|
Just wanted to know if I'd get my sperg club membership revoked
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
In what could be a really good idea if they get it right, Battlefront are basically making X-Wing for Tanks. Same low price on the starter, then all they need to do is have good rules, and additional stat cards for every tank there is in all of their games, and they'll have a good, lightweight winner.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
I hope they do a modern war one but then it wouldn't be in the historicals I guess. maybe make it like 1990 or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
I dunno; 5.30 a tank doesn't seem hugely cheap. Even for battlefront; their usual vehicles are 5.20 a vehicle, and if you're not buying from BF you can get down to like £4 a vehicle. I guess if you're really into tank-X-wing, but it'd really need some awesome ruleset for that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
Don't go pleb, go Zvezda
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I dunno; 5.30 a tank doesn't seem hugely cheap. Even for battlefront; their usual vehicles are 5.20 a vehicle, and if you're not buying from BF you can get down to like £4 a vehicle. I guess if you're really into tank-X-wing, but it'd really need some awesome ruleset for that. How is it 5.30 a tank? It's competitively priced with X-Wing, which is $26 from MM at the moment. Virtually identical components, just one comes with prepaint spaceships, the other comes with coloured plastic but articulated tanks - don't forget the price includes all the tokens, cards and such.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:How is it 5.30 a tank? It's competitively priced with X-Wing, which is $26 from MM at the moment. Virtually identical components, just one comes with prepaint spaceships, the other comes with coloured plastic but articulated tanks - don't forget the price includes all the tokens, cards and such. The issue is that it's not X-Wing; X-Wing is a company-owned IP. Tanks! is a WW2 wargame, of which there are many, and a dizzying array of manufacturers. Battlefront are always in competition with Zvezda, QRF, PSC, Old Glory, etc, whereas X-Wing isn't really in competition with Crimson Skies or whatever. So, at the moment, in terms of "a game where your pieces are tanks" it's redundant with the vast collection of tanks I have, or can acquire much cheaper. So, you're right; it comes with a bunch of ancillary crap. Ancillary crap is only of any value at all, though, if the core rules are good. With other BF stuff I can buy rules or models as needed, though, whereas here I have to get them together, X-Wing style. And to be honest, I can see why they did the latter; as stated above, they have tons of competition in the realm of "15mm tanks", so doing an X-Wing and making you buy tanks you don't need so you can get bits of paper and plastic you do need makes sense. On the other hand it's one of the most annoying and anti-consumer aspects of X-Wing so I can't say I approve.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
spectralent posted:The issue is that it's not X-Wing; X-Wing is a company-owned IP. Tanks! is a WW2 wargame, of which there are many, and a dizzying array of manufacturers. Battlefront are always in competition with Zvezda, QRF, PSC, Old Glory, etc, whereas X-Wing isn't really in competition with Crimson Skies or whatever. So, at the moment, in terms of "a game where your pieces are tanks" it's redundant with the vast collection of tanks I have, or can acquire much cheaper. Yeah ok, not sure what axe you have to grind, but sure. Would you prefer I called it Wings of Glory but with tanks then? It's not about the space planes or the movie IP, it's about the way the game is packaged, and the way it plays, or at least hopefully does, and the listed contents and single gameplay image make it look an awful lot like it marches to a similar beat. Couldn't care less where anyone sourced their plastic tanks from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:I hope they do a modern war one but then it wouldn't be in the historicals I guess. Modern warfare is still history.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Yeah ok, not sure what axe you have to grind, but sure. Well, the rules aren't out yet, and I'm always wary of any game which looks like it's jumping on a bandwagon. It's a bit of a bummer that they are making tank-X-wing, though, since I already have a ton of tanks I'd be happy to play a platoon game with that I don't want to rebuy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
We have collected tons of 28mm tanks for CoC, but you rarely field more than a few at a time, and it's a bit cumbersome for playing tank platoons against tank platoons. If the rules are good I'd be up to try it in 28mm, just to have a reason to drive around a lot of tanks at the same time. Would I buy a ton of 15mm tanks for it? No. Would I do it if we didn't have tons of tanks already? Probably, if I liked the game. Sounds like a good idea to get extra use out of your collections.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
I like the sound of this, and more importantly my kids liked the sound of it. They already like X Wing so this, if the rules are fun and cool, could be a winner. It also helps I have a load of Zvezda and PSC plastic tanks lying about too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
