Flames of War: /fowtg/ AUTISM! edition

I think I've decided to do a German army.

File: 2012blog19.jpg (591KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 1280x853px

Did someone say autism?

Which formations do you expect for MW US, Italian, and Soviet?

I guess US will not much differ from current edition, US army in 3rd edtion is already not abundant at all.

>>51763545
Cool

>>51763545
Nice

File: 2012blog18.jpg (614KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 1280x853px

>>51763606
>>51763618

Ritterkrieg does it good.

>>51763524
>>51763545
> German soldiers traverse a partially frozen lake in Russia, 1942 using their Schutzengerflottenzeug III Ausführung A single man ice flotation devices.
> The allies would not develop an equivalent equipment until late 1944 with the introduction of the M3 Quick Use Amphibious Combat Kit, which used more reliable ducks to keep its operator afloat.

They do look pretty good though.

File: IMG_3200.jpg (159KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1600x1066px

>>51763703
Yeah, those wily Krauts.

>cut MW to less than bare bones because muh new players
>seem to intend to add a lot of those lists (and of course nations) back to the game
Consider:
>in the year 2020, brainlet wants to start FOW
>see MW
>see more lists than they have fingers AND toes and enter a catatonic state
>when they recover, the local community explains that if they had started back in 2017 they would have only had to deal with 6 lists and it would have been so much easier, cheers
How does dramatically cutting the amount of shit available help new players, if it's all going to be added back in? MW was already the smallest period. Anyone who couldn't read TWO FUCKING BOOKS was probably too dense to understand the concept of games anyway. I don't see how the end state of MW could be much different from what we had in V3, it was already as bare as it gets with the exception of two or three lists. Looking at the forum, it seems that Phil either plans his life and business no more than 48 hours in advance, they don't expect to last long enough to finish MW, or they're lying and almost all equipment in MW is just being deleted full stop.

>>51763740
Why are they on a small base?
Should't a HMG team be on a medium base?

>>51764014
Such wisdom is beyond our small mortal minds.

>>51763573
My guess for soviets is a strelkovy/motorstrelkovy battalion, a T-34 battalion, a guards KV-1 company, maybe some kind of light tank or Razvedki formation if we're lucky. Lend lease (if it exists) will just be copy pastes of other allied kits. Would be nice to see a KV-1e/KV-1s plastic kit.

>>51764262
Well, you're optimistic. My bet's on Strelkovy and Tankovy (and the devil only knows how they will be nerfed).

>>51763440
>and can someone post those leaks? i can't, busy!

They're in the scans database.

Afrika Korps, Desert Rats, and El Alamein.

>>51764890
Yeah it could be that the KV-1 is stuck in as divisional support. I would almost certainly expect to see smaller company sizes for the strelkovy. Though at this rate, I don't guess I'll be too surprised to see a 40 page hardback titled "Stalin's Derps" with meager choices of poorly skilled Soviets.

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

402KB, 1000x1058px

i really wish i could hope they release a good, full MW product for v4....

i mean, look at all that fresh plastic i desire....

then,
those leaks are a tad disheartening...

i need Pak36's and Tunisia StuG's and Pioneers and captured Stuarts...Diana's and Bison would be nice...even as wildcards....even just as a future promise...

File: panzer 38(t) ii tanks endless sun-scorched steppes.jpg (232KB, 1600x673px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1600x673px

hell, i need Ostfront.

Hungarians and Finns too....

File: IMG_0096.jpg (67KB, 720x468px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 720x468px

>>51766094
I just want to be able to play MW with people without having to run a specific event.

Maybe we'll be pleasantly suprised and get the Ostfront (with more than 6 lists) before Christmas.

Today I discuss the Early/Mid British motor Platoon and take a look at what it will become in Version 4!

http://theflamescorner.blogspot.co.nz/2017/02/flames-of-war-british-motor-platoon.html

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

63KB, 480x480px

>>51766079
>that picture

>>51764014
Krieg doesn't play FOW, he just uses the minis and some of the same basing. I'm gonna do a couple of HMGs like that too for BG and other games.

>>51767605
BF's sculptors really skimped out. There's not even a pose for the RPG's assistant with the grenade pack. Also I'm so sorry for your men. They seem to be missing some gun barrels and the front of a RPG.

>>51766152
I admire your optimism.

>>51767637
Yeah. Two thirds of RPG gunners lost their warhead in the box. I salvaged some of them from the box but can't find 2. Finding figures fresh out of the box which are lost their barrel of the gun, warhead of rocket grenade, even their feet is very very frustrating.

>>51767716
I was fortunate with mine. One of the AK barrels was barely attached, and a standing RPG gunner was broken off at the ankles.

>>51767605
Noice!

Agree on the RPG head frustration....I guess you can say he's just fired off his rocket, but it still annoys the hell out of me. The TY Soviet infantry are so poorly cast it'snot funny, which is a pity as the box has some really nice figues and poses if only they would cast them properly.

>>51767666
It's the best way for me to cope with the pain of the impending Enemy at the Gates themed book... The only good news for me is that I have a lot of T-34s, and they can't take those away. And with the new rules I can spearhead with recon and dash into knife fighting range within a turn.

>>51769085
Imo BF wants to make MW focusing armored battle with few infantry like TY, so I guess MW Soviet book will cover Kursk rather than Stalingrad.
I expect a T-34 tank formation, a strelkovy formation with zis battery, a lend lease tank formation with whatever they released or will release, and a t-70 light tank or su-76 assault gun formation depending on what they will release.

>>51769176
sounds reasonable. I'd still get excited about plastic SU-76Ms. Imagine the spam with the way formations work...

I think the big question mark is the platoon size. With the new morale rules in mind, I think they will reduce the # of T-34s you can bring per company to around 6. Assuming the AT doesn't get nerfed further, the T-34/76 1942 is a really good tank in midwar. Nice balance between cost, armor, gun, and mobility (wide tracks, fast). Compare the H&C T-34 price to StuGs in midwar.

>>51769085
Well, there's no more potential failure for Infiltration, IIRC. And it gets you two inches closer than Spearhead. So that's good.

Are there any leaks of the free V4 LW books yet?

>>51772259
Calm the fuck down.

>>51772259
No.

They don't even come out for another month.

Ask again March 17th.

>>51767605
Excellent work.

File: s-l1000.jpg (101KB, 690x486px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 690x486px

Should I go with the 122mm or 152 mm?

>>51763675
Even RK gets things wrong, the Maxim eject its spent cases forward, not to the left:
https://youtu.be/ClAQ6k--jnw

>>51774128
Neither. But if you have to, go 152 or gtfo.

>>51763675
>>51774250
Left or front ... holy shit those are tiny spent shell casings! Anyone know what was used for that?

>>51774650
I did something similar for one of my Maxim teams. You can buy tiny brass rods at most hobby stores and judiciously clip some appropriately sized little rods.

