Flames of War General /fowg/ Cleaned my brush in my drink edition

File: mg.jpg (108KB, 431x408px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 431x408px

Anybody have any Forged in Battle models? Opinions? They look good in pictures. They're having a sale on mid-war stuff to nab some business from Battlefront.

Why are PSC T-34s slightly but noticeably smaller than BF T-34s?

>>52938859
Small differences in scaling. Battlefront tends to go for beefier, more heroic scaling. Unless you are looking to tell them apart they are fine to mix and match on the table IMO.

>>52938859
All of PSC's 15mm is smaller than Battlefront's. True(ish) scale versus heroic. Very noticeable with the infantry.

File: mot-schutzen.png (1MB, 800x525px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x525px

>>52937761
*Use superior skill 4+*

https://youtu.be/9_rLCAsqr_0?t=18

File: panzerfunk camo logo.jpg (323KB, 936x817px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 936x817px

Episode 19 of Panzerfunk is now available!

https://panzerfunk.podbean.com/e/panzerfunk-episode-19-the-mark-four-special/

Panzerfunk Episode 19: The Mark Four Special

In this Episode the Funkmeisters discuss:

- Intro & Recent Hobby Activities. (0:00:00 - 0:16:00)

- The Mark Four Special - Our thoughts and opinions on Flames of War 4th Edition, as well as our first hand experiences so far with the new edition of the game. (0:16:46 - 2:07:14)

- Ask The Funkmeisters - Questions from YOU, our listening audience about if we'll still be covering FoW Version 3 or only covering FoW 4th Edition going forward, Late War units that won or lost big in the transition to 4th Edition, good starting purchases for someone looking to play Late War 4th Edition, and recommendations for World War II books, movies, TV shows, and video games. (2:07:58 - 2:29:21)

>>52939713
So how long till your next question section is flooded with Cheers?

>>52940071
Knowing you guys? I wouldn't doubt if every upcomming question was a cheers question.

Although now that we're promoting ourselves on normal social media, perhaps not.

Has the "Cheers" meme spread out into the wider FoW community, or is that still something the Muggles wouldn't understand?

File: CHEERS.png (1MB, 1515x435px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1515x435px

>>52940071

>>52940153
>Has the "Cheers" meme spread out into the wider FoW community, or is that still something the Muggles wouldn't understand?

Fukken normies don't know about muh asiatic hordes.

File: comrade stalin disapproves.jpg (14KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x250px

>>52940248
>Only the T-72s are painted

>>52940298
I kinda figured the Mundanes wouldn't get it.

File: Phill yates.jpg (141KB, 1280x715px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1280x715px

>>52940298
Maybe we should introduce them to the Cheers meme and maybe battlefront might listen and fix or break even more things?

>>52940153
Still only for autistic nerds playing autistic games. So most of us.

>>52939713
>my audio

my god, it's shit.
i need to just break down and fix that permanently....FFS!!!

File: Fuck yo Konigstiger.jpg (2MB, 3426x2480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3426x2480px

>>52939713
Skipped ahead to my question at the end, which was the winners and losers.
>winners
Yeah, mortars gained so much it's absurd. And Nebs went from "they're a really good value" to "If you do not include nebs, the only logical reason is you don't have neb models. Buy some."
Heavy tanks don't just fear air and arty less, they just flat out ignore it now. A 1/6 chance of getting a FP check for a bail, after rolling to range in and then rolling to hit, means they're as immune to arty as FA 1 vehicles are to your standard rifle shots.
Heroes did indeed get a good bit better, as did the US 761st (who have the same rule).
(good) Cannon air is now really deadly and really, really durable. If they have bombs, you can't even hope to avoid them as infantry.
Surprised you guys didn't mention medium and lighter guns. The constant 3+ save makes them really tough now.

>Losers
Yeah, heavy arty is very much overpriced now, paying a lot for marginal firepower increases and nearly irrelevant AT increases.
BTGs lost, but not as hard as Bunker Busters. They were already bad, but then they made them worse. RoF
Shermans are probably going to tend towards Uparmored shermans, Jumbos (still good, they were just OP before), and basic 76s. E8s are 10pts more to go to effectively 2+ cross from 3+, so I doubt you'll ever see the non-uparmored ones.
Sturmtigers did lose pretty hard, yeah. Jagdtigers as well.
Another overlooked one, AA lost big time. No more 8" range boost, and needing 27 shots for your average 5+ FP AA to kill a single plane, means that now you need entire batteries of flakpanzers to actually stop a plane attack. There's no "Wave off under heavy fire" thing either, so cannon planes can just destroy the AA platoon in the first turn while shrugging off the incoming fire, then maraud around with impunity.

File: rian_archive_225_il-2_attacking.jpg (49KB, 600x414px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x414px

>>52940741

Played Hero tanks last night. It was pretty fun how mobile they could be. I used follow me and blitz orders quite a bit. Was up against veteran German armor though. PaKTrack and Stugs were blitz-fire-scooting popping up and down a hill like whack a mole. I need a Sturmovik...

All in all, I am enjoying how mobile everything is in V4. Makes the game pretty exciting.

>>52938403

I only have some of their older Germans. They are "heroic" scale like BFs infantry but less consistent in scale (the helmets are all over the fucking place in shape). The field cars I got from them were fine though.

>>52940998
Yeah, how good vets are now with no ability to remove GtG, reduced smoke and increased requirements for trained infantry to do things, and orders letting them do some crazy shit, is honestly making me really worried about the already notable preference of players for vet armies. I'm worried that, at least till they rework the points, trained is only going to be usable on disposable support assets.

>>52940667
I try man, I really do. But there is only so much I can do in editing.

All your sound quality issues are on your end.

Seriously invest in like a $30 USB microphone/headset combo.

Not even any of the high end gamer stuff, just a decent quality normal headset and mic combo.

>>52940741
>Surprised you guys didn't mention medium and lighter guns. The constant 3+ save makes them really tough now.

We probably just didn't think of it to be honest. We are as much noobs to 4th Edition as everyone else.

>>52940998
>blitz-fire-scooting popping up and down a hill like whack a mole

Ha! I love that mental image. German Whack-A-Mole.

Although I'd imagine that probably got frustrating pretty quickly.

Also, please tell me that someone actually gets the joke of the episode title...

>>52941363
Who's Mark?

cheers

>>52941116
I plan on running CT infantry for my Ausbildungs, mainly because the grenadiers are only there for armored assault. Not all is lost though. Infantry saves are still the same for all infantry.

Arty is key against vet infantry. If you range in on the first try or repeat a bombardment you will likely be hiting vet infantry on 4s which is really nice, especially if you have enough guns to force rerolls.

>>52941459
Cheeky bastard.

File: 1449019291807.jpg (115KB, 540x772px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 540x772px

>>52941363
liek dis?

(ok, it's actually an H)

>>52938403
I have some of their panzerwerfers which I also bought discounted a while back.
Their vehicles look slightly smaller and finer than battlefronts, but the detail is as crisp as you like, my only complaint is the cast-on bases.
Only seen infantry in their packets but they looked fairly close to BF

>>52939141
I don't believe that's true for the British Infantry.

>>52941116
I have sadly already experienced how good even simple arty can be vs veteran infantry.

Brit players at my FLGS have started using their 17/25 pounders as regular 25 pounders specifically because they feel the bombardment (even from a 2-gun battery) is so much more useful than the enhanced AT.
And of course 25 pounders are still decent at defending themselves with almost as much dakka as a Grant per gun.

Thank fuck I finally got my hands on some 10.5cm arty to counter that.

File: 100_5975.jpg (280KB, 1000x794px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1000x794px

>>52938403
Depends on the figures: early Germans and Soviets not that great, LW Brits, Brit Paras, US inf and German Paras good to very good. Way less flash and casting issues compared to BF. The new North Africa figures look good, I have not seen them in the flesh though. Pic related, some FiB LW Brits done as 8th Army (because I prefer painting long trousers).

Vehicles can be well-detailed, but come with molded-on bases. I would use PSC and BF plastics wherever possible.

http://tiberiaspainting.blogspot.co.za/2015/12/8th-army-infantry.html?m=1

File: 1492103131706.jpg (511KB, 1153x1065px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1153x1065px

/NVA/

>>52944743
Yeah, the brit rifles/paras are proportioned pretty close to BF's. Same stand, maybe not, but near each other sure.

File: Stug.jpg (68KB, 938x487px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 938x487px

Just finished painting my first historical mini, it's for tanks but hopefully will grow it into a FoW army. C&C?

>>52947321
Looks pretty solid in terms of painting quality.

Do keep in mind, though, that starting in 1943 German tanks were factory painted in a dark yellow instead of the dark grey.
I'm not sure if late-model StuG III ausf. G were ever painted in that colour.

>>52947321

That's nicely painted and all, but what you've got there is a late model StuG (Ausf G most likely) with the Topfblende mantlet, which dates it from Nov 1943 at the earliest.

Dunkelgelb (dark yellow) camo replaced the earlier Panzer Grey from Feb 1943, so there's not really any way that that combination of model and paint would be likely.

I guess it could have been an earlier model which was up-gunned and had the Schurzen added, but even still that would have gotten a repaint in the factory.

>>52947321
Nice job with the grey. What did you do for the tracks and the dirt on them?

>>52947383
>>52947387

>/tg/ - /terrible grognards/

>>52947417
>Flames of AAAAAAA

>>52947383
>>52947387

Thanks for the feedback, I went with the Panzer Grey for aesthetic reasons more than historical accuracy as it's my favourite of the German Schemes.

>>52947387
I used MIG Dry Mud. Couldn't be easier; brush on generously then apply a little bit of rubbing alcohol. Once dry it'll come out looking like that.

