Flames of War General /fowg/ Tripfags and weeaboos edition

File: tmp_20465-1455_913169580_big-578764613.jpg (343KB, 583x800px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 583x800px

>>52036570
Are all these new mid-war tokens and artillery templates from Battlefront cardboard? They look like it.

File: 1C3D7384-CD8D-4FB9-89DC-800CF5F2B80A-4111-000007A2BEB2475C_tmp.jpg (198KB, 481x500px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 481x500px

>>52037075
They're opaque white acrylic with art on top.

>>52040689
Still look chincier than the old translucent ones.

>>52040689
Not bad.

Not great, but not bad.

>>52040689
Wow. Those look kinda awful.

I was considering buying some, but if they look like that, I might as well just make my own.

File: IMG_1954.jpg (211KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1200x800px

Reposting in case anyone hasn't seen it yet:

Plastic Soldier Company's T-55AM2s

Is it worth getting into flames of war if i'm already enjoying team yankee?

>>52046508
V4 MW is essentially Team Yankee but in WW2 North Africa, so if you enjoy team yankee, you will enjoy that too.

>>52036570

Not to be a pain in the arse but can people start putting a link to the previous thread in the OP in future.

>>52046508
A lot of the new 4th Edition rules are carried over from Team Yankee. So the rules and the flow of the game should feel similar.

>>52046557
What would the reason be for that?

I can understand linking to the new thread FROM the old thread, but why link to the old thread from the new one?

>>52046656
To remember who they should kill in the new thread and if for some reason in the old thread there is a random pdf.

>>52046656

In case you ask a question or something and thread has archived by the time you come back. It's useful for slow moving threads like these. Doesn't take much effort.

>>52036570

So apparently the BBC hates Girls Und Panzer because it sexualizes children.

http://www.otakutale.com/2017/bbc-interviews-girls-und-panzers-character-designer-fiction-like-this-should-be-banned/

It's a sad inditement of the world when shit like this happens.

>>52046974
Just leave it in a tab that re-opens when you open your browser again.

You can still view threads for a while after they die.

>>52047098
>GuP sexualizes children
Had that women even seen the show?

>>52047098
I'm not quite sure what side to take here.

On the one side, they're just cartoon characters, and not even all that sexualized from what I remember of the anime.

On the other side, Japan has to put signs up on their public transportation that say "Beware of perverts". They're hardly innocent. All the weirdest fetishes come from Japan.

>>52047098
It's not the BBC as a whole, it's this one stupid woman who's on a crusade against all Anime because she's got serious brain issues.

>>52047249
Depends have you? Not that I'd defend the stupid fucking woman who's harassing the man who brought us our Queen and Saviour Yukari, but there's at least two bathing scenes in the nude. I don't know about sexualisation, but it is still something you wouldn't get in the west.

The Otakutale article also misses Takeshi Nogami burn of a rebuttal: "stop using a Japan as a distraction from domestic British sexcrime." (sic)

File: girls und panzer.gif (2MB, 850x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 850x480px

>>52047098
algabeeba has never liked anime or any competition in the tv marketplace or in childsexualistion


But girls und panzer? it's the least sexualized anime i've seen.
It's cute girls driving tanks making having a good time.

>>52047249
no this is a bbc documentary of course they haven't seen it they don't need to, they've got a narative to perpetuate.

Very appropriate edition edition.

>>52047249
Of course not. Journalists walk through Akihabara, snap a few pictures of some loli-looking characters then slap them on an article about of culturally sick japan is, above a vaguely worded story about the 5000th muslim rape of the year.

>>52047424
>no this is a bbc documentary of course they haven't seen it they don't need to, they've got a narative to perpetuate.

>implying that only the BBC engages in propaganda this blatant

$$$$$$$$$$$$
Previous thread.

>>51917743
^^^^^^^^^^^&↑&

>>52047355
>It's not the BBC as a whole
It pretty much is 2bh.
The BBC is a few gems in a pile of dogshit m8, not the other way around, which we have the privilege of basically being taxed for.

Is it just me, or finnish are in deep shit in V4? With all the artillery rules and such

>>52049853
Are you anyone other than Germans and Americans? Then V4 is going to suck for you.

>>52049994
And for other among other it will suck waaaaaay harder

>>52048625
The BBC does the important job of providing a minimum standard for news broadcasting in the UK. The papers might not be so shit if we had a nationally funded newspaper.

>>52050303
If a media outlet cant survive without the state propping it up then it doesn't deserve to exist.

File: Thomas_Sowell_cropped.jpg (14KB, 220x268px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 220x268px

>>52050233
>>52050673
careful because it's not the state that funds them it's tax payers.

you've got to remember the government dosen't make any money it has to take it at force in taxsation from the wealth producers in the country.

would you really trust a government newsnetwork to inform you.
>here is the news, everything the government did today was very good and the opposition were eating babies, now here is the weather

>>52050673
m8 have you seen our papers

>>52050865
>you've got to remember the government dosen't make any money it has to take it at force in taxsation from the wealth producers in the country.
A government's society-insurance. If you don't have a government, or have one that doesn't function, you get... Most of central africa during the cold war, or a load of parts of the middle east. "Wealth creators" are dependent on a functional society to avoid warlordism.

File: tmp_27265-20170306_1958041320757247.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

Return to topic. What's everyone working on? I have some Calliopes and a Whiz-bang that I'm too drunk to finish.

>>52051326
I need to gear up to finish my KTs, so waiting for a break in the weather to start spray painting them. Need to figure out what colour spraypaint I need to paint the T-72s etc. I really should get a spray can because I hate hate hate trying to do second undercoat by hand.

File: DSCN6962.jpg (631KB, 947x977px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 947x977px

>>52047249
>>52047098
>>52047355
>>52047424

to be honest, the 6 ova's i kinda skipped because 1/2 of them were swimsuit issues, and i'm a grown woman kinda guy. i do not fap to GuP...
those fell right n the trap of cherry picking SJW's who never saw the show and are targeting peeps who never saw the show, to hate on the show.

fucking how do we purge the liberals of SJW? they shit up the goodness of the left!

based Nogami.

>>52047438
don't remind me how racist their sex crime reporting is. there is a reason i stopped caring about /pol/

>>52049853
i think they will turn out fine, due to their lower tube prices and the allied formations rule...

>>52050865
*this*

>>52051326
pic related....

>>52047098

Holy shit all the butthurt over a cartoon. The media should be allowed to ask these questions.

Japan is the country where getting groped on a train is a common occurrence and gangs regularly force women into the porn industry, but none of this ever shows up in police statistics because 'muh fucking honor'.

Plus the Jap police tried to seize the fucking recordings, that's China level of damage control.

>>52051689
japan is not an innocent country...

still, they should have picked on Kodomo no Jikan or Boku no Pico or something....

GuP is very unsexual compared to 90% of other anime.

Daily reminder: anime is degenerate and Japanese pop culture is fucked.

This weekend: first purchase of Romanians.