>>51775543
Taken on my phone, apologies

>>51775543
>>51775564
No need for apologies, but I really lost the will to play this game... so it's 4 months now for full release of two (2!) armies out of four in Africa, without mentioning things that are missing (valentines, matildas...) or eastern front...

Right now there's separate books for mid and early/late war. Rules are largely the same in both books (with the exception of points in the hardback book). Planes are a little nicer, getting cover from trees (ie AA fire) with a 3+ save. Now can be no more than 8" from an enemy team while never getting blocked by terrain. 5+ to hit aircraft with AA.

Oh, and if their site doesn't already say it, release date is March 11th.

File: mg4_big.jpg (130KB, 800x325px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 800x325px

>>51774823
I used clippings of thin stranded brass wire.

Well, Matildas are more early war than anything, and Battlefronts focus seems to be more North Africa than MW as a whole. There is a mini rulebook of special rules and warriors, but they are specifically for early and late war.

>>51775791
So:
>AA no longer skill based
>Trees can no longer block LoS for air, but give concealment
>Air stays on the board, when it dies it's dead
>Number of planes depends on support level
>Planes have a 3+ save
>8" attack range, does not care about terrain
?

>>51775957
Unless I'm retarded, that's how I'm reading it. AA is kind of needed, if planes are in your meta. Planes will leave the board after they shoot - during any point of the shooting phase they can fire - and are on the board with a single roll of 4+. Kills carry over, etc.

Oh, hills block line of sight as they are tall terrain. Armored cars rejoice.

File: 2017-02-17 17.47.47.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

Smoke bombardments got changed, as well. Kind of like it, makes them a little nicer.

Unrelated note, command distance (on tanks at least) isn't Daisy chained, but from the command tank in particular.

While I'm here at my store (before the Magic players arrive), is there anything specific people would like to see?

>>51776729
shoe on head

>>51776729
thanks, kind anon!
Any stats for the LW/EW units?

>>51776369
I want to believe that SU-76 will be worthwhile, at least in MW. AT9, maybe with a decent cross number. Pls BF.

>>51776733
I'd rather not.

>>51776777
They don't really have unit rules yet, just base game rules - and point costs between mid and e/l war do not have parity, apparently.

>>51776729
Infantry stats, if they exist for anyone besides the Brits and Germans. Also LW/EW conversions.

>>51776729
Painting guides for germans!

>>51776783
I have a feeling the SU-76 will remain relativelu unchanged. So... yeah... AT 9 and a +1 to crossing bonus is likely.

A tangental perk to them however, is that the SU-122 will no longer be as auto-include. It'll still probably be a solid choice, as BF loves their ahistoric ROF 2 breakthrough guns... But at least they will no longer outright kill infantry/unarmored.

File: 2017-02-17 18.20.00.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

Existing players will apparently be getting these two books.

File: su76.jpg (43KB, 800x465px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 800x465px

>>51776922
Still might be worthwhile in MW if they're fairly maneuverable and have a decent gun. Means they'll likely be cheap.

I just want to model one of the most-used and cutest SPGs in the Soviet army.

>>51776858
>>51776917
Not included in the pack they sent out, and painting guides can be found in many places.

>>51776783
>AT9
The 6pdr, 17pdr and 7.5cm went down, so I'm not hopeful the 76mm's going to see much better, especially if they could cite shoddy production in the move to the urals for their CB.

>>51776967
I have like 15 for LW. If I ever start playing regularly again, and if they ever come out in plastic, I'll finish them to 21 counting CiC. They're totally worth getting, even MW. They are at that sweet spot of suckitude where people don't expect them to accomplish anything, but they'll never cease to impress you when they do. Plus if you lose them, who fucking cares!? They're cheap, fun, and expendable.

>>51777198
It'd be a bit of a stretch for them to start the ZiS-3s off at AT 8 (or worse). The gun was failing by LW standards, but it's widespread use and initial hitting power was one of the Soviet Union's early advantages. Nothing short of a Tiger could safely ignore it, and even then the damned things had an annoying tendency for tracking heavier vehicles.

>>51776854
>They don't really have unit rules yet, just base game rules - and point costs between mid and e/l war do not have parity, apparently.

So we play the EW/LW with same stats? What's the remount or last man check value - morale? You are still to-hit on your rating (since unit ratings in MW are technically gone)?

>>51777341
Typically it's a unit's remount rating, with a possible modifier. Germans have a better rating because 3rd Reich. Protected Ammo makes it easier as well.

Rather than state the rules, have a picture.

>>51777307
Imo zis-3 can remain being AT9, while zis-2, T-34/57, su-85 may loose their AT value by 1.
AT9 can't hurt tiger at front anyway.

>>51777457
Good lord, I hope the SU-85 doesn't lose one; the whole point of the 85mm was that it could beat the Tiger. Could see the 57mm losing 1 at, though.

>>51777307
>>51777457
Yeah, the short 75mm gun on the M3 Medium stayed at AT 9 as well, so I think the ZiS-3 can hang around there as well.

>>51777004
Yeah, but I want to see the one in the Afrika Korps book, if you have it.

>>51777488
It seems MW rules written with shermans.
Then why they did not included shermans in desert rats book then?

>>51777651
Likely as part of the American army, since the Americans and Italians are confirmed.

That, or the books aren't actually finished and they're going to add to them.

>>51777488
>Shermans are still AT 10
>6pdr dropped to 9
Of fucking course.

>>51777651
>>51777667
Probably because of production limits on new plastic kits.

The Brits get British-exclusive stuff plus the M3 Medium because it served alongside them.
Then, when the US release later in the year, their plastic M4 Medium kit will also provide the British with a new option.

Can someone with access to the V4 stuff give me any information about the Romanian section (Red Bear)? LGS FOW shipment appears to have never showed up this week.

>>51776729
Is there anything about the movement speed of the light tanks?

Leakfag here, sorry guys but I am home. I'll be back at the store on Sunday morning, EST.

>>51778057
12 inches tactical move, same as fast tanks. Standard moves 10, and infantry move 8.

>>51777837
Nothing on them in the v4 docs, sadly. Maybe a mention in special rules mini book.

>>51778200
Well, that makes it official, I'm not playing v4. Especially not with the cockswallops in charge not changing point values.

>>51778263
Being clear, I did not really see points values for units - although I'll make sure to check them out on Sunday for you (what I can find, anyway).

As far as moving at the double - it's not that, anymore, but 'dashing'. I believe it's another 4 inch move at the end of a tactical move.

The two photos of the rules summary are probably the most poignant out of everything.

>>51777474
The 57mm could beat the tiger, too, it's one of the reasons the T-34 tank hunter existed.

>>51777474
It would still beat tigers, by 1, so be careful what you wish for.

>>51778701
That's a Long 57mm with crazy good performance.

>>51778800
Cupola and turret seams, lower front plate at short range, sides at long range. 85mm was better but I'd be surprised if it went down to 9.