>>52947442
> I went with the Panzer Grey for aesthetic reasons more than historical accuracy as it's my favourite of the German Schemes.
It certainly is aesthetic.

In fact, I kinda wanna make an earlier-war German force in their grey colours just because I like the look.

File: 1461356123433.gif (991KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

991KB, 500x281px

>>52947472
>TFW your club is planning a seelowe campaign so you have an excuse to do panzer grey tanks

>>52947472
I did the same, when i bought a PSC Panzer 38/Marder set for some cheaps Marders, i ended only making the Panzer 38t and getting 2 more boxes plus early infantry, because with the Panzer Grey they are just so AESTHETIC.

>Battlefront forums: "You can't carry foxholes with you, even if the rules allow it, that's just silly"
>Also battlefront forums: "Yes, hull MGs can fire outside of their firing arc now, it's a bit weird but it's an abstract game and the rules are quite clear."

File: dc45a958c71817122329413e1c8167e1.jpg (168KB, 1467x819px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1467x819px

>>52949970
>>Battlefront forums: "You can't carry foxholes with you, even if the rules allow it, that's just silly"
>>Also battlefront forums: "Yes, hull MGs can fire outside of their firing arc now, it's a bit weird but it's an abstract game and the rules are quite clear."

does this mean a fixed gun on a tank like a stug can fire backwards now comon we're abstracting

>>52950228
That has forward firing, so no.

>>52944743
Okay, haven't seen Brits. I have Americans, seen Germans and Soviets. All quite a bit slimmer, with comparably tiny heads.

>>52949970
>dismount the Mg34 from its forward-facing ball-mount and hand it to the commander
>he opens the hatch and fires it with his right hand, his weaker left using the mounted turret Mg
You may think that firing not only one, but two Mgs with only a single hand each, would be highly inaccurate, but I assure you it would definitely work, because after all, the firing accuracy of the user is not the critical factor, but the skill of the target

>>52950228
No that MG can't fire all around.

Basically all MGs in FoW are now guided weapons. So if you have a turret and can sight something behind you, the bullets will swing around, but if your sights are fixed forward you can only fire your hull MG with your main gun.

>>52951313
What's wrong with that?
Have you not seen the Fifth Element?

Am I reading V4 right that you now have to use stabilisers if you have them? When historically most US divisions didn't know how to use them and turned them off?

>>52951713
Seems like it, yeah

>>52951713
V4 cares not for your "history".

>>52951713
but isn't that a thing since the overperforming skills of the Sherman park since Blood, Guts and Glory?

>>52950799
Hmm, sounds like you've just seen the three older, awful infantry sets and not any of the newer ones?

>>52951313
Also this only applies to MW; as part of the New Year's celebrations in January 1944 they forgot how to fire backwards.

File: _20170428_204232.jpg (161KB, 1073x1254px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1073x1254px

I like this guy, he's got that Blitz spirit of never giving up

>>52947387
>>52947383
Maybe it hasn't gotten the coat of dunkelgelb over the dunkelgrau yet

File: Keep-Calm-and-Carry-On-Navy-Blue-Poster-Front__69597.1319984235.1280.1280.jpg (34KB, 650x917px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 650x917px

>>52952744

>>52952744
I feel like "lead designer totally contradicts printed rules, refuses to answer any further questions" is a pretty accurate summary of V4.

>>52952493
Guess so. German webbing on my bazooka teams and all. My M5 Stuarts from PSC are great?

>>52953521
Some people seem to think they're oversized, but they look great.

>>52953460
Phil used to have "The designer who cares" as a signature, back in the day when the FOW Forum still had signatures. Now he would have "The designer who doesn't give a shit."

They had a good game. They added stuff and ended up with the bloated LW stuff. They skinned it all down to a format to make future bloating easier by using cards.

I think v4 is probably a good move, but currently very limited in scope. I don't think that the designers don't care anymore, but with a game this popular there are a lot of people shouting at them.

>>52955702 #
There's a lot of shouting going on. Some well deserved, some just complete raving lunacy.

It seems like publicly stating "I like Version 4" is along the same lines as holding up a sign saying "I am the spawn of Satan himself".

The vitriol against Version 4 and people who enjoy it is just insane.

>>52955779
Honestly, I've seen more "Stop complaining about it, it's the new version, just deal with it and stop saying bad things about it." from people.

>>52955702
>I don't think that the designers don't care anymore, but with a game this popular there are a lot of people shouting at them.
3min quickfix errata:
>Blitzing removes Concealment, Gone to Ground, and Foxholes. Otherwise you still count as not moving.
>Destroyed tanks are always in command for morale purposes.
>A team hit while crossing a minefield stops halfway across the minefield.
>Yes, snipers are Concealed, Gone to Ground, and in Bulletproof Cover at all times, even after they move. Snipers tend to prepare multiple hides.
>Night Attack can only be declared when Attacking
There, that took 3 min and hit the three biggest complaints I've seen and a few others that have popped up.

>>52955848
>The vitriol against Version 4 and people who enjoy it is just insane.
I think "the vitriol against people who enjoy it" is projecting. I don't think anyone thinks people who're enjoying V4 are a problem; you guys do you. The issue is that the rules are trash, and that's not even an opinion; they're literally full of errors. The forums have now just noticed overhead fire doesn't work because teams block LoS, a thing we complained about in TY, but still went into V4.

>>52955927
>>A team hit while crossing a minefield stops halfway across the minefield.
This doesn't even need errata, though, Phil just needs to read his own fucking rules. It's perfectly clear, he's just wrong about it.

>Blitzing removes Concealment, Gone to Ground, and Foxholes. Otherwise you still count as not moving.
Apparently intended you keep concealment and GTG.

My local club might be looking into starting Flames of War and I just wanted to ask how many tanks is appropriate for a starting army?
I'm a huge Wehraboo yes, but I also like the Winter and Continuation Wars and the Soviet army

>>52958624
Depends who you're playing. Germans, 8-10 is a good core (less if you're playing big cats but don't play big cats as your first army). Most armies are about that benchmark, maybe closer to 10-15 for western allied trained armour formations. Soviets are approximately 20 (unless they're IS-2 lists, and, again, don't play those. Not as a first army, just ever, they're awful).

>>52958710
Bear in mind these are just tanks; you'll also want support like artillery, a platoon of infantry, some recon, etc.

1500pts, EW, r8 m8s.

German Czech Panzer
Tank Company, from Blitzkrieg, page 72

Compulsory Czech Panzer Company HQ (p.73) - CinC Panzer 35(t), 2iC Panzer 35(t) (165 pts)

Compulsory Panzer II Platoon (p.67) - Command Panzer II C (late), 3x Panzer II C (late) (225 pts)

Compulsory Czech Panzer Platoon (p.73) - Command Panzer 35(t), 3x Panzer 35(t) (335 pts)

Czech Panzer Platoon (p.73) - Command Panzer 35(t), 3x Panzer 35(t) (335 pts)

Panzer Schutzen Platoon (p.79) - Command MG, Light mortar, 6x MG, 4x Sd Kfz 251/1 half-track (275 pts)
- Replace Command Rifle/MG with Command SMG (0 pts)

Heavy Panzerspah Platoon (p.83) - 2x Command Sd Kfz 231 (6-rad), 2x Sd Kfz 231 (6-rad) (165 pts)


1500 Points, 6 Platoons

>>52958737
Alternate:

German Leichte Panzer
Tank Company, from Blitzkrieg, page 66

Compulsory Leichte Panzer Company HQ (p.67) - CinC Panzerbefehlswagen, 2iC Panzer II C (early) (75 pts)

Compulsory Leichte Panzer Platoon (p.67) - Command Panzer II C (early), 2x Panzer II C (early), 2x Panzer I (215 pts)
- 3x Replace Panzer II C (early) with Panzer II C (late) (must Replace all Panzer II C (early)) (30 pts)

Compulsory Leichte Panzer Platoon (p.67) - Command Panzer II C (early), 2x Panzer II C (early), 2x Panzer I (215 pts)
- 3x Replace Panzer II C (early) with Panzer II C (late) (must Replace all Panzer II C (early)) (30 pts)

Mittlere Panzer Platoon (p.69) - Command Panzer IV D, 2x Panzer IV D (450 pts)

Panzer Schutzen Platoon (p.79) - Command MG, Light mortar, 6x MG, 4x Sd Kfz 251/1 half-track (275 pts)
- Anti-tank rifle (20 pts)

Heavy Panzerspah Platoon (p.83) - 2x Command Sd Kfz 231 (6-rad), 2x Sd Kfz 231 (6-rad) (165 pts)


1475 Points, 6 Platoons

>>52958710
But muh superior German engineering?

Also, do you guys ever play Germans vs. Germans or Americans vs. Soviets or is it all about historical re-enactment? I can see Germans being really popular with local people.
>>52958720
I figured I would. I do love me some armored cars and infantry too. Especially machine guns.

>>52958755
>I can see Germans being really popular with local people.
Our local group has 5 out 9 playing germans (and one of the others is a Finn, so an honorary German). We can barely keep allied vs Germans games going, and commonly have German vs German. Allied vs Allied is rare, and tends to be US vs Soviets (I think I, the brit, have only played our soviet player once).

>>52958755
>Also, do you guys ever play Germans vs. Germans or Americans vs. Soviets or is it all about historical re-enactment? I can see Germans being really popular with local people.
If we play blue-on-blue, it's a training exercise. But, yeah, we like to do historical matchups if at all possible. If not we laugh it off; "Today, the desert rats are fighting some very lost finns..."

>>52958821
I presume that means that the books are balanced against each other so you can run late war germans against mid war germans for example?
Or Ostheer vs. the British Expeditionary Force?
>>52958850
I'm a little bit of a history buff myself, but if we can only get 3 or 4 people in my local group interested in FoW, I don't want to limit players based on what models they want or don't want to collect.

