downside to them and they're otherwise amazing? They're honestly WAY too cheap right now. For 2-3 points you can get basically all of no-man's land and sit on their objectives being a fucker turn 1, almost certainly needing 6s to hit and being resistant to most light weapon.

>>51479857
If BF want a "percentage of guys lost" rule I'd rather it be applied equally, rather than singling out stuff. Recce cars exploding sometimes is what everyone expects.

File: 20170131_091447-picsay.jpg (2MB, 3626x1930px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3626x1930px

Finished 3 US rifle platoons for Vietnam

>>51480768

I'd score TY as follows.

Both players get 1 point for showing up.

Both players get 1 point for reaching turn 5.

Players score 1 point for each platoon (or soviet company) they destroy.

Winning the mission is worth 10 points.

Winning the mission before turn 5 is worth 5 points (conceding or forfeiting the game doesn't count).

Draws are worth 0 points.

>>51476634

My experience is probably an outlier but if often run multiple recon units in my FoW armies purely to deny ambushes, threaten support units and force my opponent to defend rear objectives. I think I used eyes and ears maybe once every 3 games or so as a armored player in a infantry heavy meta.

And yes I won games etc etc...

I haven't missed it for much the same reason in TY.

>>51480029
I'll admit, fear of losing them makes you want to play more conservatively with them, which is probably a good thing to keep people from jumping on an objective with them first thing.

Unless you have wheat fields or hills, it's hard to get them in concealment. Trying to maneuver wheeled vehicles in the forest just leads to bogging and death.

>>51482415
Winning before turn 5 seems optimistic if your opponent has any infantry at all. Those little buggers are hard to dig out and even at 80 points many lists can bring enough stuff to really drag the fight out. Leopard 2s can potentially win fast, since they can carve paths right through enemy armor and resist integrated AT on the assault, but they can also die fast if you are unlucky.

>>51473258
>ze Germans.
No idea. LW and Ew conversions are very far off. Remember its coming unstuck from simple vague terms like veteran and trained.
>infantry
Not so much. Firepower increases across the board for arty, and everyone gets all guns repeat, and the mike target save rerolls. Medium guns aren't useless anymore in bombardments.

>>51473041
They'd still get spearhead and, iirc, cautious movement. It's a mixed bag. Anf their support arty is better. Expect tie counterattack and assault ratings to blow, though.

>>51481403
those look really good. Can't put my finger on it, but I really like them for some reason

>>51481403
The basing is pretty simplistic, though admittedly that prevents it from stealing attention from the figures. Which I must say, are looking pretty sharp.

Anyone have played tanks?
Looking forward to buy starter set but not sure about it

>>51473064
I feel like it's three fold.
1) There's always the face who doesn't know shit about games but wants to be a big internet personality(see Warren from BoW or Shawn from Blue Table Painting).

2) Tend to be heavily focused on one game so have no context for rules in the grand scheme of things. There's no "I think they could take a page from company B on this thing" because they only know about company A's product.

3) Pander super hard to powergamers. Seen too many sights where this was the biggest problem. Nothing about fun, off the wall armies and lists, but 50 different articles about each fucking list from each tourny.

Which is why I mostly hit up /tg/ because at least here I have you guys.

>>51485134
Also Money. Or at least stuff. Stuff from companies is sweet, this is true, but it corrupts you, and it throttles you. If you're taking stuff from someone while reviewing their product, you can't ever bad mouth them. And you know this, they know this. So you toe the party line "Volksarmee wasn't a huge let down" "Comets are Worth the same points as Panthers." "IS-2s are completely workable.
You see the same thing with video game Critics. The ones who buy their own damn games like Zero Punctuation can rip and tear. Like when the Nintendo 2DS came out, and most people said "Yeah it's cheaper and it's pretty good." And Ashens on Youtube who'd gone out and bought one, said "Nah mate it's a bit shite innit."

File: Canuk AC.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51485134
>Nothing about fun, off the wall armies and lists
This is the biggest tragedy. I'd love for the powergaming ones to turn their powergaming to making optimal oddball lists with few or no common units. More like this than "here's why patton was OP #5"

>>51485400
Yeah, which is why I'm sort of glad gaming companies don't aend me stuff for reviews. I buy my own stuff, so when I review it I can be honest. Was it worth the money? That's usually the biggest one.