>>51777457
The 85s better not lose 1 AT. That'd defeat the whole purpose of ever using them.

Uhhh.. bump?

File: 20170217_195826-picsay.jpg (2MB, 3903x1963px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3903x1963px

8x5 feet sized table designed for TY

File: 1454370778489.jpg (13KB, 305x294px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 305x294px

>>51777488
>>51777719

oh. fuck.

they actually are doing it.....

>>51778263
>12 inch tactical

they get amazing dash moves...in TY, you typically choose to move or shoot, but tactical is really just a reposition move for units w' stabilizers. it plays differently.

still, i understand your pain....

sorry for double post!

Also, sorry for the photos all angled wrong etc. Did what I could.

>>51778263
They did that specifically so that we wouldn't have to buy 27 fucking books all over again for the new edition.

Everyone bitched about books getting only minor points adjustments between V2 and V3, but requiring people to buy the new book.

That is exactly why they're not doing that this time around.

>>51781905
They were willing to redo the points for the entire BAR in EW, in two books, in V3. And that had less of a balance impact than the swap to V4 is going to, because they decided to make it Team Yankee: WWII Edition instead of polishing it like they did from V2 to V3.

File: BMP durkha.jpg (155KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 800x532px

allah ho ahkbar!

>>51782132
>2 lists
>200 lists

Yeah, I'm just not seeing how that is feasible at all.

It would take a dedicated team years to accomplish such a task.

>>51782656
Then maybe, just maybe, they shouldn't have overhauled the shit that didn't need fixing and wreck the goddamn game in the most commonly played era.

>>51782711
Who says they've wrecked it?

Who, other than the play testers, has actually played a Late War game using 4th Edition rules?

It'll be different, but I highly doubt that they would turn the game into some unplayable mess.

I could be wrong. It potentially *could* be a disaster.

But I am at least willing to wait and see if the sky is indeed falling.

I'll judge the new rule set after I've actually played a few games with it and gotten a feel for it.

What good does it do acting all histrionic about it now when none of us have actually played any games using the new rules that aren't even out yet?

File: 20170218_165545-picsay.jpg (223KB, 1024x563px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1024x563px

Volksarmee

>>51780977
Nice! I'd leave the cars more scattered, as if they randomly pulled over, 'cause people left in a panic

>>51783455
Interesting place for the arty park.

File: t3_F-232204.jpg (65KB, 548x389px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 548x389px

>>51780977
N-scale models? I've been eyeing that brand of nip buildings for a while now.

>>51782871

That was a soothing read. Thank you.

>>51783455
I'm in love with the spherical chemical tank. Did you make that or buy it from somewhere? I used to work in an ethylene plant and we had those things all over.

File: 3423421280.jpg (212KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1024x768px

>>51780977
looks pretty sweet bro

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

1B, 486x500px

G.aufklefungs from Ardennes offenaive.
Always attack and every platoons spearhead /reconnaissance deploy except nebs and heavy artillery.

kind of a dumb question.
I know not many people are fond of "Tanks" or batter say they don't care about it. still for those who play it it's necesary to have more than just one type of tank model? I mean speaking of the starter box there's one panther and 2 shermans, and both have like building options (Panther <-> Jagopanther / Sherman 75mm <-> 76mm), do I need to get a second copy of the starter so I can have more team building possibilities? what about the other thanks models, same things applies?

>>51784493
It is 1/150 scale (N gauge?) terrain piece and our group bought it. It looks nice by itself, but is a bit small when compared with infantry team next to it.

>>51787232
It's a lot like playing X-Wing for example. Sure, you could play only with X-Wings and TIE Fighters, but you'll get more variety out of the game play experience if you mix in some A-Wings, B-Wings, TIE Interceptors, etc as well.

So it probably will be more fun to play TANKS with a wider variety of tanks.

>>51787236
I've found that HO scale model railway stuff tends to look about right, if perhaps just slightly too big.

Flames of War and Team Yankee are both 1/100 with 1/144 aircraft.

HO scale model railway buildings are 1/87, ever so slightly larger.

I'm not quite sure what size N scale is.

>>51787958
N scale is one of those model scales with a lot of creep, so it can be anywhere from 1/144 to 1/180 depending.

Personally, I enjoy using N scale terrain for games like FOW with teams being based together, and use more 1/100 scale stuff when figures are individually mounted. The reduced footprint of the terrain makes it easier to play around, and lets you put in more houses for the same space.

>>51789198
True. Footprint is definitely an issue.

BF's own terrain range looks scale appropriate from the outside, but comically small on the inside.

can confirm shops should have preview copies:

anyone want specific pages photographed? can't guarantee, but i could try....

>>51792590
The painting guides. They interest me.

But other than that, I dunno.

>>51792590
How to build a force in Early/Late.
In particular, how multiple formations will work.

>>51792590
The LW conversion book should have info on the Red Bear Romanians, pls respond.

>>51775622
Yep. Exactly. The entire V4 rollout seems to me to be a complete clusterfuck. I was conpletely unconvinced by the fanservice wwpd review that said "just try it!". That's the same thing Phil said in the podcast and it wasn't convincing then, either.

>>51782871
Do you not see how fucked EW and LW players are? The mass point conversion means V4 pricing will have V3 premiums built in for special rules that no longer exist. Best example i can think of offhand is Hellcat lists.

>>51795617
What points conversion? EW/LW are still on the Thousand Point standard.

>>51795700
Sure, but they still have to be repriced.

>>51795617
You would have had to play using the old books anyway until new books could be released.

There will be some stuff that doesn't quite work exactly the same way it used to, but I don't see the entire game collapsing the way some people seem convinced it will.

>>51795816
I really hope you're right, man.

>>51795727
The prices aren't changing. At least not any time soon.

>>51795358

I am curious why they aren't leaning more on their old line of blitsters for some of the V4 North Africa stuff. I am guessing making pretty much everything a new release is adding to the time. Over 20 kits, several being in plastic. I think they could have crutched on their existing resin blisters a bit more, but they seem very intent on pushing MW V4 as a new brand. I imagine everything but infantry will be in boxes.

oh shit, Afrika Korps dice

been wanting them for a while

>>51795835
As do I.

I'm doing my best to be optimistic. To give 4th Edition it's fair chance.

And for what it's worth, I already enjoy the Team Yankee rules, so the swap to TY style rules really doesn't bother me.

I can see MW working well. The new rules were built with the MW relaunch in mind.

The real make or break thing is how well the new rules support LW and EW.

I know there will be some specific lists that will fair poorly in the transition, and a few might get significantly better. And I fully expect certain gamers to find those lists that exploit the balance changes.

But overall, I'm hopeful that the fact that all lists have to adapt to the new rules will mean that everyone stays roughly on the same footing.

>>51795838
I mean points, not actual dollar cost

>>51795933
Do you think they'll keep them in stock or discontinue them? I want to get them, but I won't be able to buy anything for several months.

>>51795991
Yes, points for EW and LW will not be changed soon.

