Flames of War: Panzer III is Kawaii edition.

>>51917743
>who let this 404?

We did. Because we were recording Panzerfunk.

404 for v4.

Cheers.

>>51918194
we really carry this thread?

>>51918240
I was at least partially joking.

But I do tend to bump the thread when I need to.

My store owner convinced BF to ship like 8 painted British armies for the release event because out of 15 people who expressed interest none of them owned desert bong. Also it looks like we're forced to ban Tigers because nobody can find a 17/25 pounder. Anywhere. We had several world-traveling tournament players consult the lists, and they can't figure out how the British side could actually win in a matchup against Tigers. Like, we would have to design the mission around the existence of unkillable tanks and even then, if each player brought 1 Tiger (they said they would) they would simply roll over the British no matter what we did.

>>51918240
I uh, well, wasn't looking for an hour, apparently.

>>51917743
>>fucking use good banners

PS your weeb shit doesn't fit that bill

>>51919018
Force a formation morale check. The Tiger will flee if everything else around it is dead or dying.

>>51917743
>fucking use good banners.
>>51919122

There is an entire folder in the scans database with banner images to use.

https://www.mediafire.com/?8ciamhs8husms#7tu8k49kv2nbb

>>51919153
Yeah, thanks tips, I know.

Dunno what that has to do with my post.

>>51919363
Unless I mislinked, I was replying to a complaint about the thread banner with a location where people can find a wide selection of thread banners.

>>51919128
Even a platoon morale check should work if the Tiger has escorts. Destroy the escorts and the Tiger has to pass morale to stick around.

>>51919018
I mean, it's kinda bullshit that they get Tigers anyway when the context of the first two books is supposedly El Alamein. Banning them's a good idea, though I probably would've just said locking players into El Alamein thematic lists. Though even that's kind of hard with the absolute bare minimum effort lists we've got.

>>51919623
Only the tiny starter set is based on El Alamein.

Desert Rats and Afrika Korps are supposed to be about Mid-War North Africa as a whole.

>>51919555
Escorts don't count for platoon morale on Tigers. They got a special rule for it.

>>51919648
5 tanks for 35 usd

let's do it. get them while they are there...

>>51920188
Okay. Did not know that. Although I guess that kinda makes sense. Tigers have much better armor than their escorts.

>>51920602
Not a bad deal.

File: 1483235157477.jpg (179KB, 736x680px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 736x680px

Could someone give me a brief rundown of that's changing from V3 to V4? Bonus points for an opinion on whether it's a good or bad change.

>>51922029
The short answer is that from what we know so far 4th Edition is almost a complete copy-paste of Team Yankee.

If you like Team Yankee you'll probably like 4th Edition.

>>51919128
Right. Because that will be so fucking easy to do.

>>51919128
That might theoretically work when there is just 1 Tiger and you can go around it, but what about the very large games (like the release event) where you could end up with 8+ Tigers keeping the enemy from engaging the skeleton units sitting in the back corner? Basically my LGS has decided that flat-out removing Tigers is better than doing a Tiger ration, that stands a chance of still wrecking the release.

>>51922962
When there are 8+ tigers I expect at least 16+ 17pdr guns plus very many other units, and I bet tigers won't stand against them.

>>51922962
8+ Tigers?

Aren't they something like 30 points a pop?

Unless you're playing a mega battle, you probably won't be seeing that many.

That being said, the starter boxes don't even contain Tigers, so if this is a launch day event with only the starter kits, you shouldn't need to worry.

And assuming people are bringing pre existing forces, it's something that just needs to be factored into the British list building.

And if you can't kill them, smoke them. It forces them to move, dropping their RoF, or deal with the to-hit penalty for firing through smoke.

>>51919555
Reading comprehension.

I'm looking for inspiration for cool objective markers, for both Team Yankee and Flames of War.

Do you guys have any home made ones to share?

What I should use to highlight my "Army Spray - US Armor" sherms?

>>51925675
For drybrushing on olive drab, khaki looks good.

File: 20170227_174701-picsay.jpg (786KB, 2588x1309px) Image search: [Google]

786KB, 2588x1309px

Finished neb and pak.
I painted shoulder border of neb crew with purple but it doesn't look distinguishable, with photo, and with eye.

File: 20170227_174711-picsay.jpg (1MB, 2922x1944px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2922x1944px

>>51925866

>>51925815
Thanks. Any specific bottle you can recommend?

File: IMG_0193.jpg (70KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1280x720px

>American player finds out he can't cheese with Jumbos or arty parks in V4

>>51927340
Mechanically speaking, the change to Jumbos makes a lot more sense. As it was, the rule was kinda ambiguous. Not at least it's a simple "you can more easily swap the hit to the Jumbo with the Mistaken Target rule".

As for the US Arty Party, good riddance. I always thought that was a boring option anyway.

Besides, artillery bombardments in real life tended to waste a lot of shells and not actually kill much of anything.

>>51928168
>Besides, artillery bombardments in real life tended to waste a lot of shells and not actually kill much of anything.
Perfectly accurate v4 update that massively increases their lethality then. Oh.

>>51928201
I'm not sold on the artillery changes either. Going to have to play a few games and see how deadly arty really is against infantry.

TY has the opposite problem currently, where enemy infantry is well armed with anti tank weapons and really horrible to dig out.

>>51923287
In MW they're 30pts-ish. LW will probably see them a bit cheaper.

>>51929661
Points for Late War aren't changing.

>>51929661
Going off of the leaked book, Tigers are 32 points with an optional 8 point escort.

>>51929722
Yes, I know LW points are changing initially. I think it's only a matter of time before we see EW and LW updated to v4 points-systems.

>>51931495
>are note changing
fixt

>>51924808
>I'm looking for inspiration for cool objective markers, for both Team Yankee and Flames of War.
>Do you guys have any home made ones to share?

Seconding this request.

It's always cool to see home made objective markers.

>>51925866
>>51925881
Those came out really nicely!

The sandbags are a nice touch.

>>51928435
>TY has the opposite problem currently, where enemy infantry is well armed with anti tank weapons and really horrible to dig out.

It's like everyone becomes Late War Americans with their Bazookas Everywhere infantry tactics.

I got a chance to observe a V4 game today. For all the concerns of it becoming a tank game, guns going down to 3+ save and eyes and ears going makes them pretty insane; a british armoured group got absolutely annihilated by 5cms and direct-fire howitzers. I did also notice that with AT plummeting so much on artillery the brit felt no need to not car park heavily; against his all-tank group the howitzers were more useful firing directly.

File: 2017-02-27 23.51.22.jpg (5MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5312x2988px

>>51933813

Here's one I made using the Feldgendarmerie blister:

File: 2017-02-27 23.52.14.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

>>51937202

And another one, WiP, using Peter Pig casualty figures. The halftrack will get a nice big Red Cross painted on the canopy.

File: 2017-02-28 00.29.39.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

>>51937251

And finally, even more WiP, this uses an Armie's Army FV436 command vehicle, and is eventually going to be a makeshift command post, with a cam net awning from the side of the vehicle.

>>51937202
>>51937251
>>51937720
Excellent work on all of those.