Yeah free stuff is great, but I'd rather take the risk of that company saying "well fuck you, buddy" than lying to people who trust me. Honesty is one of my biggest things as a reviewer, and while free stuff wohld be nice on my poor wallet I'd rather spend $40 on a book and be able to speak freely about it than get it for free and feel indentured to a company.

>>51485428
Do you know how fee FoW BatReps are on YouTube that aren't just Germans vs. one of the big Allied powers? Where are the Finns, Hungarians, Romanians and Italians? Hell; where the fuck are the EW games with France and Poland?

File: soviet flavour.png (27KB, 1300x191px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1300x191px

>someone gives a complete breakdown on why the T-62 needs to have ROF 2, and AT 23-24, and FA18
>Phil's response: "not western tank design"

Classy af

>>51487050
Source that shit.

>>51487079
http://flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=126&aff=145&aft=576800&afv=topic

>>51487050

I assume you mean the T-64, because the T-62 wasn't any better protected than the T-54 that preceded it, had a retarded casing extractor that reduced the RoF, and had an amazing 115mm smooth bore that's probably only AT21 by TY standards.

>>51487544
Yeah, rip. I'm running on three hours of sleep. Either way, once again "muh western design".

>>51487669
To be fair he's right on the autoloader vs human loader topic: an autoloader can achieve a good sustained rate of fire but a human loader can reload much faster in shorter periods of time and this allows for a better burst reload.
An autoloader must always load the next shell wich gives a severe disadvantage when you need to switch target type as you could find yourself having an HE loaded and facing a tank.
Finally most autoloaders have a load angle where the gun must elevate at a certain angle to be loaded otherwise the autoloader doesn't work, this sometimes can fuck with the zeroing and the gunner must adjust after every shot to be sure of being still on target wasting more time and some precision if done in a rush.

>>51487857
If this is a autoloader vs dedicated loader thing, why doesn't the T55 have RoF2 then? :D

>>51487958
I don't know in fact i think too that the T-55 should have been much better than it is, must be part of the "soviet training" meme that Phil is pushing

>>51487857
Regardless, that's just one facet of the tank. Additionally, it still had swifter target acquisition and overall rof over the Leopard 2. But it's clear Phil's just going to short change everything because of his asiatic hordes thought process.

that obnoxious fucking "cheers" at the end of phils posts

am i the only one annoyed by his dismissive way of talking?

>>51488236
Yes.

Cheers,

>>51488236
What are you a fucking Communist? Eat shit you socialist parasite.
Cheers

>>51488236
hen and chicks 4lyf

cheers

It makes a post where you don't agree with somebody seem as if you know best and end the discussion on that note. A good trick.

Cheers,

>>51488236
>>51488342
>>51488433
>>51488580
>>51488592
Cheers (smile)

Amicalement,
Armand

>>51488622
ARgh! That is even worse, fucking Armand.

Cheers,

>>51485911
Ouchies has a few batreps with Italians, Hungarians, Romanians, etc featured.

>>51484694
Eh, it's $25 and you get 3 Tanks. Go ahead and give it a buy. I plan on keeping it around to play with normies. The game seems to work best with a lot of terrain and buildings where initiative actually matters. Otherwise it's just lining up and shooting.

>>51487958
The T-55 turret is pretty cramped. I don't know about the modernized version, but in the original version the ammunition that was accessible to use was just clasped onto the turret wall. It's kind of a pain in the ass to unfasten the ammo and load it in the cramped turret... that said it's bullshit that it has slow firing like a howitzer that fires 2 part ammo. It's pretty clear they needed the T-55AM to shit so we could have hordes and hordes of them. PSC thanks you Battlefront.

>>51488236
I thought it was just a kiwi thing

Cheers

File: 1464673094408.jpg (61KB, 640x411px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x411px

On a scale from 0 to FREEDOM how is this list?

