|
Direwolf posted:Do you have any recommendations for companies on the cheaper end? I got into Flames of War somewhat recently and most of my stuff (US Late-War Tank Company) has come from Plastic Soldier Company. Great models, great price, and as luck would have it they're actually doing a 30% off sale this weekend on their entire 15mm range. If you know what you want to play it might not be a bad idea to jump on that while it's still active. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Sep 22, 2013 |
#
¿
Sep 22, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
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
|
|
|
So apparently WWPD has a copy of the new Desperate Measures book. Lot of awesome stuff in there, including: -"Hero of the Soviet Union" Battalions, which represent the best of the best of Soviet forces in the ending stage of the war. They're smaller than normal Soviet armies, but in return they get three excellent special rules: CiC and 2iC teams need a 5+ to be destroyed, skill tests are taken on a 3+, and, most importantly, they get to ignore Hens and Chicks. -New German special rule entitled "Enjoy the War", which makes it so that instead of rolling a single Platoon morale check individual teams role a 3+ to avoid breaking. -New German lists that give them a huge number of options, including Confident Trained King Tigers, Hetzers with Tiger Ace skills, and a whole bunch of other stuff. I've only gotten into FoW this past year with Americans, and I'm already tempted to go Red when the new book comes out with the Hero lists. How do existing Soviet players feel about the changes?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
So, a friend of mine apparently found a new picture taken from Desperate Measures. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
Tias posted:Thanks a lot! 15mm and 1/72 are interchangable terms, right? 1/72 is quite a bit bigger than 15mm. 15mm is closer to 1/100, IIRC.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
TheBlobThing posted:Just realised I might not use the Cromwells in my list anyway. I'm doing a Canadian Infantry Company, and putting in 2 platoons of Cromwells instead of Sherman tanks doesn't make sense. I'm essentially paying 75 points extra for mobility (and protected ammo). Wait, can Canadians even take Cromwells? I'm looking through Market Garden right now, and I'm not seeing any options for Canadians to take Cromwells. What book are you using?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
TheBlobThing posted:Overlord. They are Desert Rats Cromwells, so they get those lovely Reluctant Veteran stats too. Ah, that would explain it.  Looking at the unit costs, I do think you're slightly mistaken on seeing your list as paying 75 points extra for Cromwells, though. 3 DR Cromwells and the Firefly are only five points more expensive than 3 Confident Veteran Sherman Vs and the Firefly, and Protected Ammo on the Cromwells helps to mitigate their poor morale. Obviously it's up to you if paying the extra 70-75 points for Veteran status is worth it, but given the relative thin-skinned nature of the Sherman V I'd greatly recommend it to help extend their survivability.Zodiac5000 posted:I play my first game with them over President's day weekend, and I fully expect to be playing against Germans, Americans, and Russians, almost none of which will come from the Rising Sun book. I don't have the slightest clue how many Nikuhaku (the anti-tank teams) I will need, but I have three infantry platoons, and each platoon can have at most three Nikuhaku. I've got six Nikuhaku bases in total, so hopefully six, some tanks, and an anti-tank gun will be enough to fend off any tank assaults. Hopefully you're not playing against Americans, since Americans don't have an early-war army and you'd be going up against Shermans with Early-War AT
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:Prediction: there will never be Japanese minis because the real money is in armor and the Pacific war was light on tanks They already have Japanese models, though  It's not like they'll have to change much of the infantry, guns, and tanks they've already released. Really, if anything the greatest challenge towards writing and releasing a Mid-War or Late-War Pacific book is going to be balancing the USMC and the IJA against other Mid/Late-War armies. As you mentioned, the Pacific was fairly light on tank-on tank combat, and the AT capabilities of the USMC and the IJA isn't going to be anywhere near adequate against the heavier Mid and Late War armored lists. Obviously you can mitigate that with special rules and equipment (Spider holes and hidden bunkers for Japan, Battleship-caliber NGFS for the Marines, for example), but balancing that is going to be a delicate task and I can see why they'd want to put that off for a while as they figure it out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
They're definitely coming out with two new books, which will be called "Road to Rome" and "Fortress Italy". I believe that rather than simply updating Dogs and Devils and Cassino, they're reorganizing them so that Road to Rome will focus on the Allied advance and Fortress Italy will cover the German defense, much like Overlord/Atlantik Wall, Market Garden/Bridge by Bridge, and Red Bear/Grey Wolf. Wonder if they'll do the same for Nuts/Devil's Charge so that they'll have fancy two-book sets for all of the major late-war campaigns: D-Day, Market Garden, Italy, the Bulge, Bagration, and maybe far off in the future one for the Battle of Berlin.
Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Feb 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
So Battlefront just updated their page with design notes on Fortress Italy and Road to Rome, both of which look like they've have a bunch of new options in them as well as updates to armies from the old books and web briefings. Of particular note is that they cover the timeline up to May of '45, which makes it the latest-war book out there IIRC.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
Weissritter posted:Picking up a Tiger 2 platoon and a Panther G platoon for Flames of War. Like the models, and does not want to invest too much time/money to paint all the infantry - so going with a tank heavy/only force. Most of the Late-War German books allow for KT's, including Grey Wolf (The go-to book for Late-War German lists, and includes and updates the German lists from River of Heroes), Devil's Charge, and Desperate Measures. In pretty much all those books you can take either a Panther company with KT's as Divisional Support and vice-versa, though of those only Devil's Charge allows you to take Panthers and KT's in your combat platoons, IIRC. As to playing without infantry, you can do it, especially if you're playing casually, but you'll want some good anti-infantry options so that you can defend against or root out enemy infantry. Artillery is good for pinning them down, and self-propelled artillery like the Hummel or the Grille have Breakthrough guns that can negate enemy saves, which is always nice. Flamethrower vehicles can also be fairly effective, though you only get one shot with them. Really, the best thing to do is look at each book to try and figure out what list you want to run, and then tailor your support option purchases to those lists.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
TheBlobThing posted:Thanks. That's the way we played it, but I couldn't find a rule for it. Where does it say this? It's mentioned in the Mission section of the main rulebook, where it talks about setting up your forces. IIRC, if you take additional infantry teams with your 1iC and 2iC you have to part them out to your combat or weapons platoons. If you take gun teams with your HQ section, you can either choose to attach them, or you can form another platoon with your 2iC as the platoon leader, and with tank teams you have to form an additional platoon. At least, that's how I remember it, though I only skimmed it a while ago, so feel free to correct me.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Just dropped $100 on the Italian compilation, Italian battles, and some paint. I'm happy to see I can take Easy Eights in Italy, I like the reduction in points for the FDC (only 15 points!), and I'm happy to have an "officially official" Italian list in LW. Also, HG PzIIIs. But now I want to build a Polish armored division, dismounted cavalry, a Tiger company, a French company, and of course, Italians. What do the options for the US Tank company look like? Competitive at all with Blood, Guts, and Glory?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Different, for sure. The 1st AD is the only list, and you can't take Jumbos, you can't equip your HQ with Easy Eights or 76mm tanks. You can take a 76mm tank platoon with either M4A1 76mm (late) or M4A3 76mm (late) as options (AT 13), but you can take this as a Combat platoon rather than a support platoon. Otherwise, upgrade all to M4A3s and/or two tanks to M4A3 76mm or M4A3E8 Easy Eights. There is no option to mix in 105s, those are in their own support platoon. Huh, that's pretty interesting. I'd have to look at the full list and options, but the ability to take full 76mm gun platoons and Chaffees is pretty tempting, to say the least.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Yeah, Bridge at Remagen looks like a ton of fun. Can't wait to pay an absurd amount of points for a full platoon of Pershings. 
