Warhammer-Empire.com
Galactic Conflict & Historical Games ... => Historical Games => Topic started by: GamesPoet on April 21, 2009, 01:43:18 PM
-
Uh oh ... picked up the Flames of War "Open Fire" starter set this past weekend. Couldn't pass it up when I found it on sale for 40% off because the store was going out of business. :icon_biggrin:
I've been watching the number of FoW players increase at the local store, and have been delaying my initiation in this for awhile, despite my strong interest in historical games. The starter set provides a small paperback version of the rules book, an introductory booklet to help learn the basic rules, 3 U.S. Sherman tanks, 2 German StuG G assault guns, and 3 U.S. dice with 2 German dice.
The 16 page booklet is actually quite helpful for getting up and running quickly. It has an explanation of the vehicle characteristics, and has basic sections on movement, shooting, moving and shooting, and infantry platoons. Each section has a mini scenario that can be used; rescue, shoot-out, flank attack, and breakout respectively, although the last one will need a U.S. rifle platoon and a German grenadier platoon to play, both available at a $20. Haven't picked those up yet, but I suspect it won't be long.
When I made the purchase, they didn't have many blister packs remaining, but I did pick up a German 7.5cm PaK 97/38 pair of anti-tank guns. One thing learned, although I got lucky, anti-tank guns are different, and which ones you can use is different depending on whether an infantry, mechanized infantry or tank army is being modeled. I'll probably be modeling an infantry company, so my quick pick will be ok.
Additionally, there is something to be said for making sure units purchased can be used for early, mid, or late war rules supplements. Currently, the recent and attainable supplements seem to be for the late war period. And although only one supplements is needed for creating an army type, at least one will be needed beyond the rules themselves.
I picked up Fortress Europe yesterday. This is a more expensive supplement than some of the others available, while it is late war, and it has plenty of army lists for Germans, British, U.S., and Soviets.
So I guess my newest adventure has begun, although sooner than I had planned. :icon_wink:
-
Get Tiger Tanks.
People fear them. They are devices of pure hatred. :icon_twisted:
I have five of them (average lists will have 1, but hey, I play a SS Heavy Panzer group). :engel:
-
Tigers expensive and Konigstigers are very expensive, when looking at point costs. The list for a German grenadier company allows for the purchase of one 1 heavy tank option, but at the lower overall army point totals, I'm not sure how wise these would be. However, I do plan to include these at some point further down the line.
In researching how to play the German infantry list, its seem to be better to have more infantry than less, and at the same time plenty of anti-tank options as well as miscellaneous other support units.
-
You're not a man till you've used a Tiger Tank. :-P
The Germans have some of the best infantry, and the Stormtrooper rule for their tanks is borderline broken. (Basically on a 3+, your tanks get JSJ from Crisis Suits).
-
Play Mid-War. Late War is a pile of dung. I loved the game until they went overboard with the LW stuff and pretty much everyone at my Sydney LGS (about 8 of us) just all stopped.
Tigers are pretty easily defeated (or made useless for their points). Pretty much you drop smoke on them every turn so they must always move. At best they can kill 1 tank or stand a turn then.
You'll need infantry, you'll always need infantry to capture and take objectives.
Depending on which race you go you'll want MGs simply for the pure infantry destruction they cause.
AT rifles such as Pack 40s and 17pdrs are awesome.
The best balanced lists look something like this:
2-3 infantry paltoons
heavy weapon platoon (MG's and Mortars/depending on nation)
Anti-tank platoon
Tank platoon (3 tanks usually, 5 if you can get the points)
100mm Arty
That should take you to 1500 pts and provide fun in all aspects of the game except Air (which I never got into).
-
I'd definitely play mid war if I could find players, but unfortunately most of the current FoW players available locally are into the late war. Most of these guys come from a 40K background and most seem to be into having tank armies, so I'm looking forward to playing infantry against these guys and see what happens.
Also, the thing I like about the mid-war is that the supplemental rule provide for other armies outside the normal German, British, U.S., and Soviet armies. I suspect at some point I might gravitate into these just because of some of the neat things that can be modeled and used in games.
Rumor has it that the FoW folks are planning to finish up with creating late war supplements, and then perhaps turn to early war in the near future, and I'm sensing that this would be a fun era to model and play as well.
By the way, bies21 ... what do you mean by the late war stuff being overboard?
-
What scale? Can one use the standard plastic 1/72 scale models for the game?
-
Get Tiger Tanks.
People fear them. They are devices of pure hatred. :icon_twisted:
I have five of them (average lists will have 1, but hey, I play a SS Heavy Panzer group). :engel:
Tigers suck, for some reason people tend to play 1500 games and if you try and put a heavy tank in you cant get to the magical number 6 with your platoons.
-
What scale? Can one use the standard plastic 1/72 scale models for the game?
Flames of War is a 12mm (I think) scale game with 6 people on each base. Or something like that.
Tigers suck, for some reason people tend to play 1500 games and if you try and put a heavy tank in you cant get to the magical number 6 with your platoons.
My last 1500 point army consisted of 5 tiger tanks. :icon_mrgreen:
-
I'd definitely play mid war if I could find players, but unfortunately most of the current FoW players available locally are into the late war. Most of these guys come from a 40K background and most seem to be into having tank armies, so I'm looking forward to playing infantry against these guys and see what happens.
Also, the thing I like about the mid-war is that the supplemental rule provide for other armies outside the normal German, British, U.S., and Soviet armies. I suspect at some point I might gravitate into these just because of some of the neat things that can be modeled and used in games.
Rumor has it that the FoW folks are planning to finish up with creating late war supplements, and then perhaps turn to early war in the near future, and I'm sensing that this would be a fun era to model and play as well.
By the way, bies21 ... what do you mean by the late war stuff being overboard?
In late war the game boils down to AT value and FA value. In Mid-War there are no amazing tanks (Tiger's are tough but not nearly as crazy as King Tigers) the AT guns and Tanks in General aren't as nasty either. I found it to be more enjoyable to play and a bit more tactical as well.
Mathi its 15mm
In 1st Ed Early was the best, everyone was disapointed when they cut it out in 2nd ed. I have personally 2500pts of Italians and 1500pts of Romanians. So can understand how you may like the minor nations. I have no interest in the top 4 personally.
-
15mm but you don't have to use that scale. I don't play, but I have friends that do and they went with the 10-12mm stuff, I think, because it's less expensive and there are apparently pre-painted toy or die-cast tanks & vehicles that are very cheap in that scale. Also, from what I understand the "official" FoW figures are expensive compared to other lines of 15mm.
-
Very expensive. :icon_neutral:
-
You probably could just base 1:72 miniatures on the usual bases and use 15 mm tanks, if you don't mind the difference in scale. On the other hand, infantry is not really the most expensive component, and with guns in other scales it will get difficult.
Nevertheless I found the cost to get an army going to be cheaper than Warhammer.
I've been playing for about half a year now and am still in the learning stages, playing with a British Rifle Company based on the 43rd Wessex Division and a French tank Company (with American Equipment) form the 2eme Division Blindé.
-
The DBA crowd here is also into FoW. I've noticed DBA people to be generally cheap bastards so they all use 10-12mm scale that you can get for a song in most Military Mini's stores. FoW are nice models, but if you are in it for the game then proxy with other mini's. If you are into the model side of it, there's much nicer models at larger scales for a lot less as well. If you want 'official' then you will pay pay pay.
My cousin plays British and says to stay in Mid and as far away from Late War as possible.
I love how instead of countries, most people use the term 'Race'. Old habits....
-
What scale? Can one use the standard plastic 1/72 scale models for the game?
1/72 is a bit too large, which I believe is somewhere around 20mm, but FoW is intended for 15mm.
-
Any game can be scaled up or down. You could easilly play WFB in 15mm if you wanted to. :wink:
-
In late war the game boils down to AT value and FA value. In Mid-War there are no amazing tanks (Tiger's are tough but not nearly as crazy as King Tigers) the AT guns and Tanks in General aren't as nasty either. I found it to be more enjoyable to play and a bit more tactical as well.
