[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




File: casual crisis autism.jpg (542 KB, 1452x1233)
542 KB
542 KB JPG
Scan Database:
lurk moar.

Official Flames of War Free Briefings:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=108

Some /tg/ fan projects - Noob Guide &FAQ
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eD3nkA51ddl3nmltKg0zsnfrOUhlWgcc4h5aqz-RFqw

Quick Guide on all present V3 FOW Books:
http://www.wargames-romania.ro/wordpress/wargames/flames-of-war/flames-of-war-starting-player-guide-the-books/

Archive of all known Panzer Tracts PDFs: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/nyvobnlg12hoz/Panzer_Tracts

--Guybrarian Notes:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eD3nkA51ddl3nmltKg0zsnfrOUhlWgcc4h5aqz-RFqw/edit?usp=sharing

Panzerfunk, the /fowg/ podcast.
http://panzerfunk.podbean.com/

https://vimeo.com/128373915
a neat watch.

http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Briefings/CariusNarva.pdf
http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=1949 the Azul Division:
these are no longer linkable off the main page

Which army do you play the most?
http://strawpoll.me/4631475

what actual country are you from?
http://strawpoll.me/4896764

DISCORD
https://discord.gg/drZbxvm
>>
File: V4CardSheet.pdf (577 KB, PDF)
577 KB
577 KB PDF
..just in case you reaaaallly want to convert using the converter, here are some helpful card sheet blanks.

soon:
Polish scans in 2 days
Girls und Panzer stuff.


oh, old thread:
>>62750773
>>
File: IMG_20181107_125134.jpg (4.74 MB, 4608x3456)
4.74 MB
4.74 MB JPG
Ha gottim!
>>
>>62895396
The only thing that would've made that cover art more glorious is if there was a cunt riding the V-1
>>
>>62895396
you lucky bastard! do enjoy!
>the shermans are early sherman plastics that are a bitch to put together, be prepared to test fit and shave parts

>>62895446
there are so many hollywoodisms in there it is not funny.
>>
>>62895396
Kinda wish that German officer with the pistol was Hitler
>>
>>62895834
>hard to assemble shermans.
Anything else I should know?
>>
>>62895396
I get that the box was a decent value on release and I'm not saying you did, but the people that are overpaying for these on ebay and such right now are out of there minds. It's not like these are out of print exclusive sprues or something
>>
>>62896037
it's the side armor/track fitting.some boxes had new plastics, but most had a shaving that had to be done to make it fit....

theminikingdom- blo gs po t -com/2013/01/flames-of-war-open-fire-sherman-fixes.html
>>
>>62896205
Oh yeah, I got "Fleeced" on this, paying 240 CAD for it. I tried assembling an imitation of this set with PSC minis but it came out to about the same price and too many extra models. I can't really deal with any clutter ATM. Hoping to bond with my uncle over this kit.
>>
>>62896634
Dude.... 240 cad.... Cmon man be smarter than that. If you're someone that already buys from resellers you could just have bought individual sprues or split packs and easily got what you needed for half the price. Even buying the PSC kits and selling the sprues locally to boys at the shop at a loss would still be cheaper. Or just buy the PSC and keep the extra sprues in half a shoebox for when you inevitably need them unless youre playing IABSM /BA or something. It's your life and your money but damn was that was a really dumb buy
>>
Urban or rural combat?
>>
>>62898708
I used to like urban combat when breakthrough & bunker buster guns with recon were a thing.
>>
>>62895396
>>62895834
>>62896275
The initial run had the poor fitting Shermans, the later run had the proper, very nice plastic models you now get in the Sheran V boxes. You'll soon know the difference if you have the former as the models are poor.
>>
File: DSCN7205.jpg (3.93 MB, 2500x1643)
3.93 MB
3.93 MB JPG
>>62898708
inna woods, motherfuckers!
>>
>>
>>62898708
>>62900312
>>62899386
>not fighting for a comfy village and its surrounding rural environs
Shit taste desu
>>
>>62903293
we had 2 choices given, anon.
i gave one of those two.
>>
Some announcments concering kursk
https://flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=6275
>>
>>62899625
Looks like I'm good. These shermans don't look like the ones in the blogpost.
>>
>>62905647
>https://flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=6275
man, the SU-76 is not plastic....

oh, the missed opportunity.
i guess those Schurzen PzIII's and T-70's were too much strain?
i pray they surprise us by February, lest all my kit goes to PSC.
>>
>>62905970
Psc going to make a mint
>>
File: 1516919702490m.jpg (143 KB, 1024x760)
143 KB
143 KB JPG
>>62905647
>panzer IIIs with schürzen in plastic
I am pretty hyped about this lads
>>
>>62905647
So are these replacing EatG and IC or going side by side?
>>
>>62906852
They are not officially replacing them, they are the books fore late MW.
>>
>>62905647
>More BF delays

Well I for one am shocked. Shocked I tell you.
>>
So for Kursk... it's basically a pladtic Panzer III L/M/N kit, plastic T-70 and... thats about it for new stuff? Panther D looks like resin/metal, so really, BF not adding anything that PSC doesn't already do.
>>
>>62908626
Oh and a plastic Sd kfz 251 ausf C, which could be nice if it has weapons options and assembly is easier than the PSC one.
>>
>>62908626
ded company
>>
Zvezda has nice and cheap plastic early panther
>>
Bf treats us like we're stupid and pretty much like shit. It's hilarious and ridiculous I love it
>>
Don't know if this is the place to ask, but does anyone here play in Belgium, around Brussels?
>>
>>62909488
Try asking some of the local german players

they should be in by around 1940
>>
Well folks, I think with the next wave of releases being 2.25 plastic kits (those panzer plates will just be an extra sprue) and overpriced repacks I can safely say
Fuck off battlefront
PSC already have those bases covered and TY is getting increasingly worse as more stuff comes out.
They let sales quanitiy matter more than quality and in a niche business like this thats suicide. At this rate will they even get to TY v2?
>>
>>62896634
>too many extra models

You know that open fire box isn't reeeally intended to be a stand-alone game, right?
>>
File: SBX54.jpg (88 KB, 690x486)
88 KB
88 KB JPG
>>62909217
Do you know how hard it is to get the commanders cupola right on your T34s?

Very hard, apparently. We're talking like, 80% of the time right territory.
>>
>>62909897
Lmao.
>>
>>62909897
>We take pride in the quality of our products and constantly research accuracy. We are committed to giving you the most detailed range of scale WWII models on the market.
>>
>"Due to issues with moulding tools, the first run of flexible plastic Soviet Infantry were not up to our standards and so could not be shipped according to schedule."
Considering how low the standard was so far with the new gross infantry im shocked it could get any worse than looking like they were left in acid overnight.

>>62909776
Don't break his illusion that he made a good decision instead of massively fucking up and paying 3x what the box is worth while theyre still selling for as low as 100 cad on ebay this week.

>>62909567
Take a shot every time battlefront repacks something in a different plastic color or just repacks the same old shitty slimy resin and calls it a "new release"
>>
Next book confirmed: German Army invades Soviet Union in 1940.

Gonna be gud lads.
>>
>>62910400
Nice they fucked up the infantry and the Stalingrad ruins.
>>
>>62910400
Not only do they get their kits wrong but they get the dates wrong too?? That's hilarious!
>>
>>62910141
>Considering how low the standard was so far with the new gross infantry im shocked it could get any worse than looking like they were left in acid overnight.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Whoever made the soft-plastic a real thing is a muppet. Even sticking to metal-only for future infantry releases would have been better.

I want some plastic 88s, but I'll have to find better crews or there's no point, etc. Same with all the new BF releases: nice guns in hard plastic, terrible crews that will cost extra to replace. Sucks.
>>
>>62910141
I got three for 65€ each
I don't know how you could even think that buying one for 240CAD is even reasonable
>>
>>62911193
It's like they don't even try. They could increase the new base sizes a mm or two to not leave massive gaps in their bases to be filled. They don't even make proper bases for some teams so you basically have to cute off an awkward round or create a little hill to hide your machine gun loaders.

The soft plastic really shines in anything with a guy holding up binoculars. The british mw spotter has some weird noodle bananas for arms and that figure is gross. Ill snap a pic later to share.

