|
Division on left shoulder, little patriotic flag on the right, insignia will be too small to make out at most scales so ignore it.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:12 |
|
|
Has anyone played with the Ronin rules yet? The author has an article in WI, and I was sort of interested until I read the article, in which he talks about how needlessly complicated he made his ruleset. What I really want is Sage - Samurai, which I thought there was some rumor about. Then I can buy all of that terrain from liljonas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 17:07
|
|
|
I've got them but not played yet. They look really fun. I will catch you in channel to talk some more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Has anyone played with the Ronin rules yet? That reminds me that I should get around to casting my 15mm buildings some day. I've just had way, way too many things going on at work and with the apartment, I've barely been able to cast the (fortunately) few orders I've gotten for my 6mm stuff. The last week I've had my parents-in-law staying in our house, and they are nuts about old European houses. Walking around all day, looking at medieval and renaissance houses kind of makes me want to try out some European style buildings instead. Then I'd have something to use with my 6mm Napoleonics as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 08:11
|
|
|
Lilljonas, (or anyone else), do you know any good tutorials for making Asian terrain/buildings in 28mm? VVV: Thanks, I'll check there! Pierzak fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Sep 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:Lilljonas, (or anyone else), do you know any good tutorials for making Asian terrain/buildings in 28mm? Well, not a good one, but I know a place for tutorials... http://muraminiatures.com/tutorials.html I've made a lot more buildings since then, and I should put them up with proper photographs. You can see some of the finished buildings (both 6mm and 28mm) in this album for further inspiration: http://imgur.com/a/B0ydd#hUlmzcD
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Division on left shoulder, little patriotic flag on the right, insignia will be too small to make out at most scales so ignore it. Actually very few units wore anything on their right arm. Plenty of guys in the field didn't bother to see either unit insignia or rank on their uniforms. But yeah at 15mm and under it's probably not necessary
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
If he cares enough to put unit insignia on his dudes then chances are he's playing The Big Red One or the Screaming Eagles or similar.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 02:35
|
|
|
I think he was talking about rank stripes. I did some image-searching, and didn't find combat or near-combat photos of soldiers wearing rank. I've heard that NCOs and officers from every army deliberately avoided identifying gear and markings, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was a more common practice than suggested. From a gaming perspective though, it may be useful to know who's who.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
Some units had stuff on the back of their helmets etc, and the Germans had collar pips IIRC. Still, it's not as obvious as "Officer has hat and pistol, NCO has SMG" etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:If he cares enough to put unit insignia on his dudes then chances are he's playing The Big Red One or the Screaming Eagles or similar. I was doing 28mm for Bolt Action! and was going to do Big Red One as it seemed to be the easiest to paint, as well as being in the war from early-to-late (for American involvement, at least.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
You may be interested that Warlord just put out waterslide decals for 1st ID. They're not hard to use, and it's absolutely worth the :3bux: in frustration saved.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 12:42
|
|
|
moths posted:You may be interested that Warlord just put out waterslide decals for 1st ID. They're not hard to use, and it's absolutely worth the :3bux: in frustration saved. Oh, for sure! Also my NCOs all have sub-MGs.  I know its cliche but it makes them easy to find on the table.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Oxford Comma posted:Also my NCOs all have sub-MGs. That sort of thing always takes precedence for me over historical accuracy, and it's a better way than insignia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
I've just started doing fireteams. One BAR, one Garand, one M1 Carbine, one SMG. Works reasonably well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 19:09
|
|
|
Oh boy! FOW Arab Israeli wars. That sounds really neat. What sources are there for figures? (I must have asked this already) I'd like to do some sculpts, just to give it a go; no particular plan yet. What forces or troop types would you like to see? What's missing from the market right now? Also, are there army lists? Troop types? What equipment do they list? Also, check out the latest batch of Germans from the Open Fire! box set. Gosh, this box never ends! I've still got FIVE tanks to go and then I found out there's also a V2 I forgot about. I love the water effects.       Everyone together.  I gave 1ic and 2ic a little marker thing to tell them apart.  
