Flames of War General /fowg/

>extreme slowpoke trickle of releases for things that have had models for years and years already
>main concern in my area is "will BF survive long enough for them to reach the shit I care about?"
>people afraid to start because in any given group of 3 noobs only 1 of them cares about the V4 releases so far, so they just put off buying shit until all of them can play
I haven't been this concerned about the future of the company in, well, ever.

>>54040926
I don't know who is responsible for battlefront's "only release rules for models WE make NEW plastic kits for, also string out those releases" policy but they should be shot

>>54040926
It's one of the reasons I'm genuinely concerned about the eastern front books, since there's nothing to actually release for there unless they're going to sell T-70s or something.

>>54040926
Well the good news is BF can't fluff your 15mm WW2 into obsolescence. Historicals are always valid, so even if they went tits up tomorrow, there's other rulesets like Battlegroup more than happy to facilitate.

Reminder lads to expunge the boo's.

We don't have to cheers the fuck out of the Soviets but at the same time ERA wasn't deflecting tactical nuclear middles.

>>54041247
>Reminder lads to expunge the boo's.
NATOboos are pretty lame, yeah.

>>54041024
I think I am going to check out Battlegroup. I am afraid it won't quite scratch the same itch Flames does. The past 6 months of Battlefront idiocy has really killed my desire to do much hobby wise with Flames or finish my WarPac force for TY.

On the other hand, I don't think it's too late for them to turn things around. I am still playing and enjoying Team Yankee, but I hope Battlefront start feeling V4 MW in their wallets before the game starts dying off.

>>54041341
I'm genuinely amazed how totally interest in it went after the launch. We had a bunch of people interested until most of us couldn't use our armies.

>>54041403
Not sure how they were planning to reach out to new players without support from existing players. Unless they meant for MW to be an expansion for Team Yankee.

>>54041338

They're both lame, it's not like we don't spy on each other and just copy what the other is doing, the difference in technology is minimal. It's more down to doctrinal differences.

>>54041403
>Battlefront: "We're gonna try to revitalize mid war!"
>Also Battlefront: "All existing mid war armies are obsolete and have no rules buy our two quasi-historical lists with maybe ten models"

>>54041403

They should have done late war first. As much as I hate to admit it (because I like North Africa) but if they wanted to translate it into cash they should have done 44-45.

>>54041520
Eeh, I wouldn't go that far; soviets had some deficiencies in electronics, and took weirdly long to put proper thermals on stuff, but then a lot of NATO was stuck with the 105mm and relatively weak missiles and big, heavy tanks, too.

Saying it's a difference in doctrine underplays the fact technology often factors heavily into doctrine.

>>54041598

Yeah but which came first?

Soviets wanted quantity over quality, does this mean they sacrificed thermals? Maybe.

>>54041583
They should have released rules that let you play your existing mid war armies

>>54041635
Yeah, this is the biggest thing. I was thinking "I like TY, I have italians, maybe I'll demo some games". Then NOPE FUCK YOU WAIT 'TIL 2019.

>>54041635

True, parcelling it out just feels a bit contrived.

Why didn't they just make four books that cover all the units of the four powers in the desert? They all have models just some of them are old. Feels like they're falling into GW's hate for 3rd parties, they're cutting their nose off to spite their face.

>>54041749
>Feels like they're falling into GW's hate for 3rd parties, they're cutting their nose off to spite their face.
Especially because, really, no third party is gonna do shit like make plastic Italian tanks. There wasn't enough demand before, there's not gonna suddenly be enough now. The only plastic they're losing out on with a big full spectrum release is early model shermans. They've already got plastics of the major tanks for the russians, the only other country that really needs it, on their end. They could also have delayed it by a few months to have the early shermans ready because that's the only weakpoint, and then BOOM. Done. No problems with third parties stealing your hype. Don't attempt to cover everything exhaustively, just give everyone enough to get by on.

Instead we get just enough to get by on for two desert factions of four, and everyone else is left holding their butts.

>>54041801
>Instead we get just enough to get by on for two desert factions of four, and everyone else is left holding their butts.
Enough for one desert faction and one half of another. If you have an infantry or infantry tank list you're currently fucked.

File: 1412686082175.jpg (283KB, 850x1236px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 850x1236px

>>54041635
>>54041676

Oh, Fuck, ....this.

100 times, this.....

>truth.

my point-of-view is this: I love this game. i have played since 2008. but for god sake, don't force me to try to defend a game where new players are shown what is essentially a conversation manual for 80% of the game, and then have to tell them with a straight face: "this is a good game"

i literally have this problem. it's either play 1 of 2 armies in Mid-War Africa or i'm doing patchwork.

My 2 cents.

hell, have 2 solid dollars

>>54041875
>conversation

conversion. fuck, and i do mean fuck, auto-correct.

File: doitagainbomberharris.jpg (54KB, 498x498px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 498x498px

>>54041875
2 nukes wasn't enough. They should have stolen Bomber Harris from the RAF and put him on japan duty.

>>54041875
is this el alamein

>>54041875

I get the feeling mid war may have been a test run, now that it looks like it's failed I would assume since each period now appears to have it's rulebook that the releases of the other two periods will be better thought out.

>>54041919
>implying the firebombing of Tokyo didn't make Dresden look like a boyscout campfire.

>>54042044
>implying bomber harris wouldn't have done more
If Dresden was as wooden as Tokyo, the ash would have been compressed into coal from subsequent bombings.
Also it's a meme, don't take it too seriously, just toss more nukes at japan.

File: sample-6dbe0c0a1156212bd305d2d1c445e4cb.jpg (131KB, 850x873px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 850x873px

>>54041919
this is 4chan

we commence kawaii operations, gruppefuher...

>>54041996
Except that we'll be in MW for until 2019 and in the desert seemingly halfway through 2018.

>inb4 impatient kiddies can't wait for more releases
>inb4 just play V3

I mean honestly the issue isn't starting with Africa or the release schedule. It's the lack of variety in the releases. Everything is centered around the new plastic. The card model of ripping content out of the books is a bit dishonest. If they stay the course the Eastern Front is going to be a mess.

>>54042307

God you're so impatient why no-

Well, you can always go back and pl-

..hmmmm...

We could always play Bolt Action?

This isn't strictly FoW related but I remember running into a picture of a german-captured T26 with "Tiger II" painted on the side in one of these threads.

I can't find it anywhere and was wondering if one you people could help?

File: IMG_2894.jpg (104KB, 630x630px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 630x630px

>all this negativity

I'll just be over here enjoying my BADWRONG FUN.

>>54043055

Nobodies shitting on V4 as a ruleset but the release has been bungled somewhat.

If you want to play 1942 Brits vs. 1942 Germans then it's good.

File: IMG_2892.jpg (58KB, 320x400px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 320x400px

>>54043069
Battlefront has made some mistakes in their execution of things lately.

Or perhaps more accurately, Battlefront has been Battlefront.

But I've kinda reached a certain level of zen towards that. I've come to expect it, so I'm hardly surprised by it anymore. Still disappointed by it, but no longer surprised.

As for me enjoying the game, I'd even go so far as to say I've been enjoying the Late War conversion.

Some things play slightly differently than how I used to play, but I'm willing to learn and to adjust my play style accordingly.

I don't get worked up over it. It's a game I play to escape from real life stress.

I don't need to have the game or Battlefront's business decisions become something to stress out over.

*shrug*

But maybe that's just me.