M113 Mech Combat Team
1x Cic 1 pt
Full Mech Platoon + extra Dragon 7 pts
Full Mech Platoon + extra Dragon 7 pts
2x M901 ITV 3 pts
2x M901 ITV 3 pts
2x M901 ITV 3 pts
2x M901 ITV 3 pts

Support
6x M109 Field Artillery Battery + Laser Guided Projectiles 20 pts
4x A-10 Warthog 20 pts
1x M113 FIST 1 pt
4x M163 VADS 6 pts

9 Platoons, 74 pts

>>51483463
>Unless you have wheat fields or hills, it's hard to get them in concealment
This is the kind of thing where I wonder what everyone else's boards look like, because I've never played on a table where concealment was hard to get unless I had a 10-tank T-34 company or something.

>>51487857
>Finally most autoloaders have a load angle where the gun must elevate at a certain angle to be loaded otherwise the autoloader doesn't work, this sometimes can fuck with the zeroing and the gunner must adjust after every shot to be sure of being still on target wasting more time and some precision if done in a rush.
This is one of those things where I have trouble evaluating stuff people say on the internet because this was a thing on the very first autoloaders, that rapidly got ironed out. Also possibly confused with the fixed launch angle for missiles.

That said, I don't know how fast autoloaders worked in 1985. One thing manual loading does let you do is lap-load, but OTOH lap loading should be a safety hazard.

>>51489752
>this was a thing on the very first autoloaders
IIRC it was a thing on the T-64 always. I've not been around a T-72 where I noticed the gun elevate after firing, but those were all T-72Ms, so who knows for the A.

>>51489782
Also the T-80 had the same autoloader mechanism of the T-64
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/al-80.html

>>51489669
Yeah, generally cover is plentiful, but sometimes I find the objective is over by a group of woods or a building. Hard to get the Luchs in there to contest while still being in cover.

>>51489657
I'll rate that list a Big Mac and a Large fry. Didn't realize that you could copy paste ITV platoons like that until I saw your list. Chose night fighting and laugh maniacally as you form a firing line with 8 TOW launchers that are hit on 7+ if your enemy doesn't have thermals.

>>51489752
I think it was mainly the T-62, which was a complete hackjob of a T-55 with the 115mm gun crammed in. Then people just repeat quoting the worst cases of soviet designs as if it was the standard.

>>51489858
6.3sec reload time?! Surely any improvement on that speed from a human loader is marginal?

>>51489858
Huh. Apparently it IS the T-72 that elevates to reload. Never noticed that; if that's the case it probably happens pretty quick.

>>51490089
>http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/al-80.html
Cheers!

So I picked up Leopard ona whim at my FLAGS because.my brother is playing Volksarmee and clearly I need to be his opposite number.

I am discovering though that it's practically impossible to fit more than 4 Leo 2s into a list without being forced to seriously skimp on support options.

>>51491456
You can probably get 7 in a list depending on what else you take.

But yes, 11 points per tank kinda limits your numbers.

Although you do get possibly the best tank in the game.

>>51491616
>possibly
>doubting Wessi technology

>>51491616
Arguments could be made for the Abrams being a better buy at 8 points per tank.

>>51491671
I have both tanks, and in my humble opinion the Abrams is better, being able to bring 4 Abrams for the price of 3 Leopards. The Leopard 2 is great, having the ability to point and delete 2 tanks each per turn, the extra shots are a blessing against the unwashed Red hordes.

>>51491671
I would probably put my money on the Chieftan being the most cost effective tank in the game

>>51491716
>not the Gepard

>>51492524
I mean tank as in main battle tank or a tank that can easily deal both with infantry and other tanks

>>51491456
See you in Hell, wessi. :^)

>>51491456
Play more points!

Cheers.

>>51492807
This meme needs to stop, now.

Cheers.

>>51491716
Only if you consider tank v tank and if your meta lacks Soviet infantry and RPGs everywhere. Otherwise, Abrams and Leo 2 are much better. Chieftains need some help to mitigate their weaknesses.

>>51493171
Why though? Chieftans have Brutal and that helps a lot vs infantry.

>>51493187
Side armour is weak... RPG flank shots can destroy your platoons (shoot, Bail/kill, assault). Thus, you need some support to help deal with this, your own infantry is a good option.

>>51493396
Yeah, i mean, Brits usually use infantry to assault other infantry wich is a much better than riskying your expensive mbts

New thread?

Here you go

>>51494571

Cheers!