Hellbeard fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
Is it just me or do the rules for Armoured Assault in Fate of a Nation seem to forget that 0-armour transports don't automatically get sent to the rear after a dismount anymore?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Is it just me or do the rules for Armoured Assault in Fate of a Nation seem to forget that 0-armour transports don't automatically get sent to the rear after a dismount anymore? Yes they do. Its only the German armored transports that get to skip that requirement and only because of their own "Mounted Assault" rule. Also, @Hellbeard, Battlefront will be doing a full range to support their new rules. If you don't like that I suppose you could go with the ones from Peter Pig, though the selection is small and doesn't cover everything in the book. Conan the Librarian fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Sep 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
Conan the Librarian posted:Yes they do. Its only the German armored transports that get to skip that requirement and only because of their own "Mounted Assault" rule.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
Conan the Librarian posted:Yes they do. Its only the German armored transports that get to skip that requirement and only because of their own "Mounted Assault" rule. I'll have to look into it, but I'm pretty sure all armored transports stay on the table. The German Mounted Assault rule allows them to "assault from within" the transport (or dismount to assault, one or the other, I'm too tired to look it up right now).
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:I'll have to look into it, but I'm pretty sure all armored transports stay on the table. The German Mounted Assault rule allows them to "assault from within" the transport (or dismount to assault, one or the other, I'm too tired to look it up right now). I'm somewhat new to the game, but I just checked over the rules and confirmed this is not the case. "An empty transport team (Unless a Pioneer, Supply, Ammunition, Demolition carrier, or Recovery Transport team) must be Sent to the Rear when the last passengers dismount. Some German armored half-tracks are exceptions to this, remaining on the table without passengers due to the Mounted Assault special rule".
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 04:59
|
|
|
There were a fair number of changes to armored transports going from V2 to V3 but empty transports still go away. The big change is that they are no longer considered casualties when destroyed. This means that the empty German half-tracks sit around and become a MG shooting suicide appendage for Panzergrenadier platoons. Often times American players will leave a rifle team in each half-track to keep them on the board and shoot their MGs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 08:11
|
|
|
My mini rulebook is buried somewhere in the stack of wargames that nobody will play with me so I can't check without digging so I'll just assume you're correct and I am mistaken. So onto a more unanswerable and silly question: why is there an Israeli Mirage III on the cover but the only IDF plane in the list is the Ouragan?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:My mini rulebook is buried somewhere in the stack of wargames that nobody will play with me so I can't check without digging so I'll just assume you're correct and I am mistaken. Perhaps because the Mirage III is still in use they have to get some kind of licensing for it, and were unable to get ahold of Dassault in time? Or because this is probably just a first draft of something that'll hopefully become bigger. After all, where are the M4A4 FL-10s?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
Probably because someone said "Hey Art Department! We need some Arab-Israeli war pictures. Thanks!" And no one bothered to give them the rules.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 14:56
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Perhaps because the Mirage III is still in use they have to get some kind of licensing for it, and were unable to get ahold of Dassault in time? Or because this is probably just a first draft of something that'll hopefully become bigger. After all, where are the M4A4 FL-10s? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
