|
Here's my WWI German army. 28mm scale. They're a mix of Renegade and Great War miniatures. They're "Late War," intended to represent the army at about the time of the 1918 Spring Offensive. I initially intended to flock the bases, but I may leave them bare mud. And, yes, I have a larger British army nearing completion.      
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
mehall posted:Is that the Emhar 1/72 model of the German tank that even the Germans thought sucked? It's a 28mm scale resin kit from Great War Miniatures; in this case I bought it through Brigade Games. It is an A7V, an absolutely awful tank even by the standards of WWI. That said, I had to have one - I've always had a soft spot for the A7V, it's like a barn on tracks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
Flippycunt posted:Fantastic mini's dude. Would you mind posting a couple links to where you ordered them from? Sure! I ordered everything from Brigade Games. The models themselves are a mix of Great War, Renegade, and Brigade's own line. There are a few other good WWI lines out there. In particular I'd like to pick up some "Honorable Lead Boiler Suit" howitzers at some point. quote:Also, what rules do you use for these guys? Either GW's Great War/Over the Top or Too Fat Lardies' Through the Mud and Blood. Both are very good. Great War is, unsurprisingly, a bit like 40k, but even more lethal. (Machineguns will cut infantry to shreds, fast.) Through the Mud is also excellent, but a very different game with more of an emphasis on morale and leadership. And here are the British I'm working on.  The next project after they're done is a trench terrain table...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:
They are. These are mine. The photo is a few years old, I've almost doubled them since this was taken...  And, of course, Cossacks are even more fun... 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
Very nice! I've got a bunch of unpainted Vikings I've been thinking about setting up for Saga myself...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2013 17:05
|
|
|
Sokrateez posted:Does anyone have any recommendations for 15mm American civil war figs? Blue Moon, sold by Old Glory. Here's the Blue Moon Website. Here's Old Glory's Website Blue Moon has better pics on their website, so use that to figure out what you want. Old Glory has a thing called the "Old Glory Army." For $50 you get 40% off on everything they sell for a year, including the Blue Moon Civil War stuff. If you're buying an army, it's a good deal. The real trick is to get a bunch of friends together and pitch in for a membership. We did this at our club - five people pitched in $10 each. It brought the cost of a Longstreet army down to about $100.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2013 16:07
|
|
|
That Leipzig game is inspiring!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
DoubleAughtMeowMix posted:I'm interested in historicals, especially WWI and/or Cold War between Vietnam and '90 around the world. Do any games cover that second time period in particular? Two of my favorite eras... For WWI, I would recommend Through the Mud and Blood by Too Fat Lardies, a game company out of the UK. It is a fun, playable game about small unit actions. I would highly recommend buying the scenario book, Stout Hearts and Iron Troopers. They break down the game and WWI tactics as if they were a set of field exercises from the era ("How to assault the trench with a platoon of men.") This really helps learn both the game and the historical tactics. There are also larger scenarios included. If - IF - you can find it, check out GW Historicals' Great War and the supplement Over the Top. This WWI modeled with an adaptation of an old edition of 40K. It may sound odd, but it works very well, and is also a great way to get 40K gamers to try their hand at WWI. Unfortunately it is out of print, but copies crop up on eBay occasionally. It is also a beautiful book with lots of WWI model-porn. Speaking of which, these are my 28mm WWI British:  And 28mm WWI Germans: For Vietnam, I'll recommend another game from Too Fat Lardies called Charlie Don't Surf. It is a very interesting, well thought out design that really keeps the players thinking. If you're interested in Flames of War (a popular WWII wargame) there is a Vietnam supplement called Tour of Duty. I've had a lot of fun with it, and it is a good game; it got a bit of a bad rap from folks who think WWII/FoW rules don't "fit" Vietnam, but I think it does a very credible job. Cessna fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:The issue FoW:Vietnam has is that most people think of Vietnam as a platoon-level skirmish, based on how many movies are out there that just follow one platoon (like that one movie, Platoon) Yes, agreed. Also, Tour of Duty adds rules/lists for NVA tanks. (Gasp!) This got them a lot of grief, as the popular perception is that the war was one of infantry skirmishes in the jungle - this people accused Battlefront of trying to turn Vietnam into "Kursk with Helicopters" so that they could sell more tank models. Personally I don't have a problem with this. The fact is that after 1971 the NVA did use plenty of tanks, especially in battles like Lam Son 719 and the Easter Offensive. And no one is saying you MUST use them in your game; I tend to think they're a bit of a White Elephant in an NVA list. Cessna fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Jan 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