>>52958890
>I presume that means that the books are balanced against each other so you can run late war germans against mid war germans for example?
Not in the slightest. Late, Early, and Mid all have entirely different point values. They are not compatible, and attempting to use an EW force against a LW force at the same points will see you destroyed in short order.

For example, a T-34 is 300 points at Confident Conscript in Early War, and that's one step from the worst rating in the game (reluctant Conscript). In contrast, a Fearless Trained T-34/85 (one more front armor, better motivation and training, and three points higher anti-tank) is 80 points in the Late War period.

Generally, groups tend very strongly towards one period of the war (our local shop is Late War, with the exception of two guys that have old V2 Mid War forces), since lists are balanced against their period.

>>52959050
So you should choose a period in the war and then the armies will be balanced? Got it. I might buy something during my shopping trip today.

File: IMG_0425.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>when all 3 of your Leo 2s remount and kill 5 T-72s during your turn.

>Cheers

File: IMG_0432.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>52959206
>when both your Leo 1s from reserves in the same turn so you can form a Flying V and drive the unwashed Communists from your homeland.

>>52959103
Yeah. Some forces can show up with the same vehicles in multiple periods of the war (basic T-34s or a Finnish T-26 horde can show up in all periods), but you'll need different books for the different points values of each period. It's best for a group to figure out what period of the war they like, and then build from there.

Early War is 1939-1941, generally having the early, crazy, and crappy tanks from the start of the conflict. Games are generally about 1500-1750 points.

Mid War is 1942-1943, and has received a huge revamp with the launch of flames V4. Instead of the normal 1500-1750 points for a game, it's using a different 100 point scale. Currently they only have the Desert Rats and Afrika Corps covered (and then only partially), but they'll expand it to cover the Italians, USA, and USSR within a year or two.

Late War is 1944-1945, and has all the crazy toys of that period. Panzerfausts are everywhere, Panthers are not extremely rare, and King Tigers start showing up and scaring everyone. But the german training and motivation starts slipping, while the allies now have things like Churchill Crocodiles, hordes of T-34/85s, and like 10+ types of Sherman to deal with the germans. Games are, again, generally about 1500-1750 points.

>>52959445
>T-26 Horde
Might be fun
Too bad we didn't get to buy any Tigers from Germany during the war, it would be a no-brainer to pick Finland then.

>>52940741
Can planes intercept other planes still?

>>52947527
Why? They would be red primer if they were unpainted

>>52959604
Sea Lion (the planned invasion of the United Kingdom if I remember right) had the tanks painted Panzer Gray, anon.
He wasn't talking about Seelow heights.

>>52959569
Only Interception-only air can intercept. That's only available to early war brits/french, the Japanese, and the Marines.

Why you can't get air superiority to sweep enemy fighters from the sky as late war allies, I have no clue.

>>52959651
>Sea Lion (the planned invasion of the United Kingdom if I remember right)
Yeah. It'd never have worked, but people love acting like it would have for some reason.

Crossing the channel in river barges with barely trained operators, with massive naval inferiority and no air supremacy to make up for that, no ability to do preparatory bombardments, and the enemy having intact roads and railroads to quickly respond with their overwhelming numbers... Well, to be frank, it would have pretty much killed the German war effort outright if they had attempted it.

File: e26b44766e61e77e633068e48867a0d0.jpg (170KB, 1000x742px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1000x742px

When did the US start using flak armour on a large scale?

I know Britain started using it in large numbers from 1985 to 1989 (there maybe some examples before this) but I've seen US soldiers in Vietnam using it.

I wondered if we'd see it in TY and if it could get rules.

>>52959744
It could have worked if Germany didn't flunk the battle for Britain.

>>52959776
It might have been remotely possible if they didn't lose the battle they were going to lose, yes.

>>52959838
They had the RAF on their knees before Hitler started the terror bombing campaign instead of bombing strategically important objectives though.

File: Marines in Korea.png (657KB, 729x365px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 729x365px

>>52959769
US bomber, glider, Marine tank and naval gun crews wore body armour of various kinds in WW2. The Army started using them in Korea around 1951. Here's a dated (published in 1984) but still useful Osprey on the subject:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/48kh87azfus5iku/Osprey+-+MAA+157+-+Flak+Jackets.pdf

>>52959901

Thanks for the link.

Yeah, I mean you can chase state funded attempts back to the Great War and private ones even further but I'm just referring to modern ones that use fibres like Kevlar.

>>52959857
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain#Assessment_of_attempt_to_destroy_the_RAF
The germans underestimated the RAF's size, production, repair capability, and pilot skill, while massively overestimating their kills and the effects of their airfield bombing (airfields are pretty easy to repair when not dealing with high speed jets). The British, on the other hand, overestimated the size of the Luftwaffe and their repair/replacement rate. Most of the stuff written doesn't actually look at what really existed, and instead goes off the old, inaccurate assessments. This has then been repeated so much it's "common knowledge" when it's not accurate. Just like that damned "7 Sherman to kill a Panther" myth.

>>52941181

>30 USD headset
i've done that twice.

i think it's gonna take some doing.....

File: cam306.jpg (1MB, 1418x954px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1418x954px

Luzon 1945 - The final liberation of the Philippines (Osprey Campaign 306)

Driven from the Philippines in 1942, General Douglas MacArthur returned three years later to force the Japanese off of its main island of Luzon. Containing the capital of Manila, vital natural resources as well as thousands of Allied prisoners of war, the triumph at Luzon would be a vital step on the road to victory as the Americans continued to island-hop their way towards the Japanese home islands. This new study details one of the hardest-fought campaigns of the Pacific War with Japanese fatalities alone on Luzon topping 200,000. Emphasizing the differences in Japanese and American strategy, and detailing the combat operations of the campaign, this volume tells the story of how MacArthur kept his promise to return and liberate the Philippines.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/y18d2b75oo3pd8j/Osprey+-+CAM+306+-+Luzon+1945.pdf

>>52959769

I doubt flak jackets would fit into the scale of FoW/TY.

File: IMG_2743.jpg (32KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 400x400px

>>52960559
>>30 USD headset
>i've done that twice.

I was not aware of that.

You never mentioned that you purchased new equipment, and as much as I hate to say it I couldn't even tell based on the sound quality itself.

>i think it's gonna take some doing.....

It could be the microphone, it could be your computer, or it could possibly be your internet connection.

Or some combination of any of those.I honestly couldn't tell you.

But if you've already tried new microphones, then it might be something else.

Maybe ask some tech savvy people you know locally if they can figure out what the issue might be.

*shrug*

>>52961357
The Glider Pilot units in Holland have them, it gives them an extra save against Bombardments.

>>52961399

I forgot that BF likes to ignore historical effectiveness.

>>52961455
6+ save after failing a save vs bombardments. Basically as irrelevant as the body armor on soviet sappers, which gives a 6+ save in assaults.

File: 4-28.png (5MB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 2160x1216px

Ok. I have 36 little devils to go, and 116 done. I have two days. Tomorrow I will attempt to get the 36 remaining done except for the khaki, in two shifts due to RPGs:
1000-1400: Black Grey, Green Ochre
1800-2200: Flat Earth, Luftwaffe cam green, helmet/beret mix
If I can avoid distractions and dying of heat, this should be doable. It will leave me with all of sunday to paint the khaki, and then I will have met my goal.

>>52959651
Ohh well hush my mouth haha!

>>52962093
Good luck anon: it's been quite the effort on your part.

>>52961356
With V4 i dont think we might see more PTO in a long while
What happened to digital brits, aussie, snlf lists?

>>52959651
Yeah, Case Seelowe. We're having an EW "Germany had it's shit together enough to stage a landing" alt history campaign. Also "Britain had enough stuff at home still somehow to actually field cool toys".

>>52959050
Reluctant Conscript is the lowest rating in the game, not the worst. Worst is probably like Fearless Conscript maybe?

>>52965418
Worst as in lowest, not least efficient points-wise. For the purposes of the comparison in the post the efficiency of the rating doesn't matter, just how bad or good (and thus how cheap/expensive) it is. Context matters a lot for "worst".

>>52961381
Perhaps you can have everyone record their own session as well as the group? That way you'll have an isolated recording for each person that rules out lag when editing. I've heard others start each recording session by having everyone clap in unison so you have a reference point to sync everything when editing and bringing all the individual tracks together. Just a thought.

Great podcast, by the way. It's quickly become my go to FoW podcast. Way better than the WWPD chuckleheads.

>>52965418
Fearless Conscript is a good rating for well armored tanks (T-34s in MW) and can keep infantry from fleeing after one round of assault or staying pinned the entire game. Every rating has a job it can do well and disadvantages as well.

>>52965621
Craig the recording bot puts everyone on their own separate vocal track when we record in discord. There could still be issues with internet connection dropping in and out that may be impacting vocal quality. My voice track on the Volkspamee episode had issues with that. Do you recommend any particular software for each speaker to record a single track of their own vocals? There's no reason we can't use something like this with Craig to have a backup.

Man, there's so many different kinds of schurzen. I really love LLW germans.

>>52960124
>Just like that damned "7 Sherman to kill a Panther" myth

Or 4 Sherman to kill a Tiger, 4 Sherman to kill a Panther, 5 Sherman to kill a Panther.

God damn internet. Is is amazing how people can still remeber it and make it even worse.

>>52959744
>but people love acting like it would have for some reason

Because people want to have fun? it isn't like people want to play with actual operations and change their outcome with little toy soldiers


God damn internet.

>>52966417
1 firefly to kill a tiger

Thoughts on British armored companies?

They seem like a good way to spam 6 pdrs.

