|
Leo Showers posted:I'm merely commenting that you post contains some really bizarre reasoning, such as but not limited to being okay with throwing your own money away, justifying the move that it's going to "be better", and then reinforcing your position with "you mad" and "nerds getting mad over change" I spent 24-26 bucks on easy army, used it for idk, maybe 3-4 years. Obviously didn't buy books that were already out of date. Half the lists on there were free. The books were 2 bucks a piece. I guess you would have cause to be miffed if you bought every single thing on there the day before BF dropped the Forces of War announcement (and somehow were so oblivious to the numerous statements from BF that they were planning on doing something like easy army in the future), but that's probably like 2 people in the entire world. $26 bucks over 3 years of weekly use? Getting upset about that is just stupid. There is no other way to describe it but in those terms. So yeah, It is just Grognard rage about poo poo changing. I guarantee you half the fuckers didn't even buy one book on easy army and just used it for the free PDF's. Edit: Also judging from the official forums, half of them are also the idiots who cried and screamed about V3 being a blatant grab for cash from BF because they "just" bought their v2 rule books when it came out (6 years ago) and oh its so terrible and they were quitting blah blah blah. Still around to piss and moan about Forces though. So yeah not only are they stupid, they are entitled little pricks too. Numlock fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Dec 13, 2014 |
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 09:07 |
|
|
Numlock posted:words about nerds The Flames of War forums were horrible back when I checked it, and I'd imagine their forums are still terrible now. The e-book thing that Battlefront are offering actually looks like a good change, something I'd definitely use if I was still wanting to play. I do agree in a way, easyarmy was never going to stay around because you really didn't have to buy the books if you didn't want to and it was amazingly cheap for what it was. It was only a matter of time until it was locked down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
In an unrelated note, there's no reason to ever go to Tamya Playmodel Factory in Tokyo. It's not big, it's not interesting, and you can find most of their range in any decent model store anyway. Also, I couldn't find a 1:48 Hind or T-55 because they don't make one. Tho 1:48 Cold War stuff seems sparse in general.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
I want to say that plastic models caught on during the Cold War, coinciding with the boom of cheap & plentiful plastic. There might be a connection there, but I don't know enough about the hobby to say. Zvezda just started a line of Cold War 1/72 infantry and 1:100 vehicles. Which reminds me that I finally wound up going with Cold War Gone Hot for Force on Force for my windfall of Cold War Romanians. Reading up on them, it seems like Russia would be the most likely enemy force - and lucky for me there's no shortage of 15mm Russians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
moths posted:I want to say that plastic models caught on during the Cold War, coinciding with the boom of cheap & plentiful plastic. There might be a connection there, but I don't know enough about the hobby to say. The scales still confuse me. Would those 1/72 or 1:100 be compatible with FoW? How did you Romanians turn up, the end? TQ d8, Morale d6, normal supplies, etc?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
JcDent posted:The scales still confuse me. Would those 1/72 or 1:100 be compatible with FoW? 1:100 is compatible with FoW/any 15mm scale wargame. Has Italeri started making those 1/56 scale models for Bolt Action yet? I need an excuse to ship things other than Gunpla to my apartment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:1:100 is compatible with FoW/any 15mm scale wargame. Ah, Gunpla. Was at Gundam museum yesterday. They used to make "Hovertrucks", which really were hover BTR-50s
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
Springfield Fatts posted:My brother picked up the D Day Bolt Action set recently and wants me to try it with him. Coming from (mostly) 40k, but also having played Infinity, DzC and Warmachine how is the playstyle of this ruleset? I know nothing other than "turns are diced by drawing die from a bag." It is similar in many ways. The main differences: Each unit generates an order die. These go into a bag and you pick them out then activate your units individually - they move, shoot, assault etc. Unit by unit. No alpha strike Negatives for cover etc are in hit vs cover saves. Makes a lot more sense Morale matters a lot more. If you get hit by a squad you take a pin. When it comes time to activate you pass a morale test if you want to do anything. Pins subtract from your to hit rolls Everyone is a human, the weapons are similar. 40k is very much about how many special rules you can throw on the table. BA is more about force morale and strategy Assault is super super deadly. Generally the losing side is wiped from the field. Morale check failures remove your squad from the table. In general broken morale meant a group would be non functioning for a while, not fifteen minutes http://www.warlordgames.com/guide-to-bolt-action-for-40k-players/ muggins fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Dec 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:
Yep, I believe they've done a Cromwell, Panther, T34, PanzerIV and Sherman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Does anyone have any recommendations for picking up some cheapish 28mm minis that would work with Saga? I picked up the Byzantine starter box on sale this weekend and need some ax wielding Varangian Guard-looking dudes to protect my Emperor 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
Gripping Beast makes good plastic Vikings, and Wargames Factory makes some really cheap ones that clean up nice if you have more time to polish them than money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Commissar Canuck posted:Does anyone have any recommendations for picking up some cheapish 28mm minis that would work with Saga? I picked up the Byzantine starter box on sale this weekend and need some ax wielding Varangian Guard-looking dudes to protect my Emperor http://us-store.warlordgames.com/collections/dark-ages/infantry
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
Yeah those are the previously mentioned Gripping Beast ones. Crusader makes a good set of actual Varangians that are decently priced since you don't need that many of them for SAGA (like 8 I think?).