I think I am going to turn an unassembled Soviet Artillery HQ into an objective. I think it would work really well for some EW and MW Eastern Front stuff where command posts were in imminent danger of being overrun.

>>51937720
>>51937202

we have a german term for that

fukengrooven

File: a14e0743dc6e5a78e28508b6b3b81de8.jpg (80KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 640x480px

Comon BF, pic related should be your next project.

BMP

>>51933813
An airdropped canister full of berets for the bongs.

>>51943182
One with Scho-Ka-Kola and iron crosses too, while we're at it.

This weeks article is on the new Plastic M10 Tank Destroyer Platoon, specifically the M10c, commonly known as the Achilles.

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

>>51943398

Did they put their sprue connections right at the edges in the middle of the turret like the plastic T-34 kit?

File: Capture.png (57KB, 740x425px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 740x425px

Is this what critical levels of /cheers/ looks like?

>>51946223
>commie russian peasants
>capitalist adversaries

no that's critical levels of baiting

File: laugh.jpg (48KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 250x250px

>>51946223
*Laughs haughtily from across the ocean while I train my glorious capitalist army without time-pressure or threat*

Haha, those foolish peasants desperately throwing whatever they have against the germans for the sake of their survival, what scrubs.

>>51946223
Source? Because I need to slap a bitch.

>>51947321
BF's official Team Yankee facebook, on the newslink about the Turkish Leopard 2s being trashed.

>>51946223
>Is this what critical levels of /cheers/ looks like?

No, but it is what critical levels of /Untrained Asiatic Hordes/ looks like.

File: Che laughter.jpg (35KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x374px

>>51946223
> this is what capitalists ACTUALLY believe

>>51917743

In regards to Team Yankee.

Is it advisable to maximise your HQ choice?

I'm starting British armoured and with the starter box and the separate chieftain box you get 10 tanks in total. So I was thinking of running them in troops of 3 with 1 HQ, but it always feels like he'll get knocked out really quickly.

>>51949103
>Is it advisable to maximise your HQ choice?

There are a few ways to look at the choice to bring a second HQ, and honestly I am probably going to make this a bigger deal than it is.

Of course, it gives you one additional Chieftain that you can run in your formation if you feel that you need the extra tank. Less obviously, having the second HQ tank makes your commander more mobile and less bound to one particular platoon. Essentially you get one additional tank that can pal around with your commander without getting an out of command penalty.

If your formation commander takes a hit, it can reassign it to a tank within 6" that has no hits on a successful roll of a 3+ for mistaken target. If your commander is killed it can move over to a tank from the same formation within 6" on a 3+. Now of course you can do both of these things when your commander is supporting a platoon, but now you have an additional tank to act as armor when you are moving between platoons.

Losing a commander isn't really that devastating though, as all platoons in the formation need to be in bad spirits for a formation morale check. If you are choosing between the 2nd HQ tank and filling up your platoons, I would make sure all your platoons are full strength first.

>>51950205

Thanks for the break down. I did think, unless they're within 8" I can just reassign the hit. So really he's just an extra body.

I think I'll leave him at home and just stick with the 10 tanks. Bring another would have meant totally changing my list.

I don't know if you play British but what's your opinion on stillbrew?

>>51949103
I personally don't see the use of taking a 2IC tank.

Those are points that can be better spent on more support, or on increasing the size of your core units.

>>51952318
I don't play Brits, but in my opinion Stillbrew seems to be a good idea if you want to play defensively. If you want to play offensively it may be best to leave it off because the penalty to bog.

I guess you could put stillbrew on one platoon to form a firing line and leave it off another to have a maneuver element. Too bad there's not an easy way to magnetize it.

>>51952411

Yeah it's a bit of a bitch, if they make Challengers I would have liked the dynamic of having very elite tanks with more numerous ones. But for now I'll probably go with stillbrew.

>>51952411
>Stillbrew seems to be a good idea if you want to play defensively

Seconding this. It's good for defensive tanks that don't move much, but the cross check penalty will hurt you if you try to use them offensively.

File: 2017-02-28 23.02.41.jpg (102KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 800x450px

>>51937720

Update: this is what this TY objective might look a bit like with the camo net in place.

Also, I have learned about resizing pictures before uploading them. Now I am a less morally defective human being.

File: 2017-02-28 23.02.56.jpg (104KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 800x450px

>>51954366

And one from the front. I'm probably going to drill small holes in the big aerial holders on the vehicle, and have (removable) brass rod 'wire' in those; that'll form part of the attachment for the camo net.

Removable antennas because this is already about as deep as my figure trays.

>>51954394
I've been playing with holding a lighter under sprue and stretching to make aerials. Just need to see how well they hold up in my foam. They can bend quite a bit.

Does anyone know what the next force for TY will be?

Obviously V4 will be taking up everyone's time for the foreseeable future but I assume they have some stuff in the works?

>>51956310
I believe next up is additional books for US/ USSR.

>>51956310
From what I know, the release schedule looks something like:

- 4th Edition
- Mid-War North Africa - British and Germans
- Team Yankee - Expanded Soviet and American forces
- Mid-War North Africa - Americans and Italians

And that'll bring us into at least October or November, if not the end of the year.

Probably early next year will be Mid-War Eastern Front.

>>51957542
You think there will be any overlap with the TY and MW releases? GF9 have US tanks slated for July.

>>51957619
I doubt there will be too much overlap.

Half the reason we have T-55s in resin instead of plastic is because Mid War was eating up a lot of BF's production capability.

But that being said, we don't know the exact schedule.

>>51956343
>>51957542

Cheers.

Still excited but I was hoping they might squeeze in another TY force. One of the Smaller ones like Australia or something.

>>51956343
Can't wait for the new plastic kits, man.

>>51958830

What's on the cards? Yanks getting the M60?

>>51958981
Humvee and Apache too apparently.

File: article-2133506-12B7C745000005DC-200_468x350.jpg (29KB, 468x350px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 468x350px

>>51959067

MFW the UK only started operating them in 1998.

>>51958755
There has been speculation that Canadians could easily be added to Team Yankee since they use a lot of American and West German equipment, and would only need a few extra models of their own.

But that's nothing but speculation at this point.

>>51959067
I don't know about the apache. Seems like it would be a cross between the A-10 and the Cobra, which will either be really awesome, or too expensive to want to field.

I think some blackhawks with some units from the 101st would be awesome, though I am not sure how historic.

How many T-34 or T-34/85 do yo need to overpower a Tiger? How many SU-85 do you need to do the same?

>>51956343
>>51958830
>>51958981
>>51959067

i'd seriously offer a whore to any man who'd get me the list of goodies for the upcoming Team Yankee releases for any side...

So I'm debating between Brits and West Germans for TY. I've downloaded both books and looked at the lists and I'm still torn.

I know Brits are the more conventional combined arms with infantry, and they can also do the milan spam(which I wouldn't because I'm not a piece of shit) and they have air drop infantry.

So what is West Germany's thing? I know the Leopord 2 is a bitchin' tank and the gepard is apparently one of the best AA units? What else they got, what are their strengths?