>>52966417
>Because people want to have fun? it isn't like people want to play with actual operations and change their outcome with little toy soldiers
That and it's fun to draw battlemaps of places we're familiar with.

>>52966417
I think you hit the nail in the head there.

As much as we want to dress this game up with tons of historical significance, at the end of the day what we're really doing is just playing a game with our toy soldiers.

And I think that gets lost amongst the internet autism sometimes.

Yes it's Workd War II, but it's also Toy Soldiers.

>>52966455
Of course, if it can hit it...

>>52959769
The M113 VADS is in TY at least.

>>52965803
Sadly, that goes beyond my technical expertise.

I think Craig records the audio after it's been uploaded which would explain it recording the audio cutouts. I've heard of people using Audacity to record their own individual tracks while recording and passing it along to whoever mixes the podcast. I'm pretty sure Audacity will let you mix multiple audio tracks so you can substitute the local copy for the Craig bot audio when it cuts out. It's all well and good for me to say stuff that I don't have to follow through with, though. It sounds like that'd make editing a bitch.

A friend of mine does a lot with audio like this. I'll see if he has any ideas.

I just finished the latest episode and have to say, again, it's a great podcast. You guys started out great and get better with each episode.

>>52966669
Yeah it is completely fine, you can play with more realistic rule set and all those thing, but you will never have a good simulation because at the end, miniatures are pretty limited in terms of scale.

I like FoW because it was supposed to be more balanced toward gameplay than realism, though it make it more vulnerable to nit–picking values and some kind of bias.

>>52966596
shit i meant mechanized

>>52966596
While you get a lot of 6pdrs, your core platoons are pretty small. If fielding them, I'd suggest the Guards motor from Market Garden. They can get an extra MG team, which helps a good bit with the small platoons.

>>52967140
what about the south africans from road to rome?

>>52966800
Editing is not really all that difficult, it's just kinda time consuming.

It's a long process that involves listening to a clip, removing things like heavy breathing, coughs, overly long pauses, and as much odd background noise or electrical hum as I can.

And then there's Bartosz and his Cylon robotic voice issues. I do try to clean that up, but it seems to be lag and interference as much as it seems to me his microphone quality itself. *shrug*

That's an issue that's been plaguing us for several episodes now, and I'm not quite sure how to resolve it. I try to make it as clear as possible, or just edit it out and hope the rest of the conversation flows naturally without it if his audio is too fuzzed out to comprehend.

That's our biggest audio issue.

If we can fix that, then we're golden.

>>52967207
Never noticed them, but they look pretty usable. They're basically a (Lorried) Rifle platoon that can get halftracks, which is pretty nice.

>>52967207
Might work, but do note that you don't get RA Anti Tank. Rifle Companies get four 6pdrs and four 17pdrs and some (eg Overlord) can just take the eight 6pdrs. Kangaroos, Amtraks or Defrocked Priests are a lot better than half tracks because of the new send to rear rules, so I think I'd go for Rifles personally

>>52966596
Best way is an Airlanding company. 8 6pdrs, and then another 4 6pdrs or 2-4 17pdrs. If you want to fuck someone with cheap FV AT guns, accept no substitutes.

How many of you, except where the rules specify, make specific companies or companies with "backstories"?

>>52972105
My Airlanding company is going to be the 12th Devonshire, with stuff for both the landings during Operation Varsity (Locust Tanks and misdropped US paras, both of which were involved with the 12th and not the other Airlanding companies) and for the advance through Germany afterwards (support from the 4th Grenadier Guards and a few M10s). I'll be able to use them for other lists, but that's the period I'm focusing them on.

My Churchills, similarly, are based on the period where the 4th Grenadier Guards were supporting the various UK airborne forces (paras and glider troops) during the mop-up after crossing the Rhine.

My cromwells are B squadron, 15th/19th King's Royal Hussars. Since I'm making the list compatible with both the Market Garden form and the Nachtjager form, I've got two Cromwell CS tanks from A squadron (Luttrell), and my Comet tanks will also be A squadron tanks. A and C requipped in time to use them before the end of the war, but B didn't get theirs till the final week, and they never got to use them in combat.

I'm looking at a rifle company, a sherman company, and some commandos after that, but I'm not sure what specifically I'm going to base them all off of. That's way down the pipe, though.

What's this about plastic motor rifles from Salute? I thought all we were getting was T-64s?

>>52973550
First I have heard about plastic motor rifles. At salute they only teased the plastic model and sprue of the T-64 along with a resin prototype of the the BTR-60. I am itching for more news about Red Thunder. Just waiting for Phil to pull the Cheers out of the bag.

File: 2944208.jpg (57KB, 667x800px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 667x800px

>>52974246
>Just waiting for Phil to pull the Cheers out of the bag.

I guess we'll meme hard to keep the bitter tears at bay.

>>52974422

My dream is for Cheers to become an aesthetic for /tg/'a 4chan cup team, so every new incident of it is bittersweet in that sense.

>>52959492
what are stolen KV-1s

>>52974246
Well, the company and platoon boxes have been removed from the online shop, so it could be a possibility.

>>52978084
Maybe they've had so many damned complaints thanks to their shitty castings they finally decided to do them properly.?

>>52980609
Guess I was lucky with mine, but I know BF is notorious for the shitty 'second run' they do once they find out demand was bigger than supply, for the billionth time.

>>52977799
They're fucking magical

>>52980646
Yeah. Hopefully they come back in stock soon and not look like mud men when they do.

File: podcast.png (47KB, 1137x710px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1137x710px

Trying to get the podcast on pocketcast's search has failed, is this fixable?

File: 040615_0741_ListsWePlay1.jpg (78KB, 463x465px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 463x465px

The Long Range Desert Group in World War II (Osprey General Military)

Established in June 1940, as the brainchild of scientist and soldier Major Ralph Bagnold, a contemporary of Lawrence of Arabia, the Long Range Desert Group (LRDG) allowed the British Army to gain a crucial advantage in the North African Front of World War II. Traversing great swathes of the desert that had never before been explored by Europeans, the LRDG was able to launch hit-and-run raids against remote enemy targets such as the fort and airfield at Murzuk. From December 1941 until the end of the Desert War in May 1943, the LRDG carried out numerous missions in tandem with the Special Air Service, using their unparalleled knowledge of the desert to navigate the SAS to enemy airfields on which attacks would be launched. As well as in Africa, the LRDG also fought in the Aegean, undertaking numerous dangerous missions in Yugoslavia, Albania, Italy and Greece, displaying their extraordinary versatility by operating in boats, on foot and by parachute. Using never-before-published photographs and archival material, interviews with surviving veterans who have never before gone on record regarding their wartime exploits, and special access to the SAS archives, Gavin Mortimer tells the story of the origins and dramatic operations of Britain's first ever special forces unit.

https://mega.nz/#!GslzgQ4Y!Kk_kfsXiGjQFDzEIVcSeIBMoB9qsGV_qvIIt6JNvmCs

File: BMP-1_exEastGerman_Zlot_Darlowo_2009.jpg (349KB, 751x436px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 751x436px

Are we supposed to spam BMP1's or 2's I am thinking of doing EGermans so I can only have 1 platoon of 2's but still wanna know.

>>52983885
2s are the spamalot ones.

>>52983986
Aw, thanks anon, I like how BMP-1's look but i like to win a game too sometime lol.

>>52983885
BMP-1s are the East German mainstay, and are much worse than BMP-2s.

>>52983885
Soviet BMP spam is typically BMP-2s.

East Germans on the other hand are pretty much limited to the BMP-1 due to their list construction options.

>>52982489
Try adding /feed to the end of the URL and seeing if that works.

File: TY BATREP BRIDGE.pdf (4MB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1x1px

Batrep: Soviet Afghasty attack West German Aufklarungs in No Retreat

Hello /fowg/

After much driving around I finally found a store that carries FoW, along with a lot of other interesting historical stuff, which checks off the first box of "where to buy and where to play"

My question is this, I'm interested in both Team Yankee and Flames of War. I understand that V4 for Flames of War came out, but LW hasn't been touched yet by the rules, and LW is the most popular era.

Would it make sense to pick up TY first and just wait for FoW v4 to come out for LW? Is there going to be a new box set for V4 or is that a case of we don't know?

Thanks dudes.

>>52987438
>but LW hasn't been touched yet by the rules, and LW is the most popular era.
LW has not had its points adjusted, but the EW/LW rulebook and the Special Rules and Warriors book both update LW to V4 rules. Both are up in the mediafire at the top, and are/were supposed to be given out for free with possession of a V3 rulebook. V4 will eventually arrive for LW with entirely redone points, but that's probably a ways off.

>Would it make sense to pick up TY first and just wait for FoW v4 to come out for LW?
If you mean the full revision of LW, that's going to be years down the line, so going with TY would be the better choice. If you mean any version of LW V4, then it exists now and you can go right ahead with that.

>Is there going to be a new box set for V4 or is that a case of we don't know?
It looks like the new intro set is the El Alamein set. We don't know if they're planning on making anything like the V3 Open Fire box again.

>>52987438
As far as getting started with your army let us know what kind of army you are interested in and we can give you some direction. It would narrow a lot of things down if you could tell us what nation you are interested in and whether you want to run tanks, infantry, or both.

Also check out the beginning of this Panzerfunk episode. Pretty much all of the advice is still applicable now.

https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-6vg83-5679b3

>>52987438
LW is the most popular area but a) tons of stuff transitions well enough between eras that you can use V4 lists to some degree of success in MW and EW and b) it's still played by a ton of people.

I'd advise FoW because it's still more popular than TY (hell, locally Tanks is more popular) and because TY is plagued with the whole "Soviets are NPCs" issue.

>>52987615
>>52987745

Thanks dudes. It's nice to know LW v4 sort of works since the FoW scene is much bigger than the TY scene, though I guess the latter is much newer and therefor understandable.