Well I suspected that there had to be a reason why the game was attracting local 40K players. Anyway, I'll give it a shot. I was going to try doing a mechanized infantry army, because it seemed more flexible, but I'll likley enjoy finding ways to win against the tank armies I figure I'll be seeing.
In 1st Ed Early was the best, everyone was disapointed when they cut it out in 2nd ed. I have personally 2500pts of Italians and 1500pts of Romanians. So can understand how you may like the minor nations. I have no interest in the top 4 personally.
I'm giving the Germans a try. When I was younger, played a decent bit of Squad Leader, the original version, not ASL, and ended up playing the Germans quite a bit because my relatives didn't want to, and instead prefered playing the Americans and Russians, so my interest in the Germans is probably still left over from that. However, in some ways this can be converted into some of the lesser powers, and I coudl see myself giving those and the Italians a try just for the challenge, and the fact that there are less folks doing these anyway. Problem is my understanding says that the mid war lists aren't very compatible with the late war.
-
15mm but you don't have to use that scale. I don't play, but I have friends that do and they went with the 10-12mm stuff, I think, because it's less expensive and there are apparently pre-painted toy or die-cast tanks & vehicles that are very cheap in that scale. Also, from what I understand the "official" FoW figures are expensive compared to other lines of 15mm.
Thats my understanding, except for tournaments, just like GW, they'd prefer you ahev their line of miniatures.
Any game can be scaled up or down. You could easilly play WFB in 15mm if you wanted to. :wink:
Very true. :icon_cool:
-
I've been playing for about half a year now and am still in the learning stages, playing with a British Rifle Company based on the 43rd Wessex Division and a French tank Company (with American Equipment) form the 2eme Division Blindé.
Thanks for sharing what you are modeling. I'll look these up and find out something about them.
One of my current challenges, before I start buying more stuff, is to find a historical German infantry unit that I like to base my initial collection on, and adapt the german army list to what I find out about the unit's composition and uniforms.
-
My cousin plays British and says to stay in Mid and as far away from Late War as possible.
What si his reasoning on this?
I love how instead of countries, most people use the term 'Race'. Old habits....
Yes, or perhaps even nationality, too.
-
Late War has some nasty stuff in it.
Some stupid stuff too.
Midwar seems accepted as the most "balanced" time.
-
Yeah what he said. Basically the Late War has too many supers that dominate the game and becomes FoW version of HeroHammer.
-
Yeah what he said. Basically the Late War has too many supers that dominate the game and becomes FoW version of HeroHammer.
cha... like I said at the beginning of this thread.
EW could be lots of fun as well, I know my original group really wanted to play EW.
-
Thats my understanding, except for tournaments, just like GW, they'd prefer you ahev their line of miniatures.
Actually, you don't have to, if I'm not misinformed. You may not advertise other manufacturers on their website, and they might insist on the proper scale. Can't be sure though, no such thing as an official tournament (or any) in my area.
I've been playing for about half a year now and am still in the learning stages, playing with a British Rifle Company based on the 43rd Wessex Division and a French tank Company (with American Equipment) form the 2eme Division Blindé.
Thanks for sharing what you are modeling. I'll look these up and find out something about them.
One of my current challenges, before I start buying more stuff, is to find a historical German infantry unit that I like to base my initial collection on, and adapt the german army list to what I find out about the unit's composition and uniforms.
The Wessex guys are currently just a standard British Rifle Company from the Fortress Europe book, there is no divisional briefing (though they might get one soon-ish, having been involved in Market Garden). It's quite an interesting unit that saw action all across the North West Europe campaign.
The 2eme DB was part of De Gaulles Free French Forces, formed around a core of units that fought in Africa, and was reequipped to fight in France, where it took part in the Liberation of Paris and Strassburg. The list is available as a download from Battlefront, though it requires the Cobra Briefing for full usability.
-
Is there any gamesystem that is using the 20mm or 1/72 scale? I am sort of interested a bit of trying some stuff out, but if I am going to start a new gamesystem, when we have not been able to start The great war, yet, it better be as cheap as possible.
-
I'm probably going to write one Mathi (well, for 28mm real scale, but 20mm will work too), and by write, I mean steal from various other systems and mix them together to get something my group likes. :icon_mrgreen:
-
Thatīs ambition, lad! :::cheers:::
-
Yeah what he said. Basically the Late War has too many supers that dominate the game and becomes FoW version of HeroHammer.
Well unfortunately, no one is playing early nor mid war locally. I'm going to give it a try, and try to keep my purchases as wise as possible, enjoy the modeling and research side of the hobby, and so that if I end up not liking it, then I won't have spent too much, and instead still have some nice miniatures for other games thta I might discover that I like more.
-
Thats my understanding, except for tournaments, just like GW, they'd prefer you ahev their line of miniatures.
Actually, you don't have to, if I'm not misinformed. You may not advertise other manufacturers on their website, and they might insist on the proper scale. Can't be sure though, no such thing as an official tournament (or any) in my area.
Not the first time I've been misinformed, probably not the last. Thanks for the heads up.
The Wessex guys are currently just a standard British Rifle Company from the Fortress Europe book, there is no divisional briefing (though they might get one soon-ish, having been involved in Market Garden). It's quite an interesting unit that saw action all across the North West Europe campaign.
The 2eme DB was part of De Gaulles Free French Forces, formed around a core of units that fought in Africa, and was reequipped to fight in France, where it took part in the Liberation of Paris and Strassburg. The list is available as a download from Battlefront, though it requires the Cobra Briefing for full usability.
I'm curious about the French unit, so I'll see if I can find what you mention. Is there actually mention of the French unit in the Cobra supplement?
(Not that I'll be switching from modeling a German unit at the moment.)
And by the way, do you have pictures of your guys somewhere? Feel free to pm me.
-
Here's a link to the article about the french, which in turn links to the PDF with the army list:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=842
I don't know if they are actually mentioned in Cobra, they probably should show up in some diagrams of force deployments, as they took part in the operation (actually linked the British and the Americans). Point is, they share some special rules and units with the 2nd and 3rd Armoured Division that are described in Cobra.
Concerning pictures, its not all painted yet, and I'm a pretty bad painter anyway, but I'll try to get some taken this weekend.
-
Thanks! :icon_biggrin: :icon_cool:
I printed off the pdf, and event the page with the history info. Looks like something that might be neat to model at some point, but I'm reminding myself to do one thing at a time. I'm in the process of doing research on German grenadier units to find one I'd like to base my force on for my first FoW army.
Much appreciated. :::cheers:::
-
Still, get a Tiger Tank.
-
Hah, I LOVED Flames of War for about 2-3 years, until growing out of it. I started right before they pulled all the late and early war figures so they could focus on midwar. As far as I know they are sticking with Latewar for another 3 or so years, as each year they (Battlefront) are focusing on each area of the Latewar time frame (1944-1945). The areas (well unless they changed them, but probably didn't) are Normandy, Bagration(current one they are working on), Market Garden, Bulge (this MIGHT make me want to start up again) and the last stages of the war in Germany itself.
And for those wondering the scale is 1/100 in relation to the 15mm figures.
The prices aren't too bad, especially considering the figures are a good quality, especially compared to brand such as Old Glory (real cheap, but real poor quality). And of course the prices aren't much different that what we pay for GW figures, and forces are usually smaller, purcase wise, so it can be cheaper.
I always liked midwar for the North Africa and Italy/Sicily battles. But then again latewar battles in Normandy were sweet too.
Now, that aside, as I mentioned, I used to play Flames of War, and thus have tons (ie I went nuts like a kid in a toy store, err bad analogy :laugh:) of figures that I bought in hopes of creating different forces, but realized I went overboard. I literally bought just about every type of force BF makes except for Russians. And thus, I am looking to get rid of most of them. I mostly have US troops and German troops, but have a few other random figures here and there. Not many vehicles as I just sold a bunch on eBay. If anyone is interested in some for a slightly cheaper price than through BF let me know. Everything is out of the blister packs and in bags, but ready to be built up. The main figures that stand out to me that I have are US infantry platoons, such as Ranger and Paratrooper platoons, and various German (SS and Winter gear) infantry platoons. But I have so much I hate to list it.