>>51959796

The T-34/76 will at best only be able to bail a tiger from the side. I've had games in MW where I have surrounded a Tiger just to have all my shots plink off. Usually it's just one Tiger in MW. Luckily you can upgrade the T-34 to have the 57mm in MW which can penetrate the Tiger from the front at close range.

The T-34/85 does much better against Tigers. AT 12 can pen the front even at long range. Unless you are running heroes you'all have the standard penalties for Hen and Chicks, so it's best to stay still if you plan on shooting and use your numbers to overwhelm the Cats with dice. I tend to bring 7-8 T-34s per company. Depending on how you roll they should be able to handle 2-3 tigers. You'look have better luck at closer ranges, but if you can unload most of your company into a Tiger platoon at long range, it may be worth standing still to risk it.

The SU-85 has the Cat Killer special rule which lets you reroll misses at long range. They can be pretty effective against Tigers, since they can actually own at long range (on a 1). You still will need numbers to overwhelm the Tigers with dice, but the Cat Killer rule lets you trade fire more effectively at long range. The Panther fares better against the 85mm.

No matter what you are at the mercy of the dice.

>>51959861
Leo 2s are expensive monsters that will either clear the table for you or die to a stray missile and leave you hurting. The Gepard is the best unit in Team Yankee point for point.

Download Panzertruppen. It pretty much makes Leopard obselete. The Leo 1 is cheap, weakly armored, and can be fielded in Lots of numbers, but has a decent gun on it. Good for supporting the flanks. You can also Milan spam like the British using the M113 Panzergrenadier Zugs. West Germans are the most flexible force in TY.

File: 2A4.jpg (286KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 800x480px

>>51959861
i play West Germans. well, hypothetically, they have yet to hit the table.

>>51960031
you need Leopard to play Panzertruppen.
that, or be a cardwhore

>>51960064
So you're saying I should play Brits so we have different armies?

>>51959861

Can the Germans do a victory flip after they rain TOW's on the enemy?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceOpnujmm7Y

I rest my case.

Looking at maybe playing late war Germans and was debating between using Grey Wolf or Fortress Italy. Looking to play some sort of armor, preferably from a Heer or Goring list. I'm having some difficulties discerning some differences between the books beyond a couple of special rules and the lists available and I had a few questions.

I had heard Grey Wolf was superior but was directed to Fortress Italy because I enjoy StuGs and it has the capability to deploy more StuHs. Is that enough of a reason considering I could use the StuG Batterie from Grey Wolf?

Are there any good listbuilders available? I don't mind cross referencing but having gone through both books the way they lay out unit entries made for a lot to take in at once, having a single place to collect my thoughts as I play around with unit composition would be nice.

The local group told me to just work out a 600 point list with one combat platoon to get started with, is what I want to play even viable at that level?

>>51961217
Confident Vet StuGs are pretty much unilaterally 285 points across the board. Grey Wolf is better for armor all around, but HG StuGs aren't bad either. Pretty much any book in the game will give you the option to field StuGs. Grey Wolf gives you the option to field Romanian, Hungarian, or Finnish StuGs as well.

>>51961901
Correction. 285 for a 3 tank platoon, usually with the option to swap one StuG with a StuH 42 in a platoon.

>>51961901
>>51962115
Grey Wolf it is, I think at 600 I'll play a Sturmkompanie since it at least shares a lot of unit options with the StuG Batterie. How does this look as an all comers list to learn with? I know it has an uneven number of platoons since the sniper doesn't count but I can use Kampfgrup to compensate right?

>>51963038
Sturmkompanie - 595 Points
Confident Veterans

Sturmkompanie HQ - 45 Points
Company Command SMG team
2iC Command SMG team

Sniper Team - 50 Points

Sturm Platoon - 140 points
Command Panzerfaust MG team
2 MG Grenadier Squads

StuG Platoon - 285 Points
2 StuG G
1 StuH42

Rocket Launcher Battery
Command SMG Team
2 15cm NW41 Launchers

Would help if I actually posted the list.

>>51963049
>Would help if I actually posted the list.
That it would

I would personally scrap the sniper for a full Sturm Platoon, and maybe a few additional fausts on the HQ.

That said, it's 600 pts, it's hard to not make a godawful list.

(And kampfgruppe won't be able to compensate, unless you make a rump platoon of 2iC and a single MG team, or similar. Otherwise, you'll weaken your main combat platoon too much).

>>51963077
You can try dropping the sniper team, getting a shrek or two and kampfgruppe a ghetto tank hunter platoon.

>>51963077
>I would personally scrap the sniper for a full Sturm Platoon, and maybe a few additional fausts on the HQ.
Thats fair, it just seemed kinda fun to play around with one as a cheap way to fill out a list.

>(And kampfgruppe won't be able to compensate, unless you make a rump platoon of 2iC and a single MG team, or similar. Otherwise, you'll weaken your main combat platoon too much).
This does give me an idea though. I could always cut the rocket battery for the full Sturm Platoon and give fausts to my HQ squads, this way they don't need to Kampfgruppe. I would be losing out on the smoke and pinning but the StuH has smoke and the sniper can pin whole combat platoons without needed to range in. How does that sound?

>That said, it's 600 pts, it's hard to not make a godawful list.
It feels like 600 pts can be really rock paper scissors, or at least thats the impression I'm getting. Is it a recommended starting point just because its fast and for new players people build to teach? Or is it that every list at 600 is bad somehow so it balances out?

>>51963173
I would never have thought of that, can it still ambush? Theres so many options it feels hard to decide, but I'm just a noncommittal fuck I guess.

>>51963194
Any platoon can be placed in ambush if an ambush is an option. So its a possible cheap ambush unit.

>>51963240
Going to try and remember that, as far as I know though the 600 point missions we'll be playing don't have ambush as a rule. It feels awkward to me how short ranged a lot of infantry is, especially AT weapons. I wouldn't know what to do with the shrek platoon without the option to ambush beyond just hanging out with the rest of the infantry to deter tanks from rolling over them, but the fausts already seem to do that.

>>51963297
If you can get within 8", shreks have decent ROF and better FP than infantry, so they can be used to dig infantry or guns out of cover, but the main reason to bring the shreks in a kampfgruppe is for dat even platoon count.

>>51963352
That makes sense, and it would let me start with two platoons on the table. I'm guessing those should be the rockets and the sturms most of the time.

>>51963388
Yeah. I mean at 600 points its gonna be kinda wonky, but you almost always wanna start with your least mobile units on the table first.

>>51961160
Yes they can.

https://youtu.be/RGu45s1_QPU

Also the BO-105 can literally become one with the forest.

https://youtu.be/n9ZUXNeBoHo

>>51963428
>Yeah. I mean at 600 points its gonna be kinda wonky
Still looking forward to it. Any other tips for a newbie? Am I just going to be rolled by shermans?

>>51963516
At 600 points you arent gonna see very many tanks, if at all. If you do see tanks, you'll be defending. So just dig in, group up your shreks with your infantry, and use your StuGs. If he assaults your infantry, fuck him up with the fausts and shreks. If he tries to dig you out, it'll take way too long.

>>51963745
Right, just don't panic. Thanks for the help tonight, back to lurking then.