>>51795933
Shit dices with no Nazi emblem on Palm tree?

>>51796042
That is weird because I've had two sets of those dice that have the Swastika on them.

>>51796112
I bought DAK dices from dice of war because of swastika. 16mm dices are a bit large for my hand, though.

File: IMG_1492.jpg (217KB, 690x480px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 690x480px

I will willingly pay ridiculous amounts of money for this on eBay.

http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=5459

A Stargate Objective Marker.

I fucking love SG-1.

File: IMG_3420.jpg (137KB, 900x602px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 900x602px

Tiger is my waifu.

bunp

>>51800458
WTF?

>>51798252
Yeah, me too: odd choice desu, but I still want one nonetheless.

File: IMG_3415.png (676KB, 1136x640px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 1136x640px

>>51800489
>he doesn't know about the dating sim parody known as Panzermadels

>>51782711
>most commonly played era
but we haven't seen the late war changes yet

A Volksarmee list here
How do you think about it?

T55AM2 HQ X1(1)
T55AM2 X3(2)
T55AM2 X3(2)
T55AM2 X3(2)

T55AM2 HQ X1(1)
T55AM2 X3(2)
T55AM2 X3(2)

T55AM2 HQ X1(1)
T55AM2 X3(2)
T55AM2 X3(2)

BMP1 HQ X1(1)
BMP1 X4(6)
BMP2 X12(24)
BRDM2 X2(1)
SPANDREL X2(1)
GASKIN X2(1)
T55AM2 X3(2)

BMP1 HQ X1(1)
BMP1 X4 (6)
BMP2 X12 (24)
BRDM2 X2 (1)
SPANDREL X2 (1)
GASKIN X2 (1)
T55AM2 X3 (2)

SUPPORT SPANDREL X2(1)
100 points total

>>51801627
I think small groups of T-55s will work if you keep them away from enemy MBTs. The goal would be to try to engage the enemy apcs and support assets with them or just use them as a distraction.

>>51800515
They've done stuff from popular culture in the past, but up until now it was always vaguely connected to World War II.

This is a decidedly modern, completely sci-fi objective.

But as a fan of the franchise, I don't mind at all.

File: 1485280610645.jpg (188KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 500x500px

>>51801627
>playing Volksarmee

>>51801627
Those tiny platoons of T-55s will certainly make them easier to move around the battlefield than massive platoons, but I question their staying power.

With the kind of firepower that NATO armies can dish out, you'll probably be seeing several of those 3-tank T-55 platoons gunned down each turn.

Well, I did it. I have no idea if they're even going to be usable in v4, and I've bought a Train.

File: sempai notice me.jpg (140KB, 1360x446px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1360x446px

>>51798252
go for it!

>>51792879
>>51792900
i have no pics now, but i can confirm this on LW/EW building
---there must be a prime formation you get support options from.
---your 2ndary formations must be from same intelligence handbook
---or digital matched to it....
---it is somewhat advised that your 2ndary come from companies you have platoons in support for,
---you may have 1 allied formation IF your prime formation gets allies in support.
(hell yes for Finnish StuG fest....)

>>51803182
funny, in a WARPAC army, if you take as many tanks per platoon that you expect dice of shots coming your way, the misses will typically still be able to avoid morale checks...
8 for abrams
6 for west germans

>>51803342
oh, in case it wasn't obvious, only Combat and Weapons are in your company.

>>51803320
what nation?

>>51803357

German. This was the eBay listing: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/192106175064

Artillery, AA, Infantry, Tank Hunter, and Loco; plus 2x 10.5 AA cars (standalone), track, and station.

File: IMG_0139.jpg (1MB, 2750x2248px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2750x2248px

>>51803320

>>51803495

Henry the Green Engine was acting like a bitch and had that coming.

>>51803342
Right, which is why I'm saying platoons of 3 T-55s are going to get blown away by those 8 shots from Abrams, or 6 shots from Leopards (1s or 2s).

And that's without factoring in stuff like ITVs, helicopters, aircraft, etc.

The incoming fire from NATO forces is at least twice as much as the size of the platoon. You'll need the dice gods on your side to not just end up with a platoon lost entirely from a single enemy shooting step.

>>51803719

sad but true.

then again, i've seen WARPAC players make the grade against NATO armies with terrain and tactics.

>>51804241
I'm referring specifically to the list posted here: >>51801627 .

It's using a lot of T-55s organized into platoons of only 3 tanks each.

And while that does offer a lot of tactical flexibility compared to larger platoons, it also means that each individual platoon is incredibly fragile.

>>51804567

again true. my statement was more general.

i've looked at Volksarmee. the minimum operational T-55 platoon is 6. so, 4 PSC boxes should do for 1 formation. far wiser than 4 resin boxes....

>>51804854
Why do you believe 6 is the right number? Optimal odds of surviving incoming fire?

Pretty new here, what paints do you guys use to paint your flames of war tanks and guys? Vallejo? Any recommendation for a starting kit. also is there a good army green color from vallejo? (army green is battlefronts color)

>>51803342
So... let me get this straight. If I chose Light Self Propelled Artillery regiment as my primary detachment, I can take something like Heavy Self Propelled Artillery as my secondary detachment?

Allowing me to run a swarm of SU-76s backed by a swarm of SU-152s?

>>51806151
Sounds like it.

File: Stu40G_4.jpg (141KB, 1000x566px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1000x566px

This is what was under the skirt all along... a log.

>>51806109
Vallejo mostly for me...what are you painting army green? If I know I can perhaps work out a Vallejo equivalent (sorry, I'm really unfamiliar with the BF paints: the do not have a good reputation).

File: pewpew.jpg (102KB, 700x559px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 700x559px

>>51806450
A lot of things, the only problem is that ive been using it for a few of my models and i want them to have the same kind of color, so i just need to find a equivalent. so all my guys dont look different since im running out of army green and i dont like the paint. I hope you understand and thank you sir or ma'am

>>51804854
Platoons of 3 make for INSANE points breaks. It makes an entire 10 tank company cost 7 points, the same as a small BMP platoon.

In this list the real heavy hitters are the two full strength BMP-2 companies with their infantry, they'll be difficult to maneuver and get on-line, but they'll still throw out a good number of shots while the infantry move forward. The T55's are really there to die in the attack and desu, a 6 tank platoon will fall apart just as quickly as a 3 tank platoon when focused.

I do think the list could use slightly more AA, maybe a Shilka platoon to use to cover the two big infantry blobs? One or two units of T72's might not be a bad idea either, just keep them hidden for as much of the fight as possible.

So this is what I find amusing about the new points/formation system. You can build really fun spam lists that will bleed platoons, but are nigh impossible for a traditional 6-10 platoon FoW force to beat. I'm quite happy rocking up to a tourney and forcing Natoboos to a draw again and again.

>>51805966
not the right number, the operational minimum.

hell, your only choices are 3 to 10...
experience has shown 6-10 are the only viable options....

