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.

Hey everyone,

So I'm a new player seeking a way into the game, and I read over that Beginner's Guide and have the Open Fire box set. Additionally I got the Overlord book. I was looking to start up a British Tank force. Specifically, the Armored Recce Squadron from the Overlord book.

So my question is: What's the deal with Cromwells and how is it different from the Sherman? Stat wise it looks like they're the same. And I understand that Shermans and Cromwells are available to different companies and (not usually) the same (except the Firefly.) Is picking Shermans or Cromwells a matter of picking different companies and company compositions? I have some Shermans already, but I'd prefer Cromwells aesthetically. I mean, Shermans are nice, but...rather generic.

Since I don't want to make a whole new topic, I also wanted to know two other things:
1. Are the 17pdr Achilles better to take than 17pdr guns? The way I'm running it through my head, I'd have Cromwells shake their lines and bait tanks for the Achilles to do it's job. I'd prefer the mobility of being able to move them like a tank troop instead of infantry, but I genuinely am not sure as to what would fair better in the long run. An Achilles can get knocked out quite fast after all.

2. Should I get Field Battery SP or a normal 25pdr Field Battery. I would prefer the 25pdrs, but do I need the Major HQ in addition to the Captain HQ section for just a single gun section?

Sorry for the rather long post. Trying to get all my info together before I do anything rash. Thanks in advance for any knowledge.

 blitzfenrir wrote:
Hey everyone,

So I'm a new player seeking a way into the game, and I read over that Beginner's Guide and have the Open Fire box set. Additionally I got the Overlord book. I was looking to start up a British Tank force. Specifically, the Armored Recce Squadron from the Overlord book.

So my question is: What's the deal with Cromwells and how is it different from the Sherman? Stat wise it looks like they're the same. And I understand that Shermans and Cromwells are available to different companies and (not usually) the same (except the Firefly.) Is picking Shermans or Cromwells a matter of picking different companies and company compositions? I have some Shermans already, but I'd prefer Cromwells aesthetically. I mean, Shermans are nice, but...rather generic.

Since I don't want to make a whole new topic, I also wanted to know two other things:
1. Are the 17pdr Achilles better to take than 17pdr guns? The way I'm running it through my head, I'd have Cromwells shake their lines and bait tanks for the Achilles to do it's job. I'd prefer the mobility of being able to move them like a tank troop instead of infantry, but I genuinely am not sure as to what would fair better in the long run. An Achilles can get knocked out quite fast after all.

2. Should I get Field Battery SP or a normal 25pdr Field Battery. I would prefer the 25pdrs, but do I need the Major HQ in addition to the Captain HQ section for just a single gun section?

Sorry for the rather long post. Trying to get all my info together before I do anything rash. Thanks in advance for any knowledge.

Cromwells are light tanks, which means they're quicker at moving than Shermans, which is useful for flanking enemy armour and shooting their weaker sides. Handy against Panthers.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 blitzfenrir wrote:
Hey everyone,

So I'm a new player seeking a way into the game, and I read over that Beginner's Guide and have the Open Fire box set. Additionally I got the Overlord book. I was looking to start up a British Tank force. Specifically, the Armored Recce Squadron from the Overlord book.

So my question is: What's the deal with Cromwells and how is it different from the Sherman? Stat wise it looks like they're the same. And I understand that Shermans and Cromwells are available to different companies and (not usually) the same (except the Firefly.) Is picking Shermans or Cromwells a matter of picking different companies and company compositions? I have some Shermans already, but I'd prefer Cromwells aesthetically. I mean, Shermans are nice, but...rather generic.

Since I don't want to make a whole new topic, I also wanted to know two other things:
1. Are the 17pdr Achilles better to take than 17pdr guns? The way I'm running it through my head, I'd have Cromwells shake their lines and bait tanks for the Achilles to do it's job. I'd prefer the mobility of being able to move them like a tank troop instead of infantry, but I genuinely am not sure as to what would fair better in the long run. An Achilles can get knocked out quite fast after all.

2. Should I get Field Battery SP or a normal 25pdr Field Battery. I would prefer the 25pdrs, but do I need the Major HQ in addition to the Captain HQ section for just a single gun section?

Sorry for the rather long post. Trying to get all my info together before I do anything rash. Thanks in advance for any knowledge.

Cromwells are light tanks, which means they're quicker at moving than Shermans, which is useful for flanking enemy armour and shooting their weaker sides. Handy against Panthers.

Since he only has the Open Fire rules, which are simplified, he probably doesn't have the Light Tank rule.