File: 20170301_224803-picsay.jpg (880KB, 2937x1407px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 2937x1407px

Politically correct boy scouts

>>51960408
we could.
or, we could gang up and fuck all commies that stand before us.

and our games would be simple training exercises.

choose as you wish.

>>51964491
Yes. I have a blister that I need to assemble up before a Berlin even in April. A panzerfaust for every 12 year old!

>>51964491
Very nice.

I'm impressed with how neat the armbands look. Those must require extreme concentration and very steady hands to paint.

>>51964491
Those are some impressive little snowflakes!

>>51964491
>>51965934
Yeah, wow. I could certainly never do detail work that small.

>>51959964
Only until the 57mm gets "corrected" in v4.

>>51963447

Can it be used to deploy troops though?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Er-tZGtMH8

Checkmate.

File: Surprise Motherfucker.jpg (45KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 720x540px

>>51968508

File: celebrate.jpg (639KB, 1024x796px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 1024x796px

>>51922029

>Faster play
>More flexible army lists
>Big tanks aren't an albatross anymore
>Light/medium artillery actually capable of killing infantry
>Fewer pointless command unit models/vehicles to collect/paint that do nothing in 99% of games

>>51922029
>>51970259
>Less historical accuracy
>Heavy artillery is pointless
>Attacks against top armor have been cut to AT 3 at the most because apparently a roof is proof against a 500lb bomb
>Light Tank movement is dead, cavalry move slower than infantry before a charge
>Transports are gone
>Assaults are now tiny as fuck but defensive fire is as huge as ever
>Only one observer for your entire army
>Everyone apparently has modern briefing, training, and control systems since command teams don't matter for shit
>carpark with more than 4 tanks in a platoon because of retard small 6" command distance
>Recce no longer is a solution to the hell of dug in vet infantry
>Game is much more rock-paper-scissors in what can beat what

>>51957542
I thought something about berlin was squeezed in

>>51970488
>Doesn't matter if 90% of ammo issued to unit was smoke, you only get one smoke bombardment per game
>Now are required to have more than one plane model to use them
>Absolutely no points changes in late/early war despite massive change in effectiveness for many units
>Mid war has fucking nothing atm and will take forever before we see anything of the eastern front

>>51970259
>>Faster play
Yeah this one's fair, though at the cost of having assault be useful for infantry.
>>More flexible army lists
If you wanted a panzer company or a couple of british armoured companies otherwise you can just get fucked.
>>Big tanks aren't an albatross anymore
Tiger's 25% of your points on a support choice that doesn't count for morale.
>>Light/medium artillery actually capable of killing infantry
Has to be compared with no way to lift GTG (and all units have a chance of moving and retaining it now) and infantry using their tohit to get hit by arty now, though, and losing the ability to more than tickle tanks.
>>Fewer pointless command unit models/vehicles to collect/paint that do nothing in 99% of games
Fuck you most of those were cool.

>>51970488
>>carpark with more than 4 tanks in a platoon because of retard small 6" command distance
Don't forget the fact there's no way to punish clumping. First 4e game at our club we had a wall of grants rock up and after a bombardment did nothing the german player just shuffled the 10.5cms up to direct fire where they did a fuckload more.

>>51969858
Can those troops carry a Milan though?

>>51970488

Really though, shouldn't heavy guns be off the table and be a command order or something? Maybe BF is wanting to phase them out of the game IDK. Mind you, they just released 25 pounders.

>>51971257
They tried guns off table in TOD, and they put ridiculous 18 on table guns in FoaN.
It is obvious they didn't make lots of selling by making guns off table.

Bunker Busters have gone from suck, to blows ass.

ROF 0 if they move, and otherwise are TY Brutal rule.

>>51971968

Yeah but that's what I mean. If they're reviewing their model range they might have wanted to just get rid of them and make all big guns off table. Have no model for them and just pay points for barrages. That's what they should do anyway.

>>51972084
The only thing the isu152 had going for it was the auto kill if you got that magical hit

Now it's Reroll save... Why bother, just get 122s and have better at for like 10 points more

File: C832596E-3CF3-4A48-AB38-CAF7E46B22BA_w1023_r1_s.jpg (60KB, 1023x575px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1023x575px

Now that coldwar is cemented down and we know its going to be their new cashcow and reasons to remake their nam franchise, when can we expect 'fun' coldwar stuff? I want to see the more interesting redfor/warsaw forces represented. Poland and east germany and russia are fine, but what about the Chinese, or even the Cubans?

Fidel was deployed and backed by the soviets quite a bit in the latter days of the coldwar, especially in africa. The cubans were super effective against their indigenous enemies, and against the 2nd world backed nations like southafrica which was backed and supplied by the brits and america.

Cuban special rules when? More interesting infantry rules when? Down with capitalist pigs when? African campaigns and splatbooks when?

>>51970488
>>Attacks against top armor have been cut to AT 3 at the most because apparently a roof is proof against a 500lb bomb

WW2 air support had a terrible of record of actually hitting tanks, tho.

>>51974046
>WW2 air support had a terrible of record of actually hitting tanks, tho.

Man, if only there was some sort of dice roll representing the chance of hitting the target.
Oh wait there is - and rather than changing that, they opted to weaken the bombs themselves.
Real 10/10 games design there.

>>51973942
When the AIW stuff gets ported over we should get the stats for all the 1960's era stuff to play tin-pot dictator with.

>>51974668
Is that the plan? Have the AIW stuff moved over to TY rules so they can be played against each other?

>>51974668
>>51975155

i like this plan...

>>51974617
Similarly, the changes to No HE to let it hit infantry/guns at +1 to hit. Why not just make them take a penalty to, since that actually would represent the problem of not having HE to blow shit up? Because battlefront.

>>51975347
Dorgive my ignorance on the subject, but didn't the Six Day War happen in the 60's? Wouldn't that tech get destroyed by mid 80's weapons?

>>51976419
From memory what is basically happening is that they're making a 'Early War' Team Yankee for the Six Day War and Vietnam.

Should I go with 45mm gun, or anti-tank rifles to counter mechanised infantry?

>>51976655
Ah, that makes more sense.

>>51976709
45mm guns, if I remember correctly, are only a little bit more cost and are better in pretty much every regard. If it were me, I'd go with the 45s. It also is dependent on era.

>>51977012
A lot of units from Vietnam-era are already in TY and were still in service. The M113, the Cobra, the Hind, the M109, the T-55, etc. Hell, most of the shit we use today is just upgraded 80's stuff.

File: cbt23.jpg (1MB, 603x963px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 603x963px

New Zealand Infantryman vs German Motorcycle Soldier: Greece and Crete 1941 (Osprey Combat 23)

In April 1941, as Churchill strove to counter the German threat to the Balkans, New Zealand troops were hastily committed to combat in the wake of the German invasion of Greece where they would face off against the German Kradschützen - motorcycle troops. Examining three major encounters in detail with the help of maps and contemporary photographs, this lively study shows how the New Zealanders used all their courage and ingenuity to counter the mobile and well-trained motorcycle forces opposing them in the mountains and plains of Greece and Crete. Featuring specially commissioned artwork and drawing upon first-hand accounts, this exciting account pits New Zealand's infantrymen against Germany's motorcycle troops at the height of World War II in the Mediterranean theatre, assessing the origins, doctrine and combat performance of both sides.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/bg8z36thjufq2di/Osprey+-+CBT+023+-+New+Zealand+Infantryman+vs+German+Motorcycle+Soldier+1941.pdf

>>51973942

I think AK47 Republic is what you're after.