Thought I would just throw that out there for those interested. :-) (Located in the US btw)
-
I'm curious about the French unit, so I'll see if I can find what you mention. Is there actually mention of the French unit in the Cobra supplement?
French unit? I didn't think they played a roll in WW2 outside of putting a bunch of huge guns in the wrong place and surrendering in 12 seconds.
-
My history isn't up to date, but I know there were plenty of French that fought in Africa and had other smaller units that didn't really represent the entire of country of France, such as the beginning of the war.
-
Parka...the french put the guns in the RIGHT place, just turned out the Germans knew about'em. Mind you The Germans went through Belgium in WWI so the idea they'd do it again in WWII shouldn't have been a huge surprise.
-
Still, get a Tiger Tank.
Oh I will. :icon_wink:
-
Hah, I LOVED Flames of War for about 2-3 years, until growing out of it. I started right before they pulled all the late and early war figures so they could focus on midwar. As far as I know they are sticking with Latewar for another 3 or so years, as each year they (Battlefront) are focusing on each area of the Latewar time frame (1944-1945). The areas (well unless they changed them, but probably didn't) are Normandy, Bagration(current one they are working on), Market Garden, Bulge (this MIGHT make me want to start up again) and the last stages of the war in Germany itself.
Yes, this is my understanding as well.
Regarding the Germans that you have, are the late war items from their old series, and if so how much do they differ from what is being sold currently for late war?
-
I'm curious about the French unit, so I'll see if I can find what you mention. Is there actually mention of the French unit in the Cobra supplement?
French unit? I didn't think they played a roll in WW2 outside of putting a bunch of huge guns in the wrong place and surrendering in 12 seconds.
Oss provided a link regarding info available for the French on the FoW website in a post furhter back on this thread. :icon_wink:
-
Indeed, the French put the guns along their border to Germany, with a weaker section in the Ardennes, since it was deemed unpassable for mechanized units by the wisdom of the time.
The Belgians also fortified their border to match with the french, and the dutch did aswell.
The French and british belived that they main punch would be a repeat of the right hook through Belgium, executed during WWI, since the fortifications where not as extensive as the Maginot line.
The germans however, made a variation of their old plan, sending a wing smashing into Belgium and the Netherlands, using suprise attacks, ruses and airborne assault to take out for example the strong fortress of Eben Emael where they destroyed the heavy guns, allowing the armoured spearheads to get past unscratched. But the fortress itself held for a good time.
As the french and british field armies raced north to meet the german punch, a second german army attacked via the Ardennes, where the fortifications where weaker. Weaker fortification and the big suprise about such a daring move caught the french on the backfoot and after having battled their way out of the Ardennes, the german panzer divisons raced forward, while the bulk of the allied forces was in Belgium, thereby threatening them with catching them in a big sack and going for the almost undefended Paris.
Add to this that the germans gain a strong air superiority, which was just as important as their armoured divisions rapid advances. I belive that had the allied maintained parity in the air, the german advance would have been sloved, and it would have robbed them of much of the aerial recon they needed.
For example, on two occasions, german panzer divisions where caught strung out by first a french armoured counterattack, commanded by non other than Charles DeGaulle. It was initially succesful but german airpower saved the day.
The second is a more well known incident, more well known to the anglo audience cause it involved a british unit and that it was Rommels famed 7th "Ghost" division, that took the hit.
A british force of motorized infantry and armour, about two tank battalions, one with the machinegun armed Matilda 1, and another with the famous Matilda II, who at least had a 2-pounder cannon.
The massive ambush hit the germans in the flanks, as they where rushing forward, the machinegun armed Matilda 1 focusing on softskin vehicles, infantry and artillery, while the heavier Matilda II contested with the german tanks. The germans got absolutely freaked as they faced lots of tanks that their guns could not penetrate. Rommel ordered in desperation a unit of 88mm AA guns to open up, and finally managed to make a dent in the british onslaught. But in the end, it was once again the wailing Stukas of the Luftwaffe that shattered the british attack.
But this attack had one huge impact. The germans where not certain of how large the british formation had been, and overestimated the size to at least a division! Neither where they certain how many still battleworthy enemy armoured formations there might be around, ready to pounce on the strung out panzers. People say Hitler chickened out, he was later blamed by german generals for being to cautious there. However, the truth is that most of the german commanders agreed. They where not certain about all the enemy ahead, aka, they did not fully know their enemy. They knew that even if their units outclassed the french and british tactically, the french and british had tanks that outclassed their german ones. The best tank of the early war was the French Somua, a well built and well balanced tank, with a 47mm cannon and two machineguns, good mobility and good armour. The only drawback was the tower only big for two men, meaning the commander must also do some weapon duty.
More Somuas (it was a very new design) and the germans might not have been so happy. Also, the french airforce where also in a transition period, having just started introducing a new line of fighters. Among them where a design from Bloch, who was outclassing the german fighters in almost every way. In one air battle, the only french squadron that had been equipped with these new fighters, riped apart and opposing german Messerschmidt 109 squadron.
All in all, if you forget all kind of silly hindsights, the germans desicion to pull the brakes and resupply their panzers and allow infantry to catch up, was a sound military desicion. And that meant the british counterattack saved the BEF and a large number of french troops that was evaquated via Dunkirk.
Sure, the French could have fought better, but the germans just proved a bit more sneaky.
And if you are going to blame the french for misjudging the passability of the Ardennes to large armoured formation, well, then you should know that most allied commanders tought the same about it in December 1944. But we all love hindsight, donīt we. :dry:
-
Actually, that'd be December 16 Mathi. My birthday. Get your facts straight :-P.
Oh, and I couldn't have put it better myself.
-
Regarding the Germans that you have, are the late war items from their old series, and if so how much do they differ from what is being sold currently for late war?
For infantry wise, the only Latwar ones I have are the main Panzergrenadier/Grenadier set and the Assault Rifle figures:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=290&PageIndex=2 (http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=290&PageIndex=2)
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=298&PageIndex=2 (http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=298&PageIndex=2)
Those sets do date back to the original Late War times, but appear to be still sold by BF. Now in regards to the late war figures, I would have to go through them, as I mixed up several different figure types to add variety (LW Panzergrenadiers, LW Panzergrenadiers from Halftrack box set, MW SS Panzergrenadiers and EW/MW Panzergrenadiers). I will go through my figures tonight when I have more time to give you an exact idea (and will post pictures).
I also have some of the EW/MW SS and Winter grenadier figures, mostly full platoon size.
-
I may have to check this out. Fairly cheap you say? Hm... IG or new game... IG or new game...
-
Flames of War was originally WW2 for 40k.
-
Oh really? Then I may be able to use the same models...
-
:roll:
Naw.
-
FoW isn't nearly the dice chucking game 40k.
Mathi, the Panzer II's couldn't penetrate Sumua front armour if I remember correctly, neither could the Pak 36 or 38's. But from memory again (been a while since I focused on French and Germans WWI not Australians) they just got surrounded and left behind the advance.
Great write up btw.
-
When I saw FoW being played, I saw just as much dice chucking, if not more, than with 40k.
I only saw less dice chucking when I played it because my entire army consisted of 5 Tigers. That's only like, 10 dice a turn at most, unless I use the machineguns. Or used Stormtrooper. Which admittedly, I always tried to. So that's another 5 dice.
Although when my Tigers hit something, it generally didn't like it.
-
Still Chheeeesssyyyy as hell, MrD... :icon_razz:
How many such german unit do you think there was in the war? Not that many. Why not play an honest, proper, manly and... and... what epitet am I looking for... well, HONEST Pzkw IV unit? The most numerous and the sounded of all the german designs. :closed-eyes:
That would make you look manly in my eyes. :icon_razz:
Or better, if you reeallllyyyy wanna be a man, go all out Volksturm. Now, that is what I call proper representation of the late german army. :icon_wink:
Anyway, I found this game system and I am thinking of buying it, since the basic book is cheaper than the Warhammer rulesystems, PLUS you can use 20mm 1/72 scale plastic soldiers with it and tanks! Cheap, cheap, cheap!
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/detail.php?qsID=1591&qsSeries=47
Anyone having any expirience with this gamesystem?