You're correct, I do not have the Light Tank rule. Is that from the main rule book or is that from another force book? Could you give me the rundown as to what the rule does?

 blitzfenrir wrote:
You're correct, I do not have the Light Tank rule. Is that from the main rule book or is that from another force book? Could you give me the rundown as to what the rule does?

Light Tanks simply move 16" cross country instead of a Standard Tank's 12".

The next purchase you should probably make is a copy of the rulebook.

If you're playing Open Fire! (and not Flames of War) you should probably be using the Open Fire! Forces book instead.

Eumerin wrote:


Since he only has the Open Fire rules, which are simplified, he probably doesn't have the Light Tank rule.

The Open Fire boxset includes the full rules in half sized A5 booklet form, similar to what 40K starter boxsets have.

AFAIK the rerun of the starter set replaces the tank sculpts and does not do away with the rulebook, so the full rulebook should be in there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blitzfenrir wrote:

So my question is: What's the deal with Cromwells and how is it different from the Sherman? Stat wise it looks like they're the same. And I understand that Shermans and Cromwells are available to different companies and (not usually) the same (except the Firefly.) Is picking Shermans or Cromwells a matter of picking different companies and company compositions? I have some Shermans already, but I'd prefer Cromwells aesthetically. I mean, Shermans are nice, but...rather generic.

Cromwells are better at flanking. Shermans are better at getting 17pdrs in platoons. Cromwells dont hasve integral 17pdrs in most lists, those that do must use a Challenger which easily gets bogged down, or a Firefly, which is a Sherman. Shermans just take the Firefly and the option to take one or two is available in most tank choices.

British armour also has the Churchill as an option, and that is worth looking at as it is very different.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

Since I don't want to make a whole new topic, I also wanted to know two other things:
1. Are the 17pdr Achilles better to take than 17pdr guns? The way I'm running it through my head, I'd have Cromwells shake their lines and bait tanks for the Achilles to do it's job. I'd prefer the mobility of being able to move them like a tank troop instead of infantry, but I genuinely am not sure as to what would fair better in the long run. An Achilles can get knocked out quite fast after all.

PSC will have towed 17pdr in plastic very soon.
The Achilles does work but doesnt have the ambush rules of the M10. Its also unnecessary as you get plenty of heavy firepower in regular Sherman platoons via the Firefly. The towed 17pdr can easily hide, has a gun shield and is cheaper. You can take halftracks to mobilise them enough to do their job, which is 'bashing the bosche' and 'hunting the hun' very effectively while not having to get anywhere near them. Bewtween towed 17pdrs and integral Fireflys you have all the heavy penetration guns you need, though Typhon support wont hurt.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

2. Should I get Field Battery SP or a normal 25pdr Field Battery. I would prefer the 25pdrs, but do I need the Major HQ in addition to the Captain HQ section for just a single gun section?

Are you making an Armoured Company, or adding tanks to an Infantry Company? This really dictates what artillery you field, if any. Tank forces are rather light on defence against counter attack and need mobile elements. Infantry can dig in and be supported by towed artillery easilyb enough. However if you take towed 17pdrs in any listk, with some infantry support, you can have a firebase.
Nevertheless try a mortar section first, you will find it does what it needs to do for less. An artillery heavy list can work at cross purposes to a 17pdr heavy list. British are not short of firepower but the cost adds up you wont ber able to have it all and you need to cover the basics of raw tanks or infantry and recon elements which can be difficult if you have mxeed out on artillery and tank destroyers, both of which are supporting arms.

 Orlanth wrote:

Eumerin wrote:


Since he only has the Open Fire rules, which are simplified, he probably doesn't have the Light Tank rule.

The Open Fire boxset includes the full rules in half sized A5 booklet form, similar to what 40K starter boxsets have.

AFAIK the rerun of the starter set replaces the tank sculpts and does not do away with the rulebook, so the full rulebook should be in there.

You are mistaken; Open Fire is now a "cut down" ruleset and does NOT include the mini-rulebook any longer. It contains the "Open Fire" version of Forces and the rules. The point is somewhat academic as the UK arsenal clearly lists the Cromwell at a 16" move and the Sherman at a 12".

Thanks for the replies guys.

I'm currently waiting on the rulebook to get to me. Not sure when but it's on its way. And yeah, the Open Fire set has a cut down version of the rules. Doesn't even explain artillery even though they gave the paras a mortar team...

To answer your question Orlanth, I want to run an Armored Company (specifically, Armored Recce from the Overlord book). I was thinking that having Cromwells and it's mobility to give me more flexibility on the board. Since they're essentially faster Shermans, I was going to use them to power through and/or exploit enemy positioning.

