Tankodesantniki

For those that don't know, Tankodesantniki were Soviet infantry that road into battle on the decks of tanks.

These little guys took me a long time. But I guess December is usually a write off for anyone. I did happen to refine a couple of techniques and think it will greatly speed up my painting of infantry. I'm going to really try my best to stay away from tanks and get some infantry and gun teams done. I tried a couple of different things here. I used two different base coats, and two different washes.

First I used Tamiya Khaki XF-49. Tamiya paints are perfect for the airbrush. I mix 2 parts paint and 1 part Windex and you can spray for ever. In some painting guides it says you can use Khaki as an alternate for the Russian uniform. For these guys I tried a black wash. 60 parts Future, and 1 part GW black ink. This stuff is way to think to be called a wash. But even this was a bit thin as you can see in the pic's. I'll probably try 50:1 or 55:1 for the next batch.

2nd, I used BF's Khaki Grey (880). BF paint really sucks in an airbrush. Its just crazy thick, and I've yet to find a good solution. This time I used 1:1 Windex and paint. Didn't work to bad, but it still clogged the airbrush after a bit. For these guys I used 5 parts W&N Peat brown and 1 part Future. This stuff is fantastic for faces and hands. But I think I like the black better for uniforms.

The next time I'm going to try and paint the uniforms with the black wash, and the peat brown for hands and faces. we'll see how hard it is to separate.

One of the things that took so long on these guys was the highlighting. the old way I would do a heavy dry brush over black primer for the base coat, and then a highlight dry bush. But now with the airbrush, I decided to try painting the highlights. This took for ever. Plus I really wasn't sure what to highlight. If I skip this step or at least not do as much, I will be able to paint infantry way faster then I used to.

Anyway, hopefully everyone has a great holiday. I'll leave you with a picture of the loot I received for Christmas.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Assault Gun Crews

I've competed some Assault Gun Crews.  4 for some Marder III's and 5 for some SU-76's.  I used these as a test to airbrush and wash infantry in an attempt to speed up painting these little buggers.  I avoid painting them because it takes me so long.  I don't know how the FOW world does it.

I tried 3 different things.  The German crews I used GW black ink with Future floor polish.  It was a bit thick so will take some practice to get it right.  With one of the German crews I tried just an outline of raised parts, while the other crews I just did light dry brush.  With the Russian crews I used Windsor Newton brown ink.  This stuff is very good.  was easy to mix, and not as heavy as the black ink.

The ones I did the lining are the ones with the primed Marder.  With some practice this way could look pretty good. 

I don't know how much it really sped things up.  I'll have to keep trying it.  I do like the results.

I didn't mount the German crews because the Marders III's were some of the first Vehicles I painted.  Before I discovered airbrushing, I was using an aerosol primer.  And some times it would come out gritty.  If you look closely at the Marders you can see how gritty it was.  So I think I will put these Marders in Simple Green and repaint them with the airbrush.  I even have new processes to do decals, so these would be better as well. 

Turret and Front Armor House Rules Part 2

OK, here is a rule set that I've been working on.  Lets see how things turn out.
Most of this will assume you already know how FoW works.  This is a work in progress and is designed to make turreted tanks more useful, and to take the advantage away from assault guns.

This affects all units (tank and gun teams) that previously had a 180 degree firing arc.  And also tanks with turrets.  The 180 degree arc will still be used to some extent.

The first thing you will need is 2 Laser Levels.  These will be held perpendicularly directly above the unit you are checking the firing arc or frontal armor.  This will give you a 90 degree firing arc coming out at 45 degree angles from the unit.  I had to draw in the lines because the laser light doesn't show up when you take a picture of it....go figure.   

To correctly position the lassers (remember directly above the unit) have both lasers come out the front corners of the tank.  I originally thought this would give each different sized tank a unique arc, but its so minuscule it makes little difference.  Its now more of just a standardized guide for this rule set.