The company just gives 0 damns for anything but pumping out a ton of SKUs right now
>>
So what are some good brands for infantry?
>>
>>62911366
>The company just gives 0 damns for anything but pumping out a ton of SKUs right now
I already have my fallschirmjager company box

I look forward to them re-releasing it with a fancy single coloured background for new paras book releases

>Calling it "Death from above" instead of "Bitches on the ceiling" or "Cunts under the risers"
>>
>>62911556
the -old- hard plastic BF stuff is pretty good

only other infantry I've actually seen IRL is the PSC soviet stuff which was pretty decent

I've -heard- that peter pig and armies army are pretty decent too

Personally I like to shill for BF's Metal Italians because I like 'em
>>
>>62911556
PSC is the safe bet for big chunks to really fill out an army. The last time we talked about it there was a big fight because the BF shills were out in full force calling them ugly and not dynamic. They do have hq images of the sprues and minis online so you can check and judge for yourself.
>>62911571
I would agree to use what anon listen to fill out any gaps you still have left over. All the options they listed are solid
>>
>>62905647
No Emchas in sight. Sad face.
>>
Hey at least the plus side we get 3 whole new plastic kits

Halftrack C
Panzer III with skirts
T70's

Thats good right?
>>
>>62911702
>BF shills were out in full force calling them ugly and not dynamic

I was on the ugly and not dynamic train until I saw an assembled company of soviets for 'em, and once they're on the table and painted they look fine

plus also, even if they -were- ugly and not dynamic once off the sprue, they're still better than the bad soft plastic stuff that BF have been pushing
>>
>>62912434
Cool, wonder if we'll have them by 2019 in Australia
>>
>>62912434
>Halftrack C
Already made by PSC
>Panzer III with skirts
An extra sprue with the already released Panzer III (most likely invalidating the old kit...). Also, already made by PSC
>T70's
Already made by PSC
>Thats good right?
You tell me. Do you enjoy paying more for the same?
>>
Looks like no Pz38 in Mid War. Kissing this ugly little fellows
>>
>>62912867
>no Pz38 in Mid War
why must czechnology be forever forgotten, first TY now V4
>>
>>62912867
>>62912980

*rumbles in slow-burning slavic fury*
>>
>>62912980
NPC factions never get love
>>
>>62913430
Warlords Zulu wars and the new 40k orks say that it can be done.
Battlefront are just bleeding cash and desperate to generate sales somehow so making hero faction vs spammy mooks is gonna solve that like it did Nam and FOAN.
LW not contain any new plastics at this rate but US players can field 30 shermans for 45 points
>>
File: Russian urban snipers.jpg (48 KB, 600x202)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
>>62912416
>Looks over at Emchas in case

Probably be a card or some shit. Dammit BF...

>>62911556
Most manufacturer have some great figures, some OK ones and some poor ones.

BF hard plastic releases were all great figure. BF has some really good metal ranges, but too often they're let down by poor casting quality. Because BF doesn't really give a shit, they just want your money. Hence soft plastic.

Forged in Battle have some nice infantry, worth a look, decent price and good casting quality. I've painted their LW British and they're pretty good. Some, like the FJ are also nice figures but only have 3x LMGs in the platoons, etc. and you can't always get weapons teams and the like. Fill-in with BF or Peter Pig packs where needed.

I have some Skytrex Japanese on the way, we'll see how they look once they arrive.

>>62911571
>Personally I like to shill for BF's Metal Italians because I like 'em

They are one of BF's better figure releases.

>I've -heard- that peter pig and armies army are pretty decent too

I've painted the PP British Paras...great figures, really nice crisp castings with tons of details.

Peter Pig is more expensive than BF if you're not in the UK, but their casting quality is much better. They use a harder metal alloy too, which makes cleanup a bit more work but rifles and the like are more difficult to bend. They also do some great character packs, e.g. the Soviet Bomb Dogs and the Urban sniper pack with the dummy and periscope guy is just awesome (pic related). It's worth it just getting a few character packs for the unique figures.

Generally with PP, their really old figures are not as good as the more recent ones: you can usually tell by looking at the pics. I'm not sure if all their ranges are like this, but I do know when the PP Brit Paras arrived they had much better detail than the pics on their site showed. The crispness of things, like the canteens for example, was simply astounding when compared to what I had seen on BF figures.
>>
Polish TY scans in 35 minutes, or so...
>>
File: t3_3wyqor.jpg (150 KB, 910x637)
150 KB
150 KB JPG
>>62915985
Cheers.
>>
>>62915985
so what's your thoughts on the pols and checks?
>>
Team Yankee Question: To my understanding TY is set in 1985? At that time, I am lead to understand the British Army had both the Chieftain and the Challenger 1 "on the books", as it were. I would love to do an armoured force set around the Challenger, but Iron Maiden has not rules. Never mind says I, I'll just use Challenger models as proxies for Chieftains rules, fine by me. So my questions, will there be rules? and whom should I look up for Models? Plastic Solder do one, but do any one else? please and thankyou.
>>
>>62916508
i am actually trying to get the PDF i made to the personal mediafire of mine. mediafire itself is acting up.

once it's there, it can be transferred to the MEGA owners.

i will read the book / play with lists in a bit
>>
>>62916635
Model and rules for the Challenger? probably. BF needs to keep making money after all. You'll probably get it before the US gets the Bradley and Apache...and long before the Sovs get the T-80...
>>
>>62916635
>TY is set in 1985?
TY is not based on the book anymore, so we don't really know when it's set

the fact that the soviets have at most 1978 gear and some of the NATO forces are rocking equipment from 1996 means that anything is possible

Challengers will be out around October 2019 because they'll be in the Oil Wars series of books
>>
>>62916682
TY really tries to make the Red Army look hilariously outdated and poorfag tier when in reality they were high end even in the 80s. Maybe Yugoslavia can look poorfag tier but the USSR actually invested in R&D
>>
>>62916722
I personally don't have an issue showing the majority of the soviet army to be as poorfag as it really was in a lot of cases

It's just annoying that apparently there's no such thing as favoured units that are actually well equipped and trained

hell, they even gave that to the Egyptians with the Thunderbolt Battalions
>>
>>62916682
The year and overall setup seems the same. But Stripes seems to have reversed the narrative that NATO got their ass kicked on the North German Plain because the Marines effortlessly roll up their flank from Denmark.
>>
>>62916674
>>62916682
So just wait 11 months? Ok i guess I can do that. Save up some cash and what knot.
>>
>>62916722
>>62916768
I thought the Czechs were the most Hobo army?
>>
>>62916857
Have you seen Romanians?
>>
>>62916857
Except for the fact that the soviets are even more hobo than the Czech's, the East Germans and the Polish so far, and it's fucking bonkers

The game's gone ahistorical, but it should've done it to make the game better by giving players more factions had bigger even exaggerated differences, but they don't

Imagine how much more interesting Red v Blue matchups would be if we had a 4+ to hit PACT and a 3+ to hit NATO faction?

Bring on TY command cards and TYv2 is all I say

that way we can figure out if they actually -wanna- fix it, because even if they did, it's kind of a tough call to update all the books/unit cards after they're already done
>>
>>62917070
Could you do a 2nd sub faction? like "Hobo Red" and "Spetsnaz Blue"? is that not an option? I haven't super looked in to the game / faction options yet, But I have read/played a fair amount of FoW. Sometimes its fun playing Old men and young boys with the SS elite.
>>
>>62917070
As long as the Nato players keep buying toys so they can get all sweaty at the idea of mowing down soviets in droves in their super tanks then warpac will remain the mook horde.
Hell the great irony of team yankee its supposedly ww3 gone hot but really its true to history as nato wargames against itself and the soviet never have the economy to facilaite an invasion of the west.

Bravo Phil, Bravo
>>
>>62917633
TY doesn't have the command cards V4 FoW has, so the soviets don't get anything to change their ratings, they've just made four factions with slightly different ratings and called it done
>>
File: 1450420633205.png (199 KB, 656x825)
199 KB
199 KB PNG
KURWA fucking bitch whore ass dike nigger motherfucking cuntastic jock-itch trap bitch piece of shit cock fucking australian.

now that i've gotten it to work:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/habccrtlhruru6x/TY+Polish.pdf

fuck. my life. i'm going to go read and whip up a prototlist
>>
>>62918026
>http://www.mediafire.com/file/habccrtlhruru6x/TY+Polish.pdf

oh fuck, two of the pages are clipped.
fuck.
well, let me get a patch going.
>>
File: Polish Mistakes.jpg (3.67 MB, 2124x2809)
3.67 MB
3.67 MB JPG
>>62918083
>>62918026
the patch image.

sorry, i suck.
>>
File: 1468065509359.png (63 KB, 1248x736)
63 KB
63 KB PNG
>>62918026
>>62918318
kiidos my man
>>
>>62918318
Whats a Russian gunship doing in the patch notes?
>>
>>62918026
Cross rating of the OT64 is worse than a BM21.
Wut?
>>
>>62919374
Soviet mooks can only drive when their vehicle is also an IED
>>
>>62919189
>A Hind D
>Colonel
>What's a russian gunship doing here?
>>
File: Ar7is4w.jpg (21 KB, 392x319)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
>>62919189
Hell of it.

>>62919374
i know...i know
....i know.....


.....

...i know.....
>>
>>62916768
>I personally don't have an issue showing the majority of the soviet army to be as poorfag as it really was in a lot of cases

Not only was the majority of the soviet army on par with NATO technology wise but the units in game are supposed to be the "spearhead" units which were above NATO average. That's their excuse for why the Soviets don't get to use the plethora of heavy mortars (often more like a light howitzer than a traditional mortar) they were equipped with.

