|
El Estrago Bonito posted:All the options in plastic are garbage. I painted some on commission a while ago and the plastic ones (from WGF IIRC) were absolute trash. The ones made by Avertine are great but metal and expensive. I'd convert them. Fortunately our knowledge of Roman cavalry equipment comes down to a couple finds (hell we didn't really understand how they built saddles until the late 1990's IIRC) so you have a lot of flexibility. You could probably use the WGF Persian cavalry legs (since they commonly go on eBay/Hoardobits/etc for something like 2 dollars for a dozen), torsos /upper bodies from either the WGF, WG or Victrix Romans (or honestly Macedonians or Greeks depending on your choice of armor pattern), shields from somewhere that does round shields (lets say WGF Saxons) and then heads from whatever Roman manufacturer is cheapest. Seems like it would be cheaper and easier to just opt for metal ones. I just prefer plastic when it's available. How are warlords and war games foundries metal offerings? They look good on the website...
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:05 |
|
|
Numlock posted:Seems like it would be cheaper and easier to just opt for metal ones. I just prefer plastic when it's available. Foundry tends to be very old school in their sculpts but I tend to like them. Warlord's older stuff had QC issues but supposedly the newer stuff is good. The company to really avoid is Wargames Factory, their Romans are extremely awful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Dreamforge breaks my heart. 13 bux for a box of manz, 24 for shipping. And their european resellers are basically dead. Boo!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Dreamforge breaks my heart. 13 bux for a box of manz, 24 for shipping. And their european resellers are basically dead. Boo! Yeah, Warlord buying out/partnering with Wargames Factory was a stroke of genius. I think (aside from PSC, and that's a very limited range) that there's nobody else that does plastic WWII dudes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Yeah, Warlord buying out/partnering with Wargames Factory was a stroke of genius. I think (aside from PSC, and that's a very limited range) that there's nobody else that does plastic WWII dudes. Perry does DAK and Desert Rats, but there's a suprising lack of WW2 plastics. You'd think there would be a lot of business there, but no... And I'm still waiting for Warlord to release all the plastic kits they bought up, including the Pro Gloria pikemen and the samurai kits. E: I got some sabot bases for my Nappy French, and I'm pretty pleased with them  The guys was very helpful and I got them custom cut for 20mm. He also has tons of nice markers that will make our CoC games look nicer. http://www.supremelittleness.co.uk/sld-bases/penny-sabot-bases.htm lilljonas fucked around with this message at 10:19 on Sep 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
I have a weakness for T-55s. Wish Tanks! was a game for early Cold War... Nobody will play Team Yankee here, which is a good thing, because you'd probably need tens of T-55s for E-Germans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
DDR is supposedly getting a release next year
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
El Estrago Bonito posted:Foundry tends to be very old school in their sculpts but I tend to like them. Warlord's older stuff had QC issues but supposedly the newer stuff is good. The company to really avoid is Wargames Factory, their Romans are extremely awful. Good then, I was going to order some vikings from foundry to round out the little viking army I have going so I might as well pick up some of their Cavalry as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
FYI quite a few of the war games foundry ranges are old Perry Miniatures before they were independent
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
I was wondering what lilljonas thought of the free Pike and Shotte Samurai rules? http://www.warlordgames.com/rules-pike-shotte-samurai-army-list/ Looking for an excuse to buy some (more) Baccus!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
I was wrong about OSC. You need to roll a skill test if you want to activate a supressed mini. Only then a nat 1 kills it. Other than that I think the rules are a bit messy, but I should probably give ut an another read when I'm not moving flats and trying to clean a cat that's adamant to get into any dirty place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:I was wondering what lilljonas thought of the free Pike and Shotte Samurai rules? Hyperbolic Rant Alert I've never played Pike and Shotte, so I'm faaar from an authority here. But strange things: Why would the Shimazu clan have ranged hatamoto, but no other clan? Units armed with no-dachi in a 16th-17th list? Why only ashigaru with teppo? Nagae-yari was not an anti-cavalry weapon. But overall it gets the same things wrong that almost all wargames get wrong when they try to adapt for 16th century samurai warfare. Japanese armies were organized differently than the European armies that wargames are kind of inherently designed to represent. Units would be much more mixed, with cavalry being followed closely by foot squires, attacking at a very slow pace. Archers were mixed with arquebuses, to keep a steady stream of missiles while the slower weapons reloaded. Spear-armed infantry would be part of all kinds of formations, und so weiter. For example: the Takeda clan was famous for their cavalry, and in pretty much all wargames they have superior cavalry units. But take this supreme cavalry clan, which had a lot more horses than their rivals, and actually look at how they were organized according to their own doctrine documents. How does it look?  