-
Oh Mathi, it's an easy army to beat. And I didn't even realise it was horrible for some armies. I just wanted a very cheap intro into that game, as everyone played 1500 points. A normal army at that cost something like Ģ150. Tigers Marsch was Ģ40. :icon_mrgreen:
-
Sure, enter the 17-pounder anti-tankgun and Sherman firefly, but what about that World at War game I linked too above?
How does it fare compared to others?
-
At this moment in time, I honestly do not know anything about that book. :icon_neutral:
-
Regarding the Germans that you have, are the late war items from their old series, and if so how much do they differ from what is being sold currently for late war?
For infantry wise, the only Latwar ones I have are the main Panzergrenadier/Grenadier set and the Assault Rifle figures:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=290&PageIndex=2 (http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=290&PageIndex=2)
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=298&PageIndex=2 (http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabId=117&CategoryID=7797&ProductID=298&PageIndex=2)
Those sets do date back to the original Late War times, but appear to be still sold by BF. Now in regards to the late war figures, I would have to go through them, as I mixed up several different figure types to add variety (LW Panzergrenadiers, LW Panzergrenadiers from Halftrack box set, MW SS Panzergrenadiers and EW/MW Panzergrenadiers). I will go through my figures tonight when I have more time to give you an exact idea (and will post pictures).
I also have some of the EW/MW SS and Winter grenadier figures, mostly full platoon size.
I'll review the boxes you mention, but I'm not sure I'll be modeling those two types initially.
Also, I don't want you to go through alot of effort if the figures are already painted. The modeling side of the hobby is particularly favorable to me, and would prefer to paint figures, and without having to strip them.
Update: Checked out both links ... not interested in the assault figures at the moment, but perhaps GE 722.
-
Nothing is painted, so your in luck. At most, the mold lines are cleaned off, otherwise new from the blister packs.
FoW isn't nearly the dice chucking game 40k.
When it comes to HMG teams I beg to differ. I always loved when my opponent would foolishly move at the double with infantry and thus giving me the opportunity to shoot double shots at them. I think the most I had in one roll was about 32 or so dice. Ratatatat!!!! :icon_twisted:
-
I might be interested in this. What are some links to alternate/cheaper sites?
-
Nothing is painted, so your in luck. At most, the mold lines are cleaned off, otherwise new from the blister packs.
Sounds good. PM me with what you'd be willing to sell them to me for, both the grenadier platoon and, yes I had second thoughts, the assault rifle platoon, too. I'm close to making a determination as to which German grenadierkompanie I'll be modeling, and having an option for a recon/reserve platoon could be part of the end result. :icon_cool:
-
Parka...the french put the guns in the RIGHT place, just turned out the Germans knew about'em. Mind you The Germans went through Belgium in WWI so the idea they'd do it again in WWII shouldn't have been a huge surprise.
Then I was right they put them in the wrong place as they were of no use and not even fired. Unless your term of the
RIGHT place
is the opposite to right place EG: The wrong place to make any use out of...
-
Now you are only being an arrogant ass, Parka. Like most other armchair general who just love the benefit of hindsight that makes them feel so superior visavi the men on the field that had no benefit of hindsight.
Heck, not even the german general staff were all sure about the Ardennes bypass. They simply had to since they belived it would be VERY costly to try and break through the Maginot line proper.
The punch through the Ardennes area was a gamble that some belived was bound to fail because of the terrain alone, and others belived was risky but the only option.
It is all about the effect of terrain on your army. No one, no one, had ever tried moving a large mechanized formation through such a rugged area of terrain, and most belived it would be impractical bordering to the impossible. Hence the French general had to make a priority judgement. Either put same amount of fortification in an area that might not even be considered as a war arena, and then weakening the strength of the fortifications overall, OR just screen the Ardennes against smaller flanking forces and focus the defences where the terrain for mobile warfare, and infact any warfare, was more suitable.
You just arrogantly claim the french where stupid and put the guns in the wrong place. They put the guns in a strategical place where they made SENSE!!!
They thereby forced the germans to consider other options. The Maginot line was also just as much a weapon of deterence, making an enemy think twice before attacking. Sadly, with warmonger Hitler in charge, Germany WOULD attack. And against such monsters, few deterences ever work. He just did not want to reason and negogiate on even footing.
Hitler wanted to fight a big war, the french did not want to fight a war. Hence, their respective strategies would differ.
Call it what you want Parka, but I call you a troll.
-
Ok folks, lets not turn this into a shouting match over the french, this thread is suppose to be about Flames of War. :icon_wink: :icon_cool:
-
Mathi is right. The original German plan involved attacking through Belgium once again, but those plans fell into allied hands (in an incident that is actually quite hilarious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechelen_Incident (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechelen_Incident)). As a result von Mansteins very unconventional and risky plan was adopted, and we all know how it played out from there.
-
Well still the French had the largest army of the world during that time....well perhaps Russia as the exception but having no generals left that doesn't count :biggriin:
I think it is interesting that all connect Germany's military prowess with German tanks during the WW2 but actually the first tank designs didnīt kick it alone (panzer IIF anyone try to dent a Matilda with that), it was the combined arms, the high discipline and the high tech weapons that did in for the french. I would even say the Luftwaffe including Fallschirmjäger and the Tante Ju Transports were the greatest gambits of Germany. If they would have increased the airborne superiority the war might have ended differently (but luckily it hasn't)
The Tiger was a tough nut but the motor was crap and it used to much fuel so a great tactical tank but a lousy strategical one. The Queen of all weapons the infantry still is the best of all.
-
Um... no. Just no.
Germany had more military power than France and Britain- combined. It was also the most powerful economy. Russia easily had the largest army, followed (at the height of the war) by the USA, then Germany, then France and Britain (Europe only).
... Err... Yea... Flames of War... :unsure:
-
... Err... Yea... Flames of War... :unsure:
... sucks :icon_mrgreen:
Nah, it's an alright beer and pretzel game.
-
Is there any gamesystem that is using the 20mm or 1/72 scale? I am sort of interested a bit of trying some stuff out, but if I am going to start a new gamesystem, when we have not been able to start The great war, yet, it better be as cheap as possible.
Came back over to this thread and went to the bottom of the first page where some how I believe I missed this post. The set of rules I picked up last year that can be used for different scales is called Beer and Pretzels Skirmish, by John R. "Buck" Surdu, version 3.0 (March 2003). The booklett contains 30 pages of rules, 25 pages of historical scenarios, and another 30 or so for vehicle information for WWI, WWII, and post-WWII including. It also comes with a few quick reference charts, it's not a hard back, and runs about $20 to $25 if I recall. I got this primarily for it's focus on small arms and infantry in the scenarios, but I haven't played the game yet. I've got a bunch of 1/72 scale American, British, German, and Russian infantry I plan to use with these rules at some point. The miniatures are plastic by Valeri and I mainly picked them up because they were on sale, buy one, get one 50% off. The stands are way to small for using by themselves on table top, but I plan to use pennies to provide them with a decent round and inexpensive base to make it easier to use them on the table top. Hope that is helpful. :icon_cool:
By the way, what is that a picture of in your avatar? Looks like an armoured vehicle?
-
It is my converted Ork Battlewagon, based on a 1/35 scale model of a russian JSU-152 assault gun. A true badass vehicle that you even blast a Tiger tank out of existence. It was the most heavily armed armoured fighting vehicle of the WWII, and one of the most heavily armoured. Itīs primary objective was close support of infantry attacking fortified enemies, but with that big a gun it could do a lot of stuff. 152mm of shell is not to be triffled with! :::cheers:::
-
Um... no. Just no.
Germany had more military power than France and Britain- combined.
At what date? Not in 1939/40, to my knowledge. German weapon production didn't reach its peak until 1944, when the outcome of the war was pretty much clear and it was just a matter of time.
Ground forces? I remember reading that the French army was indeed numerically superior (something about 82 vs. 69 divisions or similar), and had better tanks. Had they decided to attack immediately after the war started, WWII might have been much shorter. They got caught entirely by surprise.
Air Forces? A lot of air-to-air-capacity was sacrificed for the dive-bombing ability. Battle of Britain/Operation Eagle showed that the Luftwaffe was no real match for the RAF, which had loads of very good pilots.