That being said, I'm not ignoring the infantry component. I think having a stable firebase to back up the Cromwells (in case they need to pull back or extend too far) is a good idea. Pretty much standard hammer-anvil tactics really (yeah, not the most original huh?) I was going to have towed/guns form that base, with infantry if not have some tank hunters roaming. What sort of mortar or artillery support would work for this? After playing plenty of Wargame: Red Dragon I know the importance of smoke. Should I get long reaching smoke throwers or more mobile ones?

How are the quality of PSC units? I was looking at that amazing 47 pound Cromwell Company and thought that would go absurdly well with what Shermans I already have.

I probably should have used a different topic title, since this is starting to shift from a discussion on the unit to army lists.
Also hope you don't mind if I drop an experimental list. It's from the Overlord book for Armored Recce. Using google doc to save post space.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c378iVWkAKYWJVPcGpRnx9OwJisac71Nx8xPUfJoT34/edit?usp=sharing

Am I missing something -really- important?

 blitzfenrir wrote:
Thanks for the replies guys.

I'm currently waiting on the rulebook to get to me. Not sure when but it's on its way. And yeah, the Open Fire set has a cut down version of the rules. Doesn't even explain artillery even though they gave the paras a mortar team

If you only have a single team, then its generally best to use it in direct fire mode. Artillery doesn't work very well unless you have at least two guns (and even then its penalized).

 Krinsath wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

Eumerin wrote:


Since he only has the Open Fire rules, which are simplified, he probably doesn't have the Light Tank rule.

The Open Fire boxset includes the full rules in half sized A5 booklet form, similar to what 40K starter boxsets have.

AFAIK the rerun of the starter set replaces the tank sculpts and does not do away with the rulebook, so the full rulebook should be in there.

You are mistaken; Open Fire is now a "cut down" ruleset and does NOT include the mini-rulebook any longer. It contains the "Open Fire" version of Forces and the rules. The point is somewhat academic as the UK arsenal clearly lists the Cromwell at a 16" move and the Sherman at a 12".

So they went cheap, thats too bad, the mini rulebook was necessary. Looks like buyers should get an older Open Fire set, the earlier tanks are salvagable and PSC is better anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blitzfenrir wrote:

To answer your question Orlanth, I want to run an Armored Company (specifically, Armored Recce from the Overlord book). I was thinking that having Cromwells and it's mobility to give me more flexibility on the board. Since they're essentially faster Shermans, I was going to use them to power through and/or exploit enemy positioning.

Well that answers your question. Stock Cromwells can work but you need priority air support to deal with tanks and infantry blobs and support your mobility.
You should aim to have three preferably four Cromwell platoons and some recon on the side. Either Universal Carriers or Stuarts.

17pdrs are not strictly necessary, though you will have problems with Tigers if you dont take them. Trouble is the 17pdr choices other than the Achilles, which is not in every list, and would be isolated as a priorioty target anyway.
You can add Fireflys or Challengers to some Cromwell platoons. Fireflys slow you down and you end up might as well taking Shermans. Challengers have problems with difficult terrain.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

That being said, I'm not ignoring the infantry component. I think having a stable firebase to back up the Cromwells (in case they need to pull back or extend too far) is a good idea. Pretty much standard hammer-anvil tactics really (yeah, not the most original huh?) I was going to have towed/guns form that base, with infantry if not have some tank hunters roaming. What sort of mortar or artillery support would work for this? After playing plenty of Wargame: Red Dragon I know the importance of smoke. Should I get long reaching smoke throwers or more mobile ones?

The British race advantages are infantry that are very hard to dislodge and superior artillery rules. Their tanks do not have any advantages not shown in their stat line, though they are admittedly good especially because the British did not ignore the need to produce a heavy tank, or a high penetration gun in sufficient numbers, though they never managed to mix the two together.

You will never go wrong having an infantry platoon or two. One word of advice, never take Motor infantry, they get no special rules, have unarmed halftracks and for game balance take only one stand per halftrack leading to laughably and unhistircially small platoons of mechanised infantry. Perhaps British infantry with protected mobility looks like it would be overpowered.
Anyway, dont bother with the halftracks, take a large number of Universal carriers instead. This was historical anyway, the UC was the most produced combat vehicle of WW2 by any nation, outstripping even Soviet production numbers. Taking a large swarm of them able to plit into multiple units of three is damn useful, you can take two platoons of infantry where you want them easily enough, and you can tool them up for nasty anti infantry firepower. Once in a hardened position most British infantry will dig in like ticks and even German elite will have problems moving them.