I'm not gonna buy it because I already have two X-Wang starters I don't play that often and because of my seething, nigh-irrational hate for Panthers. Also, bought these guys yesterday with no intention of playing them or painting them historical:  I think zvezda makes them from nationed color coded plastic so you could reasonably play them out of the box. Nowhere near Gundam level of "painting? why?" though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
I don't think all zvezda stuff is "nation coloured"; I think they're the predominant colour of their camo, since IIRC their tiggers are yellow instead of the old grey plastic. On the other hand I don't actually have one so who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I don't think all zvezda stuff is "nation coloured"; I think they're the predominant colour of their camo, since IIRC their tiggers are yellow instead of the old grey plastic. On the other hand I don't actually have one so who knows. One or the other. The T-34 is only 5 parts, so easy to assemble... Shilka is more difficult, and you need glue to prevent gaps at places. That, or I'm bad at assembly. ...and this is how I got into 15mm. I already have 28mm (mostly hams) and 6mm stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
JcDent posted:One or the other. The T-34 is only 5 parts, so easy to assemble... Shilka is more difficult, and you need glue to prevent gaps at places. That, or I'm bad at assembly. Probably (forgiveable) error on your part; I put the shilkas together and noticed even small amounts of remaining clip-chaff where it'd been cut off the sprue and not filed down properly caused small gappage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Speaking of are there any snap-fit models that come in gundam-like precoloured plastic, are 1/72 or 1/48 scale, and preferably under about £15? My little sister wants to put together my models and her birthday's coming up but she's too young to be inhaling plastic glue so something I could give her she could assemble herself with some help sprue-cutting seems good. Sci fi stuff would probably do tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Speaking of are there any snap-fit models that come in gundam-like precoloured plastic, are 1/72 or 1/48 scale, and preferably under about £15? My little sister wants to put together my models and her birthday's coming up but she's too young to be inhaling plastic glue so something I could give her she could assemble herself with some help sprue-cutting seems good. Sci fi stuff would probably do tbh. Pre-coloured plastic a la Gundam is probably hard to find outside... well, Gundams. The Star Wars models that Bandai (maker of Gundams) released recently have it as well though, and they can be built decently without glue, and the kits start at around 20 bucks on amazon. I'd go for that if you don't like Gundams, there are no historical models afaik that are ok without glue and paint.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Well, I know Zvezda does snap-fit stuff. I am considering if she'll care if it's coloured plastic, though; she has frequently expressed interest in painting as well. Being paintable without primer might be more reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Pre-coloured plastic a la Gundam is probably hard to find outside... well, Gundams. The Star Wars models that Bandai (maker of Gundams) released recently have it as well though, and they can be built decently without glue, and the kits start at around 20 bucks on amazon. I'd go for that if you don't like Gundams, there are no historical models afaik that are ok without glue and paint. The Revell snap together kits are surprisingly good. My son got Poe's X Wing and for Xmas and its pretty decent http://makingstarwars.net/2015/09/review-revell-snaptite-star-wars-poes-x-wing-and-first-order-special-forces-tie-fighter/ They also do planes and tanks and cars in the same range http://www.revell.com/model-kits/snaptite/index.html Serotonin fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Jan 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
I found some Pegasus 1/48 stuff which is snap fit, too. Looking around it seems to be regarded as "A decent cheap intro to model making" which is fine, my sister can handle paint. Maybe I can set my desk up for both of us 
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I found some Pegasus 1/48 stuff which is snap fit, too. Looking around it seems to be regarded as "A decent cheap intro to model making" which is fine, my sister can handle paint. Maybe I can set my desk up for both of us Sounds great! But whatever you do, don't let her near the modeling thread and the crapkits until she is well and fully into the hobby. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Anyone interested in a DBA battle report? I just finished up a game with my Marian Romans and Gallic Tribes which went quite pretty much how one might expect! If anyone has tips on how to beat massed blades I would greatly appreciate it - I've got a bunch of spearman to convert the Marian Romans into Camillan/Polybians which may even the playing field somewhat. Anyway, I have a few questions that came up: - if an element is being flanked and causes the main attackers to recoil, must it pivot to then face the flankers? Or do the flankers get pushed back too? - if an element joins a group that's already in combat as part of the movement, does it automatically turn to face the battle line since it's now part of combat? - if an element in is in the ZoC of two units (one infront, and one behind), can it move in either direction and then automatically turn to face the line of combat? Southern