>>51973942
Rhodesians when?

>>51977902
Thank you anon

Should I stick with the 3rd edition rules or switch to 4th then given how much stuff has been changed (from what I've understood for the worse)?

File: IMG_0194.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

We had a capture Himmler scenario last night. Essentially 3 separate engagements where the allies were looking to stop 3 convoys which might contain Himmler. I thought we were going to play a long narrow game when I first saw the pictures, but I was pleasantly surprised by the set up.

File: IMG_0195.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>51980271
A lot of the matchups were interesting. I had some Jagdpathers to try and stop a swarm of Chaffees and Hellcats supporting the 101st. It was like trying to swat flies with a sledgehammer. My infantry weren't able to keep the Chaffees from clanking around.

I have question about the french borne infantry company in early war.
Are the a mechanized or an infantry company? I know it might be a dumb question

>>51980271
>>51980312
Those are some beautiful tables.

How many tables was that all together?

File: IMG_0199.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>51982272
It was two 5x8 tables if I remember correctly. I think the terrain makes it feel bigger.

>>51972889
Not even the 122 version is worth getting, now. The 152 just got it's teeth completely kicked in, but neither ISU has a place now.

>>51980977
Which "french borne infantry company"? There seems to be at least two.
Do note, it's the classification (in parenthesis) that matters. Usually, there's a line under the name that just serves as the english translation.

File: 1485494171989.jpg (107KB, 641x492px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 641x492px

>>51946223
>scrawny paesants

>>51984111
Thanks it's the one with the trucks

File: cf2e2c8fd70d1f452c9c5af3c5232884.jpg (59KB, 361x480px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 361x480px

>>51973942
>Cubans

WOLVERINES!

>>51979658
I'd go give V4 a try.
While some stuff has been nerfed, a whole bunch of (generally weaker) stuff got buffed as well.

I'm personally looking forward to a whole bunch of the changes, since V3 does have a whole bunch of flaws that V4 attempts to fix.

How am I supposed to get 2.8 cm guns for my germans for V4 africa corps.

>>51985081
I realize this is supposed to be a gag, but leverage is a real thing. Supporting it with your arms vs guiding it with your arms and supporting it with your body. Also off center of gravity vs over it.

>>51979658
Our shop is probably going to steal some v4 rules and make a v3.5, because there are some nice changes, but there are many that are 100% unnecessary and just make things worse.

>>51989431
Buy sd.kfz 250 halftracks from psc.

Is there a way to look up what lists use a particular unit?

>>51992289
forces of war
unit finder (free attached feature)

pufferfish.

>>51992385

Thanks anon

File: 20170303_144939-picsay.jpg (308KB, 1748x834px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 1748x834px

Finished boy scouts.
another blister remains untouched though.

Slow day today?

Anyone have hobby-related plans for the weekend? Me, I have 5 shermans that I hopefully get to put some more paint on.

>>51995231
Currently working on some tonks for one of my little projects.
Just did a bunch of assembly and some conversion.

Could actually use some suggestions for that: I don't currently have access to plasticard/foamcore and need to scratchbuild a turret for a Type 3 Chi-Nu tank.
What kinds of materials would work well for the basic turret shape?

>>51995231
Going to assemble some T-72s and some Skytrex T-55s then work on priming and assembly lining them for paint.

File: Kursk-Ponyri.jpg (530KB, 1484x1024px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 1484x1024px

>>51995231
We're going to be doing a 5.5k a side Kursk battle tomorrow, based off the fight for Ponyri.

>>51995231
>Anyone have hobby-related plans for the weekend?

Editing Panzerfunk and assembling some West Germans for Team Yankee.

>>51995317
Update on this: currently building a the turret out of pieces of Magic: the Gathering cards.

Turret bottom and the angled top are done, so next I'll have to attach them to each other using a spacer, probably a spare piece of sprue.

Once that is done, I can go mount the gun and vertical turret panels.

>>51995231
Finishing painting the small horde of T-26s I have lying around, then maybe work on a few stands of Jalkavalki

File: doom-cannon-28194-medium.jpg (69KB, 277x401px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 277x401px

>>51996421
Using this?

>>51996372
Pics and after action report maybe? That sounds cool. What forces will you be commanding?

Volksarmee was a mistake

>>51996852
>Resin T-55s were a mistake

Fixed that for you.

File: Ride of the Devils.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51996830
I'll actually be reffing it. Some of the players involved are normally very slow, but we're doing this at a hobby shop and so will need to finish turns on time.

The russians will have some Strelkovy and support in the town and surroundings to start with, then will get reinforced with a tankovy company and some guards paras later in the battle. The germans have a panzer company (panzer IVs and IIIs), an infantry company, and an assault gun battery (Ferdinands and StuGs). Both sides will have some off-map artillery and air support, though the shorter ranged russian guns will also be on the map.

I'll do a batrep for it as well, in my usual style (though probably with a nicer background or something to fancy it up)

File: alexander-pavlenko-kursk-add.jpg (499KB, 1900x1000px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1900x1000px

>>51997534
I'll look forward to it and hope you guys have a great time.

>>51917743

Giving it a shot:

I used to play a lot of FoW 1st and 2nd ed when they were out, then I moved in nothingNearby, and there's no occasion to play (I'm lucky to be able to play P&P rpgs).
Is there any decent way to play online, or any community that does so?

>>51997864
I remember a while back there was somebody attempting to make a Vassal mod, but I think he abandoned the project.

>>51997915

Sad

>>51997958
Maybe it's a different guy, but there seems to be a guy on blog spot that made something for Flames of War.

Although I seem to be unable to post the URL here. 4chan doesn't like blog spot for some reason.

Just google Vassal Flames of War, and you should see it.

File: Time to change my pants.jpg (126KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1200x800px

>>51996894
Cheers.

In other news look at these T-55s from PSC

>>51997534
Yeah hope you guys have fun. We ran a Prokhorovka battle this summer and it was a blast. Just make sure you give both sides some AA, even if air support is completely random. The Ferdinand is really nasty in MW. StuGs are also pretty tough unless they get flanked.

>>51995231

Playing two games: one EW, and one TY. And I got a game of LW last night. Plus I might get a little bit of painting or assembling done. Oh, and my new buildings arrived, so I'll be looking at those lovingly.

>>51998226
>Those plastic T-55AM2s

I'll... be in my bunk.

>>51998226
Those are amazing. Genuinely makes me want to run them for Volksarmee now.

>>51996852
BF's retarded "elite vs spam" game design is a mistake.

>>51978086
I looked that up, and while it looks neat, i dont think you got what i was referencing. I was talkimg about more traditional warfare. Historical events like the uprising in angola and latter the intervention in the horn areas near uganda.

These would be nations similar to their respective parent superpower but with flavor changes. For example the cubans used a surplus of soviet equipment sold or given to them as fidel's price tag for being the soviet attack dog.