For Team Tankee I was gonna do Brits.

For Flames of War I'm a little torn, I think I have it narrowed down to three lists: Berlin Kampfgruppe, 11th Armoured from Nachtjager, and British Armoured in Market Garden

Berlin
+ Panzer IVs with schurzen are probably the sexiest tanks in existence, and you can take a lot of them
+ I think Volkssturm units are pretty interesting, the bottom of the barrel up against an enemy far superior to them in every possible metric, and you can take a lot of them
+ Sdkfz 251s and the Pumas are neat
+ Berlin Kampfgruppe is an interesting list with lots of variety and great history of terribly mismatched force getting the shit kicked out of it which is appealing to me in ways I can't really describe
+ Most of the stuff I would want to get is also usable in MW
- Lot of german players at this place. I don't particularly mind playing non-historical matchups but I wouldn't be suprised if some people do.
- Have to paint buckets of Volkssturm, and I'm pretty confident my painting skills are not up to snuff
- Looking at the V4 midwar lists I feel like a v4 conversion of this list will remove a lot of the cool stuff it has.

British Armoured from Nachtjager
+ Comets are pretty neat
+ Comets are really expensive point wise so not much to paint
+ Universal carriers are cute
- LW only
- Using Comets means you don't have space for other stuff
- Not much interesting history behind it

British Armoured from Market Garden/Overlord
+ You get to use a lot of stuff from the intro box set
+ I have watched A Bridge Too Far too many times
+ Interesting history
+ Universal carriers are still cute
- I'm pretty indifferent to Shermans
- Still LW only

File: why is she so perfect tg.jpg (29KB, 729x464px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 729x464px

>>52988504
>+ Panzer IVs with schurzen are probably the sexiest tanks in existence,
my nigger

> - Have to paint buckets of Volkssturm, and I'm pretty confident my painting skills are not up to snuff
that is how you get better honestly.
can't really help you my dude

>>52988504
Well the nice thing about Berlin is you can take pretty much anything. If you want to practice painting grenadiers before you do volksturm you can just bring those instead.

>>52988504
>British Armoured from Nachtjager
If you're starting, I would very much recommend against this one. Comets were overpriced in V3, and in V4 they're not any more capable (and in fact are worse in several ways). It's fine as a later army, but it requires a skilled hand to use it right. They'll punish every mistake you make.

On the upside, flat green paintjob.

>>52988504
If you buy German Infantry, PzIVs, 251s, Pumas you'll be able to run lists out of any LW book and a bunch of MW or even EW ones, same with British infantry and Shermans letting you do a bunch of different lists. I'd recommend picking up some models you're interested in and trying different lists.

If you can get Open Fire then two boxes of that gives you a very solid foundation for British or German lists. US too, since you get the 101st boys (there are various command or warrior blisters that would allow you to make a legal paratroops list) and an M4A4 is close enough to an M4 or M4A3 that nobody will care.

Anyway, I bought two sets of Open Fire and from there I've added various PSC and BF sets to expand out. Like, two boxes of PzIVs gets you a Panzer Company; or a PSC British Infantry box gets you a Rifle Company and then you share support choices (and combat platoons as support, like with tanks in an Infantry list).

>>52990316
Who knows, the AMX30 might get the Chieftain treatment. Because NATO.
Cheers.

>>52973550
Haven't we known about the plastic Motor Rifles for as long as V4's been a thing? Seems obvious that both sides would be getting plastic infantry.

>>52986643
Nice desu

Cheers

>>52990434
For Team Yankee.

>>52991804
What? No, it's the plastic motor platoon for the Desert Rats in MW.

>>52985266
Sweet. Someone added it last night.

>>52939713
100 minutes of V4 fellatio.

>>52988856
this needs a reply with the Panzermadels Panzer4

>>52993099
noice.

sorry lads, not all of us love V4

>>52993099
>>52993229
>Stop liking what I don't like!!!

No.

And stop trying to get us to hate something just because you hate it.

If nothing else, Panzerfunk is brutally honest about what we love and what we hate.

And while you may not agree with us, we actually enjoy 4th Edition.

>>52993706
There is not one single problem with V4 according to that episode. There is no real look at changes. There is unending love of all changes and shit rationalizations. If I wanted that I'd go to WWPD. I expected a balanced look from you, not this.

Fuck off you shitty sellout namefag.

>>52993779
Did you actually listen to the thing, or just jump to conclusions, trying to protect your 'poifect vee three'?

>>52993779
We hadn't had much time to really look at it in depth. There is a couple of things that I have decided that I don't like, like some of the inconsistency in the writing, the Morale system isn't exactly rad either, aircraft are crazy hard to shoot down, and assaults are now much less decisive because frequently you'll be left standing away from the enemy like a fucking muppet.

But I stand by my points that I made. V4 is a lot better than V3.

Also Night Attacks for the British, someone made a concerted effort to kill that off, there's basically no point to conducting a Night attack because it kneecaps your armoured support, recon etc etc.
Infantry are at least more mobile and interesting to run to compensate for that.

Including Annihilate as a numbered mission also kind of honks me off because it's a "How to play for dummies" mission.

>>52993874
I listened all the way to Lord_Viruscide saying that everyone not onboard with V4 was autistic. There was not one thing they expressed dislike of. 6" command distance is totally fine, there's no flaws with having to get 12 teams in 4" assault distance for qoq, US arty party is dead just ignore having multiple observers and tot, morale is not something to touch on, only now do tanks need to avoid parking within 7" of infantry with pazerfausts, and so on. Bad things are glossed over with a throwaway sentence about the change and no opinions. Things they like get minutes of discussion about how good they are.

V3 needed fixing but V4 is just TY with a reskin and all the baggage.

>>52993779
>sellout

Considering I make zero fucking money off of this, doing this all in my free time after a 40 hour work week, that's rich.

We don't have contests or prize support directly from BF.

We don't have a cast member that literally moved to NZ from Virginia to work for them.

We tore them a new asshole over the stupidity of resin spam tanks for Volksarmee.

And yet we're sellouts for liking 4th Edition.

Whatever you say pal.

>>52994052
The US Arty party richly deserved the bullet that Battlefront put into the back of it's head. Or at least the crowbar they deployed to it's knee. I have been on the receiving end of it and it's about as uninteractive as Quest Sorcerer in Hearthstone.

>>52994198
I wish we'd fuckin' sold out mate. Then I wouldn't had to have shell out for these King Tigers, T-72s, get some replacement Hinds and the books.

>>52994198
You ditched all /tg/ stuff for facebook whoring.

>>52994233
And it still is bullshit if you play infantry except now its worse.

>>52994233
I purposely don't want to sell out. We're independent for a reason. So we can be honest in our reactions. Whether we love something or hate it.

No Kickstarter, no Go Fund Me, no Patreon. No e-begging of any kind. No sponsors or donators to keep happy.

And no sucking Pete's cock.

Why the hell do you think "Cheers" is a fucking meme here?

Because Phil can be a complete fucking moron sometimes.

But the fact is, even with its flaws we still enjoy 4th Ed.

>>52994308
If we were to grow our audience at all we had to promote ourselves on normal social media.

And in the wider world, 4chan has a reputation.

To the Mundanes all of 4chan is the worst parts of b, d, and pol combined.

Yeah, we're better than that. And WE know it.

But Joe Normie? Thinks that 4chan is literally the asshole of the internet and just as full of shit.

File: IMG_0235.jpg (72KB, 355x531px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 355x531px

>>52994308
>And it still is bullshit if you play infantry except now its worse

Maybe try to bring your own light guns or air to pin enemy artillery instead of making your boys sit through shelling all game unsupported.

Cheers

>>52994308
I refuse to let Eagles take the blame on that because it was largely my initiative. And it's largely because I like big numbers. I wanted Panzerfunk to be heard more frequently, I wanted it to be bigger, even though it's just basically a group of six or so fans just shooting the shit. And the only way to do that is to stick it on a platform where people can see it.

File: quote-you-smug-faced-crowds-with-kindling-eye-who-cheer-when-soldier-lads-march-by-sneak-home-and-siegfried-sassoon-264714.jpg (68KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 850x400px

>>52994308
>just mad because someone likes something anon doesn't
>autistic screeching

>>52994434
Blunt talk here.

How large do you think the FoWtg community actually is?

Because I don't see it being much larger than like 3 dozen people. Max.

>>52994839
Thread says 50 users. Figure half of those are duplicates and you have 25 people in this thread. The army poll at the top has 362 responses but probably a few repeats there as well.

File: T-55CHEERS.jpg (247KB, 1380x785px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1380x785px

>TFW you desperately want to play Team Yankee, but you don't want to suffer through Phil's vision of WarPact

File: 4-30.png (5MB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 2160x1216px

It's now 2:00 am, May 1st. Normally, that would mean it's the end of April. But because some people don't live in the most correct time zone ever, it is still technically April somewhere.

That means I finished on time. Or close enough. Anyway. 1355 points of the 12th Devonshire, all painted up and ready for lazy battle-ready basing (I still have to do touchup on them, so they're not going to get fancy basing for a few weeks at least). 152 men and 14 guns, all ready to serve king and country. Or my personal whims, same thing.

File: Painted.pdf (266KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1x1px

>>52997000
And the list I'll be going with on their first outing. Limited to what I have painted (I've got the Dingoes and Carriers for my 15th/19th King's Royal Hussars), and doing a local hybrid V3.5 thing. Hopefully it'll do alright.

>>52997000
>>52997130

grats anon, was interesting watching you post your progress pics

Hey guys, quick TY question: I haven´t played in over a year and missed out on the Brits, East and West Germans. I´ve a mid-sized collection of Soviets and want to expand it. My idea was to ramp up the number of T-72 and add some other stuff like infantry and AA.
My gaming buddies play Wessies and US, are Soviet vanilla lists with T-72 still a thing in the current meta or should I wait for the upcoming Soviet book and hope for T-80s and other gadgets?