>>54042429
>We could always play Bolt Action?

Isn't Bolt Action actually a worse game? Even more full of Hollywood style war movie nonsense than even FoW has been accused of?

>>54044766
yea but v4 is giving it a run for it's money

>>54044766
>>54045037
As much as I dislike V4, I'd still play it over Bolt Action.

File: The_British_Army_in_North-west_Europe_1944-45_BU4215.jpg (105KB, 800x797px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x797px

>>54041341
Battlegroup is fun. At the risk of coming across as a shill, I've been watching a YouTube channel called The Acceptable Casualties. They've got some AARs for the game, as well as discussion of the rules, a long video about the differences between it and FoW that I recommend, and they've just started a series that aims to give viewers a more in-depth look at the mechanics of BG. Small channel that needs polish but their hearts in it and the audio quality is decent so you don't find yourself wanting to seppuku all over your keyboard.

And if Battlegroup isn't your thing - WW2 rulesets are aplenty in the world and you've already got the minis for 'em. Or you could just come play VASL with me. I'm not lonely.

>>54044766
Yeah, it's pretty much WW2:The Movie:The Game. I have had some good fun playing it. Every game I play of Bolt Action doesn't come down to time, unlike V4.

>>54045412
I'll check it out. I think I have tried to watch some of their Flames videos, but they were super slow paced. Willing to give them another shot though.

>>54042307
>If they stay the course the Eastern Front is going to be a mess.
Eastern Front has less stuff, at least. We have Panzer III and IVs, Tigers, and Panthers in plastic, and we have T-34s in plastic. We might get a KV in plastic, but I'd expect the T-70 is going to remain a light tank in resin, if they show up at all. That's all pretty easy to fit into an afrikakorps style book. And it's not like we'll be missing options, either, given BF have historically covered the eastern front in incredibly broad strokes. There's nothing like the indian rifles to actually be removed in the first place.

I would laugh if the first soviet snowflakes come on cards.

File: IMG_0617.jpg (40KB, 512x405px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 512x405px

It's the year 2020. You are furiously opening your new Snowflakes of War booster packs for the Eastern Front. There it is. The holographic Comrade Stalin card. You run your eyes over the artwork while you rejoice at your luck. You read the text. "Comrade Stalin: Add one addition company of FC riflemen to your reserves." Tears roll down from your eyes as you gaze at the horde of soft plastic strelkovy in front of you. Their featureless faces stare back at you. You hear a voice in your head. "Quantity has a Quality all of its own." All is quiet for a moment until the cellophane crinkles as you instinctively reach for the next expansion pack. You manage to creak out one final phrase before you the new cards take you under.

"C-cheers, Phil."

So what late war books are actually current/not yet in a compilation. It's so fucking confusing.

>>54047373
Compilations:
Overlord/Atlantik Wall
Road to Rome/Fortress Italy
Market Garde/ Bridge by Bridge
Red Bear/Grey Wolf
Battle of the Bulge/Ardennes Offensive
(Gung Ho/Banzai - they do have LW points costs as well as PW/EW)

Softbacks:
Bridge at Remagen
Desperate Measures
Nachtjäger*
Berlin

*Nachtjäger means Night Hunter

File: Jagdpanther_FactoryColour2_sml2.jpg (111KB, 750x331px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 750x331px

At least they're still trying, and we know they're real people, even if Phil was abused by communists as a child.
I'd rather that than profitbot 5000

File: IMG_7101.jpg (29KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 250x250px

>>54047268
I laughed.
Then I got a bit sad.

File: 1497926764197.jpg (31KB, 722x349px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 722x349px

>>54047268

>>54046653
I put the video speed up...

>>54046761
We'll need Panzer IIIs and IVs with shürzen, a Panthe D (not -G), Panzer III M, Panzer IV G and H, etc, etc. So, they'd have to add quite a bit.

Still, they should have started with EF this time. But its BF: they always do the same thing they did last time.

>>54048436
It's not even that.

Midwar as a whole, and North Africa specifically, haven't been updated since V2.

And even that was just a quick adjustment from V1.

So I can completely understand why they decided to restart V4 in the desert.

It's long overdue.

But it always did feel like a bit of a sideshow compared to the Eastern Front.

Kursk or Stalingrad might have been a slightly more exciting starting point than El Alamein.

But either way, they still had to start with midwar. They ignored it for an entire edition or more.

>>54047840
Wait, Phil's from eastern europe? That actually explains it.

File: 6060110556_2d240b2950_b.jpg (168KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 800x534px

Imagine if, instead of making Panthers, they'd just make a wholly improved version of Panzer IV's

>>54049813
Still would've lost the war.

>>54049813
That pic, is it historicly accurate or fanfiction? It looks great and I'd like to paint my captured panzers like that if so.

>>54047840
Does that mean I need to reprint my red primered Panther guns? Reeeeeeee

>>54049952
According to Spielberger's book about Pz IV tank series, the design proposal was put forth and was intended to be the Panzer IV Ausf. H.

However, it would have reduced the production quantity (which is odd reason considering the need of manpower and increasing the survivability of tank crews due to catastrophic losses in the east), so the Panzer IV Ausf. H we know was made instead.

>>54043269
>I've been enjoying the Late War conversion

Well the problem is that people is trying to enjoy Mid War, the thing that was supposed to be revived with all the V4 shit, but just make all the Mid Wars lovers hate it because they can't use half of their shits.

>>54044766
It is really good rule wise when only infantry fights each other. But Artillery and Vehicles rules are still shit and 28mm is the shittiest scale for more than 1 or 2 tanks and on board artillery.

>>54041341
Battlegroup is, in general, a much better game than FoW.

>>54047840
Wait, so that is why Phil hate soviets stuff in general? because it was molested by a turbo slav T-Potato in the ass?

>>54049813
It was pretty much impossible to make an even more improved version of the Panzer IV, since its suspension was at its limits and the turret ring was small for an upgun.

The Panthers were the best option compared to all the prototypes and heavy tank the Germans were trying to make.

File: 1490528024325.png (289KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 640x640px

>>54049868
The axis defeat in WW2 was a culmination of a series of mistakes. You can point the major points that tipped the balance however.
>not invading malta
>ignoring Enigma being compromised
>Yugoslavian campaign
>Italians being dumbfucks who Germany had to rescue from getting destroyed by goddamn Greece
>Hitler being a salty faggot towards Kriegsmarine
>Hitler ordering any and all research being halted that can't make practical use of itself for the invasion of USSR
>ignoring leningrad
>entering Stalingrad
>producing over ten tank models with none of them having inter-changeable parts
>commencing Battle of Kursk even thought aerial reconnaissance revealed that the russians knew what was coming weeks in advance

>>54050436
There's a much simpler reason.
They're Germans.

File: 24829808376_8ed73508eb_b.jpg (382KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1024x768px

>>54050409
The sloped armor would have simplified and reduced the weight due to decreased amount of invidual steel plates, and that way decreased the stress on the suspensions while at the same time greatly improving protection.

This was in 1943, which these upgrades would have been sufficient for.

As for the turret ring and armament, there were various turret design proposals later on that would have allowed the installation of the same 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70 cannon the "Panther" tank was armed with.

Pic related, one of the planned turret upgrades for Panzer IV Ausf. J in 1944-45

>>54050436
>producing over ten tank models with none of them having inter-changeable parts

The only reason why i sometimes "feels bad" about germany losing the war, is that if only the war ended around 1946-8, the Entwicklung series would have been real.