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Looking forward to picking it up myself. One of the reasons I'm not doing tanks for this month's oath (that and I've got a ton of French to prep). The other being that I'm not sure which direction to take my army/armies. Unfortunately, we've lost/are losing two FoW players. One moved in with his grandmother to help take care of her, and now lives about an hour's drive into rural Ohio. The other graduated high school and is enlisting. That leaves us with four regular players, not including the store owner, with me being the 'senior' FoW gamer, one Axis player, and both super-newbies are our only allied players (one just bought the Blood, Guts, & Glory box, the other is primarily a Russian player running the heavy assault gun company out of Red Bear). Was V3 that much of a change from V2? I only started playing last year, and the vast majority of people I play against started roughly around the same time.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:I think BF's reasoning for rolling after you deploy is that the quality of the troops is such a huge variance and unknown that the commander doesn't have a true accounting of their skill until after the fighting starts. The commander has a general sense that some troops are better than others (Bersaglieri vs. Fucilleri), but only a select few are proven (Parachudisti). Which, I don't know how accurate that is in the big scheme of things as the Bersaglieri were apparently fighting Libyans for years before the war, but somehow can't apply that to fighting the Commonwealth. Hey, since you have the book, can you let me know how up-armoring Shermans works? I noticed in the FAQ they retconned Abrams' Thunderbolt VII to lose Smooth Ride, to match the Uparmored E8s in Bridge at Remagen, but since that effectively makes them M4A3 (76)s with Wide Tracks, I was wondering if the process effected other M4 variants.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:All uparmored tanks also lose Detroit's Finest. Uparmored tanks are only available for the M4A3(late), M4A3(76mm), and M4A3E8, which makes their stats 8/5/1 instead of 7/4/1. So yeah, an uparmored E8 is basically just an uparmored A3(76) with wide tracks. Uparmored E8 is only 5 points more than uparmored A3(76) vs. regular E8 being 10 points more than standard A3(76). You can have up to three M4A1(76), A3(76), E8, Uparmored A3(76), Uparmored E8 in each platoon, rather than just two in BG&G. Can still only have one jumbo per HQ or platoon, but now have the option of a 76mm Jumbo. That makes sense. Since there's the option for a 76mm Jumbo, is it now possible to have 4 76mm guns in a single platoon? Edit: I can see it now. HQ Uparmored E8, 2iC Jumbo 76, Platoon Leader Uparmored E8, 2 regular E8s, a Jumbo 76mm and a bog-standard M4A1 as a meat shield for good measure. I can see the future, and it is glorious. Also, does the M4A3 105mm HVSS get anything special like Smooth Ride? Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Jun 15, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:I think I'm probably going to buy the updated Red Bear, just so I have a way of keeping tabs on this stuff. I'm looking through (I have the old Red Bear with the errata printed out), and I think he may have brought too many IS-85s. Can Guards take the Red Army support, or do they have to take Guards support? Anyways, I'm a little fuzzy on the numbers this morning, but I know that we were facing 1iC + two squads of 5 IS-85s, and using this book + errata, the points don't work out to 2000, which is what we played. Basically this is the list, I'm assuming the 152 obr 1943 based on stats, but I wouldn't be surprised if he used the 152mm ML-20. Yeah, most of the Red Bear price changes were for T-34s and should all be in the errata, IIRC. Does this guy have a habit of doing this, or do you think he just grabbed the same army list and forgot? Also, one thing I might suggest against those IS-85s possibly playing at lower point value. At 1500 points he can only bring a maximum of 11 tanks and nothing else, so by playing at lower points you can deny him his support options that killed you in your last game and make it a bit fairer of a fight.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:I'm starting to wonder just how complicated the more spergy WWII games are. I base this on the fact that it seems like everyday I find a rule that we've been playing wrong at my LGS. Things that completely change how we've been playing, not small upkeep stuff; stuff that could've changed who won or lost a game. FoW is suppose to be simple, streamlined; but I'm finding we've basically been playing the game completely wrong for the past 3 years. Something as simple as how direct fire smoke is suppose to work generates 15 minutes of arguments, nobody actually looking up the rules, and if someone does, the owner of the store says that's incorrect, not what the rules *actually* say, and what he describes is actually what the rules say, and a vote of democracy from the rest of the table because it's easier to keep doing what we've been doing than to change and nobody wants to be that rear end in a top hat rules lawyer. No wonder why all of our players are newbies who can't seem to grasp the inconsistencies of the game. Anyone who actually knows the rules have been run off or brow beaten. What in the world are people getting wrong about assaults? Coming from 40K it seems pretty drat straightforward, but then again everything does coming from 40K.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:I was rather peeved to learn that tanks can't assault tanks. My KVs should be able to just drive over T-26s. That is my one major complaint of the system. My Shermans should be able to ram King Tigers, it's historical drat it! <  >