Navy? Forget it. Don't be fooled by all the rage around the Bismarck. Royal Navy was superior in every way. Which is the reason for the extended use of submarines - in a proper sea battle, the German navy wouldn't have lasted fifteen seconds.
However, we have to take into account that France did not want a war. At all. I guess a decent comparison would be: France was the nice big guy sitting in a pub, having a quiet evening, while Germany was the small agressive asshole who starts the fight and gets the upper hand by kicking the big guy in the nuts.
In short - Mathi is right. Sorry for the highjack.
-
Thanks Gneisenau! :icon_mrgreen:
I am reading a very interesting book now, by one of Swedens new younger generation of military historians, Niklas Zetterling, about the Blitzkrieg.
He and his mate Michael Tamelander got some international fame in the military history circle with their revealing book about the battle of Kursk. A VERY good book that unravelled many myths about the battle and put stuff straight. I think some of their stuff might have been translated into english or german. Lots of hardcore analysis and facts.
For example, they have by careful analysis showed than on many occasions, it was infact better to attack than defend, and that contrary to conventional wisdom defenders suffered more casualities than the attacker in the intial stages. It is supposed to be the opposite. It can partially be ascribed to the greater efficiency and superiority of some german materiel, but it also have general implications.
A mobile force can usually choose where to attack and how, meaning they will dictate the battle taking place.
A defender on the battlefield of the times, and even more today, will be an easier target for long range artillery, aircrafts and such, increasing the odds stacked against them. It is clear the germans did not like the static defence Hitler forced upon them, preferring a more fluid mobile defence.
Today, the swedish armys new doctrines, in contrast to what I learned when I made my conscription service in 93-94, is NOT to dig in. It is just a waste of time and if someone really want the place they will level it. Therefore mobile defence is the name of the game, also for us Homeguard footsloggers. Man, delaying actions and mobile defence sucks the breath out of the poor bloody infantryman, but watcha gonna do?
Excursus: The russian offensive agaisnt Finland 1944.
The finns realized this too during WWII, and in the end, their reasonably well made defensive lines over the Karelian insmut was cracked like a nutshell by the well planned and executed russian offensive. It was first when the finns where forced to fight from improvised fortifications, using the forest, and got forewarning about one large russian offensive, that they could put down their heels again. The artillery battle of Ithala, yes it was more or less an artillery battle, the finns had managed to intercept the russian signal traffic. The exellent finnish artillery tactics, that had been honed by the dire necessity of being able to fight a bigger and more numerous enemy, meant that they basically could aim all the barrels, from large shore batteries to small mortars and have them firing in such a sequence that all grenades came to impact at almost the same moment.
Descriptions tells how the ground almost leaped in one big motion. Then followed a concentrated barrage and waves of finnish bombers and german ground attack aircrafts.
From that point, negogiations could start. But the finns also managed to pull of a last but almost unknown motti victory in the end of the war, almost obliterating a russian division. But Mannerheim ordered that the news about this last victory should be hushed down not to aggravate Stalin.
Now, what I was going to write about was Zetterlings newest book, Blitzkrieg, where he lifts up the true reasons behind germans military successes, something he and Tamelander have been onto in many books. The focus on aggression, speed and local initiative, in order to gain time and get a step ahead of the enemy. All in all, the Panzers and the Stukas did not win the war against Poland. If you look at it carefully, the panzer divisions made only marginally better than the infantry ones, bar the initial breakthrough of the 1st Panzer division.
Germany did not win because they fought a less skilled and old fashioned enemy. The poles where infact well aware of much of the new tactical ideas and such, but they simply could not afford as much as the germans! But the main reason why Germany won was because they had more soldiers, more tanks, more artillery and more airplanes.
The dairies from the german units are not filled with much appreciation for the close support form the Luftwaffe, instead there are loads of complains about Luftwaffe bombing german units! The Luftwaffes main contribution was simply to put some spammer in the works for the poles, attacking communication lines. However, the german air superiority mean that german recon planes did valuable service, and the germans had plenty of them, working together with the front units.
They more than anything else meant that the germans knew if they could push ahead at good speed or if they must be prepared and formed up for fighting.
But as the author puts it, explaining the great but somewhat diffuse service that a recon plane does, compared to the wailing STUKA does not come out well. Stukas makes better propaganda.
But the bottom line is that what the germans really had there and then was numerical superiorty, material superiorty AND intelligence superiority.
All things we recognize today as extremely valuable.
-
Thanks Gneisenau! :icon_mrgreen:
You're welcome! I'm always ready to acknowledge expertise when I see it. :-)
-
Mathi, what is the books called? I got their book "D-day", and I have to say it was a very good read.
-
Um... no. Just no.
Germany had more military power than France and Britain- combined.
At what date? Not in 1939/40, to my knowledge. German weapon production didn't reach its peak until 1944, when the outcome of the war was pretty much clear and it was just a matter of time.
Oops... got my dates mixed up. They did in 1914.
-
I am reading a very interesting book now, by one of Swedens new younger generation of military historians, Niklas Zetterling, about the Blitzkrieg.
He and his mate Michael Tamelander got some international fame in the military history circle with their revealing book about the battle of Kursk. A VERY good book that unravelled many myths about the battle and put stuff straight. I think some of their stuff might have been translated into english or german. Lots of hardcore analysis and facts.
Zetterling wrote "Kursk 1943: A Statistical Analysis" with Anders Frankson, not Tamelander. And I believe Dunrik is refering to Zetterling's book called, "Normandy 1944: German Military Organization, Combat Power, and Organizational Effectivess". This latter book I have, and it seems to be an outstandingly researched record of information regarding the state of the German forces participating in the defense of northern France.
Primary source material was used in compiling his analysis. He blows wide holes in things like the Waffen-SS being favored for assignment of panzers, and the notion by some historians that the Allies and Germans had relatively equal numbers of soldiers, while his calculations show that by the end of July there was very close to a 4 to 1 numerical superiority by the Allies. He challeges the effectiveness of allied airpower versus german tanks, and that instead shows the airpower played other roles and more effectively than killing tanks. And he hits hard at a number of historians, most notably a lenghty refutation of some Stephen Ambrose figures. That's all in the first section, but I haven't gotten any further since I only just picked this book up. The second part is a lenghty compilation of what he has discovered regarding the organization of every German unit involved in the campaign, and the thrid part has a series of informational appendixes which I'm also looking forward to reading in detail.
Regarding the "blitzkrieg" book, what's the actual title of that one, Mathi?
-
That might be the name, yes. I just took a quick glans on the cover, saying "D-day" :wink:
-
The swedish title is Blitzkrieg: 1939-1941.
He is among other things arguing against the huge reliance but on the memoirs of many high ranking german commanders, such as Heinz Guderian, and points out that these kinds of sources, often complied way after the events, will often be affected even by unconsious attempts of putting things in a "better" view or trying to find structure where there is none.
Also, they are usually written with hindsight as help, something that was not aviable for the people making the desicions. It is a VERY good book that explains the make up of the german armed forces and explains the german military tradition.
He does something I like, especially as an archaeologist, by working with diaries, letters and official warbook from different units, written while things where unfolding, also official documents about how the reasoning went around the priorities of war materiel etc.
By using both unit diaries and personal diaries of soldiers and lower ranking officers, he gets a close picture of what happened, rather than the generals view, where things always tend to look more "planned" and orderly.
And yes, it was Frankson that he wrote Kursk with, my bad! A very good book nontheless. It also serves to strengthen my view of Rokossovski as the finest russian general. He imidiately realized that it was a waste of materiel to send in armoured counterattacks if the german had support of Tigers. Instead, he ordered that many T-34 units should get dug in and used as armoured anti-tank guns. In the north, Walter Models punch grid to a halt against Rokossovskis defences. Now, people have said Model was to careful and should have pushed forward with more panzers like in the south, but I belive Model did the right thing, not risking his panzers to crossfire and the extensive minefields ahead of him. He attacked with true combined arms and Rokossovski held him.