The cubans also excelled at creating and defeating guerilla forces. After their intervention in south america building asymetrical forces and then fighting them in africa. Special rules against forces like that? Or easier recruiting/stronger ally options with indigenous option?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_intervention_in_Angola

File: Oh that is grossly incandescant.gif (541KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 300x168px

>>51998226
>Those t55s

>>51996506
Nah, just one with a wierd flower on it

>>51999388
East German advisors? :d

File: pravda.jpg (443KB, 2400x1201px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 2400x1201px

For all my weeaboo brothers and sisters.

File: 1468637845586.jpg (14KB, 250x336px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x336px

>>52000479

>>52000479
This a cute.

>>51998226
Those look absolutely incredible.

File: to the fulda.jpg (58KB, 622x405px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 622x405px

>>51998226

me gusta....

>>52000479
send the panzerfunk email with a note for bartosz and i will see about making your KV-2 stats utterly GuP official.

cheers

>>52004455
Will get on it ASAP, I'm hitting the hay at the mo'.

Credit goes to my good friend for making the cards up and getting them printed professionally.

He also made and printed cards for the entire Oarai team, including all the main cast as crew cards, if anyone would be interested in seeing them as well (I'll have to get pictures in the morning).

>>51998226

Nice.

Does anyone ever think the PSC would branch into 15mm Napoleonics?

15mm is the patrician scale for historics in my opinion.

>>51999388
AK-47 Republic covers all that stuff, it's the go-to title for postcolonial African wargaming. Sounds more like you're wanting some kind of special snowflake ruleset to cater to your personal opinions on the subject.

>>51990858
But those aren't infantry mounted.

File: Katy Approves.jpg (78KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1280x720px

>>52000479
Well done, Comrade.

>>52005157
I'd be cool with that, so long as they made glorious plastic Austrians.

>>51995231
I might work on painting my own shermans a little more later. Also f5ing figurspel is important.

Besides that mostly my non-wargame hobby stuff this weekend I think.

>>52004888
Oh hell yes I'd be interested in seeing those.

I'm new to the game and want to use Köningstigers. King tigers. Where do I get them? Didn't see any on the flames of war webzone.

>>52000064
It's nice to get some use out of the garbage cards!

>>52009460
They're on the website. They sell different variants even.

>>52009577
Then I missed them. T(h)anks!

>>52009460
Speaking of King Tigers, are they in TANKS yet?

File: tumblr_nul40uTLDe1spfzgqo1_1280.jpg (243KB, 1010x690px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1010x690px

>>52009597
Not yet. They'll have to be remade in plastic for that and this year is all about Mid War.

>>52009460
Meine Neger. My go to for fielding KTs is Bridge at Remagen because it contains what I term 'Dirty' King Tigers, that they lack Tiger Ace Skills. You can squeeze six into a conventional sized list where most people would need to go to a much higher points bracket to do so, and you'll still get (Admittedly Crap) support options to go with them. Another reasonably good choice is Ardennes Offensive where they come as Fearless Trained rather than Confident Veteran, but still retain their tiger ace skills. V4 is going to be hugely favourable to King Tigers because most of the big Tank Killers, Artillery and Aircraft have been given a sound thrashing by the Nerf bat. Which means most cunts are going to have to try and outflank you to deal with you. Keep your front armour towards the enemy, abuse the turret facing rules, and include something else for targets that don't require overkill. .

File: Kommunistpartiet har möte i USA.jpg (173KB, 1000x786px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1000x786px

>>52009680
My friend, that is precisely what I want to do.

>>51998226
Sexy, but why is that mg so fucking thick? PSC's mg34 and such also suffer from that.

File: 1468503287789.png (189KB, 794x248px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 794x248px

>>52009935
It was almost as thicc in real life too
You'll thank PSC when they don't break off at the slightest breeze

>>52009866
Generally I run two in the HQ because that gives you forever two tanks that are always on the board. Not sure if V4 will change that or not. Then two platoons of either two or two and one King Tigers to bulk out the army, although you only need one KT platoon to be a legal list.
Then for support, two platoons of Volkssturm, which are getting better because in the next edition they count as Zero Points for the purposes of your total points remaining on the table, rather than taking up a platoon on the board which meant you needed to fuck around with even platoon numbers. Then a battery of three rockets, 15cm Nebelwerfers and 3.7s. Tailor as needed to accommodate local metas. I like the Ersatz SS Training Panzers as a counter attack and anti-infantry asset. Plus they ruined the shit of some shermans last game I played.

German Rockets are going to be Super Good in V4 because their bombardment will be doing mean things to infantry for cheap, and AA is pretty vital for deterring small vehicles and aircraft, take 3.7cm guns rather than 2cm guns of any kind. People have big arguments about quality rather than quantity of shots, but either way I prefer the 3.7s because they're better at killing things on the ground as well. Used to be that I'd recommend taking Eighty Eights, but FlaK 88s are suddenly being dethroned from their position as King Shit atop bastard mountain because they're switching to Self-Defence AA rather than regular AA.

>>52009935
Some of the proportions do look a bit on the "heroic" side but I think when the scale becomes this small and you are using the models as playing pieces some concessions need to be made for durability.

>>52009975
My shit from BF doesn't break off at the slightest breeze, but I guess that's because I'm not a cheetos-fingered neckbeard.

>>52010003
>they're switching to Self-Defence AA rather than regular AA.
NOOOO!

>>52010023
BF have thicc mgs too. Have you ever seen the .30 cal of a PSC Stuart? It's thinner than a needle

File: what in the i say what in the fuck.jpg (12KB, 260x194px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 260x194px

>>52010003
>they're switching to Self-Defence AA rather than regular AA.

>>52011014
>Trying to hit low-level attack craft with a gun designed to knock out bombers several km up.

>>52011056
This.

Fuckin wehraboos.

>>52011204
I suspect heavy AA from other countries (like the Sovier 85mm) will be getting the same treatment.

>>52011056
>not being able to snipe low-level fighters with ease

Cheers

>>52011259
Naturally. Only the krauts have been complaining so far though.

>>52011367
To play Devil's advocate here for a moment. Basically FlaK88s are the only heavy AA to see regular service on tabletops. Why would you bother with 3.7inch AA guns those are usually a rating lower, why would you bother with 85mm Soviet AA guns, you can get better AT weapons.

I am thinking about coming back to Fow, After a few years away (4/5 years). I see that 4th Ed is now a thing, 2 Questions, 1st, does any one have a link to a run down page where i can read bullet points of whats new / changed. And is my Overlord / Atlantik Wall books still good to use? Thanks for a reply. also what else in new on the WW2 scene?

>>52009460
Remember Zvezda sells plastic tigers for £3 a pop, too, so maybe grab a couple. As usual for Zvezda they don't have openable hatches or lots of optional stowage, though they're beyond most zvezda kits with an adjustable barrel and track stowage for the turret.

>>52009935
I'd prefer these ones, desu. BF's T-72 MGs are hell to get off the sprue and are constantly catching on foam and bending.

File: 1465657249554.jpg (88KB, 1277x671px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1277x671px

>>52010003
>Self-Defence AA rather than regular AA.