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
acerimmerrocks posted:I'm thinking of starting a FOW army the local scene plays mainly mid war lists. I want to play Soviets is the book I should get the Eastern Front book? Also if I buy the open fire starter would I be able to use the Shermans that it comes with in a Soviet mid war list. Eastern Front is the only book for Soviets in Mid-War, IIRC, so that'd be the book to get. As to the Open Fire Shermans, that would be a resounding eeehhhhhh-The Soviets used the M4A2 model of Sherman, whereas the Shermans in the OF box are a mix of standard M4A4s and Fireflies. The differences between M4A2s and A4s are miniscule on the tabletop, to say the least, but the bigger issue is that you'd only be getting 6 standard Shermans out of the British half of the set. A British player would then be able to use the American Paratrooper platoon and the pair of Fireflies, but as a Soviet player there's no way you could use them without proxying them as something else, which (Depending on how relaxed your gaming group is about that stuff) might not be kosher, at least not after a while. The best thing to do would most likely be to buy M4A2s directly and the rulebook separately as opposed to trying to get them both through the starter set, since you're not really seeing the discount for buying OF when you're not using half the units that come in the kit. As to who to buy from, Plastic Soldier Company makes a good M4A2 for relatively cheap AND offers a company deal of 15 tanks for 20% off the price of buying 3. So, with 15 tanks you could build a Tankovy list with an HQ Sherman and 2 7 tank platoons, and equipped with AAMGs they'd bring you up to a solid 1200 points. If you're planning on going Soviet, that's definitely the way I'd go. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 12:00 on Jul 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
Yeah, I enjoy playing big games, and doubles games, but only playing big doubles games sounds like an easy way to give everyone a case of burnout.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
I'd imagine that the justification is that German soldiers fought hard in the East because they knew the Soviets were angry as hell, and anyone taken prisoner would expect the same treatment the Germans gave to Soviet prisoners. In the West, however, pretty much everyone but the most fanatical of troops realized the war was nearly over, and if anything were even more willing to surrender to American or British forces than continue to fight for a doomed regime.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Numlock posted:The other was that to buy an Arab army required a staggering investment in models that could only be used (a few could be used in Vietnam sure, if you were one of the few people playing Nationalists) in what amounts to a side project for BF. That and your average war-gamer tends to be an Israeli fan-boys (a hahaganaboo?) so in my group which has about a dozen regulars and probably another 30 or so floating around the area, I was the only one that expressed any interest in playing not-Israeli's. I dropped that idea quick when I started pricing out some armies and discovered that Jordanians were unplayable. But wait, if an M4A1 and an M4A3 count as indistinguishable per the Gun Tank examples, how does the Jumbo not count as indistinguishable from the M4A3?  The extra armor's not that noticeable.Edit: Between this and that ridiculous tactic where people would shoot MGs at Jumbos and try to claim it invalidated Jumbos Lead the Way, I get the feeling that some people just can't handle an extremely expensive tank that you can get max 4 of in a single army.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:Here's a fix to Gun Tank: if it has a separate Armoury entry you can Gun Tank it. Jumbos Lead The Way overrides this, allowing the player controlling the Jumbo to override the normal hit allocation sequence including the Gun Tank rule and place a hit on the JUmbo first. That kind of gets away from the point of Gun Tanks, though, which is supposed to indicate the crew recognizing that a certain vehicle is a particular threat. Comparing an M4A3 and an M4, which have similar hull shapes and the same gun, for example, wouldn't be an easy task to perform at range or in combat. Comparing them against an Easy 8, however, which has a noticeably larger gun, would be a bit easier, and certainly more important for the crew. I don't think there's really a problem with the rule as it is, some people are just trying to stretch it past its stated intentions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:Counterpoint that's "forging the narrative" horseshit that leads to stupid rules arguments. Wargames in general should be built under the assumption that both players are the groggiest motherfuckers imaginable (because they usually are). Leave ambiguity and interpretive differences to games with GMs. Again, though, the rule is pretty clear as is-if you want to use Gun Tanks, it has to have a different gun, a different chassis, or have something stupidly obvious