Conan the Librarian posted:There were a fair number of changes to armored transports going from V2 to V3 but empty transports still go away. The big change is that they are no longer considered casualties when destroyed. This means that the empty German half-tracks sit around and become a MG shooting suicide appendage for Panzergrenadier platoons. Often times American players will leave a rifle team in each half-track to keep them on the board and shoot their MGs. They're really going to have to work on the transport rules if they ever go into the era of IFVs. They might have to make motostrelkovy not a horde, too. We'll see.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:They're really going to have to work on the transport rules if they ever go into the era of IFVs. They might have to make motostrelkovy not a horde, too. We'll see. Its strange how often they skip over seemingly very simple rules changes that would help things a lot. It would be simple to include rules saying that transports must be within command distance of a non-transport team from the same platoon at all times and that when destroyed they count as casualties for their platoon at half the normal rate (rounded down). Then people wouldn't use them as expendable machine gun boxes like they sometimes do now. I have dreams that one day a game company will build a rule set around a living regularly updated electronic document. The production cycle causes so much grief and trouble that it makes sense to just move away from the paper model and to a purely electronic model. Game companies, especially British ones, seem to be behind the curve on this stuff. On the subject of Soviet stuff, they really need to look at moving beyond the old "Hen and Chicks" version of Soviets. It makes them really un-fun to play with or against and it will make any late-late-war or Cold War rules the come up with DOA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
Conan the Librarian posted:On the subject of Soviet stuff, they really need to look at moving beyond the old "Hen and Chicks" version of Soviets. It makes them really un-fun to play with or against and it will make any late-late-war or Cold War rules the come up with DOA. Personally I have no faith in Battlefront to do so. Fate of the Nation as it is will sell quite a bit because there is a lot of pent of demand for Cold War Era stuff (that Vietnam in no way serviced) but in the long stretch it already looks bad for FoW:Cold War. My group did a Vietnam league for Tour of Duty and is already burned out. PAVN armor sucks (due to H&C) and while PAVN infantry is good it wasn't enough to keep interest up and most of the PAVN players simply quit. I've gotten in a few games of Fate of a Nation already and I'm skipping it. Israeli's are fun but playing Jordanians is an exercise in futility. Haven't tried out any UAR forces (Who the hell has the money to buy all that poo poo? seriously) but I'm not holding out much hope of them being fun, competitive maybe, fun no. Cold war stuff is going to be 9 NATO/Free World players lining up to play the 10th NATO/Free World player who is reluctantly pulling out his OPFOR stuff just so that a game can happen. That is where FoW is going but Battlefront has their heads up their rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
I kind of like the look of the UAR stuff. I am tempted to just do it in 20mil and not bother with infantry at all though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
I'm playing UAR for FoaN since its really not as expensive as you might think. If you go with T-34/85s then you can get the PSC models for fairly cheap. If you want T-54/55s like me then you have the option of buying up NVA boxes to mix with the new ones coming out. If you want IS-3s you are stupid and deserve your fate. The infantry is a waste of points, any remotely intelligent Israeli player will just shoot you out of your foxholes at 10.1 inches away since you are Conscript trash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2013 07:46
|
|
|
I'll be honest, I kinda went into this thinking of doing Israel anyways, but when I saw the Jordanian list I wanted to give them a try. Will probably still do Israel just because I have a poo poo ton of Shermans with enough variants that I can have consistent proxies. But I'm still bummed that the Jordanians have Hen & Chicks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
Is it kosher to ask about Vassal in here? I'd like to try FoW with goons since I really don't have the space, money, or real life grog friends to give it a go IRL.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
So does anyone know the first thing about Zvezda's new "Hot War 1990" game?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:So does anyone know the first thing about Zvezda's new "Hot War 1990" game? Try asking someone who speaks Russian maybe? The most exciting part of this game is that it may be a conduit of inexpensive cold war minis for a different set of rules. One that you could, I dunno, read?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:So does anyone know the first thing about Zvezda's new "Hot War 1990" game? It's basically Art of War meets Cold War gone Hot. So hopefully lots of 10mm scale cold war era tanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 11:30