>>51806151
>>51806180
yes.
and the one moron here at the shop who has been chiding me thinks this will be the end of my days....

( think IS-85's in red beard w anything else....)
( think Pumas in Grey Wolf with a few choice gets...)

>>51807021
Well, you can already run a platoon of IS-85s with anything else in Red Bear, and you don't really need a lot more than that. I'm more looking at the idea of taking the regiment lists with their limited support, and giving them a second detachment of something fucking crazy. Like mixing the SU-regiments so you have light and heavy. Or mixing SU-85s with Razvedki. Hell... Razvedki + IS-85s would be interesting.

Speaking of Bunker Busters... With the nerf to Breakthrough Guns going to the Brutal rules... What's happening to the Bunker Busters? Are they going Brutal as well? Can they move and fire effectively? Is the ISU-152 still going to be shit?

>>51806568
The problem is BF has made their paints just a bit different so they would not match other ranges.

The conversion chart says Army Green is "like Reflective Green, but brighter", which is about Luftwaffe Camo Green, as my best guess.

http://flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Painting/COW-Conversion-Chart-v1.pdf

>>51803342
Can I take same detachment for 2ndary formation?
For things like 20+20 lend lease matildas and 10+10 valentines.

>>51807838
Reflective Green and Russian Green are the same tint and shade of green by the way, but Reflective has a satin-sheen to it as opposed to the completely flat sheen of Russian. Both look the same when given a matte varnish finish at the end.

File: pic2558327.jpg (4MB, 2953x1826px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2953x1826px

>>51807838
>different paint.
the fuck? battlefront! what is historical accuracy, again?

>>51808349
yes. you could also take more than 25 pumas...

>>51807332
oh, i was just mentioning my armies specifically. but, you are right, 2nd formations adds 'cheeze', it does not subtract it.

>>51803320
Armored Train rules are in the EW-LW conversion. Chop choo!!

>>51807568
They are even more shit. Bunker busters have a moving rate a fire of 0 in V4. They now only cause rerolls for saves like breakthrough guns, but they still hits every other team in the room on a successful hit.

>>51809070
But not cam olive green which is the replacement a lot of guides use.

File: 1487556228039.png (98KB, 1167x454px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1167x454px

Phil confirmed 60 honey list in V4 MW is a legal one.

Cheers.

>>51810538
And this is why they need to write their shit clearer! Because we're going to have people going "No that's not how the rules work" "It's obviously how they work" over and over until BF hires a decent technical writer.

>>51810538

>overall the game will remain balanced

>remain balanced..

what the fuck is he smoking? what game is he talking about because sure as fuck he's not talking about flames of war

>>51810707
Starting with TY they made a conscious effort to trim down book sizes by cutting examples, pictures, and words in general, and then fixing their openly broken product via online errata. It's like a parody.

File: IMG_0181.jpg (53KB, 490x365px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 490x365px

>>51810759
Ah good ol' FM Fuck Me101

>>51810538

>remain balanced
I wish I were this delusional so I could enjoy life more.

>>51810538
The thing is though, no one I know would put the money (or painting for that fact) into making a force like that, so I'm almost certain that we will never see an actual list like that

>>51811838
You say that, but there are actual people who have spent the time (or money) on the BMP-2 horde for Team Yankee. If certain players think it will be OP, they will make the list.

>>51811838
Well, when this is how BF expects people to play best germany, and sells it as such, while the sheep blindly start buying as they do, there is most certainly going to be people doing that.

>>51811838
I would be surprised if someone somewhere does not have a box in their basement labelled
>stuarts: break in case of emergency
Because that's what I did with my minor axis.

>>51811838
You say that now, but people with more dollars than sense will certainly at least try out the 60 Stuart list.

>>51811904
>>51811911
>>51812012
Especially since both BF and PSC are going to be making the M3 Stuart in plastic soon. Prepare your anus.

>>51803342
Time to field an Airlanding Company, Parachute Company, and Airborne Armored Recce company and then field 12 Locusts. Yes, that's 4 more than were ever even sent into combat, and 8 more than made it to the fighting. What of it?

File: 1274749209142.png (4KB, 548x475px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 548x475px

>>51810538
>motars which were rarely taken before
>will become popular
>cheers
pic related must be phil right now

>>51812012
>>51812167

....i almost feel like saying it.

i am not going to say it, but i should. Stuart is my favorite yank tank, and i don't wanna play the USA....

then again, i'd have to have some crusaders....

Wait a minute, weren't there Churchills and Matildas in Africa? Why aren't they in the Desert Rats book then?

File: DAK-x.jpg (1MB, 2745x1032px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2745x1032px

>>51813758
Tigers are fine, but fuck you, m8. Fucking brits thinking they get anything remotely interesting.

>>51813846
I am unsure of how serious you are, as I am very tired.

>>51813991
Just being Phil of course.

Cheers.

>>51813758
Because only the germans are allowed to have their cool toys, and only they get accurate stats with them. Brits are now the desert horde list, because BF can only do "super elite" and "horde" these days.

>>51813846
What sort of half track are those?

>>51814175
Diana

Wait a minute, the Panzer III Uparmored has the same stats as a regular Panzer III, but a 10" movement rather than 12". I think that's a misprint, seeing as how the Panzer III uparmored HQ unit as a FA of 6, instead of 5.

Then again, that's a leaked and unfinished copy, so I assume it'll be fixed by release.

>>51814392
I can't find much about them, other than that they were a conversion done by adding a 7.62mm on a half-track. I assume they're going to be in the Afrika Korps stuff when it releases?

>>51814486
They're on BF's shop.

>>51814518
Oh, I meant historically. But yeah, I found them in the online store.

>>51811838
Birdy we know someone who fielded a full T-26 Regiment in Mid War.

Regiment. So two Battalions of T-26s for those of you playing along at home.

>>51811838
Man like me, just having fun by laying numerous toys on the table and seeing it, plays the list. I like it.

>>51812167
There is already a cheap Zvezda kit. I know there was one anon that built a bunch of Zvezda Grants and M3s for lend lease tankovy.

>>51811838
>The thing is though, no one I know would put the money (or painting for that fact) into making a force like that
People said this about the soviet BMP horde, which is far worse in both number of models and actual cost (45 tanks and over 60 stands of infantry), and it still saw tables. Then BF shills started whining about how spammy and cheap it was despite the fact BF were the ones dumb enough to make a list like that in the first place.

>>51814961
How many is that?

>>51815885
62.

>>51816066
Good lord. That's so much resin.

>>51813758

I'm guessing the Churchills will come with the Tunisia update. Yanks and Italian get their books. Tommys get a digital Formation for Infantry tank company.

>>51817229
Zvezda makes a plastic T-26.

>>51813758
Mainly because Battlefront doesn't have a shiny new kit to sell for either of them.

>>51813758
Probably what >>51817242 said.

They're launching with some core lists and will likely expand from there.