So today i would be able to shitpost about which tank was pretty much the first MBT the T-54 or the E-50.

>>54050571
>The sloped armor would have simplified and reduced the weight due to decreased amount of invidual steel plates
> there were various turret design proposals later on that would have allowed the installation of the KwK 42 L/70.

Wrong search it, the sloped version of the Panzer IV was scraped because it made the hull front heavier and pushed the suspesion to its limits, a problem that the Jagdpanzer IV had even without turret.

And the turret in the pic is the Panther Schmalturm, there was supposed to be project in the late 44 to mount that turret in Panzer IV J chasis but it was considered impossible because it was too heavy and they were producing more Panthers than Panzer IV by the late 44.

>>54050436
>producing over ten tank models with none of them having inter-changeable parts
It's actually worse than that, changes were snuck into the assembly line so often that there was no guarantee that, say, the part for one Panther would work on another one of allegedly the same mark.

>>54050436
The biggest mistake for Germany was ever starting the war at all.

>>54050409
>The Panthers were the best option compared to all the prototypes and heavy tank the Germans were trying to make.
The panther was originally about half it's weight; the proposed vehicle it originally was would've been on par with late Shermans, and for a medium tank an M4A3 is pretty good. Nazis just love over-engineering.

>>54050436
Honestly, Germany did far better than could reasonably be expected throughout the war. They had to repeatedly get lucky, not repeatedly fail. France or Britain mobilise earlier, Germany's fucked. Allies realise the Ardennes attack is the main thrust, Germany's fucked. Soviet response isn't the total disaster it was, Germany's fucked.

If you look at everything that had to go right, it's amazing they made it to 1945.

>>54050816
Panther didn't suffer from that, actually, but it was a big issue with Tigers and Panzer III/IVs. Panther was made in an assembly line, whereas most German tanks were made by craftspeople in-place.

>>54051142

If France had gone more towards mechanised rather than emplacement defences shit would have gone a lot worse for the Germans. They considered it too but war weariness (Among other reasons) had them choose the option they believed would deter attack rather than help them win a fight.

>>54051257
That plus you have to remember strategic bombing was seen as being like nuclear bombing is today.

File: 1475954036901.jpg (96KB, 800x416px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 800x416px

Let's talk some hypothetical tank history here. What if burgers went with an inline engine instead of the massive radial they put on shermans? The tank would have been much lower than the almost high as a KT monster that it was since it wouldn't have required all the wasted space for the tilted shaft, probably would have been slightly longer like in the A4 model and much lighter. What engines did have avaible the brugers at the time? Would have been even faster? Better armored? Maybe even cheaper? How would have evolved to fit the 76mm and better armor and suspensions in the later stages of the war?

>>54053343
The Americans had an attitude of trying to utilize things that their industry already produced.

So if it **wasn't** the engine that they actually used in real life, then it might have been something like a high power truck engine, or maybe an engine from a farm tractor or something similar. Something that could provide enough raw horsepower and torque to move something as massive as a tank.

The engine they actually used was probably the best thing they had available at the time, while they worked on developing something better.

File: 14986867456571662462330.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

Oh god I hope this works...

>>54055805
>salty af

>>54056017
That's the Finns for you

File: IMG_8097.gif (89KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x450px

>>54055805
Is this salt masking?
Because if it's snow effects then...

>>54056099
Salt masking.
I'll post results tomorrow

>>54056486
good luck

>>54050616
wasn't the comet the first proto MBT
with the next british thing being the first proper mbt or am i just an idiot?

>>54057042
Thank you

>>54055805
any particular reason you went with a 152 over a 122?

>>54049376
>>54050334
No, he's a Wehraboo and a NATOboo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0AxrOUJ62E

>>54057676
Yep, the Chieftain was the first true MBT

>>54055805
Good idea salting down your ISU-152. Hopefully this way they will stay preserved for V5.

>>54057676
A lot of the concepts for what would evolve into the MBT can be seen in the Panther, but it's more the grandfather of the MBT than the father of the MBT.

I'd say the centurion was the first (unsuccessful) try at an MBT

>>54060597
How was it unsuccessful? It served in countless armies and influenced tank design in at least five different countries. Hell there are still (Highly Modified) Centurions still in service today.

I didn't say the tank was unsuccessful but would you say that it ticks off all necessary parameters to qualify as a MBT ?

>>54060947
I would say it would. Fast enough to get places it needs to be, once they were off the 17pdr it was capable of engaging anything, and enough armour to shrug off most Anti-Tank guns that weren't big immobile monsters like the 17pdr and the big 88s.

>>54061003
I'd say the Centurion with the 20 pounder is a better example, as the 17 pounder's HE was never really good enough for the MBT role.

>>54057676
The centurion is commonly considered the first real MBT, yeah.

>>54060597
>(unsuccessful)
You are not worth wasting the tea it would require to give you the appropriate burns.

All these tea sippers.

File: Bomb it.jpg (47KB, 373x338px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 373x338px

>>54063231
>Sipping tea
>Not drinking it in large gulps

You make me sick anon

>>54063231

> All these cola sippers.

>>54050524

Basically, destined to fail in their quest to destroy Europe.

When will they learn?

File: IMG_9288.jpg (110KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1600x1200px

>>54063420
I gulp my tea tho.

>>54063473
Joke's on you, I'm no Amerifat.

>>54058575
It's finnish. They only get 152s.

>>54063490
>destined to fail
>Eurozone austerity
que?

>>54060947
As a tank design, it was highly successful.

As an MBT it was kind of slow and its armor compared to the T-54 was shit, but a lot of people consider it an universal tank. The thing is that since it was upgraded a ton of times you can actually call it as a MBT father.

>>54068463
Late Centurions are MBTs, early ones are good mediums.

>>54068677
Also the T-54/55 is technically a "standard tank" but since it fits the idea of a one-size fits all tank that's probably the first MBT; at the very least it has a similar design lineage of it's direct ancestor appearing mid WW2, reaching it's early stages by the end, and becoming available shortly after the war.

>>54067267
I'm making my own wargame based loosely around the Flames of War system set in an alternate America in the present day but with an alternate Cold War, and one of the factions uses these.

I have like 10 of the fuckers in the mail right now so I can playtest. Your pic made me feel a little less overwhelmed.

Thanks friend.

>>54068842
>Being this thankful over a BuMP post
I need to enjoy life more.

>>54068949
Everything is great when everything else is terrible.

>>54059236
>>54057676
>>54068463
>>54068696

Couldn't the T-34 be considered as, maybe not a MBT since it was doctrinally a cavalry/maneuvre tank, but as the grandfather of the concept? After all, it has (by 1941 standards) a combination of good speed and thick armor, a gun able to engage efficiently both infantry with HE and tanks with AP... The Panther, which came later, was an impressive foe on the battlefield (as long as it could reach it of course) but didn't innovate in anything, since the goal behind the creation of that tank was basically the OKW saying "We need the T-34, but better and bigger".

>>54069940
No, part of the concept of MBTs is being able to fight anything on the battlefield, also, and medium tanks were outclassed by heavy tanks. You can't have MBTs until you have a powerplant that can make a heavily armoured vehicle that can fire high-calibre sabot/HEAT while retaining good speed and reliability. A medium tank with the qualities of a heavy, basically.