>>52051689
None of that has any relevance though. What is this is a vendetta-level of targeted character assassination from a woman who seems to hold some very strange ideas. I thought we were past this shit when Jack Thompson was disbarred: Unless you're already mental, Fiction does not have an effect on reality.

File: IMG_0212.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>52051326
Working on some T-55s and T-72s. 14 tanks but less than 30 points. Hooray for the Volkspamee

Thanks to whoever posted the tablet versions of the TY books. I know the main rulebook is already on the mediafire, but any chance of a nicer PDF being made of the Team Yankee rulebook for completion sake?

>>52051780

I agree with you but it's not a crime for someone else to have another opinion and back that opinion up with evidence.

Also all this butthurt has got everyone talking about it, which was her aim since 95% of people don't care.

File: 1468475246806.jpg (22KB, 299x246px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 299x246px

>>52051780

you would be amazed how many americans i've met that actually believe what they see on TV.

they come in levels, too.
...some believe reality shows
...some believe those shows like Ancient Aliens or the Merman Documentary.
...some...even believe in fictional characters being real, or that celeb actors in sex scenes are actually having sex....

they are stupid.

i can believe it if some brits have similar problems...

File: Screenshot_20170307-105717-picsay.png (389KB, 996x943px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 996x943px

Will this list work well in V4?

>>52053478
don't see why not....

>>52053478
Your AT guns are more survivable, your Shturmoviks might actually be more useful. You really should consider getting Mortars in there though. Or the El Cheapo Dirt bag Katyusha battery that only needs two launchers.

>>52047527
well the BBC is paid for bby the taxpayer, I'd kind of expect them to be impartial.

>>52051901
are the plastics out then?

What sort of things makes a US list in team yankee good. I want to run the abrams, cobras and some infantry but not sure what to back them up with.

>>52055939
I run an Abrams combat team and they need at least 7 to be effective. 9 is preferrable. If you take Cobras you need 4 to keep them from running the moment they take hits. US infantry is very good against anything but Soviet T-72s. US arty is quite good as well. A-10s are really good at absolutely demolishing any vehicles they see, but you lack real AA.

>>52056006
How many m109s are worthwhile? Is the full six overkill?

>>52056144
Honestly 3 is fine. 6 is a bit of a points sink and also is difficult to keep out of the line of fire. Take the laser guided rounds to make them worthwhile against tanks.

>>52055820
Not yet. I bought some Skytrex metal T-55s.

>>52051566
>liberals
>left
Liberalism's centrism and always has been. "Socially progressive and economically conservative" has never been able to deal with the fact 90% of social problems come from economic problems.

>Flames of War General
>discussing modern politics

Come on guys, knock it off. This isn't the comment section on CNN.

>>52056006
>US infantry is very good against anything but Soviet T-72s.

I don't have much experience with US infantry specifically, but infantry in general in Team Yankee tends to be pretty food versus tanks and other vehicles. Especially if their backed up by some kind of missile vehicle (ITV, Swingfire, etc) nearby.

And US mechanized can get access to tons of ITVs.

>>52058110
>pretty food

**pretty good**

Damn early morning typos. You'd think I'd learn not to post before I've had my first cup of coffee.

>>52058110
Yeah, and when the ITV gets one shot, the platoon goes away.

>>52058110
>>52058125
>Damn early morning typos.

You also screwed up their/they're/there.

>You'd think I'd learn not to post before I've had my first cup of coffee.

Go back to bed Eagles. Your day can only get worse from here.

>>52047438

They then get arrested for harassing shopkeepers, and spend 3 days in lock-up.

When the article detailing this on the BBC website reaches the part where they would normally claim they weren't charged with anything or weren't doing anything objectionable the article curiously changes the subject to a vaguely worded interview with a local Japanese SJW.

>>52058145
The ITV is ideally concealed and gone to ground so is going to be a minimum of 6 to hit. If you can manage to get a night battle, things only get better for the Americans, as anything without Thermals will be looking at a 7 to hit.

>>52051975
http://www.mediafire.com/file/1k4i6j6rz4r5j71/Team+Yankee.pdf

Enjoy...

>>52058145
How? You're hitting it on 6s with a platoon that only gets 1 shot each and costs like a third of your points. It's going to lose to the BMP-horde but to kill that you need airmobile or panztruppen.

Hey, anyone ever noticed the best TY lists are really expensive to put together? Hmm...

>>52058459
You can almost match the BMP horde in numbers if you spam enough ITVs so you can beat them even without Milan spam or Leo1 spam

>>52058677
Yeah but you don't need ITVs to kill BMPs, and the BMP's RoF 3 that goes straight-through ITVs is a nice way to beat their really hardcore hit numbers.

The main problem with itvs is the number of platoons you need. A lot easier to get 16 BMPs on the table than 16 itvs when facing missions with reserves

File: frankfurt marx.jpg (142KB, 778x800px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 778x800px

The new Command rules look fucking atrocious for Soviet armies.

>>52057623
This guy gets it

>>52058244
>Enjoy...

Very Nice.

This improved quality PDF of Team Yankee has been added to the scans database in place of the older scan.

http://www.mediafire.com/?8ciamhs8husms

File: a-10 (2).jpg (192KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1280x720px

>>52060486
>16 BMPs

And then along comes some A-10s, Harriers, or Tornadoes.

>>52051566
Dat a Graze (or one of the countless variants)?

>>52060731
>The new Command rules look fucking atrocious for Soviet armies.
The new morale rules, though...
Basically bringing big Soviet blobs with centralized command means you have unwieldy but robust units. An interesting trade-off.

>>52058244
Thanks!

>>52063903
>low and slow air units
[laff track]

File: FOW1.jpg (5MB, 4048x3036px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 4048x3036px

Working on a batrep for our giant Kursk game. Turns out 50+ pictures that are 5mb each gives plenty of opportunity to grab sections of the battlefield, but it takes forever to upload or do anything with them. And it'll make getting the PDF under the /tg/ 8mb limit tricky.

Anyway, here's a teaser of the forces before they deployed. Goddamn are there a lot of russians.

>>52064228
>Graze

it is. an almost Battletech scale one, to be precise....

>>52066352
That table layout looks beautiful.

But all those unpainted minis are a sin.

>>52069394
That's what happens when people are out of the hobby for months because their group contact leaves, and they don't do any painting in the meanwhile.

Also our club is really bad about painting in general.

File: i came to laugh at you.jpg (120KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 640x480px

>>52055807
I've got bad news for you.

File: 20170308_174900-picsay.jpg (496KB, 1837x1263px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 1837x1263px

Finished a hail battery

>>52071574
Noice!

So General topic.

Other than the usual staples of this question (Soviet Marines and better Lease Lend Tank Brigades.), What is a formation you'd like to see in Flames of War?

If it can ever be proven that it was in action, Kampfgruppe Kummersdorf with a crazy mismatch of tanks, Cruiser Mark IIIs, a T-35, KV-2s, Churchills, M14/41s, Shermans, T-34s. I'd like to be able to play a army where none of the platoon have vehicles from the same era at all.