And possibly a bit of what >>51817272 said, although that's a slightly more cynical attitude than I would take.

Cavalry have a tactical move of 6 inches and cross on a 2+. Romanians split into platoons, ALL OF THEM, and then roll on the peasant army table.

My hero cossacks bog down, and my Romanians now have 30 different platoons what the fuck. Willing to answer questions.

in the E-L books come some kind of points or stats modification?

>>51820676
Stats are modified in a bunch of situations, two or three Warriors are altered and may have a different cost--do not have original stats on hand. No points are touched otherwise.

>>51814961
I don't suppose you have any pics of that? Would love to see it.

>>51820576
As if cavalry weren't bad and situational enough. Goddamnit battlefront.

Also Formations are in Good Spirits if at least two non-support units are on the table OR IN RESERVE.

You literally cannot table Romanians for 8+ turns in reserve missions, based on how well you roll.

>>51820576
so their tactical move is slower than infantry? Wat?

File: 1487621564919-1999689980.jpg (2MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1944px

>>51821726

>>51820830
Wish I did, I went up against it with my own Soviet Mixed Tankovy, so I had five KV-2 that he couldn't destroy at all, like, two batteries of 76mm AT guns, and twenty T-26s of my own. It was, a bit of a mess.

>>51822036
Huh. Kinda makes sense since shooting from the back of a horse isn't exactly easy, especially if you want to do it with any degree of accuracy.

T-34-76s look like they might be handy to have on hand even in late war (well, they were still useful) now that Fast Tank means they actually have better cross country and terrain dash.

>>51822799
Can't you not assault if you dash? Unless they add something for cav, that means they're reliant on a skill test to just match infantry charge distance.

>>51820730
What happened to plains, they are all 5+ to hit or it depends of nations? E.g. soviet are easier to hit than nazi

>>51823214
Basically all planes seem to be 5+ now.

Would any of you guys know where I can acquire the wargame 'NUTS! final version'? I've seen it on scribd but you need an account to download it.

>>51823832
You get a free week or something the first time you make an account on there, unless they've changed it.

>>51823948
it's a free month, but I think that only kicks in after you'e paid for one month.

>>51817272
But don't worry, the inevitable compilation will come out eventually, once they do get some plastics out.

Most of my MW desert shit is gone now. So disappointed.

>>51810538
I used to bring mortars all the time. I'm not sure how the new tank focus is going to help balance.

Is anyone else suddenly having issue getting TY stuff in, too? I thought the idea was going to all-plastic was going to mean this stuff was actually in stock...

>>51824060
Well, it was free without paying when I did it anyhoo.

>>51824501
Don't worry anon, it'll probably be pay-for digital content later :^]

File: 1487305727576.jpg (81KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1024x768px

>>51800539
>Gunny Hartman
>not only in a dating sim, but looks nothing like Gunny Hartman

File: fl-herbie-love-bug-auction-20150415.jpg (658KB, 2048x1201px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 2048x1201px

has anyone ever painted a sturmgeschütz III white with red&blue racing stripes and called it "herbie the love stug"?

>>51828083
It's pretty clear that artist doesn't into faces either. He deserved better.

>>51829370
>"herbie the love stug"
now i have to do it. .but i do have a few italian stugs...

>>51829556
>standard japanime style
>can do faces

pick one.

>>51828083
That's not Hartman though. That's Heartmann. In the credits it even says his favorite movie is Full Metal Overcoat. No similarity whatsoever!

:^)

>>51829556
>>51830511
The art style is intentionally like that, the game itself is a parody of stereotypical dating sims.

My latest article is on the Nikuhaku Teams and how that they can fit into a Japanese Army.

http://theflamescorner.blogspot.co.nz/2017/02/flames-of-war-nikuhaku-teams-jp706.html

File: romanian czech panzer.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Czech panzers in late war, fuck yeah. Just have to be not-germans.

can you post a photo of the especial movement orders?

Which tanks and arty are worth bringing in a jap infantry list?

>>51832392
Literally just the TY ones.

>>51833136
Most people would say any of the big guns like 105 or 150. Picking anything smaller and your antitank goes down along with firepower but they are cheap ans get burst fire. If you want arty support then go with the Naval Gun Fire support if you can.

I've had a read through, after the "points staying the same isn't going to unbalance the game" thing, and I just have to ask what the fuck Phil's smoking? Artillery change alone is massive; 155mms are AT 3, but still at a massive premium, while the calliope is now a FP 4+ Salvo template for the same points.

>>51836634
Tons of stuff like that. Bunker busters are basically worthless with the Brutal and moving RoF nerfs. The game isn't ruined, but there are going to be a lot of miniatures that are going to get shelved for V4.

>>51836634
>>51836775
Yeah. On one hand, I can see reducing the effectiveness of RoF 2 Breakthrough, and a little buff to the shittier end of artillery FP (the 5+ and 6+ FP bombardments). On the other, making some guns absolute crap, making RoF 1 breakthrough suck, and more importantly Bunker Buster suck more, are just dumb as hell and are going to result in a lot of formerly ok units (any many bad ones) now being overpriced.

Poor IS-2s and ISU-152s are even more garbage now...

>>51836876
To be fair, the ISU-152 has been in a bad spot since v3 came by and poured salt in it's gas tank. They've been on the shelf for a long time. What they really need is BF to just rework the points and redesign the damned thing to be useful, which isn't going to happen until they revisit LW. A good indicator of what will eventually happen to it, is to pay close attention to what happens in MW to the SU-152z

File: 2017-02-21 19.13.34.jpg (5MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5312x2988px

>>51803320

And here are my toys. Apparently I imagined there being a staff car, but that's not going to matter in v4 anyway...

I can't believe how quickly this arrived. If any of you ever get the chance to buy from a UK ebayer named nickg41, I'd recommend him as an excellent chap.

Would any of you fine gentlemen happen to know the most naval themed fow related minis?
Nation and Era aren't a concern.

>>51838528
There's not much that is rally naval themed since the game is focused on company-sized land battles.

The few exceptions I can think of are:

- D-Day landing craft, and Duplex Drive Shermans.

- Amphibious vehicles used by the US Marines and the Japanese in the Pacific.

- Vietnam era river patrol boats.

>>51838528
Soviet naval infantry?

>>51838765
>>51838708
okay, thanks, I knew there wasn't much,but getting second impression helps.

File: t_rex_vs_samurai_by_arvalis-d4pq931.jpg (261KB, 1600x923px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1600x923px

Is FoW worth getting into if I already play 40k competitively and collect Infinity?

>>51839126
The setting is quite interesting, there are a couple of books and movies that cover it, and if you're into large numbers of tanks rolling across the battlefield, then yes.

>>51839126
>play 40k competitively
Yeah. Even at its worst, FOW feels like a miniature wargame that was designed by actual game developers and (selectively biased) historians.