File: 7f238c075ac7aceac24a60d6fd3dea5a.jpg (51KB, 564x591px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 564x591px

http://www.wwpd.net/2017/03/fow-version-4-late-and-early-war.html

There might be some golden nuggets in this pile of shit.

>>52011504
1. There is no great summary, you'll have to read the WWPD threads and figure it out.
2. Atlantik Wall and Overlord still current, apparently not getting replaced, at least anytime soon. V4 release is also the new Mid War release, Late War will probably be years before seeing anything actually created and pointed for V4.

>>52011504
The interview Beasts of War had with Phil Yates gives a good basic overview of major changes and the rationale behind it.

It's in day one of the BoW event and also linked directly on the FoW frontpage.

File: 1476752391567.jpg (46KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x500px

>>52011997
>Wheraboos complain about this
>meanwhile they get an unexplained AT buff
>meanwhile Brits get cucked with nerfs all over the place for no apparent reason

File: IMG_0204.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Crusaders feel t h i c c

Not going to be blown off the table when someone opens the door.

>>52016203
Are those the new BF mid-war plastics?

File: IMG_0203.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>52016656
Yeah. FLGS got their demo kit in.

>>52016203
>>52016796
Very nice.

No hatches or commanders for the Crusaders though?

>>52007445

I'm still shocked no company has yet started making plastic 15mm Napoleonics. A company like Battlefront or Warlord could clean up.

File: IronMaiden1920x1440.jpg (2MB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1440px

>>51917743
Is stillbrew worth it for Chieftains?

>>52010431

If you look at the interviews with the designers they intentionally emphasises parts for the rule of cool. Which I'm fine with, they're a gamin piece.

>>52017754
Wasn't there some company out there that was trying to do a a Napoleonics game with a similar force building and game play style to FoW?

I could have sworn I've seen something like that somewhere.

>>52017791

We talked about this further up in the thread. Seems the consensus is if you plan on playing defensibly yes, but if you're going on the attack then maybe not.

I'm starting British and I'll probably be taking it.

>>52017816

I'm not sure how well FoW would translate to the pre-industrial era but I would love to have their designer studio and bankroll backing it up.

>>52017816
Napoleon at War... not that I've played it. I think plastics would be perfect for 15mm napoleonic because you don't need too terribly many poses and people will be needing a lot of little guys for a force.

File: IMG_0206.jpg (81KB, 650x441px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 650x441px

>>52017478
The hatches are there. Battlefront seems to have modeled theirs as one big hatch that opens forward like the T-34.

>>52016203
HEY now.

do the Grant sprues come with Lee Turrets?

i must know... thx!

File: oarai.jpg (528KB, 2680x1281px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 2680x1281px

>>52009050
Kept you waiting, huh?

File: oarai1.jpg (452KB, 2572x1239px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 2572x1239px

>>52018342

File: oarai2.jpg (450KB, 2584x1277px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 2584x1277px

>>52018365
Last one, my dudes. Also my camera is a potato.

>>52018375
>>52018365
>>52018342
Fuckin' Noice.

>>52017791

I played today, and my Stillbrew platoon managed to tank shots for about three turns without significant damage. Okay, they died in the end, but they tied up a lot of the enemy force for long enough. And that was their job.

>>52018342
>>52018365
>>52018375

Good job - can you post a file with all the tanks and crew?

Also, both versions of Turtle, but only one version of Ankou? Did a Pz IVH offend you at some point?

>>52018342
>>52018365
>>52018375
I'm not even really a fan of the anaime, and even I have to admit that those look fucking amazing!

Great Photoshop work on the cards as well!

>>52011421
Why would anyone play infantry tanks? Why would anyone play IS-2s, why would anyone play british sappers, why would anyone play with unarmoured transports? etc. etc.

>>52018250
Phil said on the BF forum ages ago that it does, despite the lack of mention on the box.

>>52018646

Would you mind sharing your list? Looking for inspiration.

>>52018677
They were cooked up by a friend around Christmas, and he decided on the the early series Panzer IV for something different than the usual IVH, though I plan myself to paint up the late series IV after I've completed my various other projects.

I'd be happy to upload the cards if someone could recommend me on where to actually go, given that I've never bothered doing it before.

>>52018752
Ta, but all the credit must go to my mate. He did a fantastic job on the cards especially, getting them all professionally printed.

Are late war flame halftracks useful or do they tend to die to enemy AT before they do much?

>>52018250
>>52018939
Also confirmed by BoW's review of the Desert Rats stuff. So you can go ahead and start on your Americans or Lend Lease Soviets.

>>52020557
Ok, so the small turret with the large hull mounted gun is for the US and the Soviets, correct?

And the larger turret and the smaller hull mounted gun is for the British?

I constantly get the Lee/Grant confused. Especially because they have the same designation.

>>52022535
You are right about the turrets, but as for the main guns I am not entirely sure. The later M3's got the longer gun added and since the British Lee was deployed before the Grant, I would assume the Grant would get a longer gun, but I am not sure.

>>52022535
And it certainly doesn't help that a good image search for either the Lee or the Grant will return pictures of both.

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

95KB, 920x619px

>>52022618
And I derped and got the names backwards. Yeah it's confusing as fuck.

>>52022737
>Yeah it's confusing as fuck.

You can say that again.

M3 Lee, M3 Grant, M3 Stuart, M3 Halftrack, etc

At least the Stuart and the Halftrack don't look 80% visually similar to each other...

>>52022805
>M3
37 mm Gun M3, a light American anti-tank gun
90 mm Gun M1/M2/M3, an American anti-aircraft and anti-tank gun
105 mm Howitzer M3, an American light artillery piece
M3 20mm cannon, a United States development of the Hispano-Suiza HS.404
M3 fighting knife, a World War II American issue knife
M3 machine gun, a variant of the M2 Browning
M3 submachine gun (AKA: Grease Gun), an American submachine gun
M3 tripod, a modern tripod for the M2 Browning machine gun
M3 Grant, a medium tank that was a variant of the M3 Lee
M3 Half-track, an armored military vehicle
M3 Lee, an American medium tank
M3 Scout Car, an American armored vehicle
M3 Stuart, an American light tank.

American Designation system during WW2 was fucked with a side of bacon. This is why the British gave their shit names.

>>52023366
The M in those designations means Mark. As in Mark 3 37mm. Or Mark 3 Light Tank.

>>52018891
>Why would anyone play IS-2s
In v3, because they were masochists. In v4, because they're fucking retarded.

>>52023603
M3 Grant (Translator's note: M stands for Mark!)

>>52018342
>>52018365
>>52018375
Excellent.
Mine probably won't come out looking as good.

Going for the finals colours, so it won't be as colourful either.

>>52018979

My list was:

2 HQ Chieftain
3 Chieftain with Stillbrew
3 Chieftain
3 Swingfire
4 Scorpion

HQ Mech
2 full Mech platoons with Milans
2 Spartan MCT
4 Mortars

4 Rapiers
4 Harriers

My opponent didn't bring any air, so the Rapiers didn't even come on, and the Harriers didn't do a lot; we played counterattack, and the Scorpions moved on, took cover, and proceeded to wreck a lot of light vehicles with their AT14/FP2+. I personally massively prefer them over Scimitars.