Also if you want your questions answered on Panzerfunk the /fowg/ podcast, please submit them here and we'll get to them as soon as possible on the show.

>https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeOBxEJbNzS_Ec7I76zQmCU9P7o0C5bAgcXriKQ4bOWBp4QkA/viewform

>>52072384
I know Soviet Airborne gets mentioned frequently but I reckon they'd be fun to go up against.

>>52060731
You sure?

It might not have anything to time preference.

>>52055070
I've found that the cheapo 2 Katy with extra crew option is very worth it, but the full 8 are great for offensive lists- you force the enemy to respond to just the front, which means the glass cannon katys maul away at inf with a fervor. In the last tourney i had an attacking list in, the 220 pt katy unit (660 in 3 games) mauled 1200 pts of infantry and gun teams, easily making back twice their points.

File: Full Army.jpg (4MB, 3120x4160px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3120x4160px

>>52066352
there's still space in the russian deployment zones, so something is wrong.

Attached is my army i fielded in a 5500 pts game recently (1v1) and that's mosly veterans and some Hero trained.

>>52073035

Soviet Airborne would just be better trained standard infantry for the most part. And in the only operation they did they got rekt.

File: Turn 1.jpg (4MB, 3120x4160px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3120x4160px

>>52073388
Turn 1 deployment without reserves

>>52073035
Guards regiments early in the war are Soviet Airborne, they just ran out of planes to airdrop in.

File: Reserves.jpg (3MB, 3120x4160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3120x4160px

>>52073402
The reserves are by themselves a full army.

(unfortunately i don't have the pictures of the opposing army nor the battle atm)

>>52047098
Firstly this account is entirely from Nogami's perspective, he recounts a few sentences from a 3hr interview, an interview that by its subject matter should push and challenge the subject.

I'd be curious to see what was left in because this will get cut down to a few minutes for the screen.

Secondly; Girls und Panzer is blatantly sexualising children... and tanks. You can argue "but... meh Japan" and cite cultural differences, but at the end of the day the production team are trying to appeal to you via a mix of delicious delicious AFVs and knee-high socks.

That's at least worthy of reflection and/or criticism.

>>52073388
It was a larger than normal 7.5' x 6' board, which is part of why there's room.

>>52073450
Thirdly, the thread had stopped talking about it, so thanks for stirring the pot again.

File: Commisar 3000 Cover.jpg (553KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 1024x768px

The first episode of the Commissar 3000 is here if you want to hear me prattle on about Panzertruppen (Leopard 2.0) and why statistics say the Leopard 1 will spank the T-55.

Bit of a rough edit by a shit presenter, but there might be some good insight if you are interested in West or East Germans for Team Yankee.

https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-n87js-687387

>>52073393
>better trained standard infantry
So, veterans, yeah?

>The only operation
What is August Storm.

>they got rekt
They got dropped outside their drop zone and their support was delayed, and despite that many of them fought for days then spent weeks as or fighting with partisans.

Looking at other catastrophic drops with heavy losses, we turn to market garden, where we have armies of fearless vets with special rules.

>>52073908
I'll have to listen to that.

File: ScreenShot_17-03-08_21-04-48-000.jpg (320KB, 1680x945px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 1680x945px

I was waiting 2 minutes for this match. Why I am forced to play with people who have hundreds of hours played more than me AND advantage in being 6stack. This is not acceptable.

>>52077730
Wrong thread, mate. VERY wrong thread.

File: Right+down+to+the+thousand+yard+stares+of+the+horrified+_577382d883d8b77b86d433e766dcb17a.jpg (396KB, 1000x1288px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1000x1288px

>>52077730

File: docu01578a.jpg (30KB, 610x400px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 610x400px

Does anyone still have the v4 scans? I checked the mediafire link in OP but i didnt see them. If they are named something special other than 'V4' then please let me know.

Im trying to learn it before a "showcase" game this weekend. They want me to play but i have no idea on the new rules. On a scale of % how much different is the new rule set? Is it just tweaks of the crap stuff or did they gut it and rebuild?

Any help appreciated.

>>52078515
You're looking for:

El Alamein 4th Ed Leak, Afrika Korps 4th Ed Leak, and Desert Rats 4th Ed Leak.

As for the rules, there is a lot of similarities to Team Yankee.

What's the difference between Flames of War, Bolt Action, and Crossfire? Is there a reason to play one over the others?

>>52078815
Bolt Action is a Squad Level game, so single tanks and infantry squads. Where as Flames of War is a Company level game.

It's your choice on what you play, and a lot of people play Bolt Action and Flames interchangeably.

>>52078884
Can the same models be used for both?

>>52078915
No, Flames is 1/100th scale, and Bolt Action is 1/28th

>>52078929
You mean 28mm. Not 1/28.

>>52078915
No... sorry mate.
Bolt action is a squad or platoon level game. Its a skirmish style wargame meaning that it uses single man models not stands like Flames of War. If you want to know what its closer to Bolt-action will be like ww2 version of WH40k with better rules.

flames of war is a lot like the WH40k epic level (tiny miniatures) so it has lots more models and groups of models. Infantry stands are fireteams not single dudes, and will compose platoons in companies not sections in platoons.

The distinction is mostly scale and scope. Do you want a large battle, or a firefight. If its a battle: go flames of war. If you want a firefight and individual dudes, go with bolt action.


IN OTHER NEWS:
will we see a redo of the OSS and SAS batallions in v4? early and mid war are where these units shine and it will be fun to play them. Something about the gamble inherit in their rules makes me enjoy playing them. i just hope they use more indigenous troop choices. Based on OSS deployment in and around India/Burma i've researched they should be able to create platoons of Indigs with various roles (mortars/MGs/Submachine guns) and give them proper hit and run rules so that they can fire at a decent ROF and still move away from their ambush. possibly be able to reverse their shooting and moving step or give them a better stormtrooper style movement.

>>52078674
The el alamein 4ed book is team yankee. Is it supposed to do that? are the rules now the same? the pictures arent ww2 at all.

>>52079162
It's a early editing version that is, yes, essentially the TY rules. The final version has proper pics and stuff, but this sort of stand in is fairly normal for in-production books.

>>52079229
okay. But the rules are correct yeah? so the crunch wont get me in trouble, the pictures are just wrong.

>>52073908
Excellent first episode.

A great review of Panzertruppen and a good analysis of the Leopard 1 vs the T-55AM2 and the T-72M.

Also, I loved the Tetris music at the end.

>>52079350
>But the rules are correct yeah?
In a lot of places, yes.

>>52079541

Thanks for the listen Eagles!

>>52077730
How did this even happen?

File: 11742952761280.jpg (527KB, 1153x1065px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 1153x1065px

>>52073450
>an interview that by its subject matter should push and challenge the subject.