I'll try to do rules as best I can in the order they are in the FoW book.
**Also keep in mind, Phil's new rule that vehicles with turrets can rotate hulls towards anything infront of their 180 degree arc, where before they had to turn their Turret.  They now only turn their turret when shooting at things behind their 180 degree arc. 

FIELDS OF FIRE
Infantry weapons - no changes

Vehicle Weapons and Guns
Both Vehicles and Guns now have 2 Fields of Fire.  A 180 degree arc, and a 90 degree arc.  With some varying differences.

All Vehicles and Guns can fire their weapons at anything inside the 90 degree arc with out penalty.  The unit can adjust to point at the target.  The only proviso is that vehicles may only rotate their turrets or their hull towards the enemy, not both.  There is now more strategy to which direction you face your hull.  So, a sneaky player could adjust the hull for a advantageous but different direction then the target, but then still move the turret.

You can still shoot at anything between the 180 degree arc and the 90 degree arc.  But there are now penalties for doing so.  

Hull mounted weapons and guns, (remember this includes man-packed guns) will have to rotate their guns towards their target, but are then considered to have moved and shoot at a reduced RoF.  Anything behind the 180 arc they still can't shoot at. 

Vehicles with turrets can choose to rotate their turret or their hull.  If they rotate they they shoot with their full RoF.  If they rotate their hull, they must rotate towards the target (not reposition as they like) and they would also be considered moved and shoot at the reduced rate of fire.  Anything behind the 180 arc they must rotate their turret. 

Treat each weapons arc separately as in the example to the right.  The blue line is the hull MG arc, and the red line is the turret Arc.  If the Hull MG points to something outside the blue arc, The vehicle is considered moved, and even the Main Gun could only fire at a reduced RoF.  The Red arc for turrets would mostly be used for Slow traverse and  limited vision.  And in the case of limited vision and slow traverse, the T-34 in the example above would have to use limited vision if it shot with its main gun at the StuG to the north.  But could shot normally with the hull MG. 
The hull MG would have to use slow traverse and considered moved, if it shot at the lower Panzer III, where the Turret guns could shoot normal.

You CAN aim different weapons at 2 different targets as long as they are in the same platoon.  For example a hull MG and the Main gun in a turret.  Treat each weapon as if it had its own arc.


If a vehicle you are shooting at is straddling the line, consider it inside the 90 degree arc.

Slow Traverse & Limited Vision
These are no based on the 90 degree arc of the weapon that is firing, and not the 180 degree arc.  Even if they turn their hull. 

MOVEMENT - new

Something I never thought of, was if vehicles had already moved, how does this affect the arc.  Hopefully this wouldn't come up much because the player would have adjusted what they would shoot at during the movement.  But, I guess it should be noted just in case. 


If a vehicle (or gun) moves and shoots outside their firing arc, they will already only have a 1 RoF so would have to add 1 to the score needed to hit.  Just as any ROF 1 weapon needs when it moves. 

Weapons that already only have a RoF of 1 and move, would not be able to shoot outside their 90 degree arc at all. 

Also, if a vehicle or gun has to shoot outside its 90 degree arc and is in difficult terrain it would have to make a bogging check.

You can never shoot bombardments outside your 90 degree arc...although I think this is pretty unlikely since most things far away will end up inside your 90 degree arc. 

SIDE ARMOUR
Now, if you shoot at an armored target OUTSIDE its 90 arc, you are shooting at its side armor.  This is determined by the barrel of the gun and not the tank itself.  So, the laser line could run through the middle of the tank.  But if the end of the barrel is outside the 90 arc, you shoot at side armor.

In the example to the right, you can see that the arc clearly cuts through the KV-1s.  But as soon as he turns his turret, the gun barrel will be on the other side of the line, and he will shoot at the side armor of the StuG F/8.

I am undecided what to do about hitting the side of turrets.  If I should give them the 90 degree arc, take out this rule all together, or leave it at 180.  For now I'm going to leave it at 180.