The Soviets were only "poorfag" when you count shit like the worst category C units (undrilled reservists) which might have been rocking T-34s. The T-55 with '70s ammo was more than a match for second tier NATO units which compromised the bulk of European NATO units which had upgunned M48s or Centurions and if they were lucky Leopard 1s.
>>
>>62919374
It's so there is a game reason to choose between the BTR-60 and the OT64. Except of course in real life the Poles only had a handful of BTRs for police and border guard units and BF has previously used the excuse that only "spearhead" units were represented but now we have Polish reservists being thrown into the assault.
>>
I don't know why they just don't release separate lists or a book for 'elite' East factions. It's mindblowing but of course they constantly push the steretypes and barely release anything as it is. As the months go by it's radio silence punctuated by stupidity while every other company is doing much more, cheaper, faster. And yet they seem to not give a shit about pissing off their customers and trying to fleece them at every opportunity.
>>
File: force for TY.jpg (195 KB, 397x604)
195 KB
195 KB JPG
>>62922151
yes, read on.

so, fuck my life. just...fuck.

The Poles have a sick Dichotomy.
--If you want SKOT as an infantry unit in your battalion, it has to be a T-55 battalion.
--T-72 can't into SKOT. get a full formation instead.
spoiled little imouto Bartosz wanted to do T-72's with a pack of T-55's, a dollop of SKOT, and DANA. pretty fuckign Polish.
for less than 62 points (so i can Su-22 and take allied 'Ukranians' in 100 pt games.)
>we are to play 70pts a lot, to kill the park-lot syndrome.
so, if i want SKOT and T-72, it's second formation time, for 6 more points than i expected.
it seems plausi-

NOPE: it's 65 pts with minimal needed BMP recon and Shilka, so i can't Su-22
Ukranians cost 37/38 pts minimal total, so i'm already over 100 for the bigger games....

>"...oh, just switch to a T55 force..."
AND HAVE SHIT CROSS VALUE EVERYWHERE? SHALL I PLAY IN A DESERT SO HATO CAN HIT ME AS HARD AS HE WANTS???
>"....then don't take SKOT...."
PLAYING A POLISH ARMY WITH BMP IS JUST PEACHY, ISN'T IT???
(5+ cross value could be avoided, i guess....)
>"...why are you stuck on T-72's?...
WHY ARE YOU STUCK IN MY WHORE MOTHER? DO YOU JUST LOVE EMBRACING THAT MUCH SUCK?


battlefront is going to force me to play exactly the way they want me to if i am going to go max Kurwa and eat my cake too. the only other option is to embrace a huge pot of fail and just suck dicks. i play with Leo1's in a meta where the nappies mindset and fear of terrain rules. i have sucked my fair share of MSU and HATO crank.

Battlefront, why?

My options:
--fail low amount of T-72's or just dump the T-55's
--have no recon or autocannons
--use BWP-1 and just take it in the ass from Moscow.
--build and run an illegal list for as long as fucking possible.


i am gonna find a way out of this.
i will have a decent Polish force that does not just roll over....
....i must.....
>>
>>62923087
Why'd you have to remind me about how the T-72 has better cross than the T-55 despite the Soviets switching to T-55/62 in Afghanistan for better cross country performance? WHY BARTOSZ? I DRINK TO FORGET DAMNIT!
>>
>>62923087
Autism
>>
>>62923295
yes. full multi-chromosomal reefest.

>>62923252
which reminds me, i am popping open a fresh bottle for this shit...

>>62916080
i just found out what this is.
you are a scholar and a gentleman!
>>
>>62911359
I really should have asked here first about where to buy it instead of finding the first legit one I could find on google's tenth page of search results.

I'll take it as a lesson learned.
>>
Poles can go T-72M and BMP2 in the same formation. My East Germans can only stare in jealousy at the benefit of a domestic arms industry.
>>
>>62924729
And yet in real life the Poles didn't even have BMP-2s until the late '80s.
>>
File: jesus-wept.jpg (42 KB, 900x599)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
>>62924729
>>62924837
...i know.
>>
>>62921831
Yeah, Cat B and Cat C was what I meant by poorfag, I'm on the side of reality when it comes to the soviet spearhead, GFSG and Cat A (most of the time B as well) units being a fearsome force to behold

I was just trying to not get the thread involved in another shrieking match (by suggesting that at least a single soviet unit qualifies for 4+ to hit and 3+ skill) of people who'll never be convinced the other side could ever make a valid point, y'know, like modern american politics?
>>
>>62925659
Red Thunder was the time they should made the distinction between GSFG and CGF. They fumbled both that and the opportunity to break the formation mould, and then the US got both of those things in Stripes.
>>
>>62925659
>Yeah, Cat B and Cat C was what I meant by poorfag, I'm on the side of reality when it comes to the soviet spearhead, GFSG and Cat A (most of the time B as well) units being a fearsome force to behold

Yeah but that was my point. Even the reservists rolling out with old T-54s and BTR-60s were on about the same level of technology as the bulk of NATO. The deep reserve shit like the T-34s would have never been used offensively, it was only kept around in case of another Barbarossa.

>I was just trying to not get the thread involved in another shrieking match (by suggesting that at least a single soviet unit qualifies for 4+ to hit and 3+ skill) of people who'll never be convinced the other side could ever make a valid point, y'know, like modern american politics?

Yeah I know what you mean. The Poles/Czechs were very obviously meant to be a patch to the low Soviet ratings in Red Thunder. I can only hope that if BF makes it to TY v2 they actually honestly examine their ratings as they did with FoaN v3. I'd also like to see NATO conscript/reserve units.
>>
>>62925827
If the Capitalists have no tanks, but you still have Grandfather's T-34/85, then who is looking stupid stupid now HATO
>>
>>62925768
>Red Thunder was the time they should made the distinction

Not fucking wrong

>>62925827
>The Poles/Czechs were very obviously meant to be a patch to the low Soviet ratings in Red Thunder

Too bad they killed 2 entire factions to do it
>>
>>62925863
Were they killed or artificially buffed? Everyone was fine with the East Germans having higher ratings than the Russians, they're fucking East Germans. I think many believe that BF didn't go far enough for them.

But then the Poles and Czechs too? Yeah nah.
>>
>>62925932
>Were they killed or artificially buffed?
Well if they were given the proper faction treatment, we'd of gotten more than 3 kits

We'd also of gotten Czech Infantry blisters at the least

Then again, I'm just being fatalistic because I feel like if BF made the V4 LW book about germany -only- have the SS in it and then made all the axis minors identical because "they sold them all panzer 3's at least once, so they're all the same faction"

And gave them all bad ratings because they heard in the news that an SS soldier got killed once by the french resistance, so therefore they all should be hit on 3+

Because I'm sure the 3+ to hit after Red Thunder is because of some shit to do with Afghanistan
>>
>>62925932
The Poles weren't assclowns but their characterisation as an aggressive force seems wrong. The Poles did not adopt Soviet tactics wholesale and still valued "low level initiative". For example their tanks maneuvered by company and not battalion as the Soviets did.

The Czechs on the other hand were firmly under the Soviets thumb after the Prague Spring so rating them better than Soviet units is an artificial buff.

BF also over rate NATO conscript armies that had shorter service terms than Soviet conscripts.
>>
>>62925988
>We'd also of gotten Czech Infantry blisters at the least

Polish infantry didn't look like Soviet infantry either. And yeah the level of support for Poles/Czech is fucking insulting. BF can say "wArPAc MOsTly uSeD thE SaME gEAr" all they want but that doesn't change the fact that they mostly didn't use the same infantry gear.
>>
>>62925988
>>Were they killed or artificially buffed?
>Well if they were given the proper faction treatment, we'd of gotten more than 3 kits

Yeah, I can't argue with that, where's our fucking Mi-8. If it's "too big" why did you even go 1/100 on the helis anyway BF? Only one and two half-releases since launch and how many full red carpet NATO releases were there? Four? Plus multiple minors with resin support.

And they've now really locked themselves in down this path, short of a full rework for all 4 factions there's nothing that can be done beside bandaid (real) VDV and Sea Landing lists with better ratings.
>>
>>62926043
Oh forgot the fucking meme of Australians being rated better than the BAOR. Yeah the guys who'd been training for forty years to fight the Soviets weren't as skilled as some colonials who weren't within thousands of kilometers of a modern opponent.