When has western media ever been about that? Some pencil-neck journalist wants to push an agenda and will steamroll any facts or nuance in their way to manufacture outrage. If recent events haven't raised any skepticism in you, I have no idea what would.

>Secondly; Girls und Panzer is blatantly sexualising children

I don't think you watch much anime if you think that's the case. The girls are an important part of the weeb appeal, but I wouldn't call it "blatant sexualization" just because they wear skirts. Japan has "cute culture" where neoteny can be admired in a non-sexual way.

>>52079891
Not a problem C3K.

I was curious to see how well you did, and what your opinions were on Panzertruppen, the Leo 1, and the T-55.

Also, Panzerfunk has a Facebook page now.

Search for Panzerfunk Podcast on Facebook, and Like and Share to spread the word.

>>52073908
Not promising for the East Germans but puts to bed the panic mongering people have been whipping up over T-55 spamlists.

>>52073908

>the Marder slot in the M113 formation is a typo said BF, they have errata'd it so the art and product code is the authorative deal.

>>52080190
> The girls are an important part of the weeb appeal, but I wouldn't call it "blatant sexualization" just because they wear skirts.

The show goes beyond that in the OVAs (extra episodes released after the main series), which feature lots of bikinis and almost no tanks. Hell, those OVAs don't exist for any other reason - they're pretty terrible.

>>52082870
I've watched stuff like Strike Witches (which does use stuff like nudity and yuri as a sales point) and I believe GuP's service is mild enough to be dismissed as harmless "slice of life" moe.

Please stop talking about the GUP documentary, we're basically the only people who are.

>>52082380
I think you'll find in the Volksarmee review that the East Germans are not quite hopeless. But yeah, the T-55 should not be engaging NATO armor head on. Despite the seemingly robust (for the price) armor on the T-55, slow firing and NATO doctrine (concealment/hull down, gone to ground) completely wreck the value of the T-55 in armor on armor matchups.

If anyone wants to see my spreadsheets let me know on discord. I don't think I did a great job of explaining the math.

>>52082611
Thanks for the clarification. I had seen that on the Facebook groups and should have made it a point to check the update FM101. I thought it was an intentional move to cut down on Milan spam. I gotta get me some M113s.

>>52083835
You said a few times that you Normalized the numbers, but never really explained what that meant.

But your point still got across.

>>52084263
I started with the kill % + 0.5 * bail % for each firing situation.

From there I divided that I divided the above number by the point cost for the shooting tank. I assumed T-55s cost on average 1.5 points, half of the Leo 1. That's what I meant by normalizing the data. I could then get a more even comparison.

I also did another calculation where I simulated 6 T-55s engaging 3 Leo 1s. I tried to factor in morale by adding value for any simulation that resulted in the Leo 1 Zug taking a morale test.

Using either method, the T-55 was only equal to the Leo 1 for the most ideal shooting scenario, as I mentioned. The range, speed, cross value, 4+ to hit and small unit size of the Leo 1 all work together to ensure the T-55 will be hitting the Leo 1 on 6s or 7s. While the Leo 1s will likely be hitting the T-55s on 3s or 4s. Much better odds even when you factor in the armor.

I'd rather pay 3 points for a T-55 that doesn't have slow firing, but at least you can deploy the T-55 on a wide front and try to threaten your enemies support.

Part of the V4 forces is up. Note there are already errors that contradict the V4 conversion book.

>>52081472
Liked and shared on my YouTube channel's FB page for ya!

File: IMG_3630.jpg (84KB, 350x468px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 350x468px

Can anyone find me a higher quality pic?

>>52084685
Where is it up if i may ask?

File: IMG_3076.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

My latest Ramble, on the British Matilda II Troop in EW FoW;

http://theflamescorner.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/flames-of-war-matilda-ii-br052.html

Is flames in a good place to start or am I fucked?

>>52085277
No, you should be fine, you can even learn the rules at the same speed as us who have to re learn the rules

File: Capture.png (923KB, 1005x624px) Image search: [Google]

923KB, 1005x624px

>>52084685
Too right!!!

>>52085277
Nah it's all good man

>>52085277
You have joined us at literally the eleventh hour for the current edition. So maybe wait a month for shit to calm down first.

>>52084727
Thank you.

>>52085277
>Is flames in a good place to start or am I fucked?

There is a new Edition literally coming out in a few days. Opinions seem to be split on wether or not this is a good thing, or a disaster of biblical proportions.

>>52085393
>eleventh hour

More like minutes to midnight.

File: 20170309_184330-picsay.jpg (107KB, 937x440px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 937x440px

In progress

>FLGS is only getting 20 rulebooks for release of V4.
>There's at least forty people on the list.
>Am busy on Saturday.
Goddamn it.

>>52088184
Battlefront's shit logistics strikes again.

Cheers

The force of war has been changed to V4, but nothing has changed. Point, Arsenal is the same. What has changed?

File: Screenshot_20170309-213202-picsay.png (493KB, 993x1431px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 993x1431px

>>52088313
When you see warriors like Rudel, you may notice what is changed.

>>52088985
However, the artillery Arsenal should also change. bombardment AT 5,4->3 ; But it did not change.

>>52084487

My group has started their first TY league since the release (last league ended just as leopard got released) and our initial impression is that tanks in general might be over pointed.

NATO players are struggling to fit in more than a platoon of heavy armor which only seems useful (vs the alternatives) if the PACT player goes heavy on the T-72s. But as a PACT player myself I'm finding it hard to take T-72s instead of the BMP blob which has twice the firepower and a load of infantry.

Oh and yeah T-55s are useless against armor. Basicly a BMP-1 that can assault infantry.

>>52089137
I should add that we arent going full chicken little just yet as our initial impressions often end up being wrong.

>>52088184
Battlefront failed to produce enough of something for a major product launch?

No...

That can't be possible...

</sarcasm>

File: IMG_0159.png (658KB, 1281x720px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 1281x720px

>>52089137
>>52089160

NATO MBTs, especially the Leo 2 are a bit feast or famine. 3 Leopard 2s can destroy half the enemy force or they can get picked off by a lucky missile or frogfoots that slips by your air cover. The worst is when they run away after a couple of bails.

Infantry is so sticky in Team Yankee as there aren't many good ways to dig them out with weaker assaults, proliferation of integrated AT, lack of breakthrough guns, and lack of any arty rules. We've found that the best way to take infantry out is to pull up the Gepards and throw dice at them until you finally chip away the AT assets. Or if you are desperate you can charge your Leopard 2, Abrams, or T-72 in and hope for the best.

I think that's why BMPs seem like a much better option. They have the high AT and also drop a swarm of infantry that is tough to dislodge. That said West Germans can spam out Luchs and Gepards that make short work of BMPs.

I've found that most the balance comes from the scenarios and the mission selection PDF. Do you guys ever use night rules? Night attack raises the value of the Leo 2 and Abrams significantly.

>>52089395
>>52088287
My local shop ain't got enough stock to give me a book this weekend... so I messaged Battlefront customer services. They said if I send them a picture of my rulebook they'll send me one in the post.