If you're using 15mm, check out Fields of Glory. If you're using 28mm and willing to try an out of print game, track down a copy of Warhammer Ancient Battles. There's supplement called Alexander the Great which is excellent and could easily be used as a framework for early Successors armies. If you are willing to hunt around a bit the guy who wrote Alexander (Jeff Jonas) was in the process of writing a Successors book when Warhammer Historicals died. He MIGHT have put a bunch of the army lists up on his site (ancientbattles.com) but I'm not certain...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Would these rules work for an army already based for Team Yankee? That is, 15mm scale, individual vehicles, 4 grunts per infantry base.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
tomdidiot posted:Battlefront are like the GW of the Historicals world. Absolutely gorgeous models (for the most part). Used to have a good rules set then really screwed the pooch. I played a LOT of Flames of War, but played one game of v4 and bounced off it hard. I need a good Russian Front 15mm game, but nothing else is working.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Frobbe posted:Battlegroup not doing it for you? I dunno. ("It's not the same," I whined.) I grew up on old-school hex-and-counter wargames, things like original Squad Leader and Panzerblitz, or Yaquinto's Panzer/Armor/88. I'm no longer into the chart-heavy games these days, and I like mechanics that are original and interesting, like Squad Leader was when it first came out. Maybe I should look into Chain of Command, like the thread title says?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Chain of Command is very unlike FoW but very good Will it work with models already based for FoW? Does it cover USSR v. Germany, or is that in a supplement? I'm looking for ways to use existing toys so I can push around my little T-34s with minimal changes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
moths posted:There's a free tanks on tanks supplement (Big CoC), but FoW infantry basing isn't optimal due to individual casualty removal. You can use markers to represent casualties though. Close enough. I ordered a copy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Ilor posted:Chain of Command is fantastic. Do they have rules/lists for USMC and Japanese? A quick look at their website didn't turn up any, but they could be floating around somewhere that I missed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Those look excellent. I really want to like Team Yankee. I love that era, and the models are great. But the game just isn't working for me, and when I see the pics online of tanks lined up like Napoleonic musketeers I feel ill.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Yes, "Battlefield NORTHAG." They released a teaser of the cover a few months ago, and not a word since. I'd really like to see it happen.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
I think a big part of Battlefront's problem comes from the fact that they painted themselves into a corner, time-frame wise. FoW started off covering mid-war WWII only. There were lists out on the net covering early and late war, but nothing official. Over time they moved into these eras. Early war was covered. Late war pushed later and later - first through D-Day (six books on Normandy, WTF), then the Bulge, then Bagration, and on and on. Eventually they finally hit Berlin. Then what? Yes, they've pushed into non-WWII in Europe areas with Team Yankee, the Pacific, Vietnam, and Arab-Israeli games, but their main line has always been WWII in Europe. And now that this has been covered - there's nowhere to go after Berlin - it looks like they got desperate and tried to pull a reboot with v4. And there's no way I'm going through all of that again. I've already bought huge piles of toys, more than I will ever need. I'm not going through a reboot and re-buying armies.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:H&C is disliked so much because it is part of the larger context of BF always shoehorning Soviet forces into the Zerg archetype of numerically superior but individually poor, which is awful because it draws from the "Asiatic Hordes" myth. Near as I can tell, FoW is a wargame based on movies of WWII. For the Soviets this means their army is sword-swinging cossacks, cruel commissars, and human wave attacks.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