File: nva247.jpg (802KB, 1276x937px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 1276x937px

Soviet Lend-Lease Tanks of World War II (Osprey New Vanguard 247)

The Red Army suffered such catastrophic losses of armour in the summer of 1941 that they begged Britain and the United States to send tanks. The first batches arrived in late 1941, just in time to take part in the defence of Moscow. The supplies of British tanks encompassed a very wide range of types including the Matilda, Churchill, and Valentine and even a few Tetrarch airborne tanks. American tanks included the M3 (Stuart) light tank and M3 (Lee) medium tank and the M4 Sherman tank, which became so common in 1944-45 that entire Soviet tank corps were equipped with the type. With these Western tanks, the Soviets were finally able to beat back the German tide in the East. This study examines the different types of tanks shipped to the Soviet Union during the war, Soviet assessments of their merits and problems, and combat accounts of their use in Soviet service using full colour artwork, contemporary photographs and detailed cut-away illustrations.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/hygb7jaeiye92cj/Osprey+-+NVA+247+-+Soviet+Lend-Lease+Tanks+Of+World+War+II.pdf

File: cam309.jpg (1MB, 1421x951px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1421x951px

Shanghai and Nanjing 1937: Massacre on the Yangtze (Osprey Campaign 309)

From 1931, China and Japan had been embroiled in a number of small-scale conflicts that had seen vast swathes of territory being occupied by the Japanese. On 7 July 1937, the Japanese engineered the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, which led to the fall of Beijing and Tianjin and the start of a de facto state of war between the two countries. This force then moved south, landing an expeditionary force to take Shanghai and from there drive west to capture Nanjing. This fully illustrated book tells the story of the Japanese assault on these two great Chinese cities. The battle of Shanghai was the first large-scale urban warfare of World War II and one of the bloodiest battles of the entire Sino-Japanese War. The determined resistance by Chinese inflicted sizable Japanese casualties, and may well have contributed to the subsequent massacre of prisoners and civilians in the battle of Nanjing, tarnishing Japan's reputation in the eyes of the world.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/edvub51m7egul0b/Osprey+-+CAM+309+-+Shanghai+and+Nanjing+1937.pdf

File: cam308.jpg (1MB, 1411x955px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1411x955px

St Lo 1944: The Battle of the Hedgerows (Osprey Campaign 308)

Following the D-Day landings on June 6, 1944, the First US Army engaged in a six-week struggle to break out of the Normandy beach-head. The hedgerow country of lower Normandy, called the Bocage, presented unanticipated tactical problems since it proved to be ideal for German infantry defense. This book examines the brutal attritional struggle in June-July 1944 to overcome the determined German defense and secure St Lô. The city was the site of a crucial cross-roads and was thus a vital target for the invading Allied forces; the initial bombing attacks were so severe that the writer Samuel Beckett would later report that it had been 'bombed out of existence in one night'. The attack by ground forces turned into a brutal attritional struggle to overcome the determined German defense. Using full-color artwork, photographs and maps, this is the engaging story of one of the key engagements in the Battle of Normandy.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/r9291r18qje96rq/Osprey+-+CAM+308+-+St+Lo+1944.pdf

>>54070137
>>54070197
>>54070623
if is that you osprey anon, thanks you so much

>>54070137
>>54070197
>>54070623
More stuff to add to my reading list.

Thank you.

>>54070137
>>54070197
>>54070623
Thanks! This is good stuff.

File: 1471120733292.jpg (196KB, 1280x710px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1280x710px

>>54055117
try "light" aircraft engine.
>you'd get the M27 deluxe and Pershings that weren't slow as fuck.

>>54059204
.....kek! (brits should be rated reluctant)

>i want centurion Mk13 in TY....


>>54068842
tell me more....

>>54077160
> * should be *Aussies, fuck.

File: DSCN7141.jpg (357KB, 708x800px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 708x800px

i guess Thursday night is hobby night?


...meanwhile

>acquired lateral momentum

File: IMG_2927.jpg (37KB, 500x334px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x334px

>>>54078799
I come on tg to see my co-host switching game systems...

Traitor!

Kidding.

>>54078799
>>54079080

Are there Scans of any of the theatre supplements?

>>54079503
Check with the Historical Wargames General thread.

If anyone has it, they would.

>>54079080
>Gabe Iglesias
fuck yeah.

to be fair, my interest right now is lateral, as in, "i can play FoW, i can play FoW v4, i can play Battlegroup..."

you know i also have Bolt Action?

the only system i ever dropped was Blitzkrieg Commander, because who the living fuck would ever give hit points and armor class to tanks?
it's not d20, but they literally have an *armor-is-to-hit* as well as *damage points*. do they not know you can't wear down an Abrams with T-55 shots? to the front? fuckers....

>>54079503
Battlegroup lacks some good scans, it is mostly the old core rule books, kursk and the army list from some new books.

>>54079659
>you know i also have Bolt Action?

I don't remember if you've mentioned that or not.

Im not judging. I just couldn't pass up the opportunity for making the "traitor" joke.

I've honestly been curious to try Bolt Action myself, but I've heard mixed things about it.

>who the living fuck would ever give hit points and armor class to tanks?

Yeah, that is pretty fucking stupid.

File: DSCN5354.jpg (460KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 1200x630px

>>54079810

quick BA description: it's simple and assault is horrid beyond measure. charge distance is way too long. still...

die rolls scale off your rating, but rating for morale and training aren't differentiated. it's one thing.
a lot of weapons are similar, tanks have a really odd scaling of 7+ is an armored can, 11+ is a superheavy. planes are all fucked up. v2 did fix things.

a lot of the armies look identical on paper, so the real trick is to make them look good and customized on the tabletop and pretend you didn't want to play a super snowflake list like SS Cavalry, RAD Volksturm, or Chindits.

i play LW Falschirmjager. they are the in-between.

....

If you get a model of Hitler, nothing stops you from making him a high-level officer and having him lead your SS personally, though.

File: Mans-Conquest-magazine-cover-March-1959.jpg (1009KB, 2287x2977px) Image search: [Google]

1009KB, 2287x2977px

>>54071455
>>54075394
>>54076497
You're welcome lads. I always like to share any WW2 related Ospreys I upload over here (and they're always in the OP folder of course). For other stuff be sure to check /hwg/.

Do you think Steven Zaloga is cursed to write three books a month for the rest of his life? Because the man is a machine.

File: bovington-panther-tank.jpg (71KB, 650x465px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 650x465px

>>54049976
Possibly not. The Brits captured a factory, late war, and had the workers build them a Panther (it's now in Bovington). They only had primer and dunkelgelb paint and ended up with this:

File: T20_tank_pilot_at_Fisher_plant.png (1MB, 1920x1128px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1128px

>>54053343
They did try. It was called the T-20.

>>54079503
A folder in /hwg/ has scans for Kursk, Normandy (BG Overlord) and Fall of the Reich (1945 late war), plus the rules PDF. Just the lists though, the actual books generally have several scenarios and other stuff included: they're quality productions.

>>54083966
It was the T20. Soviet stuff has hyphens, US is just letters and numbers.

Do you guys think the rumoured late late war compilation (Remagen, Nachtjäger etc) will be the first true v4 late war book. Rebalanced, repointed?

When do you guys think it will be announced / hit the shelves?

>>54085907
I think it will still be pointed and balanced for V3. Otherwise it's going to rock the boat too much for tourney play. That and I think BF is too lazy to start re pointing stuff right now.

Maybe we'll see it by Chrimbus? I dunno.

>>54040644
I unironically like playing Soviet Strelkovy lists.