Exactly. Even the Takeda clan, after the period where the cavalry had stopped being archers supported by foot squires who kept attackers at bay and became shock melee troops, would have 2-3 spearmen running beside each cavalryman. Which means that they would not be attacking at neither the speed or impact as European or other Asian cavalry. They simply didn't fight like knights. But that's only cavalry, right? Infantry fought in specific weapon-based units right, just like in Shogun Total War?  Look at them. These are the teppo (arquebus) units of the Takeda screen. There are three arquebuses per team, but also two archers, a mounted unit leader, who in turn is supported by two infantrymen. Who in turn are supported by a "captain", himself equipped with even more foot soldiers. Would this formation behave in close combat the same way that, say, a Milanese archer company? Probably not! So to me, it looks like this army list has samurai being kind of a palette swap, where you squeeze mounted samurai into the role of knights, when they didn't fight like knights, because it's conventient, and you can't get the rules to work otherwise. And then you separate spear armed infantry from archers and mounted samurai, because it's convenient, and you can't get the rules to work otherwise. And then you separate archers from aquebuses, because it's convenient, and you can't get the rules to work otherwise. And then you separate "Daimyo" armies from "ikko-ikki" armies, because they were like different countries, right? And it's convenient, and you can't get the army lists to be colourful otherwise. Finally you're left with kind of an European army list that will fight kind of like an European army in a game made for European armies, because it's convenient, and you can't get the rules to work otherwise. But they look nice! Now, I'm exaggerating this a bit. I don't have a magic answer, and I don't have a better system to offer. But the wargames we play have, inherently infused in their very DNA, the heritage of representing Napoleonic warfare. They excel when you have clearly divided and ranked units with clear battle roles and strengths and weaknesses and battle lines. It's just hard to make that work for other periods, and some periods more so than others. But if you "just" want to put a lot of nice looking samurai dudes on the table, more power to you. I've played Warhammer Fantasy with my samurai army, for goodness sake! But I do feel that the army list could have been a bit more creatively written. Moreover, I do believe that 6mm is a good starting point to solve this inherent dilemma, as it's much easier to combine different miniatures on the same base. For example, I've put infantrymen on all of my mounted samurai bases. So even if the rules don't represent them properly, at least they will look more like a samurai army. So when my samurai armies ever get big enough for me to be able to field two full armies, and thereby make my clubmates play some pity games against me, I'll look at making a hack out of ideas from games like Impetus, or even Kings of War, which seems much better for this. For example, the "best" wargame samurai army I've seen is honestly this: http://dereksweetoys.com/jims-wee-samurai-2/ It looks like a god drat samurai army. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Sep 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Well now I want a set of 6mm samurai rules. Someone make them please.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:Well now I want a set of 6mm samurai rules. Someone make them please. There's this, but I haven't tried it: https://www.facebook.com/2D6-Wargaming-708548485946400/ I'm actually kind of interested in seeing if Blucher or something like that would work, as it is more abstract.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Well, that's certainly an interesting way of organizing an army. How'd they actually fight?