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
Weird coincidence since I've spent the weekend building Gripping Beast plastics and metals for a couple of starter warbands to put a Saga demo on at my LGS. I'm less diplomatic than others and I would say the Wafgames Factory ones are shite. Soft detail, awkward poses, too many pieces and you have to hack the necks away to get the heads to fit properly and avoid them looking as if they have giraffe necks. I picked up a job lot of them cheap so they are kind of tolerable to flesh out the back ranks of my Hail Caesar/ War and Conquest forces but for Saga I decided I can't tolerate them. I do know cost is an issue though because for you non Brits my understanding is the a Gripping Beast plastics are way more money than the Wargames Factory ones, where here, other than that crazy deal I picked up at a show, the prices are the same. It came back to bite me though as I put a Gripping Beast order in for a pack of metal Anglo Dane warriors and when they arrived I opened my gaming cupboard to find a unopened box of Gripping Beast plastic unarmoured Dark Age warriors I must have bought a couple of years back and forgot I had. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
Numlock posted:I spent 24-26 bucks on easy army, used it for idk, maybe 3-4 years. Obviously didn't buy books that were already out of date. Half the lists on there were free. The books were 2 bucks a piece.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
What is bad about a company offering an convenient way of getting their products in a digital form at a price cheaper than buying the physical media? At least theoretically, I've heard there have been some problems with Forces, haven't used it yet myself. BF allowed Easy Army to exist as a courtesy because they at the time didn't provide that service. They understood that it was a very useful tool for a lot of folks. Now that they do there is nothing wrong with them shutting it down. Grogs are mad because a service that was free or very cheap now costs more (an absurdly trivial amount compared to what this hobby costs), but they had no right to expect that service to remain free/cheap forever. Just because something costed them $2 bucks at some point in the past does not mean it will or should cost $2 till the heat death of the Universe, never the less this is what they appear to expect. Comparing this to GW's practices is completely out of proportion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
muggins posted:Very helpful post. Thanks, this was exactly what I was looking for. First game this weekend, looking forward to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Springfield Fatts posted:Thanks, this was exactly what I was looking for. First game this weekend, looking forward to it. NP! Hope you like it. Bolt Action is the game I've been most excited about in a long, long, time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
I bought a whole bunch of paints for my Warmachine models in Wehrmacht/Panzer colors and I've got the bug for some Bolt-Action too - I've seen a couple of people using the WGF or Perry Miniatures to put together a 1000pt force. Has anyone got a link to some well produced video batreps which don't involve a) beasts of war b) cosplay?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 11:01
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I bought a whole bunch of paints for my Warmachine models in Wehrmacht/Panzer colors and I've got the bug for some Bolt-Action too - I've seen a couple of people using the WGF or Perry Miniatures to put together a 1000pt force. Has anyone got a link to some well produced video batreps which don't involve a) beasts of war b) cosplay? I know it's not BA, but if you want to check into a system that is a little bit more different you might also like to take a look at Chain of Command. Either way you can use the same minis, so if you get into both it's like you have two very different games without having to buy and paint more minis! If I were to recommend east/west front Germans I'd take a look at Warlord Games's Blitzkrieg Germans. NOTE! Their late war Germans kit is clearly not as good as their Blitzkrieg kit, so don't get them if you can avoid it. I've painted up almost a company of their Blitzkrieg Germans and still love the kit, which is a good endorsement. Their engineers kit, which is based on the Blitzkrieg kit with metal parts, is also fun. If I wasn't married to the idea of east or west front I'd get the Perry Miniatures North Africa box, because those boxes have everything you need for a platoon, since you get more support and such on the sprues. In fact, my next project will probably be to buy some to paint up a bunch of Allied troops based on the Siege of Tobruk, with a little bit of support. Should be cheap and simle. Really, with a British box and a German box and the CoC/BA rulebook, you have everything you need for a two-player WW2 game for £60/£65.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 12:11