>>54086175
I'm unironically glad you're having fun. Are you using v4? If so, would you say it's made them better?

>>54087837
I use V3 for now and will till BF release a proper book for Late/Early war.

Still with my brief glance at V4 I do not like a few of the rules changes and feel the USSR is worse off in V4 than V3, still that is at a glace without playing V4 i'm sure others are more experienced with the topic.

>>54086153
So you're saying... we'll be in Berlin by Christmas?

Where have I heard that before

>>54086153
But then again they give a crap about tournament players.

>>54087926
Hopefully this doesn't mean we'll all be playing Battlegroup Berlin in April.

File: IMG_6024.png (241KB, 503x470px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 503x470px

Quick!
The political officer is asleep!
Post memes!

File: T-64.jpg (113KB, 1440x800px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1440x800px

Prepare to throw all your T-72s in the trash or paint East German roundels over the Red Banner. As one would expect from a company who makes money slinging new plastic, the T-64 is a far better value than it's predecessor and there is pretty much no reason to use a T-72 over the T-64.

File: t-72 stats.png (710KB, 1128x497px) Image search: [Google]

710KB, 1128x497px

>>54091539
aaaaaaaaaa

>>54091539
I mean t-72s are way overcosted these seem like they're in a way better place

If t-72s get a discount in Red Thunder they're still worth bringing.

Of course I wouldn't be surprised if they limited you to one t-64 company or something so you had to bring t-72s along anyway

>>54091539
>>54091673

How does the T-64 have better stabilisers than the T-72? I thought the T-72 had a much more advanced ballistic computer than the T-64?

>>54092184
No, the T-72 had worse electronics. There wasn't a huge difference between them (the T-80 was getting all the cool new stuff), but if you were going to point at one as better, it'd be the T-64.

File: t-90 crash.gif (2MB, 202x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 202x150px

>>54092255

>>54091539
Meh, i didn't know i will ever say this, but i am glad i come back to 40k.

File: laughing_african_woman.jpg (19KB, 262x272px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 262x272px

>>54092884
>wants a well-balanced game where units aren't powercreeped
>plays 40k

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

22KB, 299x246px

>>54092884
you are a fucking retarded troll.

also, we have not seen to compare the new T-72 block. they may have scooted points, or added songsters.

BTW, do you even play the game, or do you just troll from the mass 40k crowd over there on page 2?

File: IMG_0621.jpg (124KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 900x900px

>>54092884
40K wrote the book on manipulating unit value to sell minis, but nice try.

File: Crazed Laughter.jpg (98KB, 548x800px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 548x800px

>>54092884
Oh god this really cracked me up.

Thanks for the laugh anon

File: oh you.jpg (20KB, 253x235px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 253x235px

>>54092884

>>54092884
somethign tells me "guaranteed replies"

amirite?

so...

>>54091539
who here plans on Cash-Whoring into T-64's to see if they can stem the NATO tide....or is the PSC T-55/Volksarmee where it's at?

>i for one accept our T-64 overlords....

>>54095098
But anon, soviet stuff is shit!

you are welcome

>>54095679
The T-72 was and still is shit ever since Leopard.

>>54095664
I think the T-64 gives WarPac a better chance against NATO tanks and Milans to the face. I believe I'm still going to go with more T-55s for my Volkspamee, but I eventually want T-64s too.

>>54092884
Just play V3, no reason to come back to that shit made by GW or play Battlegroup

>>54091539
Ok, so it's +2 points to add missiles to the entire platoon?

That gets increasingly points efficient for larger platoons.

It's almost an auto-include.

>>54096323
i thought it was 2 per model

>>54096807
>add missiles to ALL tanks for +2 points

2 for the company unless I'm grossly mistaken

File: bmp2nva6buga9.jpg (171KB, 800x764px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 800x764px

/NVA/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mG3BvkT6YQ

>>54094817

I doubt they'll recost the T-72 or add the Svir to it - they've got all those unit cards floating around that would become obsolete and need replacing.

>>54097193
hence, cash.

>>54095714
the worst thing about Red Thunder is the lack of in-company combination. if you could mix T-72 and T-64, you would have something.

>>54097421
There's a reason you can't. (Despite all the other tidbits of BF's selective view on realism)

>>54091539

How many of these bad boys are people thinking for a 100 point list? Tempted to go 3X5+Command element for 80 points.

>>54097860
I'd probably be aiming for something in the area of 70ish points total.

Maybe:

HQ T-64 w/ Missiles
6 T-64 w/ Missiles
6 T-64 w/ Missiles
Anti-air (probably Shilkas)
BMPs (either scouts or infantry)

And then see where the points values leave me as far as reaching the points limit.

>>54098864

Looks good, I may go for 2X6 as well since it's cheaper with buying them in boxes of 5 and you'd need a spare for the HQ.

I'd like some Hinds in my version if I can squeeze them in. A surprisingly cheap list given the new box set gets you 5 T-65's and 2 BMP's for £37.

>>54099852
I like the BMPs in the starter box much more than than Hinds. Especially since I bought Revell Hinds

>>54083966
This was the basis for the Pershing, yes?

Did anyone ever use Vallejo for painting Team Yankee, especially British infantry and tanks? I'm looking for tutorials, but everyone uses Battlefront colours, and I'm too much of a cheapskate to buy them while I have a gigantic pile of Vallejos sitting there.

>>54101610
http://flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Painting/COW-Conversion-Chart-v1.pdf

>>54101803
I've seen it, but it's not exactly up to date with their own product line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqfZDc0ykDY

Maverick Khaki (?)
Battlefield Brown (*like 826 German Camo Medium Brown, but paler)
Cobra Drab (?)
Chieftain Green (?)
Military Khaki (988 Khaki)
Black (950 Black)
Dark Gunmetal (*like 863 Gunmetal Grey, but darker)
European Skin (955 Flat Flesh)
DPM Sand (?)
Leather Brown (I'm going to take a wild guess and say I think it could be 871 Leather Brown)
Worn Canvas (884 Stone Grey)

Then, from the vehicle video:

Comrade Khaki (880 Khaki Grey or 879 Green Brown)

That's why I asked here if someone used Vallejo for their own Brits.

>>54091539
Would you take a photo about unit points?

>>54102199
The points are in the photo.

>>54100634
If i am not wrong, yes and no, after that thing they made the T-25 the pre Pershing

>>54101610

Are the Battlefront paints actually any good? I see people on here posting that they buy Soviet Green or whatever and it looks more like pea soup.

>>54105403
In my experience, BF paints are meh at best.

Personally, I stick to Vallejo with some Citadel stuff like washes.

>>54105403
The few people I know that tried them aren't happy about them, that's why I asked about Vallejo.

>>54106224
That and the fact that I have a huge pile of Vallejo bottles sitting around.

>>54105440
>Personally, I stick to Vallejo with some Citadel stuff like washes.
I use Vallejo for basically everything. I haven't used citadel wash, but vallejo seems fine.

>>54105440

Are Battlefront's paints not just the same as Vallejo's?

>>54108123
They used to be, but then they changed over to their own line of paints.

>>54108148
as far as I know that is not "THEIR" line of paints. it is a coop with army painter.

What next book after Red Thunder?

>>54109570
Something about Commonwealth Forces, Canadians, New Zealanders, Australians, which the models for mostly already exist.

Then it's apparently Fall of the Reich. Big Compilation of Nachtjaeger, Berlin, Desperate Measures, and Bridge at Remagen.