>>52997846
T-72 lists get annihilated by most lists from leopards and iron Maiden. I've been playing them for months and I've probably got single digit wins.

>>52998771
So how do you deal with Leos and Brits then? I´m honestly not too fond of BMP-spam lists...

>>52999128
Generally whenever I play Birdy at TY, I let my four hinds deal with his Leos, but I did get some pretty good results even in a straight shoot out with the Leopards.

>>52999172
>>52998771
With the new Soviet book around the corner, would you advise me to wait for its release before expanding my army?

>>52999541
At the risk of challenging Phil and his unholy Cheers Magicks, Red Thunder can hardly make the Soviets worse can it.

>>52999541
That's what I am doing. So far we only know that it will have the BRDM-2 variants, the T-64, and the T-72.

>>52999128
This is a hard question, as there isn't one way to do it. T-72s can be effective against Leo 2s, they just need to get the alpha strike off. You can't trade shot with Leo 2s that are hull down at long range. Within 16" you have a 50:50 shot of penetrating with each hit. To get in close you could try to draw the Leo 2s out by using some BMP-2s (or spandrels in Red Thunder). Air can also be effective but Gepards will mulch you air assets if you aren't smart about how you use them.

Attacking at night is an interesting proposition. All of your units will be less likely to hit the enemy, but you effectively limit the enemy range to 24" unless you fire. This works against AA as well. Against Brits, this would put you at near even footing. Against Germans you can attack at dawn and move things up under the cover of darkness then attack when the sun comes out. Though you don't want to do anything with night if the enemy is American or has a lot of Leo 2s.

Against Brits artillery will be key to keep the Milans pinned down and not firing. The only other thing I have thought about is maxing air power and directly attacking the tracked rapiers to try and knock them out, leaving the remaining air to have a free go at the British.

>>52999595
>>52999688
Alright, thanks for your answers! Looks like I will wait for the new book and hopefully we´ll actually see T-80s. It´d be a shame not having them included in TY.

My plan was to use BMP scouts and their spearhead rule to get as close to the enemy as possible and overwhelming them with sheer numbers. I guess I´ll have to wait for the first proper games to see how that´ll work. We´re only three players, so there´s no large meta to see yet.

>>52994406
>Thinks that 4chan is literally the asshole of the internet and just as full of shit.
desu it kinda is, normies just forget so is the rest of the internet.

Namefags living up to the title in here.

I have a big dick and am socially successful, honest guys.

File: IMG_0002.jpg (32KB, 157x160px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 157x160px

>>53000601
Yeah how dare those fuckers make a podcast that I don't even have to listen to.

>>53000622
Right...

Because obvious impersonation and and character assasination are appropriate responses to him enjoying something that you don't...

With D-Day a month out, anyone looking at doing a D-Day game on D-Day? We're considering doing one, though we'll need to make the terrain and find out how many American infantry we have to work with.

>>53000601
t.wwpd

File: _20170501_194751.jpg (144KB, 1772x796px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1772x796px

>Not according to my copy :)
>not actually reading the rulebook you wrote
Cheers you smug cunt

>>52994839
Three dozen sounds about right for users subscribed to the Discord channel?

>>53002474
Gonna have to recommend you play it in V3 rather than V4. Bunkers and fortified lists are just fucked in V4.

File: 1267681632518.jpg (103KB, 400x500px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 400x500px

>>53005777

File: 12th Devon 50%.jpg (391KB, 1080x608px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 1080x608px

>>52997000
For reference, where I started from this month. And since I'm no longer suffering from sleep deprivation, I can post the individual unit pictures if anyone wants me to (though those on the Discord server have probably already seen them)

>>52999595
>At the risk of challenging Phil and his unholy Cheers Magicks, Red Thunder can hardly make the Soviets worse can it.
"We realised BMP-2s were too good compared to T-72s, so we pushed the price up to compensate. Cheers."

>>53007237
Motherfucker....

>>53007023
I've been watching your progress this month and I must say that I'm supremely jealous of your painting skills, I'd always love to see more pics.

File: 17 pdrs.jpg (974KB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

974KB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
Thanks. It's honestly more determination than skill. The camo was time consuming, but when the smocks were given the color by people just slapping brown and green on with a brush, you can get away with sloppy camo.

As for more pics, here's a close up at the big old 17pdrs. I got the crew from BF's para command set (which also included the pile of NCOs I needed and a para Staff team should I ever get 75mms), and then just got a normal 17pdr kit. Still need to convert the gunner from that to have the para uniform, so that it's not a big gun with 4 dudes standing behind it and nobody on the sights.

File: 6pdrs.jpg (972KB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

972KB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007675
The 6 pdrs actually required a lot of cutting, since the ones in PSC's Heavy Weapons box are technically the normal, not the airlanding, version. Had to cut the axle shorter and move it up, as well as severely trim both the front and rear shields. I think they turned out pretty good, and I need to get another 4 to terrorize my tank-loving local meta...

File: 42in mortars.jpg (1MB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007733
The heavy mortars are sadly missing one pair of arms. Stanson just didn't move his hands out of the way fast enough in training, but somehow he's got psychic powers that let him load it anyway now.

That'll get resolved along with the extra 6pdrs when I get the second heavy weapons box.

File: 3in mortars.jpg (947KB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

947KB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007785
The light mortars, aside from some fiddly basing requirements, were pretty straightforward. They'll also be picking up some extra teams when I get the second heavy weapons box.

File: Vickers and observers.jpg (1MB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007814
The Vickers teams were a pain to get together, with one exploding on me when I was assembling him because the super glue dried too fast. They're ready to spend lots of games being ignored now, though. Damned treadheads....

You can also see some of the observers here. I'm going to try and make it so the 3" observers, the 4.2" observer, and the observer for the eventual 75mms are all easily distinguishable at a glance. Taking advantage of the mix of berets seems like the best way to do it.

File: HQ and PIATs.jpg (987KB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

987KB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007873
The HQ is nice and straightforward, and having extra PIATs to throw into the mix is great when your opponent refuses to get out of the damn tanks and fight like a man. You can see some more observers and radiomen here.

File: Misc Command Teams.jpg (972KB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

972KB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007912
This lot will form most of the individual command teams, as well as giving the airlanding platoons some much needed standing NCOs.

File: Airlanding Platoon A.jpg (990KB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

990KB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007934
Since the PSC kits only came with three NCO poses between them (standing and yelling, crouched and yelling, and crouched with a mismolded back), I kinda had to get the BF ones to spice them up more. So far they look fine next to each other, but I haven't tried them on the same base or stick yet.

File: Airlanding Platoon B.jpg (1MB, 2160x1216px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2160x1216px

>>53007556
>>53007968 (You)
And this is the last one, the second airlanding platoon. I'll paint a third one when I return to my Devons, which will also be able to be used as an airborne engineer platoon with flamethrower. Of which I have way too many, as the weapons box came with 4 while the BF command guys came with another 3 flamethrowers... I can't even use that many without spamming the Market Garden Engineer list.

Hope you enjoyed the pics despite the very repetitive posing and the bad resolution/lighting.

File: IMG_20170501_223138.jpg (2MB, 3674x1433px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3674x1433px

I was working in some HMG Pillbox and HMG Nest. What do you think?

File: 1492628465448.jpg (327KB, 1194x934px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 1194x934px

>>53008804
They look great.

>>53008804
It looks great!

File: 1488518039034.png (66KB, 590x605px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 590x605px

The T-80 is in Red Thunder and hasn't been spoiled yet to give us a surprise, r-right guys?

File: cheers right in your soul.png (83KB, 220x190px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 220x190px

>>53009575
you just know

>>53009644
>>53009575
T-80s where confirmed not to be in RT some time ago, whenever we get Red Thunder 2: Electric Boogaloo we'll get them apparently unless they've done some serious leg work in the interim.

File: oTmMdWG.gif (949KB, 320x234px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 320x234px

>>53009819
>T-80s where confirmed not to be in RT some time ago

What. The. Fucking. Fuck.

>>53010395
T-64 was teased in the Iron Maiden Q&A where they also revealed Volksarmee.

File: IMG_0101.jpg (51KB, 750x180px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 750x180px

>>53010395
It's okay Anon the T-64 is pretty much the same as the T-80.

>>53009819
>USSR doesn't get T-80s even though they were on the front-line as of August 1985 (setting for Team Yankee). Instead being given T-64s without the ERA they were issued years before the setting

>But let's give the USA M1A1s even though production started in 1985 and the first front-line units given them were in late 1986

It's his game, and he can do with it what he wants, but they way he has treated the Warpact nations as some back-water horde army with no skill is just fucking insulting.

t.former DDR soldier

>>53010909

I'm apparently out of the loop on my 4chan lingo. What's the deal with signing posts "t.whatever"?

File: EStheft.jpg (162KB, 1164x823px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1164x823px

>>53011148
It's a Finnish abbreviation meaning "regards" used in letters and other formal communication. It entered memedom through spurdo comics.

>>53010909
>t.former DDR soldier

Do you feel like you were 3+ to hit or 4+ to hit?

File: 1492906664736.jpg (43KB, 750x267px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 750x267px

>>53010909
Did you like the cheers?

>>53010545
>>53012426
>"No sneak and peek recce"
>"The T-55 cross rating is accurate and the AM modification is regarded as pointless"

Am.... am I just getting fucking trolled here?

>>53012504
No silly. WarPac recce found the enemy by getting shot at. They had to go 2 fast 2 furious to see where they what they were moving into.

