Flames of War General:Negative Armor Edition

File: Invasion of France Editions.jpg (170KB, 1200x778px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1200x778px

Previous thread
>>53160550
>>53160550
>>53160550

File: 1494763214337.jpg (343KB, 1280x888px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 1280x888px

Who /NVA/ here?

File: btr-40mauerbau.jpg (177KB, 1810x947px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1810x947px

>>53251748
Ayyy

File: ERNEST BEVIN.jpg (25KB, 358x450px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 358x450px

>>53251748
you can't win against N.A.T.O Russiaboos

been meaning to ask.
How are the t-55s getting worked into the soviet side?
I'm only picking up PSC so i won't have the card and I ain't sure if the Russians get access to them

>>53253198
It's looking like they aren't being put in for the Soviets, especially since PSC has a plastic model now. Enjoy your samey T-64s.

>>53253313
well then

>>53251748
looks like I'm a German now too

>>53253198
>>53253313
Yea if they put t-55s in red thunder then more people would buy PSC t-55s can't have that buy the new t-64 tovarisch it's slightly better. What, you want rules for HIPs? We don't make HIPs, sorry. We have lots of ATGMs for you though!

>>53255472
>HIPs?
>lods of ATGMs
does that mean I'll be packing fagots like crazy

>>53255472

>No T-55s
>No T-62s

Good job BF, not like the Soviets were planning on using that half of their tank fleet anyways.

Version 4 batrep: Don't like it.

At this point I can safely say it's not just random complaining though and I think the worst thing is assault. You get so few stands in, now, and worse, the assault that's in is in; there's no way of lapping around to encircle. This is annoying with infantry but terrible with tanks, where heavy tanks become totally unbeatable without a good top attack value. Playing annihilation, with an infantry company and a matilda company, I realised the game was effectively unwinnable because the only way I could wipe the second company was to get in assault, hit with an antitank rifle, have him roll a 1, and then have him fail a counterattack roll before I did to put that platoon on bad spirits.

Then do that again.

>>53256242
>Playing annihilation
There's problem one.

Personally, I haven't had much issue with assaults, especially with increased infantry mobility allowing me to get more of them into position to charge.
With tanks, I don't feel the decreased spread really reduces my ability to get stuck in.

>>53256365
>There's problem one.
Well it's portrayed as "This is how you learn the rules", at least, and it shows up on the random mission table, so "Whoops! Some lists are unwinnable if you dice this mission!" seems like a bit of a flaw.

>>53255933
no it means they have 4 flavors of incredibly similar tank destroyers with missiles but can't use any of the tank destroyer rules a la swingfire or hammerhead
no tanks get their gun-fired atgms because resons, the t-80 won't show up because the they got buried under a sea of conscripts cheers

expect m1a1 for US though because superior NATO technology and tactics

>>53256622
It's more that the mission itself leaves out half of the normal win condition rules.

And as such, it's not really representative of how the game is actually supposed to play.

>>53256725
>And as such, it's not really representative of how the game is actually supposed to play.
I mean, I'd agree, but it's also on the missions table.

>>53256830
It is.

But it really shouldn't be.

>>53256725
Yea I guess just reroll it.

Our local group has some v3 missions we'll reroll, there's some pretty "eh" ones in each edition

>>53256938
Cauldron and Fighting Withdrawal spring to mind.

>>53256998
yea, actually breakthrough and counterattack usually get skipped because most of the people can't into list building and get reamed by Mobile Reserves

>>53257090
to clarify, they just bring three platoons of tanks and are puzzled when things go tits up.

>>53256998
>Fighting Withdrawal
Wha? I love Fighting Withdrawal, very characterful, and a lot of strategy to it.

File: BEST GERMANY.png (68KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 800x480px

>>53251748
East Germany, represent

File: bmp is ded.jpg (193KB, 1600x1070px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1600x1070px

>>53256998
>oh, precious, precious Cauldron!

>>53256365
>Playing annihilation
The most hilarious thing I saw was both side encircled in the deep woods like boys scout camping while their wings compete scoring ground target.
Not worth playing the mission at all.

File: IMG_0490.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

Stretched some old sprue to make some antennas for my Luchs. Going to see how well these hold up before doing the others.

>>53260920
Nice! Looks really good.

I'm really confused by this MWV4 book... it says I'm supposed to pick units from a formation chart, but there's only a chart for the British and even that only shows a few units. Did they release new books that have the charts that I'm supposed to go buy?

Are there any swissanons willing to teach a noob TY?

File: 1459996666233.jpg (123KB, 700x543px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 700x543px

>>53264112
That's all there is for the year. GLHF

>>53264112
Are you talking about the rulebook, Desert Rats or Afrika Korps? The last two of those contains all formations for brits and germans (well, one formation with four or three different "companies"), the rulebook is only the rules.

How good are the SU-100?

>>53265121
Debatable quality depends on who you ask. Hero versions are now worth the consideration because their better skill allows them to blitz move out of the smoke that they will inevitably draw.