Since I work 15mins away from the UK HQ they also said I can just collect from the front door. I'm going down after work today to try my luck

>>52089497

Yeah we use the missions and battle planner etc.

I'm committed to running tanks this league so I'm going to try lots of things until I get them figured out.

>>52091520
For what it's worth, I haven't been able to figure out how to use T-72s correctly yet either.

I've been running them in smaller, almost NATO-like, units of 5 tanks. But I think the key is to take advantage of their larger unit sizes. Maybe run them in units of 7 or 8.

>>52091565
These hit the issue of being able to bring all their firepower to bear, though. Intelligent positioning reduces their use a lot and they're still pretty pricey.

Honestly BMPs seem so much better overall, still.

>>52092196
It's a trade-off yes, but I find that if you go too small on the unit sizes for T-72s your whole unit can get knocked out way too easily.

As for the BMPs, in the games I've played they've been a bit squishy as well.

At least the BMP scouts have. I haven't used a company of BMPs with infantry.

I dread the idea of having to paint a horde of Soviet infantry.

>>52092359
That's the thing; BMPs are alright being squishy because there's a million of them. T-72s can't be, but are.

>>52092763
The numbers are supposed to help, but I haven't found that to be the case.

File: -70.jpg (103KB, 600x413px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 600x413px

spw

>>52094703
Been thinking about variants of this list

Basic idea is that the small t-72 units try to exploit their skill to use cover and movement orders to peck at stuff while the bmp2 blob along with the spandrels provide area denial.

Note I just paid some guy to paint my infantry.

East Germans

T-72 hq
5x t-72 w/plows
5x t-72 w/plows
5x t-72 w/plows
4x Shilka
2x bmp1 Recon

Bmp-1 hq
6x bmp-1 with Sam and grenades
14x bmp-2 with Sam and grenades
4x Gaskin
Spandrels

Spandrels

File: 20170304_193354-picsay.jpg (2MB, 3628x2635px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3628x2635px

>>52092359
I've used BMP1 and BMP2 loaded with infantry in various sizes and I found a unit of 9 BMP2s and 2 units of 5 BMP1s with a SA-14 fits me perfectly.
For BMP2, a unit of 4 is too fragile and a unit of 12 is too rubbish. A unit of 4 BMP1 is fragile too, but they do not worth to be in mass and to keep SA-14 being not pinned I found it is better to keep infantry unit smaller.
I use a large unit of BMP2s is sitting in a concealing terrain and works as a death trap to enemy MBTs, while small units of BMP1s are moving around with fast dash speed, hunting enemy artillery and AAs or defending BMP2s against roaming enemy light vehicles like luchs or marders.

>>52088169
>>52071574
Mirin that modulation m8.
Crazy strong contrasts but something about it is really comfy to look at.

File: hail hitler.png (90KB, 601x297px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 601x297px

>used search system to buy TY BM-21 hail and WW2 hitler ugent at the same time
>Hail Hitler!

>>52097116
Something tells me you did that on purpose.

Also, why is Uranus on that list?

File: meanwhile.jpg (258KB, 690x514px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 690x514px

>>52088184
>>52088287
had to do it...

so, the new edition is 2 days away....

i'm a bit apprehensive.

>LaBamba Man,
send an e-mail to the panzerfunktg email, so we can start planning our games.

also, we really should fight the charge of the light brigade in V3....so your bombardments work and mine are restricted....

>>52097804
>BF factory
>staff members present and lights on
Fake photo

>>52096230
god damn do I get a boner when I see a beautiful battlefield.

>>52097942
It isn't that good, is it?

>>52096000
Nice, I like the list. People don't seem to realise it but T72's best defence is simply not being shot.

Feel free to lose the mine plows on the T72s, maybe keep one platoons worth but otherwise they're really not worth it. Compared to the cost of an infantry team it's not worth wasting a tank trying to clear a minefield.

You can use the spare points to get another recce platoon to either double expand deployment or give you a second piece of terrain for overwatch.

It might even be worth trading out part of that big BMP-2 unit to get a separate BMP-1 platoon to support that tanks.

>>52098058
Better than my flgs that's for damn sure.

>>52098063
IMO taking mine plows in T72 unit means u are safe against minelet bombardment.
When you see 4 LARS dropping 2 minefields on a tank unit, u might understood why he took mine plows in every tank unit.

>>52071574
Nice color blending and highlighting. Did you use an airbrush on the hood?

>>52097893
>LOL

you know what that pic actually is right?

it IS battlefront. their new location, pre-move.

File: 1479032406548.jpg (118KB, 900x695px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 900x695px

anyone here actually happy for V4?

>>52100295
I am, my King Tiger list is suddenly more powerful and American lists aren't just Autowin for dummies.

>>52100295
Unless there's pieces for the AA Crusader on the Crusader sprue, no.

I don't suppose any of you with access to the new sprues can take pics or otherwise shatter my dreams?

>>52098802
Yes I did.

>>52100295
I'm cautiously optimistic.

It seems to be using a lot of the Team Yankee rules, and I've been highly enjoying Team Yankee.

Although I'm holding my final judgment until I actually play a few games and see how the balance feels.

>>52100295
I am not, my British are now even shittier and all these German tank companies around here are Autowin for dummies.

>>52100295
I am.
I have wide range of US, German, and Russian models, I do not care about balance of the game. Some of my collections may become weaker, while others can benefit from changed rules.

>>52100295
I am, because I think it will be easier to teach and it will renew interest in FoW for my FLGS.

>>52097804
What's the actual email address?

I really need to paint stuff so I can buy the other stuff I need for my list.

I'm so damn behind. Stupid books I keep getting super invested in taking all my time.

>>52100295
Yeah, I am.
Especially after having played a few tiny games using the El Alamein box contents.

Gonna do my full rulebook read-through today.

>>52100367
Consider them shattered.
Crusader AA aint on there, just I, II, II CS and III.

>>52047098
That's what happens when people with you let debils run around freely

>>52101932
>What's the actual email address?

[email protected]

>>52100359
You've read the reserves rules, right? Heavy tanks are going to get butchered.

File: 2017-03-10-10-34-26.png (219KB, 494x879px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 494x879px

1500 point early war French list review
Lazy french men list

File: 2017-03-10-10-34-34.png (215KB, 494x879px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 494x879px

>>52106302

>>52106302
>>52106317
I'm not an Early War player, but it seems like you've got a pretty decent list there.

But like I said, I'm not an EW player, so I could be overlooking something that would be obvious to someone who is.

Is battlefront giving out the v4 rules for an open fire rulebook? My local store doesn't exist anymore.

>>52107585
Send them an e-mail and ask. I think so, but I'm not certain.

>>52107585
Yup, you can mail em and they will either direct you to a nearby store that has them or mail the set to you.

>>52104990
Thanks, Eagles.

>>52107623
>>52107646
Thanks dudes.