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I bought a whole bunch of paints for my Warmachine models in Wehrmacht/Panzer colors and I've got the bug for some Bolt-Action too - I've seen a couple of people using the WGF or Perry Miniatures to put together a 1000pt force. Has anyone got a link to some well produced video batreps which don't involve a) beasts of war b) cosplay? We have done a few batreps so far for BA on our club channel. About 15 mins long, no cosplay or BoW. They're not super well produced as I just take the video then add a few things in - not a whole lot of time to do overlays etc. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLd4hZWIDTpYc84HuPwMR-hSsJM3vx95gN
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 12:28
|
|
|
Indeed, I watched a few of the CoC videos and I have a copy of the rulebook around somewhere - how does it compare rules-wise to BA (for someone who's played neither).
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 13:23
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:Indeed, I watched a few of the CoC videos and I have a copy of the rulebook around somewhere - how does it compare rules-wise to BA (for someone who's played neither). In my experience: BA is a little bit more "here's my group of kickass troops, artillery and tanks, I move them forwards blam! blam! blam!", while CoC is more "holy gently caress why won't my loving units do what I tell them to! And where the hell did that tank come from?". Hidden army lists and unpredictable deployment plays a larger role in CoC, but the fighting is more about squads of infantry fighting each other with 1-2 support options per side. BA has more "toys" on the table even at 1000 pts. I feel that CoC is maybe a little bit more historically correct in that the battles more closely resemble a "typical" WW2 encounter, while BA is maybe a little more "cool WW2 movie setpiece"? And while I like CoC there are also quite a few gaps in the rules if you play it out of the box (the German 1941 army list I use is completely bonkers, with some clearly superior vehicles being cheaper than worse ones. Flamers are also incredibly good for the points in general, etc.). But in general I feel that there are more unrealistic rules in BA, such as how support acts on the battlefield, the balance between machine-guns and rifles and so on. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:the German 1941 army list I use is completely bonkers, with some clearly superior vehicles being cheaper than worse ones. Would you mind elaborating on this? I wonder if the costs aren't based more on historical availability than their value in the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
moths posted:Would you mind elaborating on this? I wonder if the costs aren't based more on historical availability than their value in the game. CoC does not use a point cost system. Instead you're given a historical infantry platoon which comes with a rating(strong platoons like US armored rifles have higher ratings than regular soviet rifle platoons). The difference in the ratings between platoons is added to the support total of the weaker platoon which is used to buy things like tanks. This is where the balance falters a little bit because the support element costs are bit off for some things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
What I mean is that the more historically common support options would appear in the lower tier lists. So something like a mortar team would be on Tier 1 or 2, while a bridge-laying tank might be Tier 5. The mortar team is more useful, but also much more common. I think Pz IIIs were more common in 41 than Pz IIs, and I wonder if this is TFL's way of nudging players towards more historical conflicts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
moths posted:Would you mind elaborating on this? I wonder if the costs aren't based more on historical availability than their value in the game. That was also my initial thought, but according to what the authors posts etc., it's clear that it is not supposed to be based on historical availability but rather value in the game. This is also generally how the lists works. But then there are some places where the lists simply doesn't make sense. I use the German 1940 (not 41 as I wrote) list, and here's an example: On list five, so basically "five points", I can get a Sdkfz 231 armoured car. A super cool looking vehicle that I just had to get when I saw it. On list four, so "for four points", I can get a Pz. IV A-C. Cool, but still a basic looking tank. The 231 has 3 armour, 6 HE and 4 AP, no hull MG. The Panzer IV C has 4 armour, 6 HE and 5 AP, no hull MG. There is no chance I could rationalize taking the 231 over the Pz. IV, even if their cost had been the same. But somehow the 231 is more expensive. If I still wanted to spend the five points I could get a Pz. IV D instead, which has armour 4, 6 HE, 5 AP and adds a hull MG so that it will tear through infantry twice as fast as the 231. I could even shoot tanks while shooting infantry with the MG! So it is a better armoured tank that is clearly better against vehicles and twice as good against infantry. For the same cost as the 231. So, for me who likes the look of the 231 and is currently painting one because of that, it feels tough to convince myself to field a vehicle that is not just mediocre, but so obviously a sub-par choice. The Pz. III