And I'm an Australian.
>>
>>62926363
the three people I've spoken to in our group here in aus have basically all said "there's no reason for ANZAC to be there, I'd still play em though"

>>62926087
I didn't wanna say polish as I just simply am not familiar with them, still, I know the VZ.58 still looks like an AKM at this scale, at least the VZ.59 should've been a new sculpt

>>62926108
I'm still stuck on if I ever delve into the hotpot that is TY, I'm gunna be grabbing some Mi-8's from QRF and just hard proxying the Mi-24, because fuck you BF
>>
>>62926547
The Poles used a similar pattern helmet to the Soviets but had a web covering which changes the profile. They also used a different cut of uniform and web gear. And apart from using AK-47s another big difference is they used the PK LMG instead of the RPK as a squad LMG.
>>
>>62926667
The AKM grenade launcher they have is an indigenous design and not the Soviet GP-25.
>>
>>62918026
The Poles are a terrible, ahistorical list made by Cold War Warriors, Wehraboos and Ameriboos? What a surprise.
>>
What infantry would be best used for representing the Poles? Soviet infantry seem to be fairly far off. Are the Arab infantry from the Arab-Israeli wars any better? Or does anyone sell 1/100 Cold War Poles?
>>
>>62927983
https://www.magistermilitum.com/catalog/product/view/id/14399/s/cw-1501-polish-infantry-with-aks-x6/category/62435/
>>
>>62927971
If only the Wehraboos were around to help out East Germany...
>>
>>62928019
All the bias went to the BRD, I hope you enjoy your conscript army of martial gods.

Cheers.
>>
>>62928036
Standardised equipment and training, they're just poles who aren't as brave

Cheers
>>
>>62928018
Thank you.

>>62928019
We can only wish. Unfortunately as anon noted, the BRD were in fact an army of superhuman aryan warriors. The East Germans are just slavic rapebabies or something piloting tin cans.
>>
>>62927983
Oddzial Osmy has a Polish cold war infantry range. Available from Picoarmor and MM.
>>
>>62927983
I saw some on Picoarmours website

dunno who actually makes them though, either way, it's something better than "fuck you, use soviets, because they're just subhumans with AK's"

https://www.picoarmor.com/product-category/cold-war-15mm/
>>
>>62928056
They look pretty good.
>>
At least Battlefront didn't make it that the Poles defected the moment they lost a morale check or something.
>>
>>62928056
here

>>62928054
Ah, so that's who makes 'em

I remember looking for hind commander stuff a while back and seeing that name
>>
>>62928087
I dunno, that would at least "Wacky"

and could have some chucklesome games behind it

currently they're just trying to emulate command cards and pretend to give us extra factions

the new East German decal sheets look great though
>>
mfw we'll never get

> Polish Militia
> Felix Dzerzhinsky Guards Regiment
> Polish Paratroopers
> NVA Paratroopers
> Combat Groups of the Working Class

Battlegroup Northag can't come soon enough.
>>
Does anyone have a copy of a blank unit card? Thinking I may just take the existing scans and edit them with proper stats and points costings. I mean all 4 warpac nations are copypasta anyway so I don't see why it would be to hard. Not looking to add any new units just yet, just make the current offering more than a hangover from earleir attempts at FOAN
>>
File: card_wp_blank.png (45 KB, 1365x898)
45 KB
45 KB PNG
>>62928563
>>
File: T72 mod card.png (100 KB, 1365x898)
100 KB
100 KB PNG
>>62928760

thanks. Heres my basic idea so far at least starting with the basic soviets (not withstanding they didn't really use T72's that much). Trying to keep within the spirit of the games design. On the cross value the T55 would get a buff while the T72 gets a drop.
Redoing stripes could be fun too
>>
>>62928114
>militia
Waste of points
>>
>>62928114
Remember when the Panzertruppen booklet came out and we were all "oh cool, the NVA recon lists will be pretty cool too"?
>>
File: IMG_20181109_201915_032.jpg (1.89 MB, 2677x2618)
1.89 MB
1.89 MB JPG
Added fancy UAZ observer to Hails.
>>
>>62928114
Don't worry . Even though they release it digitally , just like every other battlegroup release, finding scans will be hell on earth
>>
>>62931233
I unironically plan to buy the book when they release it.
>>
>>62931233
>not realizing that all of /tg/ is just gamers asking for scans

Every single thread for every single game.
>>
>>62931682
There's been about 4 totals posts asking for scans in the last 3 fow generals but ok. Some people prefer buying the physical copy and having a digital for tablet to play with. IE why fow has a trove to begin with.

>>62931344
They have a lot of the book available to view on their forum because its being playtested. Blows TY away but that's just a humble opinion of someone who recognizes TY is so far down the arcade path, laughably ahistorical and not coming back, so I'd enjoy the variety
>>
>>62931743
I’m not just talking about FoW and TY.

Just look at the massive archive for the D&D threads for the most obvious example.

/tg/ loves piracy.
>>
>>62932153
I blame (((Wizards))) and (((Games Workshop))) for the piracy on /tg/
>>
>>62932567
I have all the available V1-V3 FOW scans and the BG scans....I also buy all the books to support the games, when finances permit. Except for FOW V4 where I can't be bothered as they're really about list and compare poorly with the golden age of FOW compilations.
>>
I have a friend who brought Desert fox with card pack only to be invalidated by Armoured Fist release with updated cards in the same year

Fuck this shit
>>
How do team yankee players feel about "counts as" for factions not in the game? Say I wanted to run a Finnish mechanized division, if I ran it using soviet rules would people get salty?
>>
You have companies like Tomahawk where the guy goes on the record as saying he refused to make creating the rules a fulltime job because that would force him to do bad things to make money. The same attitude as 2fatlardies.

Then you have companies like GW or battlefront that actively try to nickel and dime every little thing to the most ridiculous degree. AKA those fucking dice or token packs thats are $15 for something like 6 tokes or just colored dice.
>Charging $60 for two small poor quality resin aircraft
>No shit people pirate certain companies
>>
>>62933789
Battlefront is okay woth you using other minis at least. Ive heard horror stories of GW removing people from casual games over bootleg minis or using models with non GW parts.
>>
>>62931743
It is very possible that in the future i play FoW and TY for social games and i play FFOT and BGN for my grit. although, i can't imagine the scale on Battlegroup Northag being very big: small actions with Battlegroup, large conflicts w' FFOT?

also i am gonna sit back and laugh until someone else scans the TY Czechs. i might eventually do it, but still, timeliness is a good thing.
i spent my money on storage foam anyway.
>>
>>62933948
at the very least the Team Yankee FB group admins are against 6mm.
>>
>>62936260
I think the hole point is that if its scale appropriate and accurate then it doesn't matter what brand models you use. They know most people will just blindly buy their models anyways since their models are right next to the books.
>>
File: DSC_0010.jpg (6.03 MB, 5984x3376)
6.03 MB
6.03 MB JPG
Remember this? Remember those hopeful months when we all talked about how fun Warpac could be? All that research we did and all those interesting formations we found?

Itt, how did BF crush your dreams for the future?
>>
>>62936832
>try and fit that in a proper list
>how much would you have to add
>>
>>62936832
The fact that people play Warpac is honestly mindblowing after how badly you guys get treated. I really have a lot of respect for you guys.

>>62936826
A lot of that is because desu lots of the people playing don't really know what exactly they're looking at and can't tell a PSC L1 or Honey for instance from the BF versions from a few feet away. Not that that's a bad thing, but it's hard to enforce 'our dudes' when you're supposedly making (but they still fail) historically accurate models.

Personally if 6mm wasn't a huge pain in the ass to acquire outside of the UK or USA I'd be all over it and wouldn't have given a cent to BF for TY. If 6mm was more easily accessible in general BF would be fucked.
>>
File: CPA air assult with Mi-8.jpg (524 KB, 1280x1598)
524 KB
524 KB JPG
>>62936874
>>62937073

It just sits on my shelf and looks pretty. I think the total force only comes to like, 35 pts roughly and I just can't be bothered finishing it.

The Warpac release was such a slap in the face. I mean I can't even say BF did the minimum possible. No dice set or tokens, no starter box set (Seriously, how hard would it have been to repackage the Syrian set from FoaN??) and two shitty little pamphlets instead of a book. That doesn't even cover the missing units or historical inaccuracies. I can't even be bothered reeeeing about that much, really killed my enthusiasm desu.
>>
File: ColdWar RedSquare.jpg (103 KB, 882x498)
103 KB
103 KB JPG
>>62936874
please learn to spellcheck, thank you.

>>62937073
>people play Warpac

you want to hear a mind-numbing "how the fuck is this possible" secret?
The Warpac NVA and Russians are some of the strongest factions out there.
>yep.
i'm not shitting you. Average 22 AT / Brutal gun for 4-6 points. Infantry blobs with light AT backed up by APC's that are effectively light tanks with a Guided 105mm for 1 point extra. Average remount is a 3+, same goes morale. oh, numbers is morale for tanks, and we bring 5 to your 3. has the numbers to beat the small numbers of big NATO tanks, and is too thick to be warded off easily by lighter NATO gear.
it gets worse when you think outside th enumbers. most online generals just use numbers.
what to table generals see?
Nato? look at the cross country dash speed. now measure that from the front of the enemy deployment zone to the front of your deployment zone. realize you have 8 dice to his 10 but he has 5 bodies with 50/50 armor to soak at 5+ to be hit while you have 8 and each hit you fail is goign to cost you 1 die and not 2. they all have LRF so range is no biggie if one unit sat still. no armor 18, but your average enemy tank is 16 armor too. and AT 22 does not care about armor 18. That point when you realize assault is for suckers and you just pour on dice in shooting. enemy cross value 2+ and terrain is their strongest weapon, but do they use it? you will loose 1/2 your forces to those Abrams, but you will also be on the objective with 1 of your units pointed at his -useless- 10 side armor.