File: 1489273936510.png (135KB, 164x300px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 164x300px

>>53012504
yes
cheers

>>53012426
Poor c3k. Having to live with his humiliation immortalised.

File: IMG_0372.gif (931KB, 250x197px) Image search: [Google]

931KB, 250x197px

>>53012972
I unwillingly sacrifice myself for the memes.

>>53013326
F

>>53010909
>t.former DDR soldier
Tell me your secret east fritz, how good you guys actually were? and how much Prussian or Wehrmacht heritage you guys had? Did they teach you how to do a stormtrooper move?

So why are heavy mortars put on a large base? They look awkwardly empty.

File: REICH.png (228KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 640x400px

>>53013504
>Did they teach you how to do a stormtrooper move?

>>52993779
i specifically remember one panzerfunkfag bitching about their shoddy patch rules and i remember the complaints about morale. they have their complaints.

>>52994308
>facebook whoring
i can guarantee you at least 1/2 of all 4chan users have a facebook group they post to as well. or worse, a reddit sub. or far worse...they tweet!
seriously: FUCK TWITTER. facebook is like owning a TV. no biggie.

>>52994406
this

>>53007237
>>53007405
please, no.

I think I've just twigged why so much stuff seems like nitpicking. People don't nitpick with stuff they basically like.

>>53014765
>please, no.
phil, yes.

>>53014765
>panzerfunkfag

Funkmeister.

>they have their complaints

Although I only learned of it after we recorded the episode, I'm truly infuriated with the Portable Hole nonsense.

Although I'm not sure if I should blame Phil for that, or the loophole seeking haters that keep insisting that it's both entirely possible and entirely legal according to their insane troll logic application of Rules as Written.

>i can guarantee you at least 1/2 of all 4chan users have a facebook group they post to as well. or worse, a reddit sub.

I think you're low balling that estimate by several degrees of magnitude.

I'd go so far as to suggest that everyone here is on at least one of the major social media platforms. That's just the way the world works today.

I think I literally only know one unrepentant Luddite who has ZERO social media presence.

>>53011148
This post is correct >>53011330

>>53012384
I feel like dying was a shit idea and so didn't just run blindly out of cover like a madman, so 4+
>>53012426
I like research into the topic you're talking about much better. Thanks
>>53013504
German/Prussian Nationalism was blended with the communist drivel to make us feel like we were fighting for ourselves when we were actually fighting for Moskow.

We felt we were better trained, drilled and disciplined than the Russians but were under no illusion, they had the better equipment and practical combat experience in Afghanistan.

And off course we leaned to stormrtrooper move, how else am I to reach the Rhine in seven days!

I can put on a trip if anyone has questions
I was 17 when I "joined" (conscription) in 1989 February, so I got to see all protests happen and the wall come down while on alert to intervene.

>>53005777

All this shit is really making me wonder if BF accidentally sent an old draft to the printers or something.

Looks like my club is gonna get a tiny group (3-4 people) of Flames of War players. It seems we're gonna start playing Late War armies, when is 4th edition going to start affecting our lives? Should we wait to buy our starter armies?

>>53016862
4th is already out. You can stay with third if you want, I'd just not invest in things that are optional in 4th like truck transports.

>>53016879
I heard that there are only two army lists out for 4th edition currently?

>>53016914
They've also provided updates for EW and LW, so that they work (to some degree) with the V4 rules. From what I've seen, it works out fine as long as you game with reasonable adults.

>>53016914

Yeah there are only two 4th ed books out atm and they are both mid-war. It will likely be years before late-war has a decent amount of 4th ed books. There is a conversion document for 3rd ed armies, and you should be able to pick up 3rd ed books cheapish. You'll need them if you want to play 3rd ed anyway.

>>53016944
>>53016914
There are only two 4th Ed Mid War books. Early and Late War books have a conversion book to make them work.

>>53016399
How much Communist theory did they teach you, if any?

>>53017315
Quite a bit actually.
Good luck voicing concerns or levelling criticism towards what you were tough though.

>>53017379
*taught

>>53017379
What was the attitude towards WW2? Also, what was the attitude towards the West German population? How did the army view the other Warpac nations? (I've heard a lot about a dislike of Poland though I don't know if it has any real weight)

>>53017422
At least where I was taught, WW2 was seen as a liberation of Germany from dangerous fascist Ideals and the test of strength of WW2 showed Communism superior to Fascism. But we all knew better than that. The west was seen as our brother who has been misguided and used as a puppet of a superpower (self awareness was shockingly lacking) We didn't want to wipe them out because at the end of it all they were still Germans.

Personally, I could not wait for the west to liberate us because everyone saw through the state lies but you had to play the game of "smile and wave" if you hoped to live in peace.

When the East fell they released the Stasi files to the public and everyone got to check on what the state had on them.
Stasi actually had me down as a "potential problem person" which made me laugh and frightened at the same time. I had only told a small number of people my real thoughts on the state and all were trusted confidants of mine. suppose it's no surprise though seeing as how extensive their informant program was.

We thought we were the most disciplined of the Pact nations, making do with sup par equipment provided to us. Quite a few of the NCOs didn't like the Czechoslovakians, heard nothing of the Polish but maybe I just wasn't listening at the right time.

>>53017602
Have you got any actual proof of being in the NVA?

Is it true the NVA expected a large series of initial losses to desertion?

>>53017638
I can go digging through my attic for you, I did hold on to some things even have photos from my time in.

yes the projections for desertion/non-compliance were quite high.

I probably shouldn't ask this, but what are regular game sizes for Flames of War Late War? Like how big should I start?

>>53017772
Build an army for 1500 points, it's basically a universal standard.

File: IMAG0089.jpg (522KB, 1517x1190px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 1517x1190px

Sourced from 'The Soviet War Machine' by Salamander Books.

Any one care to guess the date of when was published?

>>53017840

I'm going to guess prior to '81. I've got the revised one published on that date, and the profile is only slightly improved - the picture is a better and they've figured out is has the 125mm smoothbore.

>>53017772

This year's official tournament level is 1515 pts

>>53017821
Yeah that makes sense.
Will I get horribly beat if I make a heavy tank battalion with Tiger I Es?
Somebody warned me against using heavy tanks as my first army but Tiger Is make me cum buckets

>>53018140

One of my friends did exactly that and he got his ass beat repeatedly. He has since switched to using PzIVs with infantry, artillery, and air support.

>>53018140
Well, V4 is much kinder to Heavy tanks in general what with the ruination of artillery and aircraft, but Tiger Is have suffered since the Western Powers and Soviets got access more frequently to higher AT assets sometime around the midpoint of V3. Compared to Panthers, King Tigers and Panzer IVs, they became neither fish nor fowl. Too expensive to mass, too under armoured to form the point of the spearhead.

Although they where buffed by Tiger Ace becoming a constant ability rather than a randomly generated one.

Most people advise when you've got the Tiger Fever to go for Kampfgruppe Hummel from Bridge by Bridge and/or Panzer Ausbildungs Abteilung 500 from Desperate Measures which allows you to mass 'Dirty' Tigers to just throw at the enemy. Bridge At Remagen allows you to throw Reluctant Veteran King Tigers and Tiger IEs into the same list. And with their Tiger Ace they might not motivate entirely like shit.

>>53018208
>>53018233
That's a shame. I was going to run 5 Tigers (1 command and 2x2 in platoons to fill out the requirement) and fill in the gap with infantry and artillery, although I don't know what I can find in my local shop.

File: I heard you liked big cats.pdf (355KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1x1px

>>53018264
Fun trick: Using new HQ rules make your KT part of the Tiger Platoon, use Mistaken Target to shift hits onto the KT, and then because the KT is armour "Fuck you", the hits are ignored instantly.
For Infantry I recommend
>Volkssturm
Or any other flavour of them, tailor to your own points limit.

>>53018407
Interesting
It's looking like I'm gonna have to order all my stuff online anyway though, so I might just do a Panzer IV horde with an attached Tiger I platoon and other support. I just hope the game doesn't shrivel up and die instantly at my local club.

>>53018407

Isn't the whole list at risk of breaking if the lone KT gets killed or routed?

>>53018447
No, you have three Core formations, the HQ KT, the single KT, and the three Tiger IEs. You have to lose two units to go into formation bad spirits. Or you could add a Panzercrew Platoon for a fourth Core Platoon.

Anyone want some out of date 80's books?

IGT - Modern Tanks and Fighting Vehicles
https://a.uguu.se/2Grniys62iKH.pdf

IGT - Weapons of the Modern Soviet Ground Forces
https://a.uguu.se/MR4pIc1lUEzt.pdf

Get 'em before they're gone.

>>53016399
Oh thanks ddr anon, can you talk more about the army? Training, tactics, etc? They were pretty much russian copy paste?

Where did you serve? In the mot-schutzen?

>>52977799
>KV-1
I mean yeah KV-1s are cool too but Tiger I is my waifu
Also I'm not a good wargamer and I'd bet Finland is difficult to play

>>53016914
yes. this is factually true, barring patch-rules

>looks at all my Soviets and Ostfront Germans...

*sigh*

>>53017840
>>53017896

that is some damning evidence....

>>53016914
Two books. Not two lists. Huge difference.

The only two books published *specifically* for 4the Edition are the new Mid-War Africa books.

That being said, there are the conversion rules for Early War and Late War.

Mid-War in Eastern Europe is a bit of a limbo right now.

Technically the old books still exist, and you could follow the conversion rules for EW and LW, but those books are not addressed at all in the EW & LW rule book.

>>53020428
That's fine, It seems like my group wants to start playing late war.

>>53020428
>two books
Seeing as how both DAK and Desert Rats have only enough content for like 1 or 2 types of "lists" as we used to know them he's not too far off.