CONCLUSION

I think this makes for a far more strategic game.  At least positioning your vehicles anyway.  I actually still found it hard to get a side armor shot, but not impossible.  It was all about how your opponent positioned his vehicles.  2 platoons could work more closely together, to force an enemy platoon to show his flank to 1 of your platoons.  All while still being in front of the old 180 degree arc.

It makes StuG's not as strong...and different from tanks with Turrets.  Take a look at this example.  The StuG's have some choices.  They can just shoot at the T-34's with a full RoF, but leave their side armor exposed.  Or they can rotate and shoot at the KV's.  The problem now is that in order to shoot at the KV's the StuG's would end up shooting with a reduced rate of fire for shooting something outside their 90 degree arc.  And more so, the close StuG could not even target KV #1 because its behind the180 arc.  And the StuG's would have to make a bog check to turn toward the KV-1.

Luckily, the T-34's and KV's have the same anti-tank rating so it doesn't matter...they might as well use their full RoF.  

The more complicated situations are already covered in the regular FoW rules.  Like if you have some units of the same platoon with side armor exposed and others are showing front armor, lower armor gets allotted hits first.

All in all, I really like this.  I still have to do some tinkering and testing, but I think this about covers the rules idea anyway.  It took a little more time, because you have to be a lot more careful how you position your vehicles.  You can no longer just drive up, because EVERYTHING is always behind your 180 degree arc line.  you now want to position so that you can cover as much as you can.

In the next example, before the Panzer IV's would have moved forward as they are.  everything in front of their 180 degree arc.  But now you can see that they leave themselves exposed to the T-34's on the hill.

The SU's were a little smarter.  You know...if they had different front and side armor...which I totally forgot.  But for this example we will assume.  They knew a Tiger was coming from the north.  So, they positioned themselves, so that their 90 degree arc covered the tiger coming, and the Panzer IV's.

There is just way more maneuvering to get to that side armor.  rather then just sitting in a tree line shooting at each other until someone rolls good dice.

I've probably forgotten something, but I welcome everyone's input.  If something doesn't work or I've forgotten some obscure FoW rule, let me know, and I'll come up with a solution to work with the 90 degree arc.

Turret and Front Armor House Rules Part 1

I've been playing games for a very long time.  And one thing I usually don't do, is house rules.  I've never really found that games need house rules.

I find most people play a game once and immediately say "this game is broken".  Go on any game forum and you are sure too see a hundred topics on how a game is broken and suggested house rules.  How about adapt to the situation and learn.  Most games you don't get a good feel for strategy and rules until you've played it several times.

Having said that,  the one thing that has always bothered me about Flames of War is how useless turrets are in the game.  And until recently Hull mounted guns had an advantage over turrets.  They could just turn their hull but tanks with turrets had to turn their turret.  This made turreted tanks more vulnerable to side armor attacks.  But at least you were using the turret.

In a topic on the FOW forum Phil (creator) came out and said that now if targets where in front of the 180 degree firing arc turreted tanks could also turn their hulls.  They would only have to turn their turret if targets were behind this 180 degree line.  Well now this makes turrets even more useless.  How often are you shooting at targets behind you?  and even if you do, you might turn your hull anyway, or part of the platoon is in front, and you don't need to.

The same thing pertains to Front armor.  If you are in front of the 180 degree arc, you still shoot at the front armor.  Playing a few weeks ago with my friend Quach, he had a tank sitting right on the 180 degree line.  He could not fathom, he still had to shoot at the front armor.  Especially for a game that is WYSIWYG.  For those that don't know this stands for What You See Is What You Get.  In the rules they talk about getting down at eye level to see if you have line of site and stuff.  Well you can't even see any of the front armor from that angle never mind hit it.