>>53265121
SU-100s are meant to hunt Tigers and Panthers. The reason the SU-100 gets a bad reputation is that it is both RoF1 and suffers from Hen and Chicks, which means if you move you suffer a +2 penalty to hit. In V3 they were repeatedly smoked by cheap artillery and pretty ineffective.

They are much better in V4 now that artillery doesn't have infinite smoke barrages. Virus is right about heroes being nice because they have a 3+ blitz move in case they get hit with any direct fire smoke. Heroes also don't suffer from Hen and Chicks. Even the standard ones are more useful, but it's likely debatable whether they have have better value than the SU-85M.

Though it seems like the answer to all Heavy AT problems is to bring an IL-2.

File: 1458094449791.png (541KB, 1024x720px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 1024x720px

>>53251748
I am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mG3BvkT6YQ

>>53266000
"Blitz and bring an airplane," the motto of v4

>>53267396
*airplane with cannons

Has anyone noticed individual TY sprues are £5.20, vs a box for £30? Why's the box more than everything individually?

File: IMG_0480.png (68KB, 1024x749px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1024x749px

>>53269954
Decals and crew.

>>53270015
and flashy box

>>53269954
Yea I wound up buying the two pack "open fire" sets because three of those (getting 6 vehicles total) was similarly priced to the box set of 5. They had no decals but eh

>>53271133
Yeah, the Open Fire sets are great. Got two Comet ones, they even came with crew figures, and there's no way I'm ever going to use more than 4 of them as a support choice (since the comet company is just too damn expensive).

>>53270015
>>53270065
Yeah, pretty much both of these are the reasons behind it.

File: Lesany_military_muzeum_4101.jpg (916KB, 2272x1704px) Image search: [Google]

916KB, 2272x1704px

IS-2 is love, IS-2 is life....

File: IMG_0496.jpg (31KB, 236x273px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 236x273px

Put together some of the LeFH 10.5 cm guns today. Really nice minis. Only problem is I am painting them for Desperate Measures and half the guys have shorts. Would it be off color to pain the shorts as boxers briefs?

Are Il-2 plastic or metal?

>>53282940
Resin and Metal.

>>53267433
>German or soviet aeroplanes with cannons

>>53282940
Go for zvezda il-2, it is made of plastic.
You'll need to buy BF transparent flight base seperately though.

>>53280861
Try smoothing the shorts' edges with a blade and then paint them like regular pants?

So I'm a complete noob to Team Yankee, but thinking of starting with a generic US force and relying on Bannon's boys to kickstart my experience. Does these seem okay for a rookie list:

100 points
2 x HQ Abrams
3 x M1A1 Abrams
3 x M1A1 Abrams

4 x AH1 Cobras
4 x VADS AA
6 x M109 Artillery
1 x M113 Fist Observer.

m1a1 Abrams aren't in the game yet, are they?

What is the minumum points where TY becomes fun (for both sides)?

>>53285692
The gun barrel for the M1A1 is on the sprue for the M1 Abrams but not in the ruleset yet. It might, but who knows.

Based upon what I've played with Birdy, at sixty points Warsaw Pact has more tanks and Hinds are unstoppable unless you made yourself worthless against tanks. Although that's a pure tank on tank force fight. So I'd say 75 points.

>>53285692
NATO needs at least 70~80 points to build a firm list while commies should pay tons of bucks above the points.

>>53285692
>What is the minumum points where TY becomes fun (for both sides)?
If you're doing 50 points or less, gentleman's agreement not to include air. Air is amazing if you can't afford to counter it.

>>53285627
>>53285692

sorry yes, I meant M1

>>53285627
>>53285692
This means NATO players want to have the M1A1?
Don't worry, you should be covered in Stripes.

Cheers

>>53286498
Straight from the horse's mouth! Amazing!!!1

>Being butthurt about TY.
>Looks back at 40k
>Reminds me the good old days where as an austist say "for the emprah" every time.
>Read the new rules... Well they seems ok.
>Looks the prices... Ok that is not fine
>Read the new fluff and the nuBigMarines.

Welp, those PSC T-55 are looking pretty good. And the CHEERS aren't that bad, right?

>>53286970
>Looking back at 40K

Literally why?

I can understand liking the fluff, but the game itself is pretty bad.

>>53286970
>battlefront releses new t-72s with era and are slightly bigger
>updated rules make t-72 like it should be and are only on that card that comes with the model

cheers

>>53286970
I'm not going to say Battlefront is the new GW until they do something like make the T-64 more expensive because it is more effective in game than the T-72.

>>53287990
How about making the shitty spam tank the most expensive thing you have to buy for your army?

I'm looking at *you* Resin T-55s...

>>53288045
That was just a retarded business decision made with no forsight and PSC is going to anally violate BF for it.

What are people's thoughts on the Fuch's infantry teams for TY west Germans? They're super cheap, but have only 1 Milan and they're transports largely suck. Are infantry teams focusing on guns worth it?

File: image.jpg (61KB, 531x740px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 531x740px

>>53283240
>Buying gay flight stands with fat-ass bubbles in the stems
Just buy a styrene rod from eBay, chop it up and glue it to a disc

>>53289011
It's certainly a cheap enough way to do it.