bolted to it. Period. This isn't particularly subjective, and I've certainly never gotten into an argument over it. I mean hell, one of the examples listed in the book is that a KT with a Henschel turret is functionally indistinguishable from a KT with a Porsche turret-if you've seen pictures of those tanks, you'd know how different the turret shapes are, and how the rule is meant to function. Anyone arguing the extra armor on a Jumbo makes it distinguishable from other Shermans is wrong, period. Also, ironically, your solution of having Jumbos Lead the Way override Gun Tanks is pretty much the polar opposite of how the rule is supposed to perform-Jumbos Lead the Way is intended to represent Jumbo Shermans driving at the front of a column, absorbing all the shots, and Gun Tanks is supposed to represent the gun crews seeing the big tank in front and deliberately ignoring it to shoot at the scarier tank with the bigger gun in the back. It's also the best way to get around Jumbos to hit the more vulnerable and dangerous 76mm Shermans, so allowing JLTW to override Gun Tanks would be an unimaginable buff to US tank armies. Forums Terrorist posted:hell if we're going for "combat is confusing" then you shouldn't be able to gun tank period given that us troops sometimes shot at cromwells thinking they were tigers It's supposed to represent even the dumbest of gun crews recognizing that, say, a 75mm Sherman is less dangerous than the clearly much better armed and much scarier Firefly, and shooting at it directly. It's something that happened in the War itself fairly frequently, and tank crews would often try to disguise the longer barrels of 76mm Shermans or Fireflies so the Germans wouldn't focus on them-this being a prime example: 
Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Yeah, we've been playing that you can gun-tank a shot off a Jumbo regardless of the composition of the platoon he's in. Gonna have to bring that one up, as that's what won me the second game last night (Panther, shooting at M4A3(late) platoon with attached Jumbo 2iC, only one tank in the platoon, made one hit, gun tank to M4A3(late), kill the A3, two dead platoons, one alive, Reluctant Vet US Armor fails company morale). Considering that the only real noticeable difference between a late A3 and an A3E2 is the turret shape, which is specifically called out under the Gun Tank rule as indistinguishable for the purposes of using the rule (The example being the difference between a KT with a Henschel turret and a Porsche turret), so I'd definitely argue against being able to distinguish between the two. As to Total War, I've never played a game of it but it's always seemed interesting. The idea of one person handling all the support assets seems pretty neat, but does it really work out in-game?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The Russians can get a truck company but those trucks aren't going to help a lot because the trucks are going to be even more vulnerable than the blob infantry. The real answer, of course, is to simply mount all your infantry on your AFVs. Tank Riders, ho!  Edit: Is there any Soviet unit that gets to retain their 3+ save while Tank Riding like Irish Guards and US Task Force Riders?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
DJ Dizzy posted:Seeing as americans now get Pershings, is american armor viable to play now? Or will it still get murdered to loving panthers. American armor has always been viable to play as? Unless you forgot Jumbos and 76s exist.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
All I know is that my friend ordered some Germans from PSC a while back and declared Britain to be a third world country after learning he couldn't get a tracking number.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 11:40
|
|
|
DJ Dizzy posted:Aight, thanks! (Also, BG&G?) Blood, Guts, and Glory! It was the primary book for US Armor before Bridge at Remagen was released, and to an extent it still is, because US Armor is great. Sure, you don't have access to heavily armed and armored monstrosities like Panthers, Tigers, and Jagdtigers, but the great thing about playing US Armor is that you don't need them, since you can upgrade your basic M4/M4A1 Shermans to do whatever you need. Want to clear out entrenched infantry? Basic Shermans come with 2 regular machine guns and a top-mounted .50 cal AAMG, which also serves as a deterrent to enemy aircraft. Machine guns don't suit you? Well, you can upgrade one tank in your company or simply take a platoon of 105mm howitzer tanks, which have both slightly better armor and a Breakthrough gun. Let's also not forget that all Shermans get a special rule enabling regular infantry to act as Recon teams if they're in base-to-base contact with your tank, removing those pesky Gone-to-Ground penalties from tageting specific enemy teams. Tanks got you down? 76mm guns en masse can take down anything short of a King Tiger, and later-model Shermans have the mobility needed for manuvering to get those side shots if necessary. M4A3E2 "Jumbo" tanks are also ridiculous, as they've got twice the armor as a standard Sherman and have a special rule which makes it so the enemy HAS to allocate their shots to it first, pretty much guaranteeing they'll need to hit with multiple shots to do any damage. US Armor also has access to fantastic support options, be it solid artillery, air support (For which you can buy an additional upgrade to ensure you almost always get 2 aircraft), mechanized infantry, paratroopers, and one of the most broken units in the game, Tank Destroyers, which get to pop up practically wherever they feel like and put up to 8 AT14 FP 3+ shots into whoever's side armor you don't like. tl;dr Americans are great, would play again. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