|
|
|
Okay, trip report. Just had my first FoW Arab-Israeli fight. Encounter, 1250 points Israel vs. Egypt. Not sure what to think of it yet, but the special rules certainly saved my rear end (mainly the "Fate of a Nation" and Semi-Indirect Fire). I had the Israeli force running: HQ M50 Sherman P1 3x M50 Sherman P2 3x M50 Sherman P3 3x M51 Isherman P4 3x M1 Super Sherman (M4A1(76)HVSS) Limited Air Support My opponent had the following Egyptian force: HQ T54/55 P1 10x T54/55 P2 10x T34/85 P3 10x T34/85 P4 2x ZSU-57-2 Sporadic Air Support I won attacker, but failed to get Dusk/Dawn attack. I deployed my M51s and one squad of M50s, both hull down on some hills; keeping the M1s and the other squad of M50s in reserve. I kept them close enough that they could cover each others firing lanes. My opponent deployed his T54/55s and one squad of T34/85s, basically one on each side of the table; a squad of T34/85s and the ZSUs in reserve. This placed the T54/55s opposite my M50s, and the T34/85s to my M51s. I won first turn. 1. Kept hull down, adjusted positioning to avoid aerial bombardment. No targets this turn. O. Did not roll for aircraft. Moved both squads of tanks. T54/55s can't hit my M50s, but the T34/85s kill one. 2. Air Support, 2 aircraft, targeting T54/55s; opponent fails to counter. I move 1iC to join the M50 squad. M50s prove ineffective against T54/55s at range. 1iC and M51s begin chewing up the T34/85s. Air Support survives SD AA fire, but does nothing against top armor 2. O. Did not roll for aircraft. Moved both squads. T54/55s kill another M50. T34/85s bail two M51s. Last remaining M50 fail motivation, but pass on re-roll. 3. 1iC "joins" the M50 platoon. Air Support, 1 aircraft. Get reserves. M50s come in on table corner near T34/85s, I run them up to engage. 1iC repositions to fire on T54/55s. M50s and M51s kill enough T34s to force the platoon to run, they fail their 'kill the commander' roll. M50s bail a T54/55. Air Support kills the T54 commander and bails another tank. I storm trooper 1iC+1 to limit exposure to T54/55s, and storm trooper M51s to move towards T54/55s. O. Calls in aircraft, 3 planes, I fail to counter. Fails reserve roll. T54/55s fail to do anything. Air support targets M51s but fail to hit. 4. Get platoon of M1s from reserves. Fail Air Support. M1s come in on corner near T54/55s, and move to flank. Position one M51 for a shot at the T54/55 platoon. M50s double time up open flank towards objective. Concentrating fire on T54/55s, they pass motivation. Storm Trooper the M1s into cover. O. Air support is countered. Opponent gets T34/85 squad, deploys in middle of board, moves towards M50s on flank. T54/55s kill a M1. 5. Fail air support. M50s position into cover against T34s. Other three squads open up on T54/55s, wiping them out. Opponent passes Company Morale. M51s storm trooper into position against T34s O. Opponent gets ZSUs, deploy to middle of table. Fails air support. T34s move up and bail two M50s. Opponent hides his 1iC. 6. Fail air support. M50s remount. Move M51s, M1s and 1iC up left flank. M50s kill two T34s. O. Fail air support. ZSUs kill one M51, bail another. T34s kill one M50. 7. Fail air support. M51 remounts. 1iC+M50 kill one ZSU, bail another. M51s and M50s decimate T34s. Opponent fails both morale checks, but T34s pass 'kill the commander roll'. Opponent fails company morale. I started the game basically 3:1 odds and came out on top, in no small part due to semi-indirect fire. I'd say rolling wise, I was probably average and my opponent had some below-average rolls (getting 3 planes and then not doing anything). There was a close possibility of me loosing when the T54s rushed up against my M50s, but that re-roll saved me, and then taking out the commander effectively neutered the T54s. I wasn't completely unscathed but I feel the special rules helped to carry me through this match. That, the M51s being a holy terror, and the M1s coming in on the T54s' flank.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
Conan the Librarian posted:Try asking someone who speaks Russian maybe? The most exciting part of this game is that it may be a conduit of inexpensive cold war minis for a different set of rules. One that you could, I dunno, read? the infantry do look like they'd be a handy way to make quick FoF squads.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
Is that a typical FoW list? 30 tanks to one side would leave absolutely no room for manuever or anything else on my table..
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:12 |
|
|
It's for the Arab-Israeli War supplement, and looks to be reasonably big armies. There's not any way to play other than with tanks in that book though so it is what it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 00:45
|
|