In the south, the german armoured onslaught progressed better, but I think it was just as much because the Russian commander in that area did not dig in his armour to supplement his infantry but wasted them in counter-attacks, in terrain where the german armour could benefit form their greater accuracy at longer range. The great battle of Prohorvka was not this huge mix of armour, but a series of assaults by russian armoured corps from the 5th Guard tank army assaulting the positions of the SS II Panzerkorp. The german armour usually counterattacked the russians, and did not loose that much armour that was irreparable in this fight, but they lost hundreds of their panzergrenadiers. And it was these casualities, the elite infantry, that forced the germans to call it off. When the SS panzers advanced, after the battle, they where stoped cold by two strong russian "pakfronts", that is batteries of well-dugin 7.62mm anti-tankguns and minefields. There together with russian anti-tank infantry, artillery and Sturmoviks was what bled the germans, and against these threats, the tanks needed the panzergrenadiers for protection.
The heavy losses of elite infantry at Prohorkva was what swung the balance, and when the russians launched their offensive farther north, the germans had to abandon everything and rush to the aid.
-
As I said infantry in all its colours as the queen of all weapons....
as we have the history braintrust on this forum....are there any clever descriptions why the italians failed to badly....is there any actual great deed they conducted during that whole war? And why did they fail so miserably they also had a demented psycho as their leader and quite a large army.
Yes the navy of Germany was....well soft and weak. Main reason why I donīt increase the navy at all if I play Hearts of Iron 2 (I am so looking forward to play the third part) it is all tanks, infantry and planes for me.
-
That might be the name, yes. I just took a quick glans on the cover, saying "D-day" :wink:
I was sort of surprised by the length of the title when I saw it.
-
Antony Beevor's book on Stalingrad has some interesting points about the "lesser" Axis nations and their poor showing, a lot of it can be atributed to a simple lack of equipment, supplies and men - with the bulk of all of it going to the Germans, on top of that the Germans simply discounted the lesser nations, abandoning them to their fate or using them as cannon fodder.
At Stalingrad the Romanians simply werent believed when they told the Germans they were being counterattacked and so where a german division would have been re-enforced the Romanians were abandoned and swept aside.
Anyone here ever play "Combat Missions 1, 2 or 3" on the PC? Anyone still play it? PM me if so :D (if you havent heard of it, it is quite simply the best combat simulation of WW2 on the PC)
Also, not played FoG yet, but have played a few WW2 table top games, somewhere along the line they always seem to imbalance something. Early war is also the most fun imo :)
-
I played those games with my brother he is a wehrmacht fanboy (as some others here also seem to be) so I was stuck with the soviets and the brits most of the times but I really enjoyed that game and would love to play some email gaming if you would like to ...but only one condition weather and time random fighting every day on a clear day in flat terrain against german tanks...no thank you :biggriin:
right now my gaming pc is broken so I would need a week to be ready for some nasty fighting
Now you got me all giggly again
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DR0P4BP7L._SL500_AA280_.jpg)
The only thing that game lacks is some form of campaign where you can carry your troops over to the next battle and have secure supply with raiding missions etc. The possibilities are grand. There was even a hobby attempt to creat a "Combat Missions Campaign" game.
-
Doesnīt anyone still play the game "Steel panther"? I love this game and we got an old machine with Win95 so we can run it.
But Combat mission was lovely. So lovely.
Well, as Beevor describes, the Romanians where totally outgunned and they surely did not get much aid. The germans always belived they had the russians on the verge of breaking, so if they just pushed a little bit more and focused their strength, they would have victory in their hands.
The flung the romanians and italians out on some flanks and mauled everything into Stalingrad, to follow Beevors example. They totally failed to detect the russian concentration of forces, beliveing they where bleeding the russians dry at Stalingrad, when in fact it was the russians getting them more and more stuck in. Anthony Beevors description of that russian offensive that broke over the romanian lines are very telling. The romanian army suffered, as did also partially the italian army, by a divide between officers and soldiers that was clearly marked.
And on top of that, many of the romanian officers panicked and basically cried "Retreat!" and made a run for it. However, the romanian NCO and rank and file, did the opposite. They manned their posts and despite having few antitank guns, and those being of the measly 37mm calibre hardly useful against a T34 unless used against rear armour, and managed to repell the first assault wave!
But in the end, they simply could not hold against the massed material and personal superiority that the russians sent against them.
But the romanian soldiers surely deserve a better reputation. They went to war with crap and still fought a galant action that day, but an action that was quietly forgotten as they where made scapegoats.
The italians have infact been the victims of a severe case of propaganda smackdown. The brits used their early successes in the desert to paint the italians as weak and cowardly soldiers with no stomach for fighting. Rommel gave a more mixed impression of them, but he has mostly been cited for his less flattering remarks about the italians, rather than when he lauded them.
However, when you start looking into it, the true reasons behind the italians generally bad showing was lack of necessities and a class divide between officers and men. This last case was especially true in the many infantry divisions, where the officers often came from the urbanized and industrialized northern Italy, while many of the infantrymens came from the heavily populated but rural southern Italy. And Italy is more culturally splintered than people think.
This meant the cohesion and trust and respect needed between officers and men was usually lacking, and with the infantry being the backbone of the army, you can figure how that would affect overall fighting capacity.
However, it did not mean the italians could not fight. On many occasions the italian infantry gave their best! The problem was that their best was not what the other side could throw at them. It was especially glaring when it came to antitank weapons, which meant that the poor italian infantrymens simply could not stand up toward the Matilda supported british attacks.
The supply also let them down on many occasions, and the abyss between officers and men when it came to what food each had to eat was glaring. The italian infantryman had to make do with basic small arms, had fewer submachineguns, but had at least good light machineguns. But as soon was you entered the realm of heavier support weapons, and especially the very needed antitank weaponry, they where almost naked from the start.
The finns where in a somewhat similar state, but they managed to get a decent antitank capacity and they had the great blessing of their forests, an enviorment where infantry is almost supreme. They also had a superior training and army structure, based on the german system, and the connection between rank and file and officers where much better.
But the italians did take many causalities, and this alone shows that they did try to fight, but on many occasions the odds where against them from the start.
But if you look at the more specialized branch of the italian army, the picture is not as bleak. The italian artillery was efficient and got praised by Rommel. They lacked, as usual, the best materiel. They where ready to fight "To the muzzle". The italian signal units, recon units and such where good. The Bergsaglieri mountain troops where true elites and recognized as such.
Specialist units, even such that where not supposed to be combat unit, as one special italian signal and listening post that where attacked by a crack force of New Zeelanders, put up a fierce and bitter resistance but simply where outgunned.
The italian armour was in many ways a very heroic arm. They where disciplined and proud and would surely have made their roman forbears proud with their courage. On occasions they launched desperate and futile counterattacks just to gain some time, and in the end, what let them down was once more the lack of good or even decent equipment.
In short, the italian soldiers where average, with many examples of true elite that also had high and even exellent morale. The problem was that they where mostly sent out to fight with nothing but crap, and expected to stand up to enemy heavy armour in the desert, where there is great difficulties for the infantry to hide.
-
But didnīt they also have AA weapons like the 8`8 that they could fire against the matilda tanks? The German tanks in the beginning were also quite weak in the armour and gun department fast turrets and good speed yes but they also didnīt stand a chance against for example the matilda.
Is there somethin true about that Flames of War rule for the italians "The million bayonets" that their units also were quite mixed with professionals and raw recruits that never have seen combat before?
I think another thing that some forget is how stubborn the british fought. Especially in northern africa they put up a hell of a fight they were a terrible strong enemy.
Also Mathi thank you for your great replies....
well perhaps one could lure you also into a combat mission email game.
-
I donīt have combat mission! :icon_razz:
And yes, their units where mixed between professionals and raw recruits, which meant that cohesion and general efficiency could be lacking.
-
I am also in the quality over quantity department....that counts even for the russians their elites made the day in the second world war not their masses of unmotivated soldiers.
-
I played those games with my brother he is a wehrmacht fanboy (as some others here also seem to be) so I was stuck with the soviets and the brits most of the times but I really enjoyed that game and would love to play some email gaming if you would like to ...but only one condition weather and time random fighting every day on a clear day in flat terrain against german tanks...no thank you :biggriin:
right now my gaming pc is broken so I would need a week to be ready for some nasty fighting
Now you got me all giggly again
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DR0P4BP7L._SL500_AA280_.jpg)
The only thing that game lacks is some form of campaign where you can carry your troops over to the next battle and have secure supply with raiding missions etc. The possibilities are grand. There was even a hobby attempt to creat a "Combat Missions Campaign" game.
