Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Orlanth wrote:
Yes it is. There is also a fair assumption about the density of terrain in say Warhammer battles. Modern historical; gaming is usually terrain intense, most rulesets encourage this, some proactively so.

No, it's not. Most players tend to skimp on terrain because they'd rather purchase models for their army instead of terrain. Plus there's no guarantee that they'll be playing in Normandy and not the steppes of Russia.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

You're telling him to give up any chance the platoon has to take down the bigger German tanks and at the same time make the platoon more vulnerable since the Challenger is the only way for the platoon to have four tanks, all because he might have to move into Difficult or Very Difficult Going and the Challenger might bog down?

That is something I am not doing. First I did not say don't use the Challenger, I simply gave a preference for the Firefly. So please stop the "telling him to give up any chance the platoon has to take down the bigger German tanks".
However bogging down is a fatal flaw with a mobile list, especially as the key assets will be the ones bogged down.

Instead you're telling him to use a list where if he bails out of his tanks he would require a 5+ to remount just so he can have a slightly lesser chance to bog down in Difficult or Very Difficult Going? Not being able to remount your tanks is a bigger problem than bogging. For a new player I would recommend the CT or CV list with the Challenger over the RV list with the Firefly every time.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

That sounds like poor advice from where I'm sitting.

Until you stop sitting on false assumptions on what someone else said.. Read more carefully please.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Yes it is. There is also a fair assumption about the density of terrain in say Warhammer battles. Modern historical; gaming is usually terrain intense, most rulesets encourage this, some proactively so.

No, it's not. Most players tend to skimp on terrain because they'd rather purchase models for their army instead of terrain. Plus there's no guarantee that they'll be playing in Normandy and not the steppes of Russia.

Or the Deserrt theatre, however Cromwell lists werent used there.
Also skimp on terrain is a money thing not a volume thing, you can have a lot of terrain on the cheap. Open Fire provides a fair amount for the force size
As a rule of thumb moderns games have more terrain rather than less, there will be exceptions

 Ghaz wrote:

Instead you're telling him to use a list where if he bails out of his tanks he would require a 5+ to remount just so he can have a slightly lesser chance to bog down in Difficult or Very Difficult Going? Not being able to remount your tanks is a bigger problem than bogging. For a new player I would recommend the CT or CV list with the Challenger over the RV list with the Firefly every time.

That is incidental, you pay in points for the motivation and skill. veteran is important and costs. CV is expensive and you get fewer units, whether or not this is better is situational, points are IMHO fairoly balanced. With CT you gain nad lose in equal measure, yes you are one point harder to pass morale on the dice, but are one point harder to hit to begin with.

 Ghaz wrote:


It seems to me that you're the one making the false assumption that bogging down is a death sentence. It's not. You're making it to be a bigger problem than it is and in my opinion, that's "poor advice".

Depends what it is, heavy tanks that are ok being in the open, dont move very fast don't suffer heavily. Heavily gunned poorly armoured fast units used to flank or wide maneuver suffer considerably more. Consider when the overloaded rule would matter to a challanger, most likely when it is trying to relocate to clear LOS or to get into a firing position. Fair either of those and you likely will be out of position to shoot, or stuck under the enemy guns.

That being said I still did not consider Overloaded a death sentence, just a valid factor other choices need not suffer. Again I have not said 'dont take Challengers'.

Point remains the Cromwells can be played three ways: with Challengers, with Fireflys or on their own, the third options means more Cromwells and more but smaller platoons. As the OP has Challengers and Open Fire he was advised to cycle in all three rather than just get fixated the Challengers as a crutch.

And you're still making too big of a deal about the Challenger being overloaded. You can avoid terrain and if the Challenger does get bogged down it can be left behind. Only having three tanks in a platoon would be the biggest flaw that I would avoid. The extra tank is just too valuable to the survivability to the platoon, no matter if one of those tanks is overloaded is not. Then I would recommend starting with a CT company (or a CV company in a pinch) before a RV company. A RV company with Combat Platoons consisting of Shermans or Cromwells is not something I would recommend to a new player because once things start to go downhill, they go downhill fast. And having Challengers in your platoons is in no way a 'crutch', no more than it is having lascannons in your 40K army if you're facing Land Raiders. It's the proper tool for the job.