Warpac is good in a dedicated players hands, deadly in the hands of a master.
the whining comes from newbs.

only thing that beats Warpac consistently is Milan Spam and whatever the fuck they call the USA thing with army M60's and all that recon/spare AT...there might be something else but i missed it.
>>
File: 1513001429780.png (136 KB, 626x258)
136 KB
136 KB PNG
>>62938904
>Dude tank spam lmao
>Hard to master
>>
>>62938947
you misquoted, i said deadly in the master's hands. not hard to master.

Raw Tank Spam is actually where the fail is at: you need accompaning BMP's and Recon units, minimum. this is why MSU grated me nerves, they only play the numbers game.
let me be precise. in a 60 pt game, you should only spend up to 50pts on tanks, if not 40. the rest should be recon, 2 shilkas, and the infantry.
BMP's do well to have 6-8 T72's kicking around somewhere in reverse.

i get defeated when warpac gets first recon and then parks 12 T-72's 18 inches from the objective on turn 1

yes, Warpac brings more tanks. spamming them is a different thing, bucko. learn to do combined arms...works for player of everything.
>>
>>62938904
People whine because playing literal asiatic hordes with little to no variance or interesting units and having to literally flood the board with models isn't very appealing.
>>
>>62939060
true.
hence my lame and poorly advised desire to play as snowflake a Polish unit as possible.

i didn't say it wasn't bland. hell, 20 T-72's are not my idea of a swell time at the paint desk.
they do have strength. autismal strength, but it is strength still.
>>
File: french tier 1 shit.png (345 KB, 935x704)
345 KB
345 KB PNG
>>
>>62933721
Almost no one cares when the game is already so a-historical. People would only get salty about something like using British rules to represent Soviet elite units.
>>
Y'all like v4 more than v3?
>>
>>62941866

dats_bait.png
>>
>>62941866
v1, motherfucker!
>>
>>62941943
U mean TY v1, right?
>>
>>62941866
Yes, fuck the grogs and the haters.
>>
>>62941866
No, it breaks more than it fixes.
>>
>>62943290
This is untrue
>>
>>62939060
this

no one hates what BF are doing with TY's pact forces because they're -bad-

they just hate that it's all basically racist and historically -and- theoretically inaccurate

and in reality, with TY, NATO has gotten 8 lists where as the Pact have only gotten fucking 1 with command cards turning it into 4 different factions

fucking Australia and France have more kits than the -entire- Warsaw Pact, fuck that shit right off

and don't give the "muh standardised equipment" when most of the equipment that -was- standard is fucking missing
>>
>>62943415
And yet you faggots still play it
>>
>>62943438
Death to the fascists!

Этo ecть нaш пocлeдний
И peшитeльный бoй;
C Интepнaциoнaлoм
Bocпpянeт poд людcкoй!
>>
>>62943438
I ain't playing it

I'm playing FOAN so I can crush jews like fucking ice

and lurking until T-80 is released or we get 4+ to hit T-72's because Iraq being western
>>
>>62905970
Resin fucking panthers. They're going to lose out on basically everything except maybe the german SPGs here, everyone else does these kits in plastic and way cheaper.
>>
>>62938904
>only thing that beats Warpac consistently is Milan Spam
It's a pity NATO is fucking full of spammable Milans, or is the US and can play silly buggers with humvees then.
>>
Can anyone else get the great war link to work? It just takes me to the buildings page.
>>
>>62944227
To sum it up you can get your GP book in December and then wait until February for a box of 2 repacked old mold, slimy, acid bath quality, resin Panthers that just based on the sideskirt being too short aren't very high on the 'gave a shit' meter.

Or. You can buy your GP book and have already ordered and received your PSC box of Panthers that cost about the same or slightly lower depending on your area. It comes with 5 more historically accurate and scaled plastic Panthers with A, D, and G variants in case you're more serious about dioramas or theme or something.
>>
>>62945890
>slimy
Man, I thought it was just bad batch or something. All my AIW figures have come feeling kind of "sticky", is that a known problem.
>>
>>62943332
It is very true, especially for LW.

It fixed:
>Hit allocation
>Artillery ranging in
>At the Double

It broke:
>counters to infantry besides artillery
>Artillery stats and repeat bombardments
>Assault
>Morale
>Command
>Fortified lists
>Air vs AA
>points balance of units (LW)
>>
>>62946030
It's really bad. I've tried soaking them in all kinds of different things before trying to brush it off and it hardly works. It's like chunky too and affects the smoothness. Just bad bad resin that they make. And they make it in 3rd world factories so why do they think they can overcharge so much for it
>>
>>62946065
It took me getting other people's resin figures before I realised that BF is... not what resin is meant to look like.
>>
>>62943485
>the liberal Atlanticist order
>fascists
Lay down the vodka Pavel
>>62943764
Ayyy, that's muh boi
>>
>>62943764
>we get 4+ to hit T-72's because Iraq being western

this makes me fight for Saddam.

>>62944300
it's actually a Brit thing: i did the math several threads ago on it, most other factions don't get Milans the way Brit Airborne do. Aussies are limited to 8 per infantry company, and you also pay for M113's for each one. fuck, The Bundeswehr get them as integrated units, so you can call that spam if you are a brainlet, and you don't realize the 7 pts only gets 3 milan teams with only 1 type of unit rest of points are for APC's and infantry.

>>62946053
seconded, but you forgot coherency radius

>>62946250
they have always used a wierd semi-ceramic resin, even the old blackstuff is like that
>>
>>62946053
>counters to infantry besides artillery
Lol the L6/40 killed off infantry in my local meta not artillery
>Artillery stats and repeat bombardments
Artillery and repeat bombardments are in fact fine. If my minimum sized BTR company can just chill under Jew heavy mortars for 5 turns there is no reason yours can't too.
>Morale
Is fine
>Assault
Also fine, tanks can run over infantry just fine and infantry struggle to assault massed machine guns so everything is fine here.
>Command
Still fine unless your a strelk blob but those are bad anyway
>Fortified lists
Sucked before anyway so nothing changed
>Air vs AA
I will give you this one buy aircraft suck so who cares?
>points balance of units (LW)
Found your problem. Play real V4 and come back.
>>
>>62946740
The balance for milan spam is having to spend $200 on helis ahah. I hope that with oil wars the Brits will get some more interesting units and that Challengers will be fun enough to remove some of the milans. WAACs gonna WAAC but the chieftain being lame is a symptom.
>>
>>62946839
>Also fine, tanks can run over infantry just fine and infantry struggle to assault massed machine guns so everything is fine here.
The issue is when you do get in, most of the time you kill 2-3 stands and that's it. Yeah, the massive sweeping assaults that destroyed multiple units weren't good, but you shouldn't be able to take a (successful) assault on the chin then just vapourise the unit that attacked you the next turn because now you're unpinned MG teams and he's not in foxholes.
>>
>>62946740
>it's actually a Brit thing: i did the math several threads ago on it, most other factions don't get Milans the way Brit Airborne do. Aussies are limited to 8 per infantry company, and you also pay for M113's for each one. fuck, The Bundeswehr get them as integrated units, so you can call that spam if you are a brainlet, and you don't realize the 7 pts only gets 3 milan teams with only 1 type of unit rest of points are for APC's and infantry.
Wessies bring M113s now, and those can spam milan just fine to wipe out soviet tank parks. French are just as bad as the brits for ATGMs and the US have their local variant. Nobody plays aussies.
>>
File: MS painted.jpg (91 KB, 943x231)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
>>62946960
>>62947092
so, just to be a man, i made a permanent excel sheet i can update, math and all.
the sheet contains any spent value on milans,, and any added tax items you have to buy that do not contain milans. for example, you get 3 Lynx with those Gordons, but you also get Milans, so the PV is weighted toward: "you get milans"

the end result is placed in a decimal percentage rating of how efficiently you can pack in the milans
(this chart can be updated.)
>>
>>62947505
wait,
updated to show that WG can take an extra infantry and it counts as extra milans...
still pretty damning.
>>
File: MS two.jpg (84 KB, 1016x196)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
>>62947540
fuck, i need a pic.
>>
i just thought of it:
T72M is essentially a Milan on tracks that has 16 armor for about 4 pts. a piece.
how nasty is that in comparison?
>>
>>62948423
it also has brutal and Fp2+, and can move n' fire.
i'd say in a lot of ways it's worse....
>>
>>62947077
A successful assualt pushes them outta their holes and pins so idk what you're on about.

Knowing this why would you conduct assults which would be so unfavourable? When I assualt with me Americans I make sure I can do it with 2 units minimum so either all the defenders die or they're out of position and seriously depleted.
>>
>>62949541
>A successful assualt pushes them outta their holes and pins so idk what you're on about.
Then at the start of their turn they unpin and are stationary infantry, so the squad that just assaulted takes the remainder of the platoon's MG dice directly to the face, because they're not dug in.