>>54109677
>Something about Commonwealth Forces
WWIII or WWII? Also, when some non-European theatre for Team Yankee? I want my democratic mujaheddin

>>54109821
Team Yankee Commonwealth. It might even just be a small booklet like the Afgansty. Land Rovers are predicted. The American version of Red Thunder's supposed to be out soon too.

>>54109570
As far as I know, as yet untitled books for the US and Italy in Mid-War North Africa.

And then a US book for Team Yankee called Stripes.

>>54105440
>>54106224

Alright cheers, I have a massive amount of Citadel so I've always stuck with them but sometimes for historicals you can't quite find the right shade. I'll avoid them for now.

>>54105403
Their new range is shit. Don't buy. Shades are fucked, the bottles suck, and they mix and cover like crap.

>>54111788
Citadel is rubbish for historical. Far too bright and cartoonish.

Vallejo is probably the best I can recommend for historical. More often than not they'll have the exact colour you need. Or at the very least an incredibly close match.

>>54099057
>Haha, look at this confident bastard
>It's like he thinks he's as good as Muh Western Doctine or something

File: damt2.jpg (484KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1000x667px

ded bmp

>>54112226
Well, yes and no. While many colours would be unsuitable, their bone colours and the darker greens, greys and browns are good.

File: 1944.png (2MB, 1111x877px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1111x877px

Video game bump

>>54117534
What video game?

The graphics actually look pretty good.

File: [Blocks your path].jpg (597KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 1920x1080px

>>54118539
Steel Division '44. Pretty fun game, good fit for someone who enjoys Flames of War I think

>>54113104
Cheers kek

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

155KB, 800x532px

so, i have to ask:
http://www.strawpoll.me/13340334

>>54121900
did anyone stick with v2? I thought v3 was pretty much just updates and fixes

>>54101610
http://www.ordofanaticus.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F29693-team-yankee-your-old-paint-sets-are-not-obsolete%2F

might help

>>54121900
>No Team Yankee on the list

File: dfsg.png (2MB, 705x1024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 705x1024px

Iron Rations bmp

Thread seems kinda dead lately.

>>54129264
another victim of Discord

File: war_is_finished.jpg (38KB, 381x576px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 381x576px

>>54129264
>>54129486
Burgerland is asleep, you numpties.

>>54129264
It's the weekend

>>54130515

Not only that, it's the Canada Day long weekend, followed almost immediately by the 4th of July.
More than half of North America is drunk or about to be.

>>54131074
I can confirm

>>54118599
Keep in mind it is still very early development. It has a lot of dumb bugs in it, and it does NOT play like a ww2 version of wargame RD/ALB as much as it plays like a super macro version of CoH.

Shit like the morale system,and HE being a poor mans AP leads to dumb shut happening all the time. Ranges are a bit fucked as well.

Okay, here's something to hopefully get some discussion going...

What do you guys feel is the better choice for Warsaw Pact players in Team Yankee, going for massive numbers of T-55s as the East Germans, or going for more NATO-like numbers with the Soviet T-64?

Personally I think both ideas can potentially have merit, but I'm leaning more towards trying to play on NATO's level than overwhelming them with far too many targets.

File: tobruk pit.jpg (41KB, 394x400px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 394x400px

Does anybody happen to know the dimensions of the Tobruk pits?

>>54135166
Why the duality between spam and elites? Why not just take a moderate amount of everything and have a full toolbox to deal with all-comers?

One of Pact's greatest strengths imo is that everything is cheap enough they're not forced into overspecialization during list building.

>>54135590
For one thing, they're fielded by two different nations, so the E. Germans don't have the elite tank, and the Soviets don't have the crap tank.

But mostly, I just want to get a feel for what people here think about the E. German spam tank and the Soviet elite tank.

Especially when it comes to how to use them and which approach they prefer.

Judging by some of the other forums and social media pages, a lot of people are going full spam thanks to the PSC T-55, but I'm not quite sure that just relying on pure weight of numbers is a good enough tactic.

>>54135688
If you fight a Leo heavy list there's literally not enough shots to kill all the T55s.

File: BK.jpg (176KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 800x600px

>>54117534
>not posting a better game
I've not actually played Steel Division, is it good?

File: A real hero.jpg (437KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 1920x1080px

>>54137992
Its quite fun, not exactly the same type of fun as Blitzkrieg mind, but still fun.

I've said previously that I think flames of war players would like the game, since its about 50% deck building and 50% playing the actual game.

Pretty fun once you figure out how the various elements work together and you can actually embrace the combined arms.

>>54137992
It's alright. Disappointed by the shallow SP campaign but the gameplay is solid and there's plenty of Wehraboo tears.

>>54136881
Okay, sure, but other than pure weight of numbers, what do the T-55s have going for them?

Certainly not their armor, and certainly not their main gun either.

Is there something about them I'm just not seeing?

>>54138861
You're just not seeing enough numbers

They can't kill enough to make a difference before you're swarming the board getting side shots on anything you can't pen frontally and capturing objectives

File: IMG_2947.jpg (109KB, 582x437px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 582x437px

>>54138971
So it's literally just a Zerg Rush.

That's all they have going for them.

I mean sure, there's a certain simplicity to "There's too many of them!!!", but I wouldn't exactly call that the height of tactical genius.

And I wouldn't exactly call that fun either. For either player.

>>54139213
Well, no, but it works. Look at how well BMP swarms work, T-55s are that but immune to light weapons.

>>54139213
Welcome to Team Yankee as the Warsaw Pact.

Cheers.

>>54139213
>I wouldn't exactly call that the height of tactical genius.
If you have terrain on your board there's some maneuvering ability required to get shots off, especially with their awful cross rating. Concentrating your forces usefully isn't trivial.

That said, it is often a massive slog.

>>54139342
BMP2s can pop almost anything frontally at standoff range with volume of fire. T-55s have to charge forward and flank with subpar mobility and a rubbish cross.

T-55s are for killing Leos. They go straight through at any range, Leos are glancing on 4s at long, and leos are 3 points each.

File: 2017-07-03 22.58.19.jpg (4MB, 2988x5312px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2988x5312px

>>54135589

I've only got the larger pit. I'd estimate it's about 2.5" internal diameter, and about 4" full diameter.

>>54139213
True on all accounts

cheers

>>54139657
21 points of leo1s, 7 tanks, 22 points of t-55s, 15 tanks.

14 shots, hitting on 3s (take the easiest shot, you can't hide 15 tanks), basically 9 hits, 6 penetrations all dead, 9 tanks return fire hitting on sixes, one dead T-55, Leo 1 returns fire again, 8 hits, 5 dead, 4 T-55s left so they basically stop hitting stuff.

File: 096BAF57-0485-40B5-A22E-0D0A9B04DB14_w640_r1_s.jpg (52KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x360px

>>54139213
>And I wouldn't exactly call that fun either. For either player.
Anon, put on your Phil-o-Vision goggles. Then you'll see the light.

>>54138427
>there's plenty of Wehraboo tears.
?

>>54139213
That is a summary of pretty much everything wrong about TY. And why some FLGS pretty much play blue vs blue exercise.

>>54139977
Thank you

>>54140511
I'm hoping the T-64 for Russia will change this a bit. Level the playing field slightly with a Soviet tank that is more on-par with NATO.

Either that, or we need cheap tank spam for NATO. M60 Pattons or Leopard 1s in plastic.