Flames of War normally calls a forward objective capture as an autowin condition, but there is astill mileage in taking forward positions with your infantry to hem in and thus give more maneuver room for your Cromwells, which must dflank for best effect.

Remember Cromwells are not dripping in machine guns unlike American tanks, you may need support to deal with infantry. Here the UC shines again in support, especailly the cheap and nasty Wasp variant.. Be careful though UC's are fragile and you have to deal with attritional play if you use them.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

How are the quality of PSC units? I was looking at that amazing 47 pound Cromwell Company and thought that would go absurdly well with what Shermans I already have.

Very crisp and clear and are assembled without gaps you need to putty over. I recommend PSc as your primary source, other than the Open Fire infantry and Pak 40's I dont rate any miniatures from Battlefront. Though the tanks were useable if not ideal, and some prefer the rough 'handmade' style to PSC's crisp precision casts which can look too uniform.

Motor infantry sound really...sad.

Thanks for the advice. I might try and see if I can fit some UCs into the list. I'm thinking of getting Stuarts for scouts, since that's all I can choose in the army list.

I'll also probably pick up an infantry platoon with several towed/pushed AT guns for support. I'm thinking that'll form the backbone for taking and holding positions. Use the tank platoons to make the opponent reposition or risk being outflanked.

How does a Firefly slow down a cromwell team? Are they all forced to move at the max speed of the slowest tank?

And I think I'll definitely pick up the PSC cromwell company. So much awesome for such a good deal. And then find a field battery to act as my artillery.

 blitzfenrir wrote:
Motor infantry sound really...sad.

Well there is nothing wrong with them except you get one stand of infantry per M3 haslftrack, so the platoon size is stupidly small and they have no equipment.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

Thanks for the advice. I might try and see if I can fit some UCs into the list. I'm thinking of getting Stuarts for scouts, since that's all I can choose in the army list.

PSc will do UCs soon, Stuarts they already do. Tip for British Stuarts: Make a round plug to fit in the turret ring, model in two torso up men looking out and cover the plug loosely with gauze as camo netting so noone will notice. Now your Stuarts are either regular or Jalopies. Forced to make the choice I would recommend Jalopies, they do all they need to do for less.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

I'll also probably pick up an infantry platoon with several towed/pushed AT guns for support. I'm thinking that'll form the backbone for taking and holding positions. Use the tank platoons to make the opponent reposition or risk being outflanked

PSc already do a towed 6pdr boxset and are working on a towed 17pdr boxset, both are useful, but you dont need to support a Cromwell list with 6pdrs, you will already have lots of those. However note that when you buy a box of British infantry for your sup[porting infantry platoon, you not only get that, but for the same low price you get enough sprues to make four more. PSC sell enough men to do an infantry company in one box, so you are getting the core of an infantry company on the side. The heavy weapons boxset contains your mortar platoon, which you will need to support your Cromwells. But it also IIRC contains two more of different calibers and a platoon of HMG, so before you know it you have already got a full infantyry company, and tooled it out. It wont be any cheaper getting a motar platoon and an infantry platoon elsewhere, and the quality likely will not be as good as PSC plastics.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

How does a Firefly slow down a cromwell team? Are they all forced to move at the max speed of the slowest tank?

Ruleswise no, tactically yes. There are formation rules that come into play if the Firefly lags too far behind, but more importantly if there is no shield between the Firefly and the enemy they no longer need to called shot at the Firefly on a 5+, its potentially easy to set up so the Firefly is the closest tank in arc of fire. One of the nasty things about Firweflies is that they are hidden in cheap tank formations, it is why Fireflys didnt need a lot of armour, and in real history the British used this to great effect. Replicate the barrel camo on a real Firefly. The Firefly paintjobs were not so much to hide the Firefly but to make it appear to be a regular Sherman.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

And I think I'll definitely pick up the PSC cromwell company. So much awesome for such a good deal. And then find a field battery to act as my artillery.

If you can wait for when PSC next do a sale they buy the whole lot at once. PSC advertise sales on the day and they last about as long. I bought my US Armor on D-Day anniversary 2014. PSC normally do sales on military holidays, most of those for 2015 have gone except for Armistice Day, 11th November, which is the most important one in the calender in the UK anyway.

If you are interested in PSC, here is them painted...