>>53018407
Similar process for jumbos in Blood Guts & Glory, while they are at platoon level. Could you do the same for a DAK list and hope the HQ tank pops, transferring to a Tiger E?

File: tfw no dragon maid.gif (682KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

682KB, 540x540px

>>53021593
I don't follow this at all, I just wanted an easy starter army.

>be gone for a few days
>come back
>the Brit Paras are looking excellent
>the usual problems with TY being addressed
>some autists are upset that Panzerfunk doesn't cater to them, and now has a facebook page
It's definitely good to be back

>>53021775
>>the usual problems with TY being addressed
Hey, don't be mean.

We've added exciting new problems from V4 too.

>>53021748
No worries. What they are saying is that while it is possible to run Tigers, they can be a bit expensive for what they do. There are little tricks to make Tigers more survivable, but that can wait until later.

If you want to run Tigers, feel free to run tigers, but I would suggest using them as a single group of 3 or groups of 1 individual tank. This is because the way morale works. If you bring them in pairs, one will be taking check to run away every turn after his buddy dies.

TL;DR
If you want to run Tigers, I think it is definitely a reasonable option in V4. I would also highly recommend StuGs or Panzer IVs (the late war box) to add some cheaper tanks to your army. If you want to keep expanding from there you can buy a box of Panzergrenadiers and maybe the new 105mm Howitzer box.

>StuG box http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=4599

>Pz IV H box http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=4278

>Grenadier box http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=4235

>105 mm howitzer box http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&art_id=5546

>>53022120
Oh, this stuff is plastic now too? That's great.

>>53022120
>>53022526
I'd like to chime in and recommend that you get your toys from PSC where that is possible. Their models are almost always better than Battlefronts (excepting their first infantry units like Later War Germans and Early War Russians in summer uniform, but even that is debatable). In most cases these will also prove considerably cheaper as well.

>Listening to the latest WWPD
>reviewing Desert Rats and Afrika Korps

God, they sound so fucking bored...

And people are honestly complaining about Panzerfunk?

At least they seem to have some actual passion for what they're talking about.

>>53022813
I only know Battlefront's and Zvezdas miniatures.

>>53022813
Battlefront's plastics are good. Especially the newest stuff.

Although I will agree that you'll certainly save money and still get absolutely amazing quality with PSC.

>>53022120
Not the guy you are replying to but I'm in the same boat as that annon am I ok if I wanna go with nebelweffers instead of the 105 guns?

>>53023591
You're fine, especially as nebs might count as two weapons in regards to bombardments; this gives you a double wide template and potentially rerolls to hit.

>>53023591
Nebs are generally seen as BETTER than german 105s. Though they're only available in metal.

>>53023615
Only the Panzerwerfers, ordinary Nebs will be restricted to single template (though they can still get rerolls if there's enough of them).

>>53021748
Me personally, I run a panzer 3 or 4 list with Tigers as support (not weapons). So what I would do - if this benefits me, anyway - is run the company CO close to a Tiger. With its weaker armor, if it is destroyed I would roll to move the CO to another suitable tank. In this case, at mid war it'd be the painful as fuck to kill Tiger E. This would (in theory) turn a support option to a combat platoon. So my effective combat platoon doesn't go down, and the CO is in a tough as fuck tank to boot.

If I can do that, anyway. I know you can do that with tanks, but I don't know if it's the same tank, similar tank, or just a nearby tank. Hoping for the latter.

>>53023690
thank god for 'werfers, then. Just picked up 4 of them. 230 points for 4 with extra crew.

>>53023690
Oh man, Panzerwerfers sound pretty great.

File: psc-bren-3.jpg (75KB, 585x786px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 585x786px

>>53023591
Nebs were a near auto-include in V3 because of how cheap and efficient they were. They gained massively from V4. Yes, you can take nebs instead of the 10.5s, and it will in fact probably turn out better.

>>53022867
Plastic Soldier Company (PSC) makes very nice plastic kits in the same scale as Battlefront's models. Some of the older kits can be a bit of a pain to make (damned multi-part tracks) or have odd proportions (their old infantry), but the vast majority of them are quite good. For an example of PSC models, see most of >>52997000 (there's some BF ones mixed in).

Oh, and they tend to give you much more customization than Battlefront does, though without Stowage bits.

>>53023820
Good to know, although I'll probably go with Battlefront's miniatures, depending on whether or not my local game store can get those in stock, I like to support them.

>>53023798
I've enjoyed them in the games I've used them. Doublewide, ranged in and hammering dug in russians.

I don't know if I did this right or not. They count as two weapons for firing bombardments. Is this the same case for smoke? Four launchers would give me 32 inches of smoke, then.

File: Pershing.jpg (130KB, 975x455px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 975x455px

I played a lot of V3 as germans before I left the game for over a year, coming back now i've decided to pick up some LW Americans for both sherman and eventually a sherman/pershings list. However in the mean time I intend to pick up a rifle company as I can use them in MW and LW pretty easily. What's the best artillery for them now? Cost vs usage?

>>53023862
Yeah, I'm still not super optimistic about how Flames of War is going to go at my local gaming club so I've just been browsing over different lists in the Grey Wolf book and didn't even notice they were an option.

>>53023887
I've used 105's and a small amount of mortars for closer support. Liked what they provided, just need to protect them a little.

>>53023915
And it's a nice option to slap an anti-tank gun to the platoon for security.

>>53018140
>battalion of Tiger 1s
>at 1500pts

Jokes aside, if you're going heavy tanks you wanna go cheap as chips. Hummel Schwere Panzer from Bridge by Bridge (PDF on the OP) would be a good starting place, and I think Desperate Measures can get cheap Tigers?

File: Gepanzerte Ausfuhrungschnitzelkugelkompanie.png (14KB, 487x508px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 487x508px

>>53024092
I was considering just doing this instead, if it's legal. I'm not 100% on how to read that Nebelwerfer chart.

>>53024341
15cm Nebs are better than 21cm; in V3 the smoke bombardment ability is worth far more than +1FP, and in V4 both rockets have the same firepower so it's a worse deal despite the nerfing of smoke bombardments.

>>53025798
But then I'd be blowing 25 points to the wind from the 1,500 point goal?

>>53025869
Burn those to upgrade the infantry to a full platoon. 5 teams really isn't enough.

>>53024341
As already said, 15cm rockets are more effective than the bigger, more expensive ones, mainly due to smoke.

Also, ALWAYS bring full-strength infantry platoons.

Also, I recommend fowlists.blogspot.com for toying around with random lists. It's completely free. Lacks a few of the latest books (Nachjager, Berlin and the latest Bulge compilation books - it does however have most of the lists in those books from their older mini-books and PDF lists).

>>53023820
PSC released one-part plastic tracks for their old kits in the meanwhile.

>>53026002
>>53026066
So you're telling me to bring less panzers and more infantry and artillery?

>>53025869
Three 15cm NW41 are 105pts and you're 10pts under currently. If you have the option to take a cheaper Porsche King Tiger you could use three 15cm Nebs instead of two 21cm ones. On that note, it's really not worth it taking a two gun battery since you have to re-roll hits with only two. Likewise, you generally want to try and max out any infantry platoons.

Realistically you're not getting a King Tiger into a medium tank list at 1500 though whilst getting decent support in too. Heavy Tanks are gonna be better either supporting infantry or as the core of a list (e.g. RT King Tigers from Bridge at Remagan)

File: Panzer list.png (31KB, 875x481px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 875x481px

>>53026141
This looks pretty close to one for me, granted I have never played the game, but at least it's got all the toys that I like.

A thought in V4 tournaments where the "More Missions" thing is being used:
Hasty Attack means you only need to play 6 types of Mission. You play Breakthough, Counterattack, or Hasty Attack vs Prepared Attack or Defend lists. Against other Hasty Attack lists, you play Dust Up, Encounter, or Free For All. Importantly, on top of the predictable missions, you're only dicing off for attacker against other Hasty Attack lists. Against both Prepared Attack or Defend lists, you automatically attack. That makes it much easier to plan your force comp based on what missions you'll encounter.

>>53016862
You're better off starting with Late War (or Early) because mid-war models are being pulled and slowly replaced with new ones. Right now you can only really get into Mid War if it's the North African theater. Just use the new rules and their revised points and don't get too worried if some things don't work quite right.

>>53017602
>Personally, I could not wait for the west to liberate us because everyone saw through the state lies but you had to play the game of "smile and wave" if you hoped to live in peace.
>Stasi actually had me down as a "potential problem person"

Makes me wonder if everyone saw through the state's lies, or if you were unusual.

My mom grew up in a right-wing dictatorship (Taiwan) and there were some similarities. Due to the "smooth" transition to democracy those state surveillance files weren't fully released, but a lot of people found out they were on a watch list and couldn't figure out how. The walls have ears.

>>53022813
>Their models are almost always better than Battlefronts
I can't really agree with this. They're cheaper and often have more options, but when BF has the same kit in plastic I generally find it to go together better and have marginally nicer detail. Not necessarily enough to make up for the cost difference, granted.

>>53026588
I find this depends on age, though their T-34s are great. Pz IVs, yes, IS-2s, hard to pick a clear winner.

File: Panzer list 2.png (29KB, 991x432px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 991x432px

>>53026197
This could also work. I'm not sure if recovery vehicles are worth taking?

>>53026495

In the USSR, by the end pretty much everyone knew the official line was worthless.

>>53026742
Recovery vehicles don't exist in V4, any you take don't get deployed.

As someone that loves his Churchill, Cromwell, and Sherman ARVs, this is very annoying.

>>53027162
No recovery vehicle? Really?

Do Battlefront do Deser Rats in Shorts in Plastic? Firestorm has the weapon sections listed as plastic but I can't find a platoon/company box?

Cheers!

New thread: >>53027835

>>53027808
Coming soon...