>>54140548
>Leopard 1s in plastic.
>he doesn't know

>>54140548
maybe m60s if you're lucky

>>54140548
Based Plastic Soldier Company is doing a Leopard 1 kit that is also rumored to have Gepard options

we're saved

File: 2015-10-10___Pic_of_the_week - Leopard2.jpg (105KB, 640x358px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 640x358px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baXUge30beg

>>54140487
Wehraboos are people that constantly wank anything ww2 german. Like the Panther, Tiger tanks, or aircraft.

They also think the V programs were actually useful weapons and that all the tecdhnology we have now is thanks to the nazis.

Considering Steel Division is actually pretty close to how warfare really is (to videogame standards that is) and the germans aren't wanked they are crying non-stop.

File: Leopard_1A5A1_2.jpg (241KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1600x1067px

>>54136881
say that to a leopard 1....

>>54143324
The V weapons were inefficient wonder weapons by many standards, but they were interesting pieces of technology.

The V2 specifically was the basis of the ballistic missile and space programs in both the US and the USSR thanks to both nations seeking out German scientists at the end of the war.

Even the V1 can be considered a predecessor to the cruise missiles used today.

How do most people handle ranges when playing TY in 6mm?

>>54143561
Leo 1 loses on stats.

>>54143324
I know about what a wehraboo is since i despise that word because it is a WoT/Warthunder thing.

Sorry i should had been more clear, why that kind of people is mad about that game?

>>54146008
Try to using the same ranges, that is what i do when i play games with smaller scale (Bolt Action and most 1/72 games with 15mm) since it makes ranges feel kind of "realistic".

If you don't like it use something like 3/4 or 1/2 of the ranges

>>54136881
>>54146038

I've discussed this briefly in a podcast found under the panzerfunk page. But I will run through a few things as they pertain to the matchup.

Leo 1
>Better Cross
>Hit on 4+
>RoF 2
>3+ skill
>Longer range

T-55
>Autopens Leo 1 at all ranges
>~1/2 the price
>Can bounce the Leo 1

Essentially what it comes down to is whether the Leo 1s can do enough damage before they get overwhelmed. In a Leo 1, the added range and better skill and cross will typically allow you to put your tank in an advantage firing from concealment and beyond the maximum range of the T-55.

Slow firing messes the T-55 up. As the +1 penalty will make NATO tanks anywhere from 2-6 times harder to hit. You'll likely want to just push up at Dash Speed until you get close enough to fire. The T-55 player will be looking to overrun the Leopard 1 or overwhelm them with a high volume of stationary fire.

The Leopard 1 player is going to want to push up and maintain a hull down or concealed position while trying to wear the enemy T-55s down. Pushing the enemies flank is encouraged if possible. If the T-55s star closing in, move away and use your superior range to chip away at the enemy.

Statistically I have calculated the the Leo 1 is a better value per point, but that assumes ideal usage. The East German player still has numbers to overrun and overwhelm the Leo 1s, especially if the opponent leave them vulnerable.

>>54146382
>Slow firing messes the T-55 up. As the +1 penalty will make NATO tanks anywhere from 2-6 times harder to hit. You'll likely want to just push up at Dash Speed until you get close enough to fire.
Que? As soon as you're in range, halt and fire, keep the CO near to blitz if you can. Hitting on 5s means you blap a platoon easily.

>>54146382

I still don't understand why battlefront decided the make the T-55AM the donkey tank instead of something older like the T-55A or T-55M. They could have even recycled the molds for the ToD and FoaN version instead of making an entirely new one just to be outdone by PSC. Then they could have taken their time and put the AM in as an improved machine when they inevitably revisit Best Germany.

>>54147038
>inevitably
Not sure if this is bait or if you actually think the entire OPFOR faction in TY is getting more than two books. When Red Thunder's out the soviets are going to be complete.

File: 00e-vdv-chaplains-29-03-13.jpg (219KB, 1000x675px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1000x675px

>>54147038
>inevitably
Anon, Soviets always get one-and-doned, you know this.

I just want a resin lynx or M114 so I can break down every move action, desu.

>>54147399

>Not sure if this is bait
It's not, I really do hope OPFOR gets more coverage - TY lives or dies based on how much content it gets, and if were not getting quality we might as well get quantity.

Some sort of booklet or digital release.for the Czechs and Poles.

Another revisit for the Soviets once NATO gets some more toys to add things like more rocket artillery and T-80s.

A far East theatre book with both Koreas, China, Japan, and US Marines.

A book for France and the Low Countries.

Hell, throw Romania and the other forgotten WarPac countries in as a digital release while were here.

All of these are options to push books and models while keeping the hype/release train rolling to avoid becoming ToD/FoaN/Great War. They'd have to be functionally retarded to look at potential sales and growth and say 'No, we'd rather finish releasing and let the whole line stagnate, thanks.'

>>54147683
I agree with what you're saying, but BF has been taking steps to reign in the scope of their product line. We've already seen a lot of "more obscure" items being dropped from the shop. I've personally seen the memo our FLGS got about what was going OOP at BF. I'm sure they will add more content, but it's not going to be as all-encompassing as we will hope for. V4 is going to be less full, even after we see more content for MW. The variety of the past FoW won't continue.

>>54147851

The thing is that most of the WarPac forces are so samey you could cover most of the rest with maybe half a dozen kits

>T-55 Merida, OT-62, OT-64, Mi-2 Salamandra, Dana SPG

Boom, there's two more countries covered in 5 boxes - and then you've got enough stuff that any other WarPac country (like Bulgaria) can be done as a digital release using existing models.

>V4 is going to be less full

Fuck it, I'm going to go buy the Battlegroup books.

>>54148208
This is why they need to expand into other theaters ASAP. WARPAC is monolithically boring.

>>54148391

I don't even want to think how many Type 59s the PLA would be able to bring to the table.

>Using extra PSC parts on BF T-54s to make T-55As

Feels kinda like putting Coke in a Pepsi bottle, but the results look alright.

>>54148391
So we can play even more spammy Banana Republics?

File: 19657485_10154603167341835_4575726135487816382_n (1).jpg (102KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 900x675px

>>54148786
Iran and Iraq shouldn't be massively more spammy than East Germans.

>>54146874
That's why I said you need to push up with the Leopard 1s and fire from a concealed position. Then you can attempt to kite back. Eventually table space or objective placement will kick in, but the idea is thinning out as many tanks as possible before you have to engage in a slugfest.

The other thing is that currently in the TY meta, arty like the M109G for the West Germans isn't really that popular, but now that T-55s are about to become a dime a dozen, they make more sense to bring. Same thing with mines, if nothing else but to try to bunch up your opponents tanks more.

Tornados really are too vulnerable against tank based AA to really be effective on their own. They are better used hitting large groups of BMPs. Never really understood why AA MGs can shoot down fast movers, but I can understand the need for game balance.

>>54146874
Another thing is the Leo1 gun has an 8" range advantage, so if you are careful the T-55s won't be able to blitz up into gun range.

it's time guys:

it's time.
it's definitely time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOJCmPKaYN8&t=0m24s

(best copy-pasta'd for use of timestamp....)

File: DSCN7023.jpg (1MB, 1800x1217px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1800x1217px

>>54149122
>>54149140

hey C3K, enjoy the 4th!

i had a game where i fought T55's with Leo 1's in a forest. a large forest
they needed to move to get to an objective
i didn't give a shit.
out of 2 platoons, i lost maybe 1 Leo per turn to the tune of me taking out 2 of them per turn. The Leo 1 is a forest animal: enjoy cross checks, enjoy that 6+ to hit, so what if i get no Long-Range bonuses?

you will either suffer or never reach the objective in time...