Thanks for the warning. I've been thinking of doing a "Brits in the Pacific" army - Burma, etc. - and I'll avoid those plastic Carriers.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Victrix has you covered for everything but cavalry. Their boxes even come with mounted officers: Ooh, pretty. If I didn't have a gigantic pile of untouched Russians I'd consider getting Austrians.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Is that an excuse? Good point. Why worry about completing armies now?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:Playing any scale that isn't 6mm or 28mm seems wasteful. That's going to be tough for WWI Dreadnoughts.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:28mm seems like the best scale, honestly. Just look at Blood and Plunder. Fair point.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:
Second from the left, but don't be afraid to mix 'em up.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2018 00:03
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:Has anybody been able to take a look at Gangs of Rome? I love the idea of it but am wary of buying the book sight unseen. Historicals are a fickle mistress. The rules are a free pdf: Link. In a somewhat related problem, someone talk me out of buying a big pile of those Aventine 28mm Republican Romans. A regular opponent of mine has Successors, and I love the era - but will I ever actually paint them?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
long-rear end nips Diane posted:You might not paint them, but when has that ever stopped anybody? My basement is already about to collapse into a singularity from the mass of all of the unpainted metal... Totally worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Those are beautiful. Seriously, you're killing me here. (But I'm awful at plastic. Give me cold, hard metal.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:With the new Victrix Republican cavalry coming out soon in plastic, there won't be any reason to buy metal Republican Romans ever again Those are beautiful. But I'm really bad with plastic. I've tried making 28mm plastic Napoleonics, and they were so fiddly. It seemed like I broke Every. Single. Bayonet.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I know what you mean. When I was painting my Veitnam US, I did a bunch of research on how many of the platoon should be black. While it's well known that the poorer Afro-American population was drafted disproportiantly to the richer parts of the population, I read in a few places that due to the civil right movement, a lot of (mostly white) officers decided it was simpler to keep the in non-combat roles. I did roughly the same thing, also for 15mm Vietnam. I went with about 20% very dark skin, 20% mid-tone skin, the rest light skin. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:You guys are worrying me now. When I get around to painting my 1960's Irish in the Congo will I be able to get the right shade of sunburn? Hope you saved a bottle of old GW Tentacle Pink...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:My entire AWI army is white (because it's primered and nothing more) Or, French uniforms? 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Someone posted here a while back that MERDC is wrong for US vehicles in Europe in the 80's. What schemes should I look at for an 82-84 ish force? MERDC was standard up to the mid 80s. After that they started using NATO 3-color. It wasn't introduced overnight or in a uniform manner, so a mix is fine. (I was USMC, they changed over a few years later. We'd send a vehicle out to be rebuild and receive a replacement in NATO 3-color, so platoons had both.) Phi230 posted:NORTHAG will fill the hole that Team Yankee left in my heart So, so true.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Were USMC units deployed to Germany? From what I've found of Reforger '83 images it seems that the heavier vehicles there are a boring green. At 6mm this might actually matter, since telling apart M113s and FV432s at that scale at a glance might be awkward. The USMC has three divisions. 1st Marine Division is on Camp Pendleton, California. 2nd MarDiv is from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. 3rd MarDiv is stationed on Okinawa. There are smaller units scattered elsewhere, and the Air Wings follow a broadly similar plan. If there had been a war in Europe in the mid 80's, the 2nd MarDiv would have been sent over immediately, if not sooner (that is, when tensions were building up). They probably wouldn't have been sent into the middle of the Fulda Gap - that's Army territory, and the USMC isn't a tank-heavy force built for that environment. Instead, they would have been sent to fight on one of the flanks. The 80's saw a lot of deployments to Norway, the Team Yankee game postulates Denmark, and the John Hackett book Third World War that Team Yankee's scenario is roughly based on has the USMC sent to Yugoslavia/the Balkans. Northern coastal Germany was possible, think "amphibious raid on an exposed flank." The 2nd (and 1st) Marine Division's tanks and AAVs were all painted in "Winter Verdant" MERDC in the 80's, which is mostly green and brown. (3rd MarDiv's were "Tropical Verdant," mostly greens.) "Winter" is a bit misleading here, it worked fine in the summer as well and vehicles weren't repainted season-to-season. (The exception is that for winter deployments they might have the brown painted over with white to make "Snow with Trees.") Humvees and LAVs were newer vehicles; except for a few prototypes they were always painted in NATO 3-color. I never saw one on MERDC. It's possible they existed, but again, never saw it. Battlefront is wrong here, they painted their stuff to be more "uniform" than it would have been in reality.