>>51839126
>play 40k competitively
You're going to find gameplay quicker and more balanced from that, at least. I would have said "it's a different scale game" but seeing how much stuff's on the table in 40k these days they're probably similar.

It's nothing like Infinity, but the gap between them is huge so I'm not sure if there could reasonably be much comparison.

>>51839167
>there are a couple of books and movies that cover it

WW2? I laughed.

>>51839167
>The setting is quite interesting, there are a couple of books and movies that cover it
The factions are all pretty interesting but I feel like a lot of the plot was just the writers throwing stuff in when they'd written themselves into a corner. Like, the horde faction leader knows there's loads of earth-marine tanks on his borders, gets told by his own intelligence service that they're about to attack, and then when they attack they're surprised enough that they almost take the capital that's thousands of miles away? It's pretty obvious they just wanted a big setpiece battle in the snow.

>>51840697
They gave them such a huge numerical advantage in the fluff they needed to explain why they didn't just roll over everyone. I mean, come on, "more tanks than the rest of the world put together"? That was obviously going to be a plot hole if they didn't write them out somehow.

Nice one guys, thanks :D

>>51840697
Clearly what Happened was Everyone that Expressed opinions Representing Soviets thought they should be nerfed.
for those of who didn't see it, look for the caps.

File: Ch-eers.png (744KB, 645x518px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 645x518px

>>51842756

>>51830858

now i have to go buy it. i'll see if i can win all the tanks i have armies based around
>IS-tanks, Puma, StuG, Panther...

>>51832085
you are a beautiful genius! may you play Finns and German Panzerspah!

>>51840697
dude, Germans are Eldar

most lists are Footdar or wave-serpents, Tigers+ and the kin are Iyanden WraithKnighter lists.....

>LGS gets their preview books in
>spends a day reviewing them
>"hey anon we have 16 feet of wall space that we just decided to open up, what games do you think will be worth trying to sell?"

>>51844032
Bolt Action

>>51844032
Infinity and X-Wing are both pretty good.

Well, there goes my soviet artillery. It was already a struggle to justify them against 160mm mortars, but at least in the big-cat heavy meta here heavy artillery had a lot of use for blasting Tiger IIs off the board.

>>51838528
Besides the amerifats with their landing craft, the marines now, and the aforementioned black death, there is also some LW kriegsmarine dudes if you've got the hots for Germany.

>>51844032
Some Shakespeare books and scripts, costumes, props, and lighting gear. Because they're Drama Queens.

File: IMG_3516.jpg (49KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x620px

>>51844032
40k

>>51844032
Serious question: Do you think the extremely stretched out launch for MidWar is really going to support the FLGSs? I guess it depends on how many new people decide to hop on board.

I am guessing it will sell fine at my store since we have a proliferation of guys with more money than brains who buy everything Battlefront releases, spray paint it, and put it on the table.

>>51845559
Tbqh, it'll be good for my wallet.

So it appears my Finn's are getting screwed over, as well as my Australian "death or glory" squadron. really battlefront????? I use to love you!

>>51845630
Yeah, I guess spreading out the releases makes paying for and painting everything easier. Would make a good opportunity for an escalation league.

>>51845559
Basically the owner will only order BF items at customer request now, and is going to let the BF section shrink naturally over time until he puts the last bits and pieces on ebay. He can't find anyone to do demo games since everyone either owns LW (and is therefore not really supported, but need playtesting to establish this for sure) or MW Eastern Front, which....yeah.

>>51844615
they should retain direct fire effectiveness....
...against non-KT targets

>>51845644
how is that? they can ally full Sturmi to Pansarri now...and they still get cheaper tubes...

>>51845715
It's that they have gotten rid of the artillery rules that I rely on.

>>51845701
Yeah, I will be happy to run demos for Eastern Front MW, but looks like we aren't getting it for at least 6 months. I could honestly care less about Africa.

>>51845701
>>51845806
>tfw no lgs
>really like africa because desert camo is cool
>would definitely run demo games if i knew how to play
>/qa/ probably stole the images so i can't sadface

i'm wondering something....

we lost the ability to post images on 4chan, yo....
and i see no news post....

>>51846740
New post, can't post an image though.

>>51846902
Can't read, either. Bushmills vs. Depeche Mode. Calliopes partially assembled.

>>51846902
i really meant news post, as in, this is a new feature, use this.

tried to drop a new thread....no go.

>>51846923
Yeah, I got there in the end. Still no images.

So I was thinking, and I fear MW may be screwed.

Think about it; BF fucked up the Brits with their random AT nerfs, took away more than half their options AND they don't plan to release the other two nations which fought there for at least 5 more months.

So why wouldn't people just keep playing LW where all their stuff is still allowed and no stat mods? If I were a more paranoid man I'd swead this was BF's plan all along to get more people playing LW because that's where the money's at for them(because nobody seems to care about EW).

>>51847265
If this is true I'm gonna be sad, because I really want to play Mid War Germans.

>tfw already feeling depressed right now

>>51847265
>>51847265
Except it's the usual suspects playing late war: people with existing collections, not new players. This version reeks more of incompetence borne of bean counters making decisions; giving Battlefront credit for cunning is giving them too much. I say this as somebody soon to pull the trigger on Romanians and French.

>keep reading these changes
>Was already planning on selling my krauts before but now it's getting pretty clear what's about to happen.

What do you guys think, has the panic selling started yet or do you think I can still get a halfway decent price for mine?

This isn't me getting out of the game by the way, just ready to downsize a bit since when I showed off Flames vs Bolt Action at the FLGS, Flames of War didn't stand a chance.

>>51847648
The ugly truth of the matter, nevermind how shitty and soulless Bolt Action is. Flames/15mm is in a bad spot.

I'm lucky enough to have a few people who might play Battlegroup/Chain of Command/nu-Flames(?) With me, but í'm still considering selling my large American collection.

>>51847706
I fully admit that Bolt Action is not the ultimate historical simulation game, but neither is Flames in all honesty.

Bolt Action is a very fun game in my opinion, V1 was pretty bland and had some stupid rules but V2 did a lot to fix the issues and really was a big improvement. The big thing to remember is that the game was always intended as a pretty chill game with a historical veneer. It is quite literally the gateway drug into historicals, hence why I'm using it to break some of these magic and 40k players into the historical scene. It's meant to reenact all those movie scenes people want to recreate and it does that pretty well.

Plus it gives me an excuse to paint historicals, and when people start to learn more and realize "hey, this isn't exactly how the real thing went", I can break out the more simulation tier rules and they already have the models good to go.


Honestly this is a bad sign for the health of Flames of War. When I played both in store, Bolt Action had the biggest interest by far. The rules are easy for 40k players and even non wargamers to grasp (for example, we had a magic player who had never touched a tabletop wargame in his life have a good grasp of the rules by turn 2) and the activation mechanic it uses makes for memorable games. In addition, Bolt Action is cheaper to get into as it has far more plastic options available, and the books are cheaper. The final nail in the coffin will be the amount of inventory space it takes up. Bolt Action can get a good solid representation in a store with a fairly small amount of inventory space. Flames of War on the other hand requires a hideous amount of wall space to fairly represent everything, even with smaller models. I'm sure some will remember the absolutely massive "wall of Flames" I posted here a long time ago from a store in Lexington that was over 30 feet long.