I understand this is all for simplicity, but you have these beautiful models, and you are making the game so simple that there is zero point to even having turrets on these tanks.  You might as well glue them down.  I have these beautiful tanks.  I want to see the turrets turned in pictures. Not to mention the rules for turrets that you'll NEVER use.  Like Slow Traverse and Limited Vision.  There was never any point to spending money on the cupola for soviet tanks because the rule never came up.

So, I've come up with a solution that adds a LOT more realism to the game, and makes turrets far more useful...

Change the firing arc to 90 degree's.  45 degree's out each side.  Also change this for determining if you hit the front armor or not.

How are you going to figure that out you say?  Easy.  I have 2 laser levels I used for line of site for other board games.  You put them perpendicular to each other, and boom....instant 90 degree arc you can place on top of your tank.

In the little play testing I've done, I'm finding this to be far more realistic (not that FoW is realistic), puts some choice into the players hands, and makes the turret (and turret rules) useful again.

Take the Diagram to the right as an example.  Lets say the tiger at the top of the triangle wants to shoot at the 6 pdr no. 4 over to his right.  He has 2 choices.  He can turn his turret and fire with his full rate of fire. Or, he can turn his hull and count as being moved (for shooting outside his 90 degree arc) and fire with 1 RoF.  The player now has a choice because if the 6pdr shoots, he will now hit the side armor form there (for shooting outside the tigers 90 degree arc).  And now Slow Traverse also comes into effect because he is turning outside his firing arc. 

If the Tiger was an assault gun in the same situation,  He would have no choice but to turn his hull and be considered moved and shoot with a 1 RoF.

I have also found that rotating your vehicle after moving matters more now.  with the 180 degree arc it never really mattered.  You would just basically face your vehicle forward and pretty much everything is in front of your 180 degree arc.  thus again, always shooting at front armor, never using the turret. 

I find this triangle adds more realism to articles I've read about combat.  Especially against Tigers.  I always read that T-34's and Sherman had to get very close to destroy a Tiger.  You can see by the Triangle, the further away you are, the more likely to hit the front armor.  the closer you get, the more likely to hit side armor.  Where before, you would have to get all the way past the tank, (never mind close) and survive to get a side armor shot on a tiger.  And you'd almost likely have to move at the double to get past it. 

You can also think about it from the point of view of the gunner looking through his firing slit.  He is going to see things of to the side that are farther away, where he won't see things off to the side that are close up.
Since artillery and anti-tank guns would follow the same rules, they would have to really crank their guns to shoot something to the side.  therefor considered to be moving if they are outside the firing range.  Makes movement and placement far more interesting.

The only thing, I think, that I have to work out, is how things will work if the turret is already turned.  but don't think it will be to tough.  I'm going to do some more play testing and then post my official house rules on this in part 2.

This new rule really makes Panthers vulnerable...and not as scary. 

I know the hardcore FoW people will think I'm crazy.  But I'm a gamer as much as I am a historian or hobbyist. The best games are always the ones where there are difficult choices.  Simply adding this firing arc, adds so much choice to how you move and shoot, and makes turrets mean something again.

The more I play with it, and think about it....the more I like it.

Stay tuned for part 2.

Fallschirmjäger vs Cossacks

Figured I might as well try to start doing some game reports. Last night Sylvain and I played a fighting withdrawal with Fallschirmjäger defending (Curtis) and Cossacks (Sylvain) attacking.  I apologize if some of the picture aren't that great.  I'm still playing around with flash or no flash.  More on that later I suppose.

Anyway, to start there were so many cossacks Sylvain could barley fit them all on the board.  Definatly cause for increasing the offical board size in FoW with the new intelligence books.  You get way more for point costs now.  and the Russians always got a lot before.  I believe he had to leave the trucks off the board for his Anti-tank guns because they just wouldn't fit.  Good thing for me!

My Fallschirmjäger look pretty bare over there in comparison.  And their numbers would start to get smaller each turn.