krushgroove posted:Cool - so if I go for the PSC Panzer IV box and the M4A3 Shermans, does that also give me a base for building up a pair of balanced, period-appropriate opposing forces? I bought the PSC US infantry box last year, and they're not kidding about "A company in a box". There's enough infantrymen a full three-platoon, 9 rifles per platoon infantry company out of Overlord or Devil's Charge, plus snipers and some change. The only downside is that it doesn't come with any mortars, MGs or bases, but the PSC base set isn't that expensive and they came out with a heavy weapon set last November. There's a ton of stuff between the two boxes, and if you decide to get all three boxes (Rifle, heavy weapon, and M4A3), you could easily field a near 2000 point list. Not a bad deal, by any measure. Edit- I made up a list of all the stuff you can take between the three boxes, minus the four .50 Cal HMGs I have no idea where to stick in. It's not a very good list, and there's very little chance you'd use it all at once, but it does a good job of showcasing the flexibility you have in building a list with the stuff you get. quote:US Rifle CompanyInfantry Company, 2nd Infantry, from Devils Charge, page 48 Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Sep 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Seems like a good weekend for deals-Plastic Soldier Company is having a 25% off sale.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:A typical late war ARP has 5 M3 half-tracks, 5 rifle teams, 5 bazooka teams, a command team, a 60mm mortar team, and two m1919 .30 cal MG teams. You need two of those, and then a HQ consisting of two command carbine teams, a jeep and another half-track. Once you've got that it's down to what book and era you're making. I'd check out EasyArmy, you can get unlimited access to a book for $2 and it's a fantastic tool for list-making. http://fowlists.blogspot.com is a good resource as well, though it's been pretty slow to update recently. But yeah, between the Infantry box, the heavy weapon box, and the two sets of halftracks, you should have enough for two Armored Rifle Platoons, with a whole bunch of extra infantry to spare.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
So the Flames of War site has a preview of the new Barbarossa book. Not much there except some army lists, but what's interesting is that the Russian lists reveal A) Both Guards and Red Army are rated as Conscripts, and B) T-34s are goddamn expensive. As in, "More expensive than Jadgtigers" expensive. Are there even any more expensive units in the game right now, given the veterancy rating?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Are they doing that to control the number you can field? Seems odd to do, but it would be more historically accurate. It's probably that and for balance. I don't have much experience with Early War, but from my understanding most Early-War units have poor AT and poor armor, which is one of the reasons why the Matilda is so good. Given that the T-34 mixes excellent armor, armament, and speed for the period, it makes sense that they'd be priced appropriately and given the poor veterancy to prevent them from outclassing everything else in the period.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Any idea what the stat line is? If it's anywhere close to it's MW/LW stat-line (Soviet Sherman), it's going to be damned expensive. I imagine the PIVE/F1/F2 will be equally expensive. It's a T-34 obr 1941, so the statline should be the same as the obr '41 in Eastern Front: 6/4/1 with a Co-Axial and Hull MG, Wide Tracks, and the Fast Tank rule, with a RoF 2 AT 9 FP 3+ gun. Which, from what I understand from Early War tanks, is absolutely horrifying.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
I sort of wish I'd jumped on the PSC sale, since I'm really tempted to try and pick up some Zvezda KVs and T-34s and start a cheap army. Only need five tanks!* *Depending on how many tanks you need per platoon.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Numlock posted:Assuming you are talking about FoW, The current semi-official word is that .50cals and AA MG's are not eligible for the gun tank rule last I bothered to check the official forums for what Phil's opinion was on the issue (which changes like the seasons on this issue). The Rule is vague and needs clarification but Phil has some sort of bug up his rear end about it and refuses to do. He has stated on multiple occasions that its "Obvious" what is gun tank-able or not if you read the rule but he's full of poo poo. I'm pretty sure points 3 and 4 are inaccurate, as well as the point about being able to GT E8's. I don't have the book in front of me to check, but it's pretty explicit that only different chasis and gun types can have GT used against them-so an E8 could be picked out from an M4A1 because of the gun, but a Jumbo is indistinguishable from other 75mm Shermans, and E8s from 76mm-armed tanks. The rule is more ambiguous than it should be, though, that goes without saying.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 06:08
|
|