File: IMG_2029.jpg (94KB, 475x547px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 475x547px

>Me trying to adjust to 4th Edition

File: You see comrade to beat Panther in gun duel you must simply trust in quality Soviet steel.jpg (161KB, 1280x768px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1280x768px

Comrades, the War Ministry brings you word of a glorious victory over the fascist pigs at the hands of our valiant and battle-hardened heavy tank crews!

Facing our men was all the vile Germans could muster, including Panther heavy tanks, numerous medium tanks along with mechanised infantry and anti-air vehicles.
Our valiant heroes only had five IS-2 heavy tanks, a platoon of highly skilled infantry with portable anti-tank weapons and a small battery of heavy mortars. But that would be enough.

The battle started with a long-range gunnery duel between the heavy armour. The first volley from our boys failed to deal proper damage and the fascist return fire managed to knock out one of our precious heavy tanks.
However, our second volley proved much more effective, knocking out two of the Panthers and chasing off the third, along with the coward commanding them.

With their greatest asset denied, the fascists then attempted to push our dug-in infantry off a critical location.
Their half-tracks charged in and eventually managed to push our warriors back, but at the cost of almost half their numbers.
Our brave infantrymen managed to find some good bulletproof cover to weather a storm of machine-gun bullets before the Germans came knocking again. Once more some casualties were caused, but the counterpush killed most of the remaining German infantry and captured the survivors.

With both of their greatest threats denied, the remaining tanks made a few futile attempts to knock out our IS-2s from the sides, but even that armour, produced by the fine workers in our tank factories, proved too solid and they, too, were eventually chased off.

This left the road open for us to continue our glorious advance to liberate the innocent victims of fascist aggression and ensure these people remain free and protected.
For the Motherland!

Does anyone know if the Forces of War free lists will be updated?

File: IMG_3101.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

My review on the finished Grant Model and the parts of the sprue;

http://theflamescorner.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/flames-of-war-grant-el-alamein-set.html

>>52113729
So yellow...

>>52110457
I see the russians have their buggy allies nearby and ready to help.

>>52113996
> Implying the Tyranids aren't just how Soviet reports describe Finnish troops.

>>52101932
don't worry too much, if you are at...say, 40%, it actually puts me quite at ease. i still need to paint ALL my army, and i need to assemble 3 cruiser tanks still.
...also, plastic 25 pdr's aren't even out yet....


>>52105332
>my mind...
...i hate reserves...i always will. i never can forgive them...for the death of my armies....


>>52110364
yeah, me too

also, i have my V4 stuff....i can confirm that free rulebook you get ACTUALLY IS A RULEBOOK! you don't actually need the V4 MW book...it duplicates a ton of the rules in the V4... special abilities, national rules, etc.

File: 20170311_133206-picsay.jpg (268KB, 1509x924px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1509x924px

Psc 2.8cm with old MW pzgrens figs for new V4.

>>52115263
Well of the stuff I own I need to finish the crews for my 75s. Then I need two more tanks, a 105 battery and some tankettes.

Do you know if Gajo will have the free books?

>>52113729
You say that the MG turret on the Lee can be assembled open or closed. What about the Grant turret? Can that be assembled open as well?

File: fun in the desert.jpg (841KB, 750x1125px) Image search: [Google]

841KB, 750x1125px

>>52116587
good sir, i already have mine, the v4 book, and an El-Alamein memepack. go get' em....

bring in an old Rulebook if you want a sticker of veterancy as well.

i still look at a 100 pts of afrika corps and realize an all tank list is just 3 boxes, while full stuarts need 10

>>52117003
Yes that too can be assembled open or closed.

File: IMG_3107.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

My review on the Crusader has been up for some time, just forgot to post. Here it is, putting as much detail as I can in, but if you have a specific question, just ask.

http://theflamescorner.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/flames-of-war-crusader-el-alamein-set.html

>>52118202
I'll have to swing by on Sunday and see if I can get one.

Anyone downloaded 4th edition rules from FOW digital successfully? I can't get one, it says unable to fetch data from server.

File: IMG_20170311_103610.jpg (3MB, 4864x2736px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4864x2736px

I'm still only started painting miniatures and wanted to ask your opinion guys. How did I do?

>>52118990
Not bad, try looking into washes to tie all the colors together. If you feel comfortable a little streaking grim and weathering will go a long way too.

>>52118946
I am having the same issue.

File: 20170311_181841.jpg (979KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

979KB, 2048x1536px

In V4, sapper was useless.

But the point remains.

shit

>>52119343
Aren't they retain higher tank assault?

>>52119417

no. AT remains. The benefit of eliminating obstacles is eliminated.

>>52036570
So I/m slightly confused by how the 'trade in your V3 rulebook for V4 stuff' is meant to go down. Does it have to be this weekend? Becuase it seems my LGS didn't actually order in any V4 stuff (which I suppose isn't that surprising, nobody really plays it much here). Otherwise I might need to take a trip to find someplace else that stocks it.

File: 1489229493194-picsay.jpg (159KB, 720x786px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 720x786px

Played V4 MW today, found Germans definitely need a tiger(or a couple of) in urban fighting. Line of sights from long ranged pz4 and marders are blocked by buildings and fast crusaders outflank them.

>>52119805
Think you are in the same boat i am here >>52107585
I sent them an email, and got an automated response with what I am assuming is a customer support tracking number. We'll see what their answer is.

Played 2 partial V4 games at 1625 LW today. The missions haven't really changed but the roles your list needs to fill are different. Might dial it back to 1200 points or so and have some smaller test games.

Arty seems okay, not quite as OP as I had imagined vs stationary platoons, though not being able to get chance kills on Tigers is very frustrating.

Orders are fun-ish, Vet infantry can sprint across the board. Forgot guns can't do any of the 4" move orders, they could have got into position in a single turn using their transports and risking a 3+ save, instead they took 3 to get even close.

Rulebook is okay but needs clarification in a few places. The V4 EW/LW warriors book is out for free, how long until we get a good scan of the rules? :D

>>52119883

Why? If a platoon of panzer IV/III and Marders can't stop a crusader bum rush then how is cutting your fire power down to 1/8th of what it used to be going to help?

>>52120265
>Arty seems okay, not quite as OP as I had imagined vs stationary platoons, though not being able to get chance kills on Tigers is very frustrating.
This seems to be the biggest thing and honestly I'm not sure it's a good change. Infantry (supported with guns) are now insanely hard to kill; shooting is essentially pointless, assaults are now really lopsided towards the defender, and Even arty is hitting on 4s and 5s still. Far from fixing the "the best list is infantry sat in foxholes bombarding the enemy" thing, it seems even worse.

>>52118990
The base colour is a an interesting choice but its bit dark, so the details are kind of obscured.
Id also try painting the canvasy top in a lighter grey or brown or something, just to break up the monotony of the main colour a bit (I typically do this even if it wasnt strictly historically accurate), softskins dont really have that many hard edges you can highlight to break up solid blocks of colour, so a bit of variation is always good.