This was a very strange but fun scenario.  Maybe the coolest one.  But I think we would need to play it a bunch and adjust tactics.  Its also a good fast one because its not to the death.  Basically the defenders will start loosing platoons on turn 3 as they start to withdraw.  But the Trick is on turn 6 the germans get to start removing objectives.  On turn 7 you remove a 2nd object leaving only 1.  And if the Attacker hasn't taken an object by turn 8, the defenders win.  

 Turn 1 not to much happened.  The Cossacks all charged into the ravine to prepare their assault the Fallschirmjäger defenses.  But 2 German StuG F/8's raced across the bridge to start harassing the german flank.

Turn 2 turned out to be the decisive turn.  The German mortars pinned the Cossacks in the ravine, and they failed to become unpinned.  Something to be said about Kommisars hey Sylvain?  Which he had none this game.  This delay prooved to be fatal in the end.

Turn 3 was more of the same, Cossacks stuck in the ravine while the StuG's continued to beat upon rear units.  Except this time 1 platoon was to leave the field of battle. The Fallschirmjäger decided to pull their front line combat platoon away from the barbed wire, leaving the door open.

Soviet Sturmoviks tried to take on the StuG's but there were just to many Soviet Troops, and the StuG's got near them too quickly.  So the aircraft were waived off.  Sylvain, seemed to think the Russians would be OK with their own troops getting in the way.  "We shoot our own troops all the time, why should aircraft be any different".  But I suppose Russian pilots or more sympathetic then Kommisars.

Turn 4 the Cossacks finally broke out of the ravine, and put them selves into position to launch an assault against dug in Fallschirmjäger.  The Fallschirmjäger continued their withdrawal and pulled out the mortars this time.

Turn 5 the Cossacks moved into position to take an objective and dismounted.  Mean while devastating bombardments continued to rain down.  but the guns were just not big enough to destroy the dug in paratroopers.  The Germans would continue to hold on, keeping their heads down and not attacking.  The StuG's completely obliterated the Soviet Heavy mortars, and moved on to destroy more cossacks in the ravine, and they were getting dangerously close to the front lines.  But this time there would be no withdrawing a platoon for the entrenched Fallschirmjäger.

Turn 6 would see the removal of the first objective.  Freeing up the Fallschirmjäger Pioneers to attack.  Realizing, they were running out of time, the Cossacks made a charge for the 2nd line of defenses.  Unfortunately for them German HMG's mowed them down and beat back the assault.  Feeling that they did enough damage, the Germans withdrew the StuG's.

This broke the cossacks back.  the 2nd objective was removed, and they made 1 last ditch effort for the 3rd objective, but it was to late.  The Fallschirmjäger successfully delayed the Cossack charge long enough for their armies to escape.

This was a very fun scenario.  But seeing how history and this article was written by the victor, I'm not sure Sylvain feels the same.  I would defiantly like to try this one several more times.  I think understanding the scenario a little better the out come might be a bit different.

I think my next article is going to be about my purposed rule changes to the fire arc.  My only pet peve for this game is the lack of usefullness of the turrets.  I know they want to keep things simple, but I'd don't care about simple when you have these beautiful figs to play with.  If you want simple play A&A minis'....that game is awful....sorry Matt.

here are the rest of the pics from our battle.

T-34's and Panzer III J's

Its been a while since I've put something up on here.  I haven't painted much in the last month.  Been pretty busy.  But I've finally managed to finish some more tanks.  Tried a couple of new things here, including using an ink that every raves about.  Winsor & Newton Peat Brown ink.  I must admit it worked rather well.  It's still going to take me some practice.  I'm not going to try and move on to do as much infantry as I can.  I've been avoiding it ever since I started using an airbrush.

One thing I am noticing is that the round soviet star decals are thinker then other decals.  These are the only decals where the edges are picked up by dry brushing.  I don't do these any different, but you can still always see the circle after, where you can't on other decals I do.


Of course my son and his mohawk  had to get into one.