That being said, here is what I would recommend for a new player wanting to field Combat Platoons of Cromwells:


Armoured Recce Company, 11th Armoured Division, from Market Garden

HQ
Armoured Recce Squadron HQ (CT)
CinC Cromwell IV, 2iC Cromwell IV (145 pts)

COMBAT PLATOONS
Armoured Recce Platoon (CT)
3 Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (335 pts)

Armoured Recce Platoon (CT)
3 Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (335 pts)

Armoured Recce Platoon (CT)
3 Cromwell IV, Challenger A30 (335 pts)

WEAPONS PLATOONS
Scout Car Platoon (CT)
4 Daimler Dingo (90 pts)

BRIGADE SUPPORT PLATOONS
Motor Platoon (CV)
Command MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 3 MG, 4 M5 half-track (140 pts)

SUPPORT PLATOONS
Field Battery (SP), Royal Artillery (CV)
Command Rifle, Staff, Command Rifle, Sherman OP, 4x Sexton (250 pts)
- Jeep, 15-cwt truck, Jeep per Sherman OP (5 pts)

Air Observation Post
Auster AOP (25 pts)


GRAND TOTAL: 1,660 Points, 6 Platoons

We will have to agree to disagree on CT vs RV, I am happy with theither and unless someone is completely new to gaming they could likely cope with either also.

As fro the 'crutch' of the 17pdrs, yes they are, and the lascannon analogy doesnt match. 40K has very little in terms of field maneuver, and what maneuver there is is crude. FoW and WW2 games in general emphasise flanking attacks more, or at least are intended to. The lascannon is straight up essential because you cant (practically) flank a tank and then kill it with an autocannon in the current meta with line units. FoW tank armies can.

I play US Armor and like many was tempted to max out on 76's and get in all the stuff like Easy 8's and Jumbos, and Lafayette Pool turning up as often as Eldrad. I flatlfy refuse to use special characters outside of a recreation scenario (because they are a crutch) dropped the last two out of hand by going with PSC for my tanks, and in about half my games drop even the 76's. My 76's platoon Shermans have two turrets so I can swap out for more 75's. 75's cant fight Panthers from the front, but with a lot of them, and stabiliser, they can flank German tanks and mess them up from the side.
British have it easy with their AT13 or 14 gun (same gun different rulebook edition) trouble is killing Germans now becomes an exercise in direct frontal fire. With less incentive to try to flank. Hence the call for a Cromwell (or Sherman ) player to try Armoured Companies with and without the 17pdr.
Again I am not saying not to use Challengers, only that you get a better grasp of the game and considerable variety in lists simply by swapping them in and out, and more variety yet by swapping in Fireflys.
US Armor is just the same, many players wear by the 76, I was advised to try with and without, the army style changes immediately if you do so. I also use Stuarts as backup for the Shermans, who need the flank move to be of use.
Tigers become a problem without the extra penetration, so I recommend air support for allied tanks without.

As for your offered list.

No comment except for the Motor Platoon, can you take lorried infantry so you can actually have some infantry in your infantry platoon.? British halftacks are so desperately undermanned. Why you would take an M3 and put only five people in it I have no idea, and I wonder if this was a flavour/game balance decision or did the British army really make Motor platoons like that.

So was the real life Challenger or Firefly a 'crutch'? No. It's not a crutch in the game either.

As for the infantry, that's more of a personal preference on my part. I play Guards Armoured Division, 2nd Battalion Grenadier Guards who were supported by 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards who were organized as a Motor Company.

Battlefront seems to be consistent at making their decisions based on historical accuracy. In light of no evidence to the contrary, I would say that it's because that's how their Motor Platoons really operated.