Orlanth: I agree it's somewhat unfortunate they didn't include the mini-rulebook, but I can also see where the "starter" version of the rules has its advantages. I know some people's eyes have glazed over when they saw the size of even the mini-rulebook, but the Open Fire rules don't scare them much at all. Since it's a basic framework which then dovetails over by adding more special rules and granularity, there's an argument to be made that it's better for the starter set than throwing people newer to the hobby in the deep-end from the get-go. Whether that approach is successful, I can't say.

I will disagree that the old OF Shermans are salvageable (though the old StuGs were passable if not great). I mean, yes, from a purely technical sense you CAN make them work with proper tools and supplies, but the new designs included are so dramatically better that the $5-10 you'll spend getting a mini-rulebook on its own is by far the lesser cost. Unless you like a frustrating challenge for what should be simple, the time saved using a properly designed kit is worth a lot more.

On that note of designs, I'll vouch that PSC's kits are fairly nice overall as well. The tracks are annoying to work with at first due to a lack of easy part identification on the sprue, but you'll eventually figure out the at they only go on the tank properly one way without big gaps. An annoyance at first but fairly minor overall. The kits are designed well enough that you can generally dry-fit the tracks with ease to make sure you're putting the right ones on.

Also, don't believe Big P's pictures are typical examples; normal humans cannot paint like that. He is an alien or super-mutant from the future sent back in time to make us all feel inferior. The PSC infantry are nice from what I've seen, I just find I prefer BF's "chunky" styling to PSC's more "real" proportions. Different strokes and all that. I think some of the later PSC stuff is beginning to slide a little bit more towards "heroic" proportions, but I could have entirely misheard that news.

 Krinsath wrote:
Orlanth: I agree it's somewhat unfortunate they didn't include the mini-rulebook, but I can also see where the "starter" version of the rules has its advantages. I know some people's eyes have glazed over when they saw the size of even the mini-rulebook, but the Open Fire rules don't scare them much at all. Since it's a basic framework which then dovetails over by adding more special rules and granularity, there's an argument to be made that it's better for the starter set than throwing people newer to the hobby in the deep-end from the get-go. Whether that approach is successful, I can't say.

I am sorry but I cannot accept that argument and why in my opinion it is a complete load of horse manure. No disrersdpect to you here as the argument I critique is that posed by Battlefront's policy and not your observation of it.

Yes the main rulebook, in any size format is daunting, but it's the rules of the game. If you want to go beyond what is in the starter box you need the rules. It is also a historical wargame not Age of Stigma or another cut down game, its naturally complicated because to some level or other it is a sim. Not as accurate as other WW2 sims to be sure but nonetheless broadly indicative of capabilities and tactics. There is a limit to how much that can be simplified or dumbed down, even if you wanted to.

Furthermore wargamers are the second highest IQ group by hobby after astronomers, people into this sort of stuff can handle the main product. As a community we don't need molly coddling or holdy-hand, WWE2 wargaming doesnt touch that market in any real way.

Finally there is no real learning curve set up, once you have passed the intro boxset you are truly in the deep end as any particular combo of rules can crop up, from odd terrain to fortifications to air support and once you start adding things that could conceivably be encountered in a WW2 company level action it gets messy quick.

Had Battlefront wanted a stand alone tabletop wargaming boxset with separated rules they needed to make a different boxset. A playmat would help and a slightly different composition that adds more variety piecemeal. The playmat could include just the terrain elements they want the game to include and the redesigned contents could add units piecemeal so that units are included sequentially in a set of scenarios, with the back half of the scenarios involving whole froces used in different tactical situations.

 Krinsath wrote:

I will disagree that the old OF Shermans are salvageable (though the old StuGs were passable if not great). I mean, yes, from a purely technical sense you CAN make them work with proper tools and supplies, but the new designs included are so dramatically better that the $5-10 you'll spend getting a mini-rulebook on its own is by far the lesser cost. Unless you like a frustrating challenge for what should be simple, the time saved using a properly designed kit is worth a lot more.

I dont like Battlefronts sculpts, but I would these tajnks servicable. The Shermans needed quite a bit of work to fit properly but ironically they are better than the StuGs. The Stugs unfortuneatekly have too much hard shadow on the bracing for the shurzen, and without going anywhere near rivet counter level of requirement of detail because hard shadow is always a bitch. I could be a Golden demon winner and still be flummoxed by hard shadow as uyou just cant fix it. You cant cut it out easily, and no matter which way you paint it or to what quality it just looks wrong.
The barrel ends on the StuGs were a work of the devil, I was forwarned and even then had big trouble not fething them up. The Shermans sucky though their fit was fit together reasonably once you worked out how