And indeed, why would you assault? Assault's just a pointless endeavour, especially with artillery being so good at clearing things out now.
>>
>>62949593
In my last game I was facing a pgrens list, I assualted one flank of a platoon with my stuarts, killed 3. My rifles assualted the other flank, killed another 2. He didny unpin and killed one of my 12 bases from my rifles then I mopped em up. Wasn't a big deal.
>>
>>62949593
TY Arty isn't V4 arty. You don't get the rerolls on ranged in.
Nam and FOAN nation do but they are sperate rulesets atm
Good thing breakthrough guns ignore saves still
>>
>>62950838
>TY Arty isn't V4 arty.
Assault's still useless, especially since everyone meant to assault can do an AK-47 horseshoe and dig them out with the effective firepower of a horde of .50 cal.
>>
>>62951070
This. in TY assault is often a bad idea, except against pinned dug in infantry
>>
>>62951868
Even then, AK-47 horseshoes are better. 4-5 rolls of 5+ tohit in assault is very bad when everyone else has 4+ back at you and you got shot with no cover coming in. The AK-47 horsehoe, meanwhile, gives you about 20-30 dice with FP 5+, which should give you a kill or two, with the added perk that from the second turn on you can potentially be dug in as well.
>>
File: GWSaleLowRes.jpg (62 KB, 690x301)
62 KB
62 KB JPG
Looks like Great War is back...with a sale starting tomorrow, apparently.

While I'm glad to see it back and hope to get some things I'm missing, BF do seem to be having an awful lot of "sales" for anything non-WWII or TY-related. It worries me.
>>
>>62952933
It's pump 'n dump. They're making shit during the sale period and then when that's over they're done with the line.
>>
>>62952933
>BF do seem to be having an awful lot of "sales" for anything non-WWII or TY-related

Because they’re BF’s equivalent of GW’s Specialist Games.

Vietnam, Arab-Israeli, and Great War are to FoW and TY what Inquisitor, Battlefleet Gothic, and Space Hulk are to 40K and AoS.

Sure, those games have fans, but they have nowhere near as large of a player base as the core games.
>>
Does somebody have the painting guide portion of the polish booklet by chance?

I wonder where the fuck BF got the "big white marker crosses" idea from, as I can't seem to find any historical notion of it anywhere :(
>>
>>62953640
This. Theyve already offloaded the books to Osprey. They just hope people pay the still inflated 'sale' prices so they can empty out their warehouses of products that flat out dont sell.
>>
>>62948423
>>62949071
i just thought of it:
T72M is essentially a Milan on tracks that dies in a single hit with fuck all save against 90% of things and costs more than 1.4 points according to anons spreadshit

it also has the ability to be done without spending $400 on tanks that aren't even the correct models

i'd say in a lot of ways it's worse....


But fucking seriously, spam is bad, HATO at least get's the fucking choice

Pact still doesn't have a list that's in the correct time period for team yankee, they're stuck with a fucking FoaN list with reduced points costs
>>
>>62952222
now i see what you mean!

>>62952933
guess what? the link is broken!
i got sent to houses.
>>
>>62956525
the fact that BMP's still cost more for us in kangaroo land to get from BF than just buying them from somewhere else, even when they're fucking on 25% off

Then again, I'm starting an arab force for FoaN, so half the shit is basically special order anyway
>>
File: chuckles sovietly.jpg (62 KB, 720x718)
62 KB
62 KB JPG
>>62943485
>Death to the fascists!
Dimitri, this into 40 years late
this is war against the capitalists not the great patroitic war
also i reported you for singing songs subversive to the state.
B пoбeдe бeccмepтных идeй кoммyнизмa
Mы видим гpядyщee нaшeй cтpaны,
И Кpacнoмy знaмeни cлaвнoй Oтчизны
Mы бyдeм вceгдa бeззaвeтнo вepны!
>>
>>62946740
with the mixed forces ability you can shove a Scottish air company into anything
24 points of airlanding millan spamm no?
>>
>>62946839
>Lol the L6/40 killed off infantry in my local meta not artillery
he's talking about breakthrough guns.
but i think he has a point. you either throw a fuck tonne of dice or you drop a template.
>I will give you this one buy aircraft suck so who cares?
i heard the russian air units were annoying as fuck.
>>
>>62948423
>has 16 armor for about 4 pts. a piece.
couple issues with that.
it's a Milan, on tracks that takes up way more space and doesn't have an infantry save and either chaff bodies or is in a unit.
though according to that spread sheet
you get 5.milans for the British 12 and the chaff and their transports
even panzertruppen has a better cost/milans
>>
>>62957760
i think you can also run 3 air companies in one force also.
question: do you hate your other players?
>>
>>62958250
i play warpack is my answer to that
>>
>>62958349
is the Warpack like something from LOTR or something?

sounds cool
>>
File: red army.jpg (127 KB, 800x685)
127 KB
127 KB JPG
>>62958381
Cheers Phil.
>>
File: uruk noises.jpg (37 KB, 700x700)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>62958381
nope
i meant warpact but it's late cut me some slack
>>62958479
uruks are actually pretty elite
>>
>>62958479
>>62959122
It's funny because they're considered the same by the game designers

Actually that's a lie

Uruk get elite units in LotR
>>
Just getting into FoW, have the Churchill's Kingforce box coming tomorrow and was wondering what I should consider as my first add to that, since being nothing but tanks and UCs seems like maybe suboptimal fun.

Infantry would make the most sense I guess right?
>>
File: Capture.png (100 KB, 390x210)
100 KB
100 KB PNG
>>62956432
It's based on the invasion markings used by the Soviets when they crushed the Prague uprising.
>>
>>62956962
>guess what? the link is broken!
>i got sent to houses.
Yeah, same.

Won't PLEASE think of the fallen?
>>
File: images (3).jpg (7 KB, 267x189)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
>>62947077
>WWI tactics produce WWI results
>>62949593
>laughs in L6/40
>>62949541
He is on about how he dumb and not using optimal units for a task the complains about suboptimal results. He is probably some grog who is mad that you have to play assaults different from what he is used to.
>>
>>62960438
Let me get this clear; your actual position is "you should only ever assault with tanks"? What role do you envisage infantry having in this game?
>>
>>62960204
Have seen similar markings used in some footage from other exercises as well
>>
>>62960471
Not that dude but any assault should be supported and covered, what even is this discussion?
>>
>>62960563
Nobody is saying you should just head-charge machineguns. The point of contention is whether infantry get too few stands in, and, due to how contact works now, can only kill a few stands before the assault is over. The answer appears to be "Infantry assaults work fine, because you can do it with tanks instead".
>>
>>>>62960578
One time during the Morgansfest Tournament we did last year, my German infantry failed to get at the Dutch Bunker because of the support infantry behind it. So the second platoon went in, headfirst, into the bunker so that the infantry couldn't shoot through the bunker.

It totally worked.
>>
File: Capture.png (749 KB, 712x475)
749 KB
749 KB PNG
>>62960517
I've seen Russian and Ukrainian units using various stripe ID markings as well.

(Couldn't find a picture I've seen of 1980s versions)
>>
File: Capture.png (1.43 MB, 898x619)
1.43 MB
1.43 MB PNG
>>62960517
>>62960594
>>
>>62960517
>>62956432
>>62960594


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRpNd6ScQXw

4:43 onwards
>>
>>62960471
Infantry are good at many things, assaulting large units is not one of them.
>>62960578
No the point of contention is if the assault rules function properly, they do. You are whining that your squishy sacks of meat are getting shot up in a game where machine guns are everywhere. If you can't make contact with large parts of an enemy unit to hack them up that is your problem for not making use of normal movement, follow me, and assault movement to contact properly. The are all you problems and not problems with V4.
>>
>>62960639
Ah, nice. Interesting that the stripes don't seem to go down the engine deck.
>>
>>62960686
>Infantry are good at many things, assaulting large units is not one of them.
>No the point of contention is if the assault rules function properly, they do.

Lol.
>>
>>62960705
>>62946053
>[V4] broke assaults
This is the original claim which is obviously false. The rules function well enough. You just moved the goalposts afterwards because whatever infantry you ran before can't run strait into a bunch of MG teams and not take a bunch of casualties. Again some units are better at assaulting in some situations over others and if the thing you need to assault has lots of MG dice you need to use something cheap with an armor value
This should not be hard but I am being patient with you because in your advanced age your mental faculties have diminished.
>>
>>62960799
Infantry IRL has two jobs. Dig in and hold ground. And assault and displace dug in infantry. Light armour IRL can not dig out infantry. Therefore the assault rules do not function properly.
>>
>>62960865
>the goalpost is now do the rules accurately represent reality not do they function well.
Lol ok gramps.
>>
>>62960686
>Infantry are good at many things, assaulting large units is not one of them.
That's literally one of the jobs of infantry. The assault step basically doesn't exist if there's no infantry on the board for fuck's sake.
>>
>>62960891
I'm not the anon you were originally arguing with moron. And yes rules for a wargame should actually reflect roughly what happens in reality and not produce completely ahistorical tactics like light armour digging out infantry or infantry firefights being better at digging out infantry than assaults.