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Well, that's certainly an interesting way of organizing an army. How'd they actually fight? It helps realizing that they were a feudal army even when they were the most organized at the early 17th century. Each lord were expected to supply men with all types of weapons, and these would be organized under that specific lord. So you would pretty much have a lot of small armies. They were also big into the Chinese deployment models, which looks loving alien to us. Like the "honshi" army deployment:  or the "gyorin":  How the hell does that even work in practical terms? How could you represent that as a tabletop game, with units and movement trays and poo poo? Now you start to get what I mean with the inherent difficulty in trying to squeeze this poo poo into neat and clean battle lines with neat and clean rectangular units. But yeah, I've read about samurai armies for some 10 years on and off, visited various museums and watched tons of movies, and I can't answer the plain question of how they actually fought. But not like European armies, that's for sure. At the same time it's a very intriguing puzzle. How would I do it, to think that it's "better" or "more accurate" than Pike & Shotte? I mean, I have a whole bunch of 28mm minis, and even though I have a lot of them based for Field of Glory, I don't necessarily think that FoG does samurai wargaming that much better. But a big part would be to make the units work more like mixed arms, and scale down the differences between cavalry and infantry when it comes to speed, and maybe put a hell of a lot of emphasis on control and command, given the absurd amount of "NCOs" they'd put in their armies. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Sep 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
what a beautiful way to solve the 17th/16th century firearm problem most people don't really get how things worked in europe then either tbh, for infantry you'd be looking at a lot of different subunits inside your big block of dudes, and they're each doing things on their own, directed by their own leaders
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
I have to confess, I didn't realize medieval battles probably didn't work out like they do in Total War (big blocks of dudes all dressed the same) until very recently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:what a beautiful way to solve the 17th/16th century firearm problem Exactly, which is why in some ways, all tabletop wargames that are featuring periods earlier than 19th century tends to have some instances of 18th century idiosyncracies sprinkled over them. Because they tend to feel "right" on the tabletop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:what a beautiful way to solve the 17th/16th century firearm problem Yeah, mixed up units are more the norm than the exception through military history. Even back in the Roman times you hear a lot about light infantry running along with the cavalry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Man, I'm pretty much made up to buy into Bolt Action (my FLGS is making a pretty great value offer for preordering, considering the discount plus throwing in a box of Infantry), but I'm kind of debating whether or not to get a US infantry box or to grab instead a box of British (that I might be using as Canadians instead). I don't suppose anyone could help sway me one way or another.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:It helps realizing that they were a feudal army even when they were the most organized at the early 17th century. Each lord were expected to supply men with all types of weapons, and these would be organized under that specific lord. So you would pretty much have a lot of small armies. A while back I was looking into doing Satsuma/Meji stuff and I think (IMHO obviously) it's a much better time period for wargaming Japanese stuff just because the force organization is a lot more western and understandable in a wargames context.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Man, I'm pretty much made up to buy into Bolt Action (my FLGS is making a pretty great value offer for preordering, considering the discount plus throwing in a box of Infantry), but I'm kind of debating whether or not to get a US infantry box or to grab instead a box of British (that I might be using as Canadians instead). I don't suppose anyone could help sway me one way or another. The Perry plastic Desert Rats are amazing, and could easily be fielded as Canadians in North Africa, Sicily, and Italy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Man, I'm pretty much made up to buy into Bolt Action (my FLGS is making a pretty great value offer for preordering, considering the discount plus throwing in a box of Infantry), but I'm kind of debating whether or not to get a US infantry box or to grab instead a box of British (that I might be using as Canadians instead). I don't suppose anyone could help sway me one way or another. The only comment I have is that Americans are pretty common everywhere. I will do more research tomorrow, but WLG early plastics you had to glue the rifle into the guys hands - I don't recall if either plastic Brits or plastic USA have that problem. For Sharpe Practice grogs, can someone explain to me the process of an officer directing fire? I don't get how it works.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
muggins posted:I will do more research tomorrow, but WLG early plastics you had to glue the rifle into the guys hands - I don't recall if either plastic Brits or plastic USA have that problem. Can confirm current Warlord USA have the same thing. Very frustrating...