Many of my Chieftains got locked in position by having Minelets fired at them by a LARS platoon, but since I was (mostly) happy staying stationary anyway, I could take that.

>>52025174
I think 'colourful' was my friend's primary reason for going for the early series look.

Post pics when yer done!

>>52025927
The ones I got done so far are here: >>52016285

The other Oarai ones (plus a Zvezda Tiger II for Erika) have been basecoated. Might get some more of them done later today.

>>52025189
I'm taking part in my first tournament for Team Yankee in April, and my biggest worry is my opponent not using any air support, and rendering my Rapiers useless.

(Plus we're only playing 85 points, so I find myself having to sacrifice some form of support to keep it legal.)

>>52025956
Noice. Take it you're using decals for the insignia?

>>52025974

There's always Blowpipes, which are AA with a less-great reversionary mode against surface targets?

Otherwise, you will just have to decide what your tolerance for the Air risk is. Personally, I've not seen them do too much yet, although I know that they could be highly effective (if I were unlucky)...

>>52025974
What's your list? You could try to go with blowpipes. They aren't as good, but if someone really goes heli heavy, you could shoot Milans or try to shoot the heli's down with your Harriers. Strike craft could be hard to deal with due to their range, but there's always a chance they might not come on and if you are running a Mechanized list it won't be as big of a deal.

>>52026002
Yup, except for the Leopon there and the Anteater, since I couldn´t get the decals for those.

Freehanding the Leopon symbols worked out decently well, so I´ll be trying that for Anteater as well.

File: IMG_0209.jpg (90KB, 985x554px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 985x554px

Sandnigger BMP

>>52009680
>most of the big Tank Killers, Artillery and Aircraft have been given a sound thrashing by the Nerf bat
If by "thrashing" you mean "have been completely neutered and are now overpriced as fuck and outperformed by light mortars", then yes. Why the goddamn they thought a limit of AT 3 against top armor was a good idea, I don't know. They could have at least expanded the dam scale, top 0-2 with maximum AT of 3 just does not fucking work with a d6 system.

>>52018342
>>52018365

>Chi-Nu

WHOA! HOLD UP!!! HO!!!

where didja get that ....thing?

File: chi-nu.jpg (208KB, 1554x1144px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1554x1144px

>>52031652
My mate sourced it from a guy who literally hand casts tanks in his garage. That's what he told me anyway! The quality is nowhere near the same as the plastics or resins, and he spent an age doing a lot of clean-up work before he even thought about primer.

Not the best looking tank as a result, but we were limited in options.

>>52026091
>>52026106
Honestly, if I wasn't stretched for time (and money) as it is, I'd be investing in the Blowpipes. At least then they'd have a use beyond shooting down planes and choppers.

As it stands, I have no list beyond some brainstorming I did last night. The plan is a core of Chieftains with Stillbrew, and a mech platoon with Milans; I have M109s, Rapiers, Lynxes and Harriers as options, though I haven't settled on what to actually take in support.

I know earlier in the thread you guys were talking about King Tigers, but what about list recommendations for regular Tigers in Late War?

>>52034224
Regular Tigers are unfortunately neither fish nor fowl in Late War. Panthers are cheaper and faster and better armoured. The buff to the 17pdr made them pretty vulnerable.

Most people when they try to run Tiger Is do Kampfgruppe Hummel or the Training tanks from Desperate Measures

>>52034975
>too expensive to take in Mid-War
>runs into too much stuff that can kill it in Late War

Is there no happy medium?

>>52035131
In Mid War they're beasts. Especially now that V4 has taken the bat to a lot of the AT values. You'll buy one, and it'll sit there as a basically untouchable brick that you use to smash the faces of bastards you don't like. AT Value: Lots. Armour: Big. Training: Ubermensch

Only problem is that a Tiger costs an actual third of your points and doesn't count for certain morale rules.

>>52035366
>Only problem is that a Tiger costs an actual third of your points

Like I said, too expensive to take.

Alright; 50 points TY Brits to stary with. How shit is this list?

Chieftain HQ
> 1 Tank
Chieftain Armored Troop
> 2 Tanks
Chieftain Armored Troop
> 2 Tanks
FV432 Mechanised Platoon
> 4 GMPG teams with 66mm AT
> 3 Carl Gustavs teams
> 1 2" Mortar team
> 4 FV432 Transports
Spartan Blowpipe SAM Section
> 4 Spartans
TOW Lynx Helarm Flight
> 2 TOW Lynx

Was debating between the TOW Lynxs or swapping them for some Scorpions, but I do get the two Lynxs in the starter box which was part of their inclusion.

>>52038013
http://tylists.blogspot.co.nz/

>>52022805
Only the British actually gave the US vehicles names like Lee and Grant and Honey, iirc. Those were only adopted by the US post-war.

>>52038062
I'm aware that exists.

>>52025189

Cool thanks. I had overlooked Scorpions but I might give them a chance.

I'll probably be taking 3x3 Chieftains as well.

>>52038128
Right, I knew that.

But my point still stands. They're two tanks, both called the M3, both on the same hull and chassis, with the only visual difference between the two being the sponson gun, and the turret.

File: Flames.jpg (3MB, 2241x3984px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2241x3984px

What's the best book for US Infantry right now?

Is Devil's Charge still valid?

>>52038742
I think Devil's Charge got folded in to the new Bulge compilation.

>>52025189
>>52038406

Your list was pretty close to mine but I had more Chieftains. What does everyone think?

Chieftain Armoured Squadron.

1 Chieftain HQ - 6
stillbrew - 1

3 Chieftains - 18
stillbrew - 3

3 Chieftains - 18
stillbrew - 3

3 Chieftains - 18
stillbrew - 3

4 Scorpions - 4

Mechanised Company

Mechanised Company HQ - 1

Mechanised Platoon - 5
Milan Team - 2

Mechanised Platoon - 5
Milan Team - 2

2 Mortar Teams - 1

Divisional Support

2 TOW Lynx - 6

2 Rapiers - 3

Total: 99

>>52038128
Americans officially adopted nicknames in late '44, both existing British ones (Sherman, Stuart, etc.) and names for new vehicles the British never used and thus never named (Chaffee, Jackson, Pershing, Hellcat). Americans put General in front of these names.

>>52039110
Also Honey isn't British and nobody knows where Wolverine came from.

>>52039208
I've heard Wolverine was like "Gavin" in that the name never existed in reality and was only forced by historians later.

>>52038013
2 tank troops are worthless, my dude

>>52039552
Could be. Wolverine, Honey, Slugger, Ronson, Super Sherman, Isherman. All of dubious provenance.

>>52039208
Wolverine is actually a name though that was in use. It was used by the Canadians to refer to M10C 17pdrs.

>>52040210
You should tell the Canadian War Museum that, they don't seem to know. Odd it's always the 3" version called Wolverine in games, or that the Canucks didn't use Achilles, the official British name (for 3" and 17lber) from early '45.

PS do your jobs and lock this one, janitors.

>>52039208
>nobody knows where Wolverine came from.

The Weapon X program.

>>52039097
Solid list. I like it.

New thread?

New thread here:

>>52036570