And I know me bringing that up has completely destroyed your argument as you were previously relying on arguments based on your version of reality ("mah WW1 tactics"). Now respect your elders you ignorant zoomer fuck.
>>
>>62960925
>>62960929
>Assaulting a dug in enemy without lots of support and a 3-1 advantage results in getting BTFO by MG teams that just sensibly fall back and light you up in the open
Muh realisms!
>>
>>62960973
You don't fall back when being shot at even at 1:1 odds you moron. Not even from a hasty shell scraping let alone proper defensive positions.
>>
>>62960973
>driving light tanks into a swamp while the enemy has lined all their pak40s up means you get dunked on
por que?
>>
>>62960990
>being shot at from range is the same as being assaulted
lol ok
>>
>>62960973
>a 3-1 advantage
This is the problem. This is literally meaningless in v4/TY because you can only get a few stands in contact, now, because everyone who should be following up just sits around like a gormless idiot. Even if you do use movement orders to get people close enough for the 4" contact, you're relying on them to have spread their infantry put in a wide line so you can contact it, because if they only have 2-3 bases out front line any sensible person, your contacts are capped to 4-6 stands. You'll wipe the guys at the front, sure (unless you're potato soviets from TY in which case you've got about a coin flip to do anything), but then they might just fall back and light you up (if they're defending in front of the objective, which is sensible in V4), or they might counterattack and kill those four stands (which is the usual case in TY given everyone's vastly better assault ratings), at which point either way the assault is over and you've been shot at going in and are going to get shot more for maybe two dead stands.

Yeah, you can use assault to mop up the last two teams who keep passing last stand or to grab a bailed tank, but it's so vestigal now. I'm curious how the new Soviet rifles play because their game seems to be 100% about assault, and previous experience suggests you just can't do it anymore.
>>
>>62961061
I didn't say anything about range moron. And in reality accurate fire is accurate fire and suppresses infantry.
>>
>>62961061
Oh and ranged firefights are literally more effective at digging out infantry in current rules then assaults. That is so fucking ass backwards that I doubt a moron like you has even seen Saving Private Ryan to be defending such absolute bullshit.
>>
>>62961083
>now we are not even talking about assaults anymore
>>62961064
>not enveloping a unit like that on at least one side before going in
seriously you scrubs deserve what is happening to you at this point.
>>62961097
>FP 6 good at clearing out infantry
Have fun trying to dig out infantry with that
>>
>>62961160
>Have fun trying to dig out infantry with that

Yet still more effective than assault in most cases.

Anyway have fun jerking off to your Ork speed freakz army as you play Flames of Warhammer.
>>
>>62961160
>not enveloping a unit
Most players are infamously fine with this happening and take no steps to prevent it. If you have board control like this you've won anyway.

>Have fun trying to dig out infantry with that
TY you moron.
>>
>>62961189
>not eliminating the enemies mobile elements before you commit to an assault
Lord have mercy the players posting tonight are really bad
>TY
We are talking about V4, now shoo! Off to your meme game without gun teams and full of spam.
>>62961177
Lol BTFO
>>
>>62961269
>Lord have mercy the players posting tonight are really bad
So basically you just need to destroy about half your opponent's army completely unopposed before assault works? Yeah, sounds about right, assaults are definitely fine and balanced. You've convinced me with your big special brain.
>>
>>62959727
I bought that box and regret it. The churchills are too expensive a formation. You ideally want to create another entire formation and bring the churchills as support. What I did which might work for you using mix of bf and psc:
Rifle or motor platoon formation. Rifle and motor platoon box. Gives 9 stands. The kingforce carriers. 4 6pdrs. 2 3in mortar and 4 vikckers. This gives you a nice thick infantry formation.

Youll have 22 or 33 points tied up in your churchills so pick your preferred lower end tanks to fil it out. 2 honey boxes fill a formation. Or do crusaders for an arty option. if you like grants they are used to fill out many formations so 1 box goes a long way. Shermans are an option since they come in your box as well but using them and churchills at the same time ties up like 60+ points in 8 vehicles. It's risky but viable. Just be sure to pick up a daimler or humber team and your'e set

Also
>ITT
>people furiously circlejerking their assault positions and ignoring questions
>>
>>62961291
>>people furiously circlejerking their assault positions and ignoring questions
It's because FoW is a dead game nobody actually plays. Everyone can argue their headcanon about assault but would have to actually play to answer build/rules questions.
>>
>>62961284
>I get wrecked because I don't know how to build lists that have the right tools or use them correctly even if I did
Obviously assaulting strait in on turn 3 is the answer! Never mind trying to thin the enemy out beforehand or leveraging the mobile elements of my army to achieve local superiority and and focus my firepower.
>>
V4 is killing the game and TY is the cancer. Enjoy the late war with 4 lists per nation and a card pack.
>>
>>62961322
Yeah been in the hobby long enough to know the bitching and whining and bickering is always loudest from people that aren't playing.
Also learned that if you're throwing insults at people into your argument then no one gives a shit what you have to say because you're clearly not mature enough to handle disagreements. This thread is clogged with useless opinions from people more interested in being right than changing someone's mind.
>>
>>62961350
The Germans alone have 14 different company options sorry they did not reprint almost the same company 4 times in one book for you.
>>
>>62961340
>I'm a retard who can't read argument premises, rendering my contributions pointless, like my life
>>
File: su76.png (235 KB, 770x406)
235 KB
235 KB PNG
>>
File: su85.png (241 KB, 777x386)
241 KB
241 KB PNG
>>
File: T34Hero.png (140 KB, 551x298)
140 KB
140 KB PNG
>>
"The second rule is for the Borgward demolition carrier and allows a control tank to take charge of these small monsters packed with explosives and charge them at the enemy. Get them past the defensive fire (or even dont as on a 1-2 they blow up when they die) and their artillery template which is auto ranged in will do huge damage with AT4, auto FP and brutal. Oh and it takes out minefields touched by the template automatically as well. I can see these being a ton of fun!"
>>
"A hero tank company is really a platoon, being limited to just three tanks. These three tanks gain better skill (“trained”) and hit value (“Aggresive”), increasing their survivability.

The increase in points isn’t huge, all three tank types work out about the cost of four normal tanks for three Hero ones."
>>
File: Panther.png (188 KB, 559x300)
188 KB
188 KB PNG
>>
File: mixed-panzer.jpg (102 KB, 778x513)
102 KB
102 KB JPG
>tiger
>>
File: ferd.jpg (115 KB, 829x363)
115 KB
115 KB JPG
>>
>>62961407
>14 different company options
Not in my v4 forces of late war...
>>
>>62961674
Play real V4
>>
>>62961612
40 inch range panthers...
>>
>>62961642
>am going to likely be the only german player in club not taking this abomination
>moral high ground

>Luftwaffe Master Race
>>
File: Vorenus and Pullo.jpg (38 KB, 600x399)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
>>62961612
>Tank notorious for fragile transmission
>Cross 2+
>>
>>62961642
where were you when a long 88 had better range than 120mm fin?
>>
File: 1519661788387.jpg (147 KB, 1095x730)
147 KB
147 KB JPG
>>62961726
The Hornisse will be significantly cheaper and the proper go to option.
>>62961638
>Italy can now has Tiger and/or panthers
Lol, why even play Germans?
>>
>>62961771
You can't bring Tigers, they're not mandatory.

You can have Panthers tho.
>>
>>62961642
>"aggressive" points break
So they're just going to give it a weakness that won't matter because it can sit at the back of the table and bounce shots all day erry day huh.
>>
>>62961783
http://www.breakthroughassault.co.uk/ghosts-of-big-cats/
Read the article my friend. Tigers have their own company.
>>
File: colbert.png (325 KB, 624x352)
325 KB
325 KB PNG
>>62961568
>>62961575
>Not having a turret massively increases your chance to become bogged.
>>
>>62961808
Well they cost 20 points and yoou have to buy 2 of them.
>>
>>62961815
This appears to be actually part of their logic.
>>
>>62961638
>Mixed panzer platoons are now a thing again
>They weren't in the other v4 MW books because of reasons

They only enforced separate panzer companies in the older v4 MW books so that there were two more unique "lists" in those anaemic books instead of there being just the one.
>>
>>62961809
lol jesus christ they're actually doing it the absolute madmen. Tigers are what, 25 points?
>>
>>62961815
>poorer vision
>heavier gun
>>
File: 1520238949695.jpg (160 KB, 1251x786)
160 KB
160 KB JPG
>>62961833
29 my good sir. to expensive to run in a German list but perhaps viable with cheap pasta
>>
>>62961821
I don't think you and I read the same image friendo, because it looks like 1 for 17pts with a 1 tank platoon option to me
>>
>>62961642
So schurtzen and +1 FA for the Ns seems to be free
>>
>>62961835
The later T-34s and SU-85s are almost identical in weight (it's going to come down to ammo load and baggage). The SU-85 also doesn't have a massive fucking forward sitting turret so the increase in forward weight due to the gun is negligible. The driver vision is identical and if anything the tank commander/loader being lower down means it is easier for them to observe for obstacles the driver can't see without being exposed to fire.