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Like I said: Cessna posted:Humvees and LAVs were newer vehicles; except for a few prototypes they were always painted in NATO 3-color. I never saw one on MERDC. It's possible they existed, but again, never saw it. Battlefront is wrong here, they painted their stuff to be more "uniform" than it would have been in reality. That's probably a prototype or a very early production model from the time when the USMC was first buying Hummers - or, possibly, from when the Navy was testing the LCAC. I never saw a Humvee painted like that, but I saw whole motor pools full of Hummers painted in NATO 3-color throughout my time in. If you paint yours like that, you're painting a rare exception. That's fine, of course, but understand what you're doing isn't what was standard for the time. Edit: Also, keep in mind that I'm talking USMC here. I wasn't in the army, so I don't know how things went for them. I do know that the USMC made the switch from MERDC to NATO camouflage a few years after the army. Up to mid 1988 every vehicle (M-60A1 or AAV) on the 1st Tracks ramp was painted in MERDC and every Hummer in the Motor Pool was NATO; I've got old photos that can verify this. After that we'd send vehicles back to higher-echelon maintenance for periodic rebuilds - we'd send out a vehicle in MERDC and get one back in NATO camouflage. This continued up to just before the Gulf War in 1990 - things were still a bit of a hodge-podge, as the transition wasn't complete. But, again, Humvees and LAVs were new. They came straight from the factory in NATO camouflage, and it was verboten to paint over that paint. Cessna fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Jan 29, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:This is the good stuff. Thanks. I'm more than happy to help with questions about that era's USMC.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I want to keep them visually consistent so I'm considering going with natural colours (beige, brown, grey, etc.) and keeping the colour scheme to faded blue and red (more like teal and pink), i.e. the 2nd row, 2nd figure and 3rd row, 3rd figure in this picture: I'm always a bit stumped when it comes to getting the "Dark Ages Look" right. But if you google "Dark Ages Palette" or "Dark Ages Dyes" you can find some cool photos where reenactors have experimented with natural dyes and the like to try to recreate the colors available. Link. Maybe use this to pick out a limited number of paints, then mix-and-match across the army?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Battlefront only care about tanks. If the NVA used a single tank during the entire war, then you need to have 50 of them in a normal game. Agreed, yes. I really enjoyed v3 Vietnam, it was the most fun I had with FoW. And no, I didn't use any T-55s. I broke down and got a copy of the new 'Nam book. I'm pretty happy with it - they didn't screw it up as much as they did WWII v4. The inclusion of hordes of T-54s is pretty silly, to be sure. I suppose you could rationalize it as "Easter Offensive" or something, but it's just Battlefront's love of tanks. I'll stick with my NVA infantry. That said - you could take a US force of tanks or mech infantry, M-48s and M-113s. The take an opposing force of a horde of T-55s backed by infantry in BTR-50s. (All of this is doable in the v3 Tour of Duty or v4 Nam rules.) Use "counts as" terrain left over from your WWII in Europe games. There you go, you've got a pretty decent Cold War Gone Hot in the early 60's, like the Berlin Crisis or the Cuban Missile Crisis gone wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
spectralent posted:Was there a NATO winter scheme that went with or was to be used instead of NATO three-colour, or was that a "just whitewash whatever" type thing? Not that I saw. Keep in mind that NATO 3-color uses "CARC" paint, which is nasty stuff. It's supposed to help keep chemical weapons from sticking to the vehicles. It has an odd finish, almost like a charcoal or a very fine sandpaper. It's highly toxic, so if you want to paint it on you're supposed to wear a special hazmat suit and mask. Also, if you paint over it, it's hard to get the other paint off. (Remind me to tell you about "Santa Track" someday.) I understand that this would be ignored in wartime, but the upshot of it is that in peacetime vehicles didn't get repainted for different seasons. As a result, we never saw "winter" paint schemes, if there even was such a thing. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2018 17:08
|
|