Heel fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Jan 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Sounds great! But whatever you do, don't let her near the modeling thread and the crapkits until she is well and fully into the hobby. I am like 99% sure we're getting a blue spitfire with purple-glitter dazzle camo and absolutely no regard for proper weathering technique anyway  My current models are all a bit awkward because she really likes them and likes watching me paint stuff but she thinks the cannon barrels on my tanks are telescopes and my dad's told me to run with it. A plane with no visible armament should be good though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Got over the Seahawks losing by playing a little 6mm Black Powder this afternoon. The scenario involved an entrenched Union brigade with a line of infantry, a unit of skirmishers and a Gatling gun caught exposed by the Confederates- the bulk of the Union force would be entering as reserves coming to their aid. Here's the initial field of battle: The Confederates plan on keeping the stranded Union brigade pinned with two lines of infantry, two artillery pieces on a hill and a unit of cavalry. A third cannon is positioned on the road to await the expected Union reinforcements while another unit of cavalry, another line of infantry and a unity of skirmishers prepare to set an ambush. The Union trenches:  Union wins the first turn, but the cavalry doesn't arrive. The entrenched position exchanges fire with the Confederate lines and both the rebel and Union lines suffer some light damage. The Confederates wheel their cavalry, move their skirmishers into the woods, and bring their third artillery piece to bear on the besieged Federal position:  At the beginning of the second turn, the cavalry arrives! They storm down the road- one regiment dismounting to provide additional weight of fire while the second advances as far as possible. Union shooting bloodies the Confederate cannon that's occupying the road.   However, they may have been too late to save their comrades- focused Confederate shooting (and an unlucky roll by the Union commander) causes the entrenched line infantry to break:  Although arriving too late to come to the relief of the besieged position, the bulk of the Union army arrives on turn 3. The cavalry attempts to cause some havoc in the middle of the Confederate position while the infantry and artillery...mostly ignore their orders. One infantry brigade reforms into a line while the other remains in a vulnerable column. One unit of artillery unlimbers while the rest remain limbered up to hopefully support the infantry, once it actually decides to get moving.  The Union cavalry charges and breaks the Confederate cannon in the road, clearing the path for the bulk of the army but exposing themselves to fire from both cannon on the hill and lines in the trenches, as their sweeping advance fails to get them into combat. The Confederates launch a cavalry charge of their own and clear out the Union fortifications that were originally supposed to be relieved- this is starting to look bad for Federal forces:   The Union commander, no longer needing to come to aid, attempts to form a defensible position on the road they entered the battlefield from. The Confederate skirmishers ambush a limbered artillery piece and destroy it while the smaller Confederate line miraculously holds out against the weight of fire of Union cannon, sharpshooters and line infantry. Two cavalry regiments clash and the Confederates drive the Union forces back down the road, where they are met by their commander and rallied, but subsequently torn apart by cannon fire.  The Union position for its last stand:  The Confederate general rallies their shaken cavalry and infantry, then trains their artillery on the line infantry in the road-- to great effect:  When the first of the infantry units brought as relief breaks, the Union general issues the order to retreat. A well executed rebel ambush, capitalizing on the disorderly nature of the Union relief effort. Southern Heel posted:Anyone interested in a DBA battle report? Battle reports are awesome!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:Anyone interested in a DBA battle report? tallkidwithglasses posted:Battle reports are awesome! And I'd like to hear thoughts on DBA (I've been thinking about getting into wargaming, and I've been eyeballing DBA); were you playing 3.0?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
Nice reports guys. I've had an urge to do 6mm ACW for a while. Really should finish off my Naps first though
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I am like 99% sure we're getting a blue spitfire with purple-glitter dazzle camo and absolutely no regard for proper weathering technique anyway There is no shortage of artillery tractors and observation vehicles with no guns at all to paint in purple glitter camo with no problems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:There is no shortage of artillery tractors and observation vehicles with no guns at all to paint in purple glitter camo with no problems. I'll go for those in future. I figured I'd just start with a classic plane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