 Ghaz wrote:
So was the real life Challenger or Firefly a 'crutch'? No. It's not a crutch in the game either.

No a valid comparison. In RL you use what you have got and if you have got 17pdrs for a WW2 battlefield, use them. However often they were not available, though more available than 76's.

The reason why its a crutch is because FoW gives you access to a lot of tools that in likelihood will not be there. Very few Tigers and Konigtigers served on the western front, yet you can have some in every list if you want. In a lot of engagemnts the British didn't have the 17pdr and had to make do without, haviong 17prds all the time gives a lobsided skillset of playing British Armour no less than maximising out on 76's gives a lobsided experience of US Armor.
You can defeat Panzers with stock Cromwells and Shermans, it requires different tactics. The ever-present 17pdr crutch takes away the need to develop the maneuver, flank and shoot skills.

 Ghaz wrote:

As for the infantry, that's more of a personal preference on my part. I play Guards Armoured Division, 2nd Battalion Grenadier Guards who were supported by 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards who were organized as a Motor Company.

I like to keep my forces generic

 Ghaz wrote:

Battlefront seems to be consistent at making their decisions based on historical accuracy. In light of no evidence to the contrary, I would say that it's because that's how their Motor Platoons really operated.

According to what I have researched a British motor platoon squad was eight men seven rifles and one LMG, that ought to mean two stands of rifle/MG

I'm learning a TON from all the input, very helpful, thanks guys

I will definitely be trying out Cromwell platoons both with and without the challenger to see what I like best.

I do like the proposed list Ghaz, it sounds like a great starting point at the very least, though it pretty much encompasses everything I want. Would it be possible to swap out the Daimler cars for stuarts, or Jalopy stuarts? I'm willing to drop the M5s for lorries or just have the troops on foot, for points if need be. Do the MGs have AA when in the transport? Is that enough infantry?

Also, based on previous dialogue, it sounds like Sexton's would be best for routing/killing infantry/light vehicle first, smoke second, and opportunistic tank killers third, is that correct? Any other uses for them?

All that being said, I've been playing around with Easyarmy these last few days since the books still aren't in yet (though I didn't buy the Market Garden lists since I hear that's likely to change on the website) but in all the free lists, I couldn't find a list that included all three things I really want in the list: Cromwell's, Airborne, and Wasp Carriers. Are there any in the Market Garden book, Road to Rome, or any that I may have overlooked in the free lists on EA? Or were wasps simply never used around airborne?

Also is airlanding worth it--over just being on foot, or in transports?

 Awesomesauce wrote:
All that being said, I've been playing around with Easyarmy these last few days since the books still aren't in yet (though I didn't buy the Market Garden lists since I hear that's likely to change on the website) but in all the free lists, I couldn't find a list that included all three things I really want in the list: Cromwell's, Airborne, and Wasp Carriers. Are there any in the Market Garden book, Road to Rome, or any that I may have overlooked in the free lists on EA? Or were wasps simply never used around airborne?

Go to EasyArmy and click the 'Links' tab. Then click 'Find Companies containing a given Arsenal Item'. That should show you what kit was available to what companies.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
So was the real life Challenger or Firefly a 'crutch'? No. It's not a crutch in the game either.

No a valid comparison. In RL you use what you have got and if you have got 17pdrs for a WW2 battlefield, use them. However often they were not available, though more available than 76's.

The reason why its a crutch is because FoW gives you access to a lot of tools that in likelihood will not be there. Very few Tigers and Konigtigers served on the western front, yet you can have some in every list if you want. In a lot of engagemnts the British didn't have the 17pdr and had to make do without, haviong 17prds all the time gives a lobsided skillset of playing British Armour no less than maximising out on 76's gives a lobsided experience of US Armor.
You can defeat Panzers with stock Cromwells and Shermans, it requires different tactics. The ever-present 17pdr crutch takes away the need to develop the maneuver, flank and shoot skills.

