|
Southern Heel posted:
Yeah, it requires some research, but basically: If it is carried by a squad, it's an LMG If it is carried by a dedicated team with 5-6 men, it's an MMG If it is .50 cal, it's a HMG
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 13:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
British designers doin' their thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
OK, here's how scouts work: On a roll of 1, you can deploy a one or two-man scout team. This team is comprised of men from a particular section (which you should denote when you deploy them, as in: "This a scout team for 1st Squad"). This does not cost any CI, it's just something that any infantry squad can do. In further phases, they continue to activate on a 1, just like any other team. During later phases, you can deploy the remainder of the squad/section. The scout team continues to function independently until they get to within 4" of their section, at which point they are automatically re-absorbed. Why would you want to do this? A 2-man scout team is a great way to threaten a JOP, especially early in a game. And by threatening a JOP, what you are really doing is forcing your opponent to deploy. Forced deployment is important because it helps deprive your opponent of strategic reserves. It makes him commit his forces where you want them rather than where he wants them. Scouts (especially Soviet and American scouts) are also really important for giving you a relatively low-risk advance team to use to move a JOP. Does the enemy have a bunker or fortified position you're having trouble cracking? Use a scout team to push a JOP right up close to it, then deploy a Flamethrower team almost right on top the enemy position. This represents the scouts finding a covered or hidden approach, and leading another team in by that route.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
^ Excellent and very thorough, thank you.lilljonas posted:Yeah, it requires some research, but basically: Right! So by default infantry guns are LMGs (and are 6d6 mag-fed or 8d6 belt-fed), MMGs and HMGs are 10d6, the latter reducing cover by 1 level. I guess I can go by models at that point. For some reason I thought the MG42 in a Wehrmacht Rifle squad was 10D6, but that might be from the 2FL Demo game which predates the rules release and maybe some kind of errata. It's really odd how when you compare something like WW2 forces from a birds eye view they all look very similar (compared to say, Space Marines vs Tyranids from WH40k) and yet now explaining to my opponent the rules-which-make-the-Wehrmacht-the-Wehrmacht which boils down to some orgnisational nuance, two very situational special rules and some adjusted support values - I can see that big difference but I'm sure to him it's all a shade of beige. OTOH I spoke to him about the game and he's really excited, and he wants to try out Early War French if he enjoys our demo game - if that's the case then I guess I can use a list like this: http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Germany-Infantry-19391.pdf - right? It seems basically everything is cross-timeline compatible except the switch from MG42 to MG34s (which as above doesn't have any rules impact, right? both being belt-fed bipods) He can grab this http://www.forgedinbattle.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=90_112&product_id=466 and by converting one rifleman into a VB carrier he's platoon ready for the 1940 French list, with six dudes to act as whatever. Panzeh posted:British designers doin' their thing. Roll 2D6 + [country code] on table to see what happens. On a roll of a 1-2 roll an additional effect and if it's a Tuesday or any other day with U in the name re-type the reply D3 times. Southern Heel fucked around with this message at 14:21 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:It seems basically everything is cross-timeline compatible except the switch from MG42 to MG34s (which as above doesn't have any rules impact, right? both being belt-fed bipods) Yes, it's just a cosmetic difference in CoC. The main difference in 1939 is that the German squads are bigger, 12 men compared to 10 later on. There isn't a second Senior Leader as in many later German platoons, nor any integrated light mortar. There's not the fourth squad of say, the 1940 list. E: Here's the German 1940 list if you want to fight France, it's beefy. You have the smaller squads of later German platoons, but you get a fourth squad, a mortar and a second JL, for a whopping +4 force rating. http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/German-1940-Army-List.pdf lilljonas fucked around with this message at 14:33 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Yeah, it requires some research, but basically: If it fires bullets smaller than your nation's rifle caliber, it's a SMG. If it fires your nation's rifle caliber and is carried around by a dude, it's a LMG. If it fires your nation's rifle caliber and is fixed in some manner, either to a tripod or a building or vehicle, it's a MMG. If it fires bullets larger than your nation's rifle caliber, it's a HMG. If it's 20mm and larger, it's a cannon. If it's also fully auto, it's a autocannon. Example: MG42 fires 7.92mm, which is the German's rifle caliber. If it's carried around by a dude, it's a LMG. If it's fixed to a tripod or on the roof of a vehicle, it's a MMG. e: This is not related to COC's rules obviously, I just recently learned what the actual definitions of L/M/HMGs are and I found it interesting. 