also costs the same as a Pz. IV, but has worse stats. Yay Pz. III! At least it is cheaper than the Pz. II, which is faster but worse at everything else. Thinking about it, I somehow imagine that they gave way too much credit to speed an wheeled vs. tracked for this list, but I have never been in a situation in our games where the speed of vehicles is important (because they support infantry in relatively close combat). So all the fast vehicles, which I happen to like the look of, are hopelessly handicapped in cost compared to the heavier tanks. There are similar snags in some other lists as well, and the simple solution is that we will sit down together at the club and make our own, modified lists. It's not impossible, but I still can't figure out what the fat lardies were aiming at when they made this list. EDIT: Actually, the worst case is my Sd. Kfz. 222, which I just adore, which is also four points. For armour 2, HE 6, AP 4, no hull MG. So worse anti-tank than the Pz. IV at the same cost, but half the armour so that it is guaranteed to start taking damage as soon as anything heavier than a Mosin-Nagant is aimed at it. Score! I've fielded mine only once, I just couldn't justify it after that. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
I'm guessing that speed was the deciding factor, since being able to park something on an opponent's Jump-Off Point is huge in Chain. But it's been too long for me to say with any certainty. I'll read up on it some more, it's probably intentional but that intent is mysterious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
I like the idea of the jump-off points, and I like the idea of the infantry + support; but the command dice thing is really killing it for me - it seems so hilariously convoluted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
The command dice play out a lot cleaner on the table than they read in the book! It's probably one of my favorite activation systems. You get some battlefield friction, but you can force an action if you really need to - it just comes at a higher cost.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
moths posted:I think Pz IIIs were more common in 41 than Pz IIs, and I wonder if this is TFL's way of nudging players towards more historical conflicts. Depends when in 1941, before Barbarossa it was probably even, but the Germans lost a stack IIs there and then relegated them to recon roles before withdrawing them completely in 42  It's Comet time NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
BA is definitely WW2 arcade, but that makes it much more appealing and accessible for my friends, which is good. Chain of Command is barely even available for purchase from US retailers =/ I think I can get it from Brigade Games but I'm not sure
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
moths posted:I'm guessing that speed was the deciding factor, since being able to park something on an opponent's Jump-Off Point is huge in Chain. But it's been too long for me to say with any certainty. My experience is that tanks rarely dare to operate alone, since threats can turn up pretty fast from nowhere, so that they are rately held back because of a lack of speed. When choosing between an average tank with better everything and a fast but fragile tank, it's just no real choice. Bu then it might be different if we played on ginormous tables, who knows. As it is, I just think that this list in particular doesn't make sense after a dozen games with it. And command dice are simple after a game or two, but close combat is a deadly mess of dozens upon dozens of dicerolls, and it's a good thing that it rarely happens. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Thanks for the recommendations on the viking minis, everyone. Got some Varangian Guard and fancypants shield transfers on the way 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
I'm fairly new to the whole historicals business but the Perry Brothers Afrika Korps box has really tickled my fancy and has me hankering to try Bolt Action or even perhaps something from Too Fat Lardys at some point in the new year. As a convert from the GW side of things I have however noticed that I'm having a really hard time trying to gauge the quality of sculpts that a lot of 28mm manufacturers are putting out there - I can't tell if for the most part they're sloppy models, sloppy paint jobs or a combination of the two? There does seem to be a lot of effort putting in to using the *exact* right colors, but not so much when it comes to making them look believable beyond that. It's hard to suspend one's disbelief when your platoon of Panzer-grenadiers seems to be comprised of burns victims led by the elephant man. I don't know, do a lot of historical players just not believe in thinning their paints or does this style of game for the most part not attract the same level of skilled painters? I'm not trying to rant or complain - There are some great paint jobs out there and enough cool looking WW2 man dollys to keep me entertained for quite some time, I'm just trying to understand what seems to be a completely different mindset compared to what I'm used to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Historicals hearken back to the time in GW's history when everything was bit more delightfully amateurish. Exhibit A:   There is a lot of great stuff out there though, you just have to know where to look: Bunker Hill Silver Whistle Scrivsland E: If Warlord's sculpts bother you, definitely stick with Perry miniatures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