T55's are plains-dwelling animals. you want to cross open ground where no major predators are hiding and wheel around for a flank or an ambush

slow firing is the real clinch there...

>>54146170
Their Tigers die.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16gWRxv_aZY

>>54151061
>the fuck?
57mm gets to kill KT's ? ok. how many PzIIIN's can one bring in lieu of Kitties?

>also
>the next vid to play
>d'fuck?
>what the absolute fuck?
that 'average wehaboo plays WT' vid is outright unwatchable cringe.
tel me this is just a YouTube sketch...

>>54151061
As a Warthunder buff myself it seems like the Jumbo's front armour is over-modeled.

But I am not buying the game until they add the Eastern Front and Axis minors.

File: IMG_8193.jpg (377KB, 1395x2048px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1395x2048px

Have a thing
>I enjoyed it but for the wrong reasons

>>54151750
Is this supposed to be funny?

>>54151211
>As a Warthunder buff myself it seems like the Jumbo's front armour is over-modeled.
Warthunder actually kind of infamously under-models it because of how sloping is calculated; shells normalise twice on it, meaning the second plate is far weaker than it should be.

File: IMG_8200.jpg (364KB, 1178x1044px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 1178x1044px

>>54151797
They are all like that. This one is smirkworthy when you cut the punchline

>>54151870
>Warthunder actually kind of infamously under-models it because of how sloping is calculated

It's usually people complaining about the opposite in T-34s, the late IS2s and KTs.

File: 1450420633205.png (199KB, 656x825px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 656x825px

how about we start today with some glorious feedback?

http://www.strawpoll.me/13354932

>>54152146
Yes, he's saying because it calculates the second plate impact as being at 90 degrees rather than at the same angle as the first plate. Overall WT way overestimates angling and their mechanic for overmatch is functionally non-existent (shell diameter has to be 7x armor thickness for it to happen). They also have APHE too good (perfect sphere internal explosion every time) and thanks to the way you need to kill all crew solid shot that pens won't do much (while IRL the crew would have abandoned the tank). "Oddly", both of these things manage to favor Russian designs.

>>54152146
WT models the Jumbo as having two plates directly on top of each other; the first shell hits and "turns in", i.e. normalises (especially if it's a capped or blunt tip shell), so the armour's a little less sloped than it would be. In a normal tank, that happens once and the armour's at most a couple of degrees less sloped; in the jumbo, it hits the first plate, normalises, then hits the second plate where, hitting it flatter it normalises even more, meaning that the 47 degree slope of the main plate is easily halved in practise. Altogether it means that there's barely any improvement in it's armour over that of the regular sherman, despite being far heavier, because regular shermans reliably have 40-45 degrees of slope and the Jumbo's usually like 15-20 on the main plate, which is meaningless for armour slope.

>>54150946
You too man!

I think you are spot on about the T-55s. Your whole goal with them should be to haul ass across an open field until you get into knife fighting range. A smoke barrage from arty will buy you a turn. After that you just need need to get in without losing too many tanks.

>>54137992
>Blitzkrieg
My Negroid gentleman.

>>54151061
0/10 made me replay

>>54153147
Ahh I see, I never got past the 76mm Shermans because of how rubbish their protection is, sad that americans get unfairly beaten on in that BR bracket.

>>54148866
Yeah but with the alt-history clusterfuck happening at the same time as their war they're both unlikely to enter the war and if they're both REDFOR it would be the single most retarded thing Battlefront has ever done.

IIRC Iraq was more heavily supported by the US in the end anyways, unless I'm misremembering, it's always been a fuzzy period for me.

>Want to get into Flames of War
>Really want to play Italy or France
Am I retarded /tg/?

>>54153835
>Am I retarded /tg/?
No, both nations are great. Italy has shit tanks with random skill and morale, and France is either trenchlines uber alles or America with baguettes depending on period.

>>54153835
France only really has forces available in Early War and Late War. They're kinda out of the picture in Mid-War.

And their Late War forces are all equipped with American equipment.

Italy has some decent Early and Mid-War forces.

We're still waiting on their updated Version 4 book for Mid-War though.

>>54153888
Though it's worth noting both are "minor" nations in FoW terms, so don't expect a ton of love given they're out of the Big Four.

>>54153932
Vichy France can into midwar.

>>54154286
Not in V4™

>>54154938
They haven't even finished adding the british, asking for vichy france is a bit much.

>>54154938
I was arguing thematically.

As far as V4 is concerned, World War 2 was a resource war waged in a limited scale between the English and Germans.

File: 1469793537545.png (76KB, 428x380px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 428x380px

>>54151061
>Bomber Harris, destroyer of Dresden

Any link for command cards?

File: 1469163855675.jpg (45KB, 480x361px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 480x361px

>>54153932
>http://www.strawpoll.me/13354932
to you who play 6mm: may you live long and defeat all foes!

i am definitely looking to expand in this area....
do you guys tend to do "use inch measurements with centimeters" to par down the scale? or do you like the big swathes of space?

>We're still waiting on their updated Version 4 book for Mid-War though.
this is the sound of my tears....i have 3 Italian players whom are waiting for V4 rules....

>>54155114
i kek'd.
...too bad you are so damned right....

>>54156921
i had posted pics, but, well, they aren't saved on my camera SD anylonger.

anyone?

File: 1000pts USA Assault.pdf (110KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1x1px

>>54040644
Thoughts?

File: IMG_3360.jpg (3MB, 2000x1956px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2000x1956px

>>54157034
I have the German ones you posted saved on my phone.

File: IMG_3361.jpg (3MB, 2000x2106px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2000x2106px

>>54157034
>>54157439

2 of 3

File: IMG_3362.jpg (2MB, 1668x1827px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1668x1827px

>>54157034
>>54157439
>>54157463

3 of 3

>>54156921
>>54157034


https://mega.nz/#!cqQh2LRT

>>54157439
>>54157463
>>54157479
>>54157034
Thank you guys!

>>54153829

Iraq was favored by the Americans, but most of their equipment was Soviet or Chinese.
The Iranians on the other hand had M60s, Chieftains and other western weapons, and are also hostile to the Soviets AND America.

So really, Iraq could have gone either way, and Iran at this point would have been all on their own vs both Blocs.

>>54157310
Looks good. Anyway to import some smoke?

>>54162032
No idea, just making this with the models I have. Smoke however would be awesome.

>>54151061
>the commander has the MG on the AA mount and the hull-mounted MG is still present
REEEEEE

File: maushaus.jpg (26KB, 552x293px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 552x293px

>I miss when tanks could enter buildings

>>54153829
Which superpower supported the two was a total cluster fuck. The Commies were not happy with Iraq though.

The most solid major power was actually France, they stayed pro Iraqi most of the way though.

>>54163780
>a tank large enough to disguise as a building

Only in Nazi Germany...

>>54163780
Clever girl.

>>54164085
>>54159377

Fair enough.

I still think making them just be PACT would be stupid, which was my original point.

>>54169814
>I still think making them just be PACT would be stupid, which was my original point.

Yeah, trying to squeeze the Middle East clusterfuck into blue and red is only going to result in stupid matchups and allies.

>>54169945
You mean like the finns in EW?