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
INinja132 posted:Can confirm current Warlord USA have the same thing. Very frustrating... Yeah, looks like Brits are the same. USMC are not like this, it's two arms attached to a rifle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
Ilor posted:The Perry plastic Desert Rats are amazing, and could easily be fielded as Canadians in North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. One of the other things I've been doing (assuming I can find an appropriate head) is perhaps adding in a Chines-American soldier to my US troops, or a Chinese-Canadian and African-Canadian if I do go the  route. I'm not quite sure where to source the heads, though - you can't really get the Buffalo Soldier/Nisei heads separately and to be honest they don't seem that great from the images on Warlord's website. I'm thinking of borrowing some heads from a box of Project Z survivors I'm getting for Terminator, but they might not really match scalewise.muggins posted:The only comment I have is that Americans are pretty common everywhere. Edit: Honestly sticking the gun to the Soldiers' hands isn't that big of a stepping stone, I'm fairly familiar with the procedure from GW minis. It's more of a mild inconvenience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Yeah, I've been considering Canucks primarily because they're not that common in the popular view WW2 (unless you fold them into the British). I'd probably make the US infantry Glider Troops (although I am slightly unsure, since I'll probably be painting my starter Paras in the M1943 uniform, whether I'd need to do anything other than paint the Glidermen in the same colour scheme - other than I guess sculpting them in Jump Boots) My vote is ! Like others have said, US are pretty much everywhere, where as almost nobody plays Canadians.I've just finished 1000 pts of Normandy Germans and I'm currently in the middle of doing 3rd Canadian Infantry Division in Normandy right now, pulling in elements of the 2nd Canadian Armoured.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
I played some BA last night with tentative V2 rules. 1000pts German vs Japan and it was very well balanced. We ground attrition down to the units to two by turn 6. MVP the Anti tank rifle squad in the upper level of the building rebuffing two banzai assaults and taking out a light tank. I bought the German Grenadiers box set and will supplement it with a hetzer and kettenkrad
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
who makes prepainted 1/76 aircraft again?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:what a beautiful way to solve the 17th/16th century firearm problem The Wars of the Roses are another good example. I've seen a lot of games attempt to do the period with nice individual units of Billmen, Bowmen and Knights. In actual fact the Knights would be spread out along the battle-line to bolster the foot troops of lesser quality which would consist of a motley crew of both Billmen and Bowmen. lilljonas is absolutely correct when he says that wargames are limited by their Napoleonic origins into forming nice neat square units of dudes who are all there to do 'the thing' at the same time and it's a detriment to basically every other period of play preceding the 19th century.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Swagger Dagger posted:If anyone wanted the wargames factory infantry models, Dreamforge is selling them all for 13 bucks + shipping. Thanks for this. I just ordered Americans, Germans, and Russians as my first ever miniatures. 90 dudes for $50. So excited.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Man, I'm pretty much made up to buy into Bolt Action (my FLGS is making a pretty great value offer for preordering, considering the discount plus throwing in a box of Infantry), but I'm kind of debating whether or not to get a US infantry box or to grab instead a box of British (that I might be using as Canadians instead). I don't suppose anyone could help sway me one way or another. As someone who has managed to slowly slide into collecting a platoon of every army here's my take on the different armies boxes they're offering for the BA version 2 deal: US infantry - Kinda boring models, honestly. The poses are static and they don't come with a ton of cool goodies. British Infantry - My least favorite, static models, not a lot of extras, a lot of the weapons seem too small and they're hard to avoid breaking Soviet Infantry - Best deal in terms of mans per dollar, mix of different uniform types which could be annoying to some, lots of weapon types to choose from Japanese Infantry - Dynamic poses, lots of cool little extras like swords, anti-tank pikes, standards, ect. German Grenadiers - Tons of different weapons and cool addons, lots of ability to customize your hitler mans IMO if you want to go British/Canadian grab the Desert Rats Perry miniatures box. I picked up my earlier this week at my FLGS for $20 and it comes with an entire platoon of models.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