It's a little of everything you mentioned, and also GW's style getting progressively more and more cartoonish as time goes on. In historical terms people tend to split between gamers and modellers a bit more sharply than happens in the GW world too. You get some insanely detailed models, and yet the person who made it will just stare blankly at you when you talk about actually using it to play a game all the way down to people like one friend of mine who will just take whatever mans he has and throw them on the table to try out a new FoW army.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Hi! It looks like you're having some difficulty transitioning, but that's OK! You've taken the hardest step already. Most of the available 28mm stuff is good! Warlord infantry leans toward "heroic" proportions that will be familiar if you're coming from a GW background. The Perry brothers are excellent. Wargames Factory's WW2 figures are more 1/56 models - as in the proportions are closer to real people or scale models. Old Glory 25s (Battle Honors?) are actually 28mm, and decent figures with a lot of character and super cheap. Baker Company is a mixed bag, but they make a lot of figures that other companies don't. Looking for a Finnish baggage sled pulled by reindeer? Baker Company. The closest thing to GW you'll find is Battlefront, and Flames of War is a popular "first step" game for GW refugees. They're a little (a lot) loose with the history, but it's a solid action game with a very professional presentation, and produced by a company that doesn't hate it's customers. Warlord Games' Bolt Action is also going to seem familiar, because there are a lot of ex-GW staffers at work there. Some big differences: - Rules companies aren't necessarily miniatures companies! A lot of studios putting out rules aren't tied to any one figures company, so you won't find crap where such-and-such unit is suddenly massively powerful and price-hiked. - WW2 is public domain. Nobody holds exclusive rights to anything. So if you don't like Warlord's version of a unit, you've got a half-dozen other options. Unless it's a German unit, which means you've got two dozen to choose from! - Scale is up to you! If you take a natively 28mm game and use 15mm figures, congratulations - you've probably just fixed the ground scale to historical weapons ranges. If you go down to 10mm, you can just read cm for inches. Or go the other way, and bust out some 54mm Green Army Men by doubling ranges.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
I've been looking through CoC and BA rules while we've been having this discussion and I'm having a hard time working out how the melee rules work when the rubber hits the road for BA: the combination of remove-all-pins and 'you roll dice and one side dies' seems quite both quite arbitrary and lethal. For CoC I'm considering introducing my friend to the idea, but since I'll need to pick up two forces beforehand so there's no rush. Would it be accurate to describe the cliffnotes of CoC like so: * Forces deploy markers in sequence, and are locked when one side meets the other. Jump-off points are presented 6" from these markers when used. * The game is divided into alternating phases (where commanders move their troops) and turns (where long-term effects like smoke, shock wear off) * The actions a commander can play in each phase is determined by his order dice - rolls of up to four relate to units a commander can activate (team, squad, junior leader, senior leader - with cascading implications) rolls of five add to your special abilities, and rolls of six contribute to ending the present turn. If one could succinctly divide BA and CoC from a player-perspective, would it be accurate to say that BA is more like 40k and WW2 Arcade, and CoC is on a totally different foundation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 09:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 09:07 |
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I've been looking through CoC and BA rules while we've been having this discussion and I'm having a hard time working out how the melee rules work when the rubber hits the road for BA: the combination of remove-all-pins and 'you roll dice and one side dies' seems quite both quite arbitrary and lethal. Basically each side attacks simultaneously, unless there is some sort of terrain involved. You have to roll higher than the enemy rating to kill them, so killing an Inexperienced soldier might require a 3+ while killing a veteran requires a 5+. Some troops get abilities that give them two attacks, or if their weapon is a close range weapon like an SMG you often get a bonus attack as well. Side that took the most casualties loses and is destroyed. Its a good way to annihilate a squad once and for all, but yes it is very deadly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 16:59
|
|