Dead right about the lack of proper campaign thing and no, dont worry, no flat plains in good weather against germans :)
Playing against the PC I always took allies anyway, apart from one mission where it was impossible lol
Still the only game where the AI taught me a thing or two about small unit tactics and tried to flank me!
CM: Overlord Onwards was my fave despite being late war, though scenarios in June '44 when you could buy naval artillery support, watching those 12" rounds land was soooo sweet lol
-
Have you ever used the Sturmtiger?
(http://i4.tinypic.com/10yewxl.jpg)
Two of those annihalted half my army in one turn because all my Infantry was on the run and the t-34 close together it needs like 10 minutes to reload but the shot is devestating.
-
Antony Beevor's book on Stalingrad has some interesting points about the "lesser" Axis nations and their poor showing, a lot of it can be atributed to a simple lack of equipment, supplies and men - with the bulk of all of it going to the Germans, on top of that the Germans simply discounted the lesser nations, abandoning them to their fate or using them as cannon fodder.
At Stalingrad the Romanians simply werent believed when they told the Germans they were being counterattacked and so where a german division would have been re-enforced the Romanians were abandoned and swept aside.
Interesting info. Leads me to immediately ask why the Germans wouldn't have listened?
Anyone here ever play "Combat Missions 1, 2 or 3" on the PC? Anyone still play it? PM me if so :D (if you havent heard of it, it is quite simply the best combat simulation of WW2 on the PC)
Also, not played FoG yet, but have played a few WW2 table top games, somewhere along the line they always seem to imbalance something. Early war is also the most fun imo :)
FoG?
-
This game is probably the best supported in my local hobby store. Tons of stuff on the racks. I think a private school right next to it runs campaigns a lot. One of the history teachers is using it to get the kids interested in history it seems.
-
Well, as Beevor describes, the Romanians where totally outgunned and they surely did not get much aid. The germans always belived they had the russians on the verge of breaking, so if they just pushed a little bit more and focused their strength, they would have victory in their hands.
The flung the romanians and italians out on some flanks and mauled everything into Stalingrad, to follow Beevors example. They totally failed to detect the russian concentration of forces, beliveing they where bleeding the russians dry at Stalingrad, when in fact it was the russians getting them more and more stuck in. Anthony Beevors description of that russian offensive that broke over the romanian lines are very telling. The romanian army suffered, as did also partially the italian army, by a divide between officers and soldiers that was clearly marked.
And on top of that, many of the romanian officers panicked and basically cried "Retreat!" and made a run for it. However, the romanian NCO and rank and file, did the opposite. They manned their posts and despite having few antitank guns, and those being of the measly 37mm calibre hardly useful against a T34 unless used against rear armour, and managed to repell the first assault wave!
But in the end, they simply could not hold against the massed material and personal superiority that the russians sent against them.
But the romanian soldiers surely deserve a better reputation. They went to war with crap and still fought a galant action that day, but an action that was quietly forgotten as they where made scapegoats.
I understood that the Romainians also had some Pak 37/97s, but perhaps these weren't available at Stalingrad?
-
This game is probably the best supported in my local hobby store. Tons of stuff on the racks. I think a private school right next to it runs campaigns a lot. One of the history teachers is using it to get the kids interested in history it seems.
Battlefront seems to make a decent effort at providing historical information their rules booklets, and their web site.
Since I picked up the starter set mentioned in the inital post, I've also purchased two German infantry platoons in blister pacs, GE722 and GE732, and having two different ones was done to mix up the pacs a it when modeling so that no two stands of soldiers looks the same. The rules provide for the making of Panzer, Mechanized Infantry, and Infantry companies. I'll be doing the latter and I've started doing research on which unit I wanted to model. I figure if I'm going to give this system a try, I might as well make the modeling part fun as well, while learning something, too.
I started out looking at the Eastern theater (late war), but moved to the Western theater when I discovered so much to review when trying to pick something. It looks like I'm going to make my units after the 346th Infantry Division, and I just discovered the units shoulder patch insignia the other day, and now the trick will be to paint these on 15mm soldiers. Although, I do have an example of how to do this from Battlefront's second "The Art of War" book that focuses on modeling the Germans. And I have a magnifying lamp, too.
If you are thinking of getting involved with this, be certain you do your homework before buying anything, and if you have questions let me know.
-
Due to the gracious MrDWhitey, I know got the Battlefield evolution:World at War rules on my computer. My bloody printer has not worked for aeons, but hey, they are inthere at least so now the fun begins! :icon_mrgreen:
-
If you are thinking of getting involved with this, be certain you do your homework before buying anything, and if you have questions let me know.
I'm actually going to be getting into Epic soon, methinks. I can only handle one new system at a time. :wink:
-
LotR (as Mr. D can atest- he's been helping me make lists before I buy stuff) for me.
-
Due to the gracious MrDWhitey, I know got the Battlefield evolution:World at War rules on my computer. My bloody printer has not worked for aeons, but hey, they are inthere at least so now the fun begins! :icon_mrgreen:
I've been looking them over and I quite like the rules. Only 40-50 pages of rules, 100 of army lists and scenarios.
LotR (as Mr. D can atest- he's been helping me make lists before I buy stuff) for me.
Get legions!
-
I like them aswell!
Especially the focus on the small unit combat, and not the big stuff. Gotta have to get more minis for my WWI armies, due to the battalion scale of The Great War, so the focus on the infantry platoons in BE:WaW is refreshing! I am tempted to get away into Gothenburg and getting hold of a box of germans and a box of Russians so me and my son can start practicing right away.
-
Haha, funny. I was putting my Biography of Caesar by Adrian Goldsworthy back in the shelf when I notice one book, and it turns out that it is Niklas Zetterlings book Kursk :icon_mrgreen: I am so going to read it now :icon_mrgreen:
-
My understanding is it is very good. I'm liking the "Normandy 1944: ... " one enough to pick up the Kursk one asap. :icon_cool:
-
I hope no one objects to a little thread necromancy.
A short while ago, the only FoW players around here were two guys(US airborne, SS Panzer) in my city and British player in a nearby city. I guess all it took for more people to start was for me to verbally commit to starting. One guy ordered a bunch of US infantry stuff, another is going for US armored, and a third wants to play Russians of some type.
I ordered the Open Fire start and got it yesterday. The rulebook slipped out of its cover during my first read-through and the two Stugs had damaged armored skirts. :icon_evil: I suppose I can forgive that, apparently in the non-starter kits the skirts are a separate/metal piece. Going to see about getting replacements... Through my LGS I ordered the first units for my Panzer Lehr force.
-
In seeing the mention of FoW on another thread, searched for this one, and discovered I'd forgotten how much good info was being reviewed here. Nice read this morning, thanks guys!
Since I last posted, besides the basic rules set that comes with 3 Shermans and 2 Stugs, I picked up two packs of German grenadiers, about 70 figures or so, and seperated them out into small groups for painting and basing them. Didn't get much further unfortunately.
About a year ago, encountered a store having a sale on all FoW stuff, an so I picked up 3 Marder IIIs, a pack of 2 7.5 PaK40 AT guns, and HQ company, a HQ heaquarters scenery piece, and a box of a 10.5 Artillery battery. Have had so much going on, I haven't even cracked these open.
Somewhere along the line, I need set these all up, base coat them, and get to doing some painting.
-
I'm going to have to take a look through this thread and the other one you pointed out Games Poet. I will likely be purchasing an American army in June. Having gotten the free copy of the 3rd edition rules has really pushed me over the edge. I then need to decide on a Axis army. I'm the type that has to have two armies so that I can have an army for other people to use, in order to bring them into the game.
-
3rd edition ... hmmm ... wondering if thats what I have, when did that come out?
Also, keep in mind that each force can make infantry, mechanized, or armor forces, and they play obviously differently against eachother.