I'm playing DBA 2.2+ from WADBAG, because it's not the autistic vision of multiple people instead of one complete savant and as such has some semblance of reality. I posted some nice pictures of the 6mm Romans below already, and the Gauls aren't quite finished yet so I won't post them now. Anyway, the forces arrayed were: - Marian Romans, with 2 Psiloi (scouts), 2 Cavalry, 8 Blades - Gallic Tribes, with 2 Psiloi, 6 Warband, 2 Cavalry, 2 Chariots  Gauls are defending: Chariots are off to the left, scouts left-centre, and warbands right-center and right, Cavalry on opposite flank Romans are attacking: Half the Century supported by Psiloi on right, Half the Century on the left hanging back, and Cavalry down the center.  The lines clash, and the romans get a few easy kills, putting pressure on the Gauls to kill the Roman General (indicated), but lots of bad command rolls meant there wasn't much momentum in the mid-game  As the game draws to a close (just after this shot) the Gauls take out the Roman general but have lost three of their own, and the legionnaires manage to finish off another warband of Gauls and it's game. Ultimately the Romans are simply a better army and played to their strengths more: they were able to effectively make difficult targets of their Legionnaire blocks - Blades have a bigger bonus against foot troops and are average against the remainder, they also recieve support from Psiloi. The Cavalry was deployed as a hard counter to Gallic Psiloi, which wipes out those scouts easily (most things just cause the Psiloi to rebound). The Gallic troops had a chance to take out the Roman camp and the General, and would only need to kill one more element to win - but the early losses stymied any chance. I would characterise the game as alot more abstract than something like Warhammer: all historical troops are broken down into archetypes - 'Blades' is shorthand for close-combat, highly trained troops - so covers dismounted knights, samurai and legionnaires. Each army is always 12 elements, and the composition varies. For example, the only difference between Polybian, Camillan and Marian Roman armies are either 6x Spears, Spears/Blades, or Blades. Combat is 1 dice for each side, with bonuses and penalties depending on the particular archetype and opponent as well as more general situational modifiers (such as being supported or being flanked). Typically a unit will only die if one roll is double the other, with the usual result being a recoil. From my own research much of pre-blackpowder combat was this shield-wall shoving, until one force turned a flank and rolled up the enemy - so pretty accurate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Every page of this thread should have multiple 6mm battle reports. God's own scale.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:Every page of this thread should have multiple 6mm battle reports. God's own scale. 6mm is good too, but it ain't no 20mm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
If you guys want to hear more, I'll happily oblige. I still need my DBA questions answered though, pawing through that 'rulebook' (https://www.wadbag.com/DBAGuidePlus/v2.2PlusUnofficialGuide_double.pdf) is not exactly easy. I always thought people were exaggerating when they said how quick/easy 6mm was to paint. Until I painted 135 romans in two days, including tea breaks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:Every page of this thread should have multiple 6mm battle reports. God's own scale. Agreed. I have one for 6mm Napoleonic war, but I'll save it for a new page 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:
This was my experience as well, it is just tricky to get a win with a warband-heavy army against most other armies. If the warbands are not lucky and get in a few straight up kills on the charge, they will usually lose the fight. It doesn't help that both Gauls and most Roman armies are very one-sided, with so many of the same type of troops. We also tried some non-historic fights, and let me tell you this: if you thought Gauls vs. Romans was a tough match-up, wait until you have met a crusader army. Can't help with the rules though, it was some 6 years since I played it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 09:14
|
|
|
Gauls vs Crusaders? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Gauls vs Crusaders? Yeah. Welcome to Flatville, population 3000 Gauls and a disappearing cloud of dust left after the knights ran them over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:This was my experience as well, it is just tricky to get a win with a warband-heavy army against most other armies. If the warbands are not lucky and get in a few straight up kills on the charge, they will usually lose the fight. It doesn't help that both Gauls and most Roman armies are very one-sided, with so many of the same type of troops. The only armies worse than WB-heavy armies in DBA are the Aux-heavy armies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The only armies worse than WB-heavy armies in DBA are the Aux-heavy armies. Yeah, after a brief trial with Mongols I also realized that Light Cav-Heavy armies have it rough. Pike-dominated armies look good on paper and won a lot at the start, but once we got better at the game we learned to exploit their weaknesses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 12:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I always thought people were exaggerating when they said how quick/easy 6mm was to paint. Until I painted 135 romans in two days, including tea breaks. Wow, that's impressive. It takes me like a week to paint and base a regiment of my guys, but I don't do it all in one go like that. I wish I could maintain that degree of focus to just power through and finish them off at once.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 16:21
|
|