 Ghaz wrote:

As for the infantry, that's more of a personal preference on my part. I play Guards Armoured Division, 2nd Battalion Grenadier Guards who were supported by 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards who were organized as a Motor Company.

I like to keep my forces generic

 Ghaz wrote:

Battlefront seems to be consistent at making their decisions based on historical accuracy. In light of no evidence to the contrary, I would say that it's because that's how their Motor Platoons really operated.

According to what I have researched a British motor platoon squad was eight men seven rifles and one LMG, that ought to mean two stands of rifle/MG

Most Brit tank units had a firefly per platoon at least after Normandy, and my understanding is results for the British when they didn't weren't brilliant. Flanking and manoeuvring with fast lightly armored shermans all sounds very good on paper, but really in reality it is pretty difficult thing to pull off in the heat of battle... Especially in the claustrophobic battlefields of western europe...

And if your going to talk about Tunisia and italy, well the allies didn't encounter large numbers of heavier german tanks till 1944 and they did have access to 90 mm and 17pdrs .... as well as M10 76mms and later m36s.

Got the first few tanks painted!

So I've had a little bit of time to read the books and go over the lists a little, a couple more questions:

I love the look of the Sextons, but besides the look and and points difference, are there any other benefits of taking Sextons over the BL 5.5 field guns? They just seem way better for taking out tanks.

Also, in the market garden book, the motor platoon entry doesn't make much sense to me. For the options you can take either 2 or 3 squads, but my confusion comes from the picture. the picture has the command platoon plus three 5-man teams plus one M5 for each of the 4 total squads shaded black (which to my understanding meant they are paid for by the lowest point option) and there's one grey 5-man team next to just one of the black teams in the third squad. Do the extra points only pay for one extra 5-man team, to go in the third squad? This doesn't make much sense, as I thought that only one 5-man team went in each half track to begin with (not including command squad). Plus there's already 3 squads blacked out, which doesn't make much sense to be paying for the two squad option and get 3 squads. If that's the case, how do you get the fourth MG team in that platoon?

 Awesomesauce wrote:
I love the look of the Sextons, but besides the look and and points difference, are there any other benefits of taking Sextons over the BL 5.5 field guns? They just seem way better for taking out tanks.

You do realize that before you can field a Medium Battery, Royal Artillery you must first have a Field Battery, Royal Artillery or a Field Battery (SP), Royal Artillery? In order to field the BL 5.5" guns, you must first field either 25 pdrs or Sextons.

 Awesomesauce wrote:
Also, in the market garden book, the motor platoon entry doesn't make much sense to me. For the options you can take either 2 or 3 squads, but my confusion comes from the picture. the picture has the command platoon plus three 5-man teams plus one M5 for each of the 4 total squads shaded black (which to my understanding meant they are paid for by the lowest point option) and there's one grey 5-man team next to just one of the black teams in the third squad. Do the extra points only pay for one extra 5-man team, to go in the third squad? This doesn't make much sense, as I thought that only one 5-man team went in each half track to begin with (not including command squad). Plus there's already 3 squads blacked out, which doesn't make much sense to be paying for the two squad option and get 3 squads. If that's the case, how do you get the fourth MG team in that platoon?

The greyed squad represents the option for Guards to field an additional MG team, sans transport. A transport purchased as a part of a platoon can only carry teams from their own platoon, and a transport can carry up to six teams. Theoretically if you don't purchase the extra MG team all of the teams could ride in any single half-track that the platoon has.

for the motor platoon if you pick 2 squads you get 2 MG teams, 3 squads is 3 MG teams and the guards have the option to buy an extra MG team. also to get the 5.5's you have to also have a 25pdr platoon or a sexton platoon.

beaten to it and better explained above....

Ah I see. Arty makes a lot more sense now.

And as for the motor platoon, now that you said it, I can't believe I didn't see that in the book... I must have just been so focused on the picture not making sense that I wasn't reading the entry correctly either... Anyway, thanks for the info guys