>>52119885
Yeah, I tried that myself. The email said its been classified under 'Missing Part or Replacement Issues', so maybe they'll send me copies directly (I attached a photo of my rulebook with a postit that had my name and today's date on it as proof of ownership). Guess I'll have to wait and see.

>>52123373
You can get them online.

I think The War Store is running a special where you can get the free books as long as you order something else from them as well.

>>52110457
Mat? Deep Cut Studios? Table looks great!

File: IMG_0037.png (7MB, 2048x2732px) Image search: [Google]

7MB, 2048x2732px

>>52120265
>The V4 EW/LW warriors book is out for free,
Speaking of:

HEY FAGS, HERE'S THE EW/LW WARRIORS/ARMY BOOK

http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Version4/SpecialRulesBook.pdf

And the quick reference docs
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Version4/V4-EarlyLateWar-QuickRef.pdf

Does anyone know if the Pheasant sprues in the Desert Rats box also give you the option to make 25 Pounders as well?

File: All Armor.pdf (19KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 1x1px

How dumb of a list is this?

>>52124471
Looks pretty good. I'm thinking maybe try to add some infantry. Keep the recce though since spearhead will be good for slow heavy tanks in V4.

File: IMG_3117.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

My complete review on the model and sprue components of Battlefronts New Panzer III;

http://theflamescorner.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/flames-of-war-panzer-iii-el-alamein-set.html

>>52124993
Meh, they could at least have done two part road wheels.

>>52124979
Was more planning for V3, local shop is not very enthusiastic for V4. I'm more worried by my lack of artillery than lack of infantry. I could drop the Stuarts and the HQ uparmoring to get a battery of 25pdrs, but that would only really be a good idea in V4 (since you really need recce for good arty placement in V3) or if fighting tanks only.

>>52125059
You're kidding right? When PSC did tracks and wheels separate, everyone bitched. And if the wheels are in two pieces, they're require more than twice the space on the sprue, crowding out other pieces.

Can anyone log in their FoW digital apps?

>>52125457
I think anon is referring to the road wheels being composed to two wheels instead of one large one. Anon is merely idler wheel tier austistic.

File: IMG_1252.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

So the dice that come in the new starter set have the symbol on the one rather than the six like every other dice set BF has sold.

Pic related, one of these dice is from the old Africa korps and the other three are from the new starter. Can you tell which is which?

>>52126150

Hint each one of these dice is showing a "1"

>>52126150
Damnit, Battlefront.

I own old Desert Rats dice and they have a rat as a 1 as well. No harm for me

File: battlefront.png (546KB, 854x409px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 854x409px

>>52126150
Shit i can't think of anything other than a sit-com based around the fuck ups of battlefront

>>52126150
>Symbols on El Al dice

All the ones I've seen have had no symbols and are the size of the old dice from Open Fire and the Tanks box.

You sure you aint just trolling around?

>>52127643
I think he means the Afrika Korp starter.

Also, aren't BFs dice terribly weighted?

>>52128221
If they are, I've never had them benefit me.

>>52124048

To make up for not sharing the link to the conversion book.

Here's the link to the full mission pack!

http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Missions/MoreMissions.pdf

>>52128221
AK starter aint out yet for several weeks, bro.

Also, even the dice on battlefront demo vids have the symbol on the six.

All my stuff is for Market Garden, how scared should I be for my lists? How long till they are playable again?

>>52128428
Depends, what were you playing from MG?

>>52128428
Market Garden is fully converted by the free V4 books for Early/Late war.
Some things might be better or weaker, but it's still fully playable.

Only mid-war is getting a full redo.

>>52125777
I can't.

>>52128289
Oh, well then don't mind me.

>>52128261
Well terrible in the sense they seem to roll only 1's and 2's from what my friend told me.

>>52126150
>>52127643
Easy way to tell, take pictures of them with the 6, 5, and 4 showing for one dice, and the 1, 4 and 5 showing for the other. The 4 and 5 will be reversed on the one with the 1 at the top.

File: tmp_4438-20170311_205335-1418348747.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

Can confirm, El Al dice have symbols on the 1 spot. Battlefront on it as usual. The tank kits are nice.

>>52129953
>>52126150
What the fuck Battlefront.

File: squinting_Ross_Geller.jpg (38KB, 600x420px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x420px

>>52126150
>>52129953
>white on cream
Why

>>52130349
They've been like that for a while.

>>52130358
It was a horrible decison back in the day, and it's a horrible decision now. Black on cream would have been fine, or white on a darker sandy color, but instead they go with the fucking unreadable white on cream again.

Yes, one of the local players uses the old white on cream ones and they're the biggest source of eye strain in the store, why do you ask?

>>52130490
Perhaps the actual symbol was white on cream?

>>52130508
Yeah, that's great, but when I have to stare at them across the table they're nothing but misery. Fuck those dice.

>>52130722
>>52130508
>>52130490
I maintain that there's nothing wrong with white on Cream. Never had a problem reading them.

UNLIKE FUCKING MARBLED DICE. I'm not about to accuse people who use them of cheating, but I am about to insinuate that cheaters use them frequently because it takes a full two seconds to recognise what the fuck they're marked as.

File: Air_Chief_Marshal_Sir_Arthur_Harris.jpg (33KB, 607x798px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 607x798px

>>52129953
> symbols on the 1 side

Trash

Anyone not using simple white and black dice is a heathen.

File: antipathy for those of common birth.jpg (7KB, 209x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 209x241px

>>52130906
>black and white
Black and yellow here, black and white a shit

>>52129953
uhm, i bought el alamein.

those are not the dice i got.

File: DSCN6967.jpg (1MB, 1460x1800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1460x1800px

Virus, did you see the latest issue of WGI?

>>52131401
Interesting, Now if only I could ever find issues of it.

at least the Grant sprue has the Lee's turret on there as well

>>52131633
That actually looks pretty cool.

>>52131367
same, mine (both Brits and Germans) have the symbols on 6's.

>>52131367
lolol, Battlefront.

File: DSCN6970.jpg (147KB, 800x629px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 800x629px

>>52131367
>>52131937

err, worse. mine are the 12mm dice that are plain cream with white pips, and red pips on yellow.

see pic. this was from ElAlamein

>>52132451
>>52131937
>>52131367
>>52129953
>>52127643
>>52126150
So the overall message is that they have at least three different types of dice in the starter sets, with different symbol placements and colors.

An amazing feat of standardization, that.

File: 2017-03-12 00.30.15.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>52131937 here. These are what I got out of El alamein. Added in the tank for fun, doing it for a friend.

Lads...

Did Battlefront just Squat everything that isn't WWII and Team Yankee?

I went on their shop and that's all that's available.

>>52132691
I thought I saw Arab-Israeli and 'Nam the other day, but that could have changed since I was on the site the other day.

>>52132691
NEW VERSION NEW SITE LADS

yeah shit's missing

>>52132747

Oh thank fuck, so chances are it's just in the process of being updated?