Geisladisk fucked around with this message at 15:04 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:If it fires bullets smaller than your nation's rifle caliber, it's a SMG. Yeah, it's tricky for CoC as a MMG fixed to a vehicle fires 6 dice, like a LMG, but other than that it's a good rule of thumb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
I think the acronyms are a bit deceiving, it's easy to think that it's: Light, Medium, Heavy. When is Light, Mounted, Heavy in CoC. With the caveat of vehicles. My memory rule is: If one dude can carry it, then it's an LMG Put one of those on a tripod and you have a MMG You ain't gonna be going anywhere quickly with a HMG, a DShK is 34kg
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
^ MMG = mounted? Mind blown.lilljonas posted:Yes, it's just a cosmetic difference in CoC. I see - so tweaks but mainly just trading a panzershreck for a mortar, losing panzerfausts and and getting a JL/squad out of the equation? Are the French lists balanced against it? Is that even a concern? Should I just assume all forces are "balanced" at least as far as it can be assumed with all the variables that go into it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
When it comes to platoons being balanced, that's were force rating comes in. Although a lit of stuff is discounted if it's part of your platoon. A sniper is 3 "points" and ratings are in increments of 5 iirc, giving you quite a rebate. And speaking of snipers, British airborne have them as parts of some sections. Would you treat them as actually part of the section? My guess is that you treat them exactly like a support option sniper... So no shooting with the rest on 2's, activation by JL or moving without a CoC dice?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Yeah, it's tricky for CoC as a MMG fixed to a vehicle fires 6 dice, like a LMG, but other than that it's a good rule of thumb. Internal MGs (hull MGs, coaxial) fire 6 dice to represent the poor visibility, top mounted MMGs and HMGs (such as the MG42 on top of a Hanomag) fire 10 dice and reduce cover by one, presumably to represent the greater elevation and good visibility. E: Someone show TFL the last two pages and tell them, "No, you actually do need a second edition". Geisladisk fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I can see that big difference but I'm sure to him it's all a shade of beige. 50 Shades of Feldgrau 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:^ Excellent and very thorough, thank you. Southern Heel posted:For some reason I thought the MG42 in a Wehrmacht Rifle squad was 10D6, but that might be from the 2FL Demo game which predates the rules release and maybe some kind of errata. Southern Heel posted:It's really odd how when you compare something like WW2 forces from a birds eye view they all look very similar (compared to say, Space Marines vs Tyranids from WH40k) and yet now explaining to my opponent the rules-which-make-the-Wehrmacht-the-Wehrmacht which boils down to some organisational nuance, two very situational special rules and some adjusted support values - I can see that big difference but I'm sure to him it's all a shade of beige. The coolest thing about it is that these relatively subtle differences in organization or special rules really do result in a different "feel" for each of the different forces.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:50 Shades of Feldgrau Indeed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Indeed. Is the SS 50 shades darker?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Is the SS 50 shades darker?  Not sure where that take the third one, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:
It's about the uniforms worn by the Free French and other resistance/liberation armies. Don't even need to change the name
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
I found the numbers from the NHK mounted samurai tests. They put 90 kg (45 kg gear on a 50 kg rider) on a poor 350 kg, 130 cm pony (which would still be a relatively big mount for the period). It could reach 5.6 mph during short spurts (canter, not gallop), but would fall back into a trot pretty quickly. So yeah, basically reaching a fast jog/slow run for a man, but only for a very short charge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
So... I own 3 different British LW Armoured Squadrons (Comets, Cromwells, Shermans). I'm about to pick up a Desert MW Armoured Squadron - probably one with Crusaders. I've painted one of these squadrons. Do I have a problem?
tomdidiot fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
Yup. No plans for an Early War Squadron 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
This French Napoleonic officer is amazing from Gringo 40s I also found my spirit mini  I also got some Stone Mountain Miniatures paint to try out since they have a native American flesh color, and coat D'Arms is amazing 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Yup. A9s and A10s are sooo.. .crummy. I might got for a Pure Crusader II Squadron so I can do a Crusader/Gazala Squadron rather than a Crusader II/III Alamein Squadron.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
Matildas, dude, Matildas
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Vallejo colours guide suggests using field grey for Wehrmacht uniforms, and dark camo get forv the helmets. It seems a lot more green than I was expecting. Is this my mistake?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 11:44
|
|
|
Yeah, those Gringo 40's are hella nice and I'm thinking of trying out a few of their personalities minis for my Frenchies.Southern Heel posted:Vallejo colours guide suggests using field grey for Wehrmacht uniforms, and dark camo get forv the helmets. It seems a lot more green than I was expecting. Is this my mistake? It varies a lot, some field grey uniforms were more grey, and some were almost green. It varied by where it was made, what dyes they had, how long it had been worn and so on. I used Vallejo's Field Grey for my Germans, and it's pretty green. Imgur is down, but there are (bad) pics on our club blog: http://krigetkommer.weebly.com/stalino-1941/german-reinforcements-first-gebirgsjager-squad-and-a-hanomag
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 11:54
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:Vallejo colours guide suggests using field grey for Wehrmacht uniforms, and dark camo get forv the helmets. It seems a lot more green than I was expecting. Is this my mistake? No, grey-green is correct. There's a picture of german uniforms where all of them are totally different colours floating somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