This is very obviously another dumb ass ahistorical rating given to differentiate units which fill near identical battlefield roles within the bounds of FoW rules.
>>
>>62961850
Lol I mistook the thumbnail for a panther. See this comment>>62961771 for my opinion on that abomination.
>>
So as we enter the end times, spaghetti with heavy kraut toys to ironically be the definitive v4 MW master race.

What a time to be alive.
>>
File: 1520028548449.jpg (66 KB, 398x513)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
>>62961868
Correct me if I am wrong but I do not see a cupola and the gun being lower and significantly heavier makes sense to me.
>>62961899
Indeed my friend, we will lack for almost nothing.
>>
>>62961899
That's how you know the CPU allocation for our simulation was reduced a few years back.
>>
>>62961642
Why do I get the feeling 16 front armor wont lead to fun gameplay. There's creating a distinction between tiers or what can hurt what and then there's feeling like you're playing OGRE

>>62961808
Pray to god the table has a good terrain setup or 50 inches of hell.
>>
>>62961903
Firstly the T-34 cupola is a piece of shit and in particular does not help with observing close to the tank. Tanks mostly get stuck because the driver can't see things close or to the sides of the tank, which is when the TC/loader observing comes in. The SU-85 being lower means the TC/loader can stick their heads out to the side and be less exposed to fire then the taller T-34. A lower center of mass is also better for crossing rough terrain. The weight the SU-85 gains in the gun is balanced out by the loss of the weight of the turret.
>>
>>62961932
>Why do I get the feeling 16 front armor wont lead to fun gameplay.
At least it's support-only.
>>
>>62961808
SU-85 is soviets only 4+ to hit and is AT12

Probably just so there's something that can kill panthers

so I guess stupid charge and force a flank shot, it's stupid

>>62961821
If I can take a single ferdinand but not a single panther, I'm going to be tilted
>>
>>62961932
>Why do I get the feeling 16 front armor wont lead to fun gameplay?
Because it wont, I ran a tiger in MW once and it was not fun for me or my opponent because 17lbrs dont actually kill tigers very well. Now we have this thing>>62961642......
>>
>>62961977
In the SU85s defense, it will dunk on the medium tanks you are actually likely to face
>>
>>62962003
In a point against the su85

I saw in a 12 player league 4 people take units of 5 KV-1's at 60 points

noone around here is gunna be applying logic when 88s get replaced with ferdinands
>>
>>62961726
Luftwaffe dude here

How dare they sully our A-10 of the 40's HS129 with not even enough AT to kill T-34's
>>
>>62961932
Their solution to tanks being fragile and losing 25 points to a 3 point lucky shot was to make it so that your chance of getting a successful shot is tiny.

In anything but a dense urban layout where I can safely flank my midwar brits can't realistically deal with these panthers or that abomination. Anything at long range will let me only achieve bail from the side and only on 6s for half my antiarmor. Most scenarios if my opponent is smart I'll be typically on 5+ kills but they'll kill me long before I reach.
>>
>>62962023
Well RIP them if they get a mission with reserves
>>62962036
They still have the 30mm cannons in 1943 I think. The 37mm and 75mm guns came later
>>62962049
It is just a more expensive 88 to the Brits, it does not kill that much stuff because it only has 2 shots.
>>
>>62962091
yeah but those 30mm cannons were AT9 in the old Eastern Front book

then again the 37mm's on the JU87G were also AT11 and -actually able to fucking kill KV-1's at fucking all-

But I guess stupid heavy tanks that replace everything is the current BF idea
>>
>>62962091
we were playing with "more missions" and it seemed like a couple of tank company players were always picking defend just to make sure the strelk companies had to chase tanks around the board
>>
>>62962140
At least heavy tank lists are cheaper than light/medium spam.
>>
>>62962140
>heavy tanks will beat everything
Not really, heavy AT is not prohibitively expensive in the armies that get it. Also heavy tanks can't be everywhere at once.
>>
>>62962203
>heavy AT is not prohibitively expensive in the armies that get it
I was unaware that there was AT 19 units in the Soviet book

Wonder where they were during the preview

>Also heavy tanks can't be everywhere at once

they only need to be one a single objective to win, and there's usually two, they only need to be in one place
>>
>>62962203
The only heavy AT in my army moves 4 inches. In certain scenarios against a competent player I'm fucked.
>>
>>62962240
You did get an AT 13 unit which is fine against everything not a Ferdinand. if you absolutely need to kill it just surround it with units and assault it till it fails its 5+ counter attack and dies because it has nowhere to retreat to. If you are feeling lucky you can try the plane because a failed FP check is no big deal because lol 5+ remount.
>>62962246
Well my British friend you should borrow some M10s from the Americans.
>>
>>62962339
There's theorycrafting and then there's telling someone to do X scenario that will never happen unless you're playing a 13 year old who can only afford 6 tanks. What baked world do you live in where that would actually happen.

>M10s
Yeah how about hard no
>>
>>62962420
Well if you chose to limit the tools you bring to solve a problem don't come into the tread and bitch about it.
>>
>>62962520
If you play with people that allow mass infantry to reach the other side of the table in enough numbers to surround and kill tanks against the table edge please tell us where.

I know a lot of soviet players who will gladly play in a meta full of baddies who let chinesium tools work
>>
>>62962520
>horseshoe tanks
>assume M10’s don’t get shot at

Yeah, tools...
>>
>>62962641
Literally move 3 AC or light tanks behind it and form a semicircle behind it with gaps narrower than it is so when it breaks off it cant fit and is destroyed because it cant get more than 6 inches away from an assaulting team. Do you even play this game?
>>62962795
>M10s can't JSJ
Yep you don't play
>>
>>62962339
>You did get an AT 13 unit which is fine against everything not a Ferdinand.
Which is dumb because SU-152s infamously did knock out Ferdinands (and got the nickname "Beast-killers" from that).
>>
>>62962868
I am not going to disagree with you on this one.
>>
>>62962911
Yeah, it's the classic issue that BF doesn't recognise anything other than complete penetrations. They need to reintroduce a rule like the old AVRE/Sturmtiger had to allow high-calibre guns to knock out tanks by mission killing them or pulping the crew with spall or overpressure.
>>
>>62962936
You are not wrong
>>
>>62962829
You don't play you only theorycraft ridiculous scenarios that don't actually occur. But if you do play I pity people that put up with your inane WAACfaggotry.
>>
>>62963066
>moving a cheap fast unit behind another unit never happens
Your not helping yourself lad. You are just uncreative and never thought of it.
>>
>>62962339
>>62962520
>>62962829
>>62963151
>T. 40kplayer no one in the flames community actually likes because he plays the rules not the game
>>
>>62963165
>playing the game is only trading shots on front armor and frontal infantry assaults
"The game" sounds boring
>>62962868
>SU-152 is 15 points each
Oof
>SU-85 is 12 points
Double oof
>>
>>62963323
>"The game" sounds boring
The game is everything up to WAAC bullshit like building a solid wall of tank hulls around someone so they can't move, are you retarded? Nobody would ever do that.
>>
>>62963420
Ok whatever you say scrub. I don't want to see any bitching about Ferdinands in the future then.
>>
new thread, gents:

>>62963724
>>
>>62961561
Huh, the 76 has an artillery statline finally.
>>
>>62962023
>I saw in a 12 player league 4 people take units of 5 KV-1's at 60 points
Surprise, V4 is resulting in medium tanks being ignored for heavy tanks, spam light tanks, and wall of guns. It's not like anyone predicted this or anything...
>>
>>62962829
>>M10s can't JSJ
>Yep you don't play
yeah

M10's can JSJ 36 inches forward to hit the flanks of a Ferdinand

Obviously my not playing has not taught me such things

>Doesn't theorycraft on a weird torus shaped board that means 8 inches can get you behind an enemy
>Yep you don't play
>>
>>62961177
>>62961189
why are you guys replying
>>
File: hah.gif (3.42 MB, 406x202)
3.42 MB
3.42 MB GIF
>>62961758
it's within it's 150 km it SHOULD be fine
>>62961642
>cross 4+
THIS THING COULDN'T GO UP A FUCKING HILL WITHOUT BLOWING UP
WHY DOES IT HAVE SUCH GOOD CROSSING?
>>
Remember when No Dice No Idea published their review of EATG and someone (maybe me) had a rant about the cost of Hero Rifles (10 points for 9 teams) vs US infantry? And then it turned out No Dice No Glasses had just got a whole bunch of shit wrong?

I'm thinking (hoping) that might be the case here, and the SU-85 is 8 points a model (meaning 3 cost 24 points, not 2). That would make them the same as an M-10 - which seems reasonable - rather than 50% more.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.