Too bad I already ordered brits. All hail Canada, I guess, unless the Canadians don't get Shermans. Endman posted:I've seen a lot of games attempt to do the period with nice individual units of Billmen, Bowmen and Knights. In actual fact the Knights would be spread out along the battle-line to bolster the foot troops of lesser quality which would consist of a motley crew of both Billmen and Bowmen. Can't you just make it a blob of three bases where two of them are strips of knights and bowmen respectively? Hell if know how that would work and if all armies wouldn't end up being Knightbillbows with some cav. I don't know how samurai armies work, but mixing cav with infantry just looks stupid, like some early attempt to penby packet tanks. Just play skirmish level.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
Flippycunt posted:As someone who has managed to slowly slide into collecting a platoon of every army here's my take on the different armies boxes they're offering for the BA version 2 deal: JcDent posted:Too bad I already ordered brits. All hail Canada, I guess, unless the Canadians don't get Shermans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
Which book are the Canadians in? For that matter, are Brazillians and Free French anywhere? It would be my way into getting into Americans, I guess. Same miniatures, but with more baguettes on bases/nipple tassels.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
muggins posted:
Ok bear with me as we struggled at first with this but think we have it nailed down after a lot of rules rereading, faq reading and browsing the TFL forums. If I go through firing as a whole as we understand it it may help clarify. If a group fires on its own action ( without a Big Man attached or on a Command card at Tiffin) it can direct it's fire at any group within its 180 degree of fire. If there are other groups within 4 inches of the target group hits are spread out. If a formation fires it has a line of fire that is a straight corridor from its front as the diagrams in the book show. If as in the prior example it fires on its own action hits are allocated on EVERY group that is within its fire corridor. You can't target a specific group or formation. This is to simulate the formation just opening fire without careful target selection. If you have a Big Man attached to a group or formation and he uses a Command Initiative to activate them he counts as Directing Their Fire. He adds his Status Level in dice to the total dice used for shooting. The formation can also then target a specific group or formation in its arc ( much like if a group shoots) obviously spreading any hits out to groups within 4 inches. The formation still gets is normal 2 actions so it could reload and fire or fire and move etc. If a Big Man wants to Direct the Fire of a group or formation he is not attached to but is in his Command Range then that unit fires adding his dice as in the above example but that's all they can do that activation, they don't get there 2 actions, just the fire action with the dice boost. I can't swear this is 100% accurate but this is how we are playing it and it seems to work well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Which book are the Canadians in? I believe they're folded into the British lists. Apparently they let you choose a national characteristic from a list, rather than a specific one for each commonwealth nation. I believe the Free French aren't currently in any books-I know Franca has its own book but I think that is primarily Blitzkreig focused. There's a pdf list for Free French on their website, but it's specifically for in North Africa. Brazilians aren't anywhere to my knowledge. I know FoW has rules for both the Free French and the Brazilians and they both note they used US gear and to a lesser extent doctrine. I guess you could try and figure out how to hammer the US lists into the right shape.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
The max strength Motor-Rifle Company is an enormous formation. I don't know how Team Yankee players maneuver one of these in 15mm. I guess that's why all their battle reports are of hubcap to hubcap tank parks slugging it out. Soviet doctrine called for a 100m seperation between vehicles but I'll settle for an inch or two.   (Models are GHQ, bases by Gamecraft Miniatures.) Polikarpov fucked around with this message at 12:06 on Sep 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:05 |
|
|
I had that same issue in Flames of War with a Tankovy force. Also, I'm a huge fan of Gamecraft. Glad to see them getting more love.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 12:11
|
|