I still want to get into WWI at some point.

>>52132764
I think they're trying to revamp their website, as the date right now is January 1, 0001.

Either that or V4 is supposed to be the second coming of christ

>>52132810

Kind of retarded of them to do this as they're launching a new game.

>>52132838
Kind of Battlefront if them.

>>52130906
I use my old black and red Rackham dice for FoW because I need so many fucking dice.

Other games I tend to lean towards my pink and white just to see the confused looks on peoples faces.

I'm confused about the aircraft shooting rules of V4.

follow 'to Hit' when shooting a cannon?
Does it follow the normal shooting rule?

For example, if a veteran is in the forest, aircraft shoots a cannon

is it 5+ or 3+?

>>52133995
Just normal weapon with ROF2 - so shooting rules for concealment, GTG, to-hit based on target's rating, front/side depending on position

>>52134501

Priority, aircraft 3 is ROF 6? thanks.

Is it just me, or did Mounted Assault get better in v4?

Reading the rules, it looks like you get one attack for the halftrack, plus one for each passenger. For my Lehr grenadiers packed in three bases to a vehicle, that's four swings in melee. That almost makes me want to assault Strelkovy just so I have enough things to kill!

>>52132476
Let's see if there's a geographic thing going on here; all the El Al sets I've seen in the Netherlands had the 12mm dice without symbols.

>>52135209
Oh, so that's how you win an assault now.

That's retarded.

In v3, air support was always a new aircraft..

But in V4, aircraft were shot in the previous turn. Is the number decreasing?

>>52135393
Yeah, you don't get lost aircraft back now.

However, no more dice pool messing around. Aircraft just show up on a 4+ and the number you get is based on the level: 1 for sporadic, 2 for limited, 3 for prio.

>>52135393
>>52135407
Adding to that, there's no real need to have more than one aircraft model; you can use the aircraft die to indicate the number of aircraft in a flight instead of placing each as a separate model.

>>52135407


What happens if all the planes are shot down?

Can't do the 5+ interception roll?

>>52135452

When they're gone, they're gone.

But also I think interception is now only if you have dedicated interceptors. It never really made much sense to have dogfighting Stukas anyway.

>>52135452
Planes don't give you an interception roll, only dedicated fighter intercept does.

If all the planes are shot down, that's your air support.

So, er...looking at the price difference between PSC and Battlefront T-55s, is there going to be any reason to go with the Battlefront ones at all?

>>52135638
no. Unless you have a fetish for overpriced resin. PSC tanks will be about half of the price and will build at least 4 variants of the T-55

>>52135473

Fw190, typhoon, zero .. I have not found any interceptor rule anywhere. Is not it basically in every airsupport?

>>52135755
Early war forces have Interception.

>>52135755
Rising sun Japanese air, Blitzkrieg British air and pacific US Marine and Japanese naval air support have fighter interception.

>>52135648
Nice. Thinking of doing some up as Type 59s for an Alternate History where China democratized after Tienanmen.

I wonder if China proper will get lists for Team Yankee?

>>52135789
I hope so. I am painting all my T-55s in generic green in hopes that I can use them for Best Korea or China some day. If not I plan to run my East German armor as republican guard against M1A1s, now that we have some nice sand terrain coming.

>>52135822
I'm not sure if it applies to the entire Republican Guard, but the unit at 73 Easting was comprised of T-72s.

Also, M1A1s were a significant improvement over the M1 we have stats for in Team Yankee. At the very least, the gun is upgraded to the one on the Leopard 2. And there were some armor improvements as well.

I don't really get the appeal of playing the Gulf War - especially considering the Iraqis scored less than a handful of victories in which their own forces where always severely crippled.

>>52137067
American power fantasy.

"Look at my Awesome Super-Tanks blow away hundreds of Soviet-made tin cans!"

>>52137067
It was americas last 'true' war fought in a conventional manner. It involved two opposed and combined arms forces going head to head and duking it out. It wasnt fair, and the rags got their shit kicked in, but it works if you want a more recent team yankee game.

File: 1500px-DesertStormMap_v2.svg.png (674KB, 1500x1056px) Image search: [Google]

674KB, 1500x1056px

>>52137252
>>52137067

we have a hindsight view that dispells being there at the hour.

and to be honest, the USA had never fought T-72's with their main force before...

people forget there was a brutal defeat plan worked in there somewhere. we don't have the old recordings, but Nightline and 20/20 posted basic info about the Iraqi army, and on paper it looked like an assault into Mordor.

4 million strong army vs. our 15,000 expeditionary force? yeah, we had no idea in foresight....in 1991, we still thought of the T-72 and M1 Abrams as equals...

>>52137067

I am thinking more of a scenario inspired by the Gulf War. Giving the Iraqi's more effective armor and ammunition, as represented by the East German T-72M and T-55AM2 would hopefully put them in a better position, than their historical counterparts. The other aspect is leaving it up to the commander as to how they wish to use their force, perhaps with tactics that actually better the equipment.

>>52136853
Yeah, I think the East German T-72M would be a decent enough representation. The Republican Guard also had several variants of T-55s.

As for the M1A1,it would have the Leo 2 gun and maybe an extra point of front armor to make it nice and bouncy from range.

>>52137067
I've heard stories of people playing their Iraqis with Soviet doctrine and inflicting heavy losses on the Americans. There could be some fun trolling the murika stronk people.

>>52137406
this.

the guy saying we had no clue how it would turn out was right. we thought this was going to go pretty badly if they dug in hard enough.

New rulebook is already released via digital? Waiting for stealed copy

>>52137861
Second this

>>52137067
My friend was in the Bradley that parked on a T-72 at Eastings. He only survived because even Republican Guard tanks lacked power traverse and the Bradley blew them all up while they were trying to point at him.

>>52135417
You can split a flight up to shoot different targets at +1 to hit.

File: DeusFeels.png (1MB, 1162x850px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1162x850px

>>52138075

>mfw

IIRC the Republican Guard T-72s were made in Iraq and lacked most of the advanced features, I've also heard they were using steel training ammo.

>>52138075
I think there was a similar anecdote in the Bradley vs BMP book. A Bradley stumbled across a dug in BMP1 and had to back up to depress their cannon enough to get an angle, meanwhile the Iraqi retards buried their vehicle too deep and couldn't elevate their gun enough to shoot out.

>>52137339
The T-72A and M1, sure, and you could make a case for the T-72B vs M1A1. Remember, then, that Iraq primarily had T-72Ms that had been assembled in-country to get around arms embargos, a lack of ammo, and were maintained by people who wouldn't let each other read manuals for fear they'd lose job security up against M1A1s crewed by an America that had spent the best part of two decades focusing exclusively on defeating the soviet army after their forces were butchered in 'nam.

neu brot:

>>52138401

>>52138333
This is all true, but also keep in mind training and organisation matters hugely. Compare early-war germany against the soviets or even french/british.