-
3rd edition technically isn't released until March 10th. They've had a promotion for the last month to give away a free copy of the small soft cover book for free to everyone who purchased a copy of the 2nd edition book. Just take it to your local store that sells Flames of War products. They should have copies of the new book and they will put a gold veteran sticker in your book and then give you a copy of the book. If you don't have a local store you can contact Battlefront anytime before March 10th and they'll hook you up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddt8rKpbyWs&feature=related
-
Probably can't get one since I only have the small version of 2nd edition that came with the starter set.
-
It would hurt to ask!
-
im rather interested in getting into flames of war , can anyone suggest a good starter set or selection of things to get me started? i know 3rd editions round the corner if not here already? so maybe best to wait a little bit longer?
-
The third edition hardback is out now. It comes with a softcover Hobby book and Forces book, which essentially replaces the old Fortress Europe book. It contains basic army lists for British, US, German, and Russian armies. From what I understand it has rules to build an infantry, mechanized, or armored force for all three of them. I'm guessing this is based on Late war as the US is in it. That would be a good place to start.
From there you really have to decide what kind of army you want. I was talking to one of the employees at my local store who is into FoW he said he thinks one armored company, and a couple infantry companies is a good start, with some command for them, assuming you want a good mix of infantry and armor.
I'm deciding exactly how I want to dive in myself. It won't be until June though.
-
Infantry all the way tanks are incredibly expensive for the FOW line.
British Infantry with big artillery support and anti tank guns ...Huzzah!
Hmm I will check the local hobby store what is new and might in 2 years delve into another tabletop.
-
I see the wisdom of infantry but ..... theres gonna be tanks! :happy: no doubt ill pick up some footsloggers too , think i might try and grab the 3rd edition books this weekend then , start learning :)
-
Who needs tanks if you can have !AIRBORNE!
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Rules/Airlanding-Rules.pdf (http://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Rules/Airlanding-Rules.pdf)
You know it is what Chuck Norris would do.
-
From what I understand, an all tank army is very difficult to play due to most Flames of War Scenarios being objective based. Tanks can take objectives fairly easily, but they have a hard time holding objectives. You really need a combined force to do well. Tanks to overrun and take objectives, then infantry to move in and hold them.
-
Or infantry just pounding everything with artillery and anti tank guns and trolling in to take the win.
I would like to take Germany just for the storm trooper movement but it would be too cliche so I think Britain is even better!
Any Reference for army organization of a British rifle company or some Airborne?
-
I'm only just getting my feet wet with Flames of War, so I don't know what's in the book. As the Forces book replaces Fortress Europe I'm sure it has the rules for the standard British Rifle company. My local store employee said that Fortress Europe had good solid basic lists for all four of the main countries. He's suspecting that it will pretty much be the same. I'm guessing there will be no airborne rules in that book though.
-
But...Airborne is fun!
Well British rifle company is nice too as long as I can take some royal engineers in there too.
And artillery...boom boom boom.
-
I can't help but like FoW, because... it's from New Zealand... :eusa_clap: :::cheers:::
-
http://theplasticsoldiercompany.co.uk/ 15mm tanks that don't cost 10 bucks apiece.
I'm thinking of getting ahold about bunch of the British Shermans and making a Guards Armoured Division company.
I've also been thinking of running the Sturmdivision list from Grey Wolf/Stalin's Onslaught. I'm really not enjoying playing Gepanzerte Panzergrenadiers. I feel like I'm playing Eldar - one wrong and I'm dead. And the army was expensive as heck.
-
Hey guys, just wanted to join the FoW thread here. Got my first FoW minis a few days ago, I'm planning to do a Soviet Midwar Strelkovy Batallion any hints or tips what to add? I currently have the HQ, 2 Comps of Rifle/MG platoons and an assault gun company of IS 122.
Btw any pic thread for FoW, or do you just submit your pics to this thread?
-
(People play Midwar where you live?! :icon_mrgreen:)
I would add some HMG teams and artillery.
-
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 60 days.
Another thread of long time, no post. :icon_lol:
I still got Germans in 15mm scale for this, but I've been gravitating towards 20mm instead, although not sure I'll use this rules system, but more likely Rapid Fire.
So ... what's the status of this game system, anybody know? Been seeing it still played at some stores, but not seemingly as much as it once was.
-
A new LGS just opened up about a month ago and they don't have any in stock. I think my old LGS (the one you visited, GP) still has some, but I don't think it's moving. They used to have an agreement with one of the local private schools where the kids would come in and play the game to learn WWII tactics, but not sure if that's still going on. I wish I had classes like that...
Anyway, I'm not sure how popular it is around here in the rural areas.
-
It is really hot in germany lately together with infinity....sadly the guys playing it are very anal about historical accurate armies and battles...nah japan never fought the krauts sorry mate we cant play.
-
Anal? What is wrong with buttse... Oops! Sorry, wrong topic. Personally, it would feel strange to send finns to fight japanese! Feel it Fandir! You must feel it. It is almost as absurd as HE fighting HE!
And why must you have only one army when you can get them so cheap!
Me and the lad is going into FoW. Mid and early war now. I have found plastic soldier company, your saviour in the 15mm jungle. I have started to collect Russians, so I can fight the Hungarians that my lad will get. Then he will also get a german heavy tank company. And I will of course get finns so he can field my russians with his KV-5 midwar monsters.
I got 130 russian infantry for about 15 Euro from Plastic soldier company. Then a box with Russian heavy weapons for about the same, bagging me 4 maxims, 8 PTRD, 4 light mortars, 4 medium mortars and 4 heavy mortars. Then a box of 5, yes 5 T-34:s for about 15 Euros. I have added a pack of Battlefront russian casualites and a T-34 with 57mm gun for 20 Euro total!
That gives me a 1500 point Guard Rifle batallion with armoured support! I have added a scout platoon for another 10 Euro. And I will get myself 4 Zis-3 guns and 45mm AT-guns for another 30 Euro total. Plastic Soldier company is your friend. Gives you the volume that you can spice with the more expensive Battlefront stuff. I will probably get myself a Tankovy batallion too. After all, plastic is cheap!
Then I must admit I am also thrilled about the Rota Razvedki, but I need a bunch of them fancy M3A1 scout cars, 10 in all. But they are expensive. BUT Plastic Soldier Company sell german Sdkfz 251:s in packs of 5, for about 15 Euros! And the russian Raszedki can take captured 251:s instead of M3 scout cars! Sneaky russkies!
I will probably make myself a company of landsers and get my mate Tom to play them.
So instead of raping the sanctity of history get more cheap armies, Fandir. That way I cold play youif we meet someday. Anal is the way to go to get TRUE enjoyment.
My son will get japs so we can bash russian vs japs later. And maybe make some history rape and have finns fight japs for some real infantry badassery. But you should not really let fights fight anyone but russians. That would be close to a warcrime since the would tear anything else totally apart.
-
Yep, Plastic Soldier seesm to do a decent enough job with their figures. My first purchase was 20mm StuGs, but not for Flames of War, and instead going to use them with Rapid Fire.
-
Anal is the way to go to get TRUE enjoyment.
Well, here's a new sig if anyone needs one.
-
And it would be the first I wrote here while drunk so swiftly, go grab a true drunken viking sig! I will trademark it but I will allow you to use it if you just give me credit for it. :engel:
Plastic Soldiers are ace. Not least their tanks!
Now, I have become a sucker for the true unsung heroes of Mother Russia. The Anti-tank gunners. They were a true elite recognized as such even by Stalin. Wermacht said they were the true opponent to the Panzerwaffe and always very skilled and tactical. 75% of all panzerlosses on the eastern front were caused by soviet AT guns and AT assault guns, who were also organkized by the artillery. Hence I am going to get more light and heavy AT guns to support my infantry. And some SU-122 assault guns who helped to stop the germans in the north of the Kursk salient.
My tanks will form the core of a Tankovy battalion later. One or two will get to support my finns instead.
-
They had a tutorial day the other day at the LGS (that store is great). Didn't get a chance to go. Not sure I want to get started in another system right now, either.
-
Don't think I even have the newest rules for this system. Not that I'm interested in learning currently. Way too many other rules systems rumbling around in my head at the moment.