>>51847809

>Continued

And on inventory, inevitably your store will not have something. So what happens next? "Don't worry we'll put in an order for it and it should be in within a couple weeks."

Except a couple weeks turns into months. Warlord has never had this issue, and that is a big thing that retailers will remember. I've travelled all over the US and I don't think I've met a single place that carried Flames that didn't have at least 1 bad experience with Battlefront. That is not a good reputation to have in this business.

I'm worried that with a release like this, and essentially invalidating a ton of books all at once (yes they're not truly outdated but it feels like it) Battlefront may burn through a lot of remaining good will. Then you'll end up with stores like >>51844032

And with Bolt Action right there on a lot of distributors' catalogs, it'll be all to easy to say "you know what, to hell with Battlefront, I'll just stock Bolt Action instead"


I dunno, feel free to disagree, I just have a bad feeling about this is all.

question... if in v4 a tank platoon is in bad spirit with less than 2 tanks... if i have in my list a platoon of 1 konig is allways in bad spirit?

>>51847903
Of course, poor King Tiger-chan would be lonely without other panzers to keep her company.

>>51847903
I can't look up the rule right now, but aren't there some exception if all the teams in the platoon are active, none destroyed, bogged, or bailed.

Of course, as soon as you're bogged or bailed, you need to take a test.

I feel I'll be sticking for V3 for now. V4 is looking to be fairly gash all things considered, and something of a terrible disappointment for myself and my friend. Thinking about getting into Battlegroup but needing to mark down individual casualties sounds painful.

>>51848033

I tried Battlegroup, and it just felt a bit... small to me. Not just casualties on a one for one basis, but even tracking ammo consumption. Every vehicle and fireteam requires an individual movement order.

It just felt like the focus was on a reinforced platoon action, rather than a company (with some battalion-plus assets) that Flames uses.

>>51847903
Team Yankee says: A unit is in good spirits if: it does not have any bailed out or destroyed tanks.

>>51847975
That's wrong.

Are there any american lists that uses churchills?

>>51848236
From the top of my head, 29th Infantry in Normandy can have Churchill Crocodiles, and US Airborne from Nachtjäger (digital) (means Night Hunter (digital)) might be able to have support from Guards Churchills.

>>51847809
Just recently played some Bolt Action at the 'forge. The change from V1 to V2 seems much more effective and concise than V3-V4 Flames. The V4 team went far beyond the promised simplification of V3 and at best the EW/LW conversion seems sloppy. With the new release of MW it seems clear that they want to be shipping new SKUs to TY players and people who don't have North Africa. Just seems shady when you look at all the lists covered in the North Africa book.

I think I am still going to play both Flames and Bolt Action, because I honestly don't know how things are all going to play out for v4. The version has definitely caused me to focus more of my hobby money to Bolt Action. The one silver lining is I might finally get to play MW on the Eastern Front in a year, even if my Soviets will end up being Tiger bait with stat nerfs.

>>51847852
Luckily most my BF orders have been coming in quickly as of late, but holy shit I have been waiting on rattle cans for half a year now and I highly doubt they are ever coming.

>>51845715
Yeah, but if you want to kill things that aren't KTs you've already got basically every AT gun in the soviet inventory.

>>51845701
>Basically the owner will only order BF items at customer request now, and is going to let the BF section shrink naturally over time until he puts the last bits and pieces on ebay
My FLGS did this ages ago anyway. The owner was looking forward to having less codes to order but the apathy over the release spooked him.

>>51846740
Something probably just fell over.

>>51847265
>So why wouldn't people just keep playing LW where all their stuff is still allowed and no stat mods?
If that's their plan it's dumb as fuck because LW is going to be wonky as hell for years now.

Quit FOW, play Battlegroup, the best WW2 ruleset !

>>51847852
Bolt Action is easy to swallow because it was designed to be. It's 40k 3rd edition, shamelessly so. It's 28mm; I've heard plenty of people claim disinterest in Flames because it's not, and there are plenty more at the FLGS with Flames armies who play other 28mm games instead. Plus, all the main Flames guys are playing Bolt.

I'm biased, I like 15mm. I don't champion Flames as a ruleset, I think Battlegroup is better and more interesting, as well as Too Fat Lardies stuff. These games are obviously made by gamers who still have passion for the hobby. It shows in their rules. Flames 3rd had some of this, less in the creativity of the rules and more in the overall attention to the subject matter. Somebody over there obviously cared. Bolt Action, it's apparent to me, is a companion ruleset to a model range. It's purpose is to sell models. This is true of Flames too of course, seemingly moreso with 4th, but Bolt is too obviously cynical in this regard. Historicity aside, Bolt is a lazy, sloppy game lacking creativity. Warlord snatched up ex-GW heads, including Priestly himself, and had them knock out a safe, palatable, but shallow game to push their new model range. I don't think Bolt 2nd improved much of anything.

Bolt Action isn't the answer to Battlefront cocking up Flames that I'm looking for. Sucks for me, I'd happily keep playing 3rd alongside other rulesets, but it looks more like I'll be scaling back generally.

>>51849585
28mm is cool for intricately emblazoned power armour. But for drab guys in fatigues I don't think the reduction in size really impacts the detail and you can fit so much more stuff on the table and play out a battle rather than a firefight.

>>51849652
I agree, most seem not to. Point of note: Bolt Action/Chain of Command/28mm rulesets play just fine at 15mm with no modifications (Bolt makes more sense at 15mm with the dumb weapon ranges), and larger battles are more easily accomodated.

>>51845715
>they should retain direct fire effectiveness....
>...against non-KT targets

So... worthless. Soviet Artillery is too slow-firing to be of value for AT. And you ultimately have to chose between the 122s, or the 152s, both of which are available in better, but still shit, ISU form.

And they compete directly with the ZiS-2 godhammer, the riskier but more potent 85mm, and the even more worthless pile of shit known as the BS-3.

>>51848260
Just seeing Nachtjäger (means nighthunter) reminds me of a simpler time when /fowg/ didn’t live in fear.
This must be what it was like in Poland in 1939

>>51850793
indeed. then a new version of war brought flames to their country

>>51850793
Totally a false equivalency.

People are paranoid about v4 because it's new and is going to shake everything up with TY rules.

>>51851077
No shit it's a false equivalency, I don't genuinely expect to be conscripted to work in the Battlefront Factory pouring in the moulds.
But at least then I could steal some free shit once in a while.

>>51851077
That's kinda the joke.

But yeah, saying that people are paranoid and fearful about 4th Edition is a bit of an understatement.

>>51850871

new bred for likin