Yeah... somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Yeah... somewhere. I have scrollitis, a disease which prevents me from scrolling down when making replies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:Vallejo colours guide suggests using field grey for Wehrmacht uniforms, and dark camo get forv the helmets. It seems a lot more green than I was expecting. Is this my mistake? I also found Vallejo Fieldgrey too greenish for my tastes. I ended up using their German Tank Crew II Feldgrau (#335 from the Panzer Aces line):  It's a nice grey with just hints of Brown and Green. Washed down with Agrax, it works really nice as the worn brown-ish grey that you see in a lot of photos: http://www.anglonautes.eu/history/hist_20_ww2_prison/hist_20_ww2_prison_pic_germans_normandy_france_august1944.jpg
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Any other goons get in on Blood and Plunder?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
spectralent posted:No, grey-green is correct. There's a picture of german uniforms where all of them are totally different colours floating somewhere. Colonial Air Force posted:Yeah... somewhere. spectralent posted:I have scrollitis, a disease which prevents me from scrolling down when making replies. Hi chaps, I did see this - I was just really, really shocked at HOW green it was. I thought the colours you see in those old photographs were due to a combination of age and the chroma of the photo -and those jackets were picked as particularly extreme examples. There are two vallejo colour guides and they mostly agree:   I can see that one suggests anklets are beige, but the other has full boots. My models have full boots so that's not a problem, and I'm going to assume the vertical webbing straps are meant to be black, but one just doesn't have them? I guess the uniforms would get dirty very quickly, is it worth me trying to highlight the epaulets and collars like so: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I can see that one suggests anklets are beige, but the other has full boots. My models have full boots so that's not a problem, and I'm going to assume the vertical webbing straps are meant to be black, but one just doesn't have them? If your models all have full boots, they're likely Early War. Germans cut their boots down later in the war as they were running out of leather. If that's the case, Early War uniforms are a lot greener. Trousers may also be grey in that case. In your paint scheme examples, the left one is Early War and the right is Late War. Here's another good example of Early War: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/64/45/7a/64457a29fafd7ef83e92bc70bdd4504e.jpg Enentol fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
Right, so more green and full boots = early war. I'm going for 1942 latest I think so hopefully it's not too out of period. Please excuse the static grass, it's not fully dry yet and they need a coat of varnish: Before I do that however, is there anything obvious I'm missing? I highlighted up the feldgrau with light camo green and that worked, but I think highlighting the helmet (dark green) with feldgrau has made them a bit too homogenous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
I'm working on a set of early war Germans right now, here's what Vallejo colors I'm using: Helmets: 979 German Camo Dark Green - this goes for a lot of the dark green metal equipment like the gas mask holder, mess kit, and the top of the canteen as well. Jackets: 830 German Fieldgrey Pants: 866 Grey Green - this is actually kind of a gray blue, and not to be confused with 971 Green Grey, which is a light color (good for uniform highlights and gas cape bags). For the jackets and pants, I actually blend black and whatever color I'm using together to create a dark base color that goes on first. I then highlight (broadly) the areas on the jacket and pants with the "main" color before applying a wash. (After the wash comes a highlight of the main color blended with a highlight color.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
ExtraNoise posted:For the jackets and pants, I actually blend black and whatever color I'm using together to create a dark base color that goes on first. I then highlight (broadly) the areas on the jacket and pants with the "main" color before applying a wash. (After the wash comes a highlight of the main color blended with a highlight color.) I'm very aware of colour-scaling - that is, we tend to percieve big things as have a lighter shade, so you can mimick this by painting smaller things more pale or brighter to make them look larger. I'm trying to avoid anything darker than charcoal on the mini, I think i could go even lighter tbh...
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I can see that one suggests anklets are beige Maybe they're butternut 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I'm very aware of colour-scaling I was typing my reply before I saw yours above it and just wanted to include some general knowledge, as not everyone knows it. Obviously you did, but I didn't see the photo before I started typing. Didn't mean to cause offense. I think your mans are looking really good as-is! If you're looking to go even lighter, then I say slap down another layer of highlight on large surfaces and call it good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
ExtraNoise posted:I was typing my reply before I saw yours above it and just wanted to include some general knowledge, as not everyone knows it. Obviously you did, but I didn't see the photo before I started typing. Didn't mean to cause offense. Oh no I didn't take any offence at all and I'm sorry for no possibly implying your help could be unappreciated! I just meant it was something I was trying to focus on!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Holy poo poo the german tanks are TINY compared to the Russian ones I bought - the KV-1 and ISU-152 dwarf the StuG III and Panzer II absolutely, the latter looks like it's almost the wrong scale: Pzkw II  KV-1  EDIT: Panzer II, not III. Southern Heel fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Feb 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
The Stug and Pz III should be roughly the same dimensions, given that the StuG is basically a turretless Pz III in construction. The KV-1 and ISU-152 were both heavy tanks built on a big-rear end chassis, though, so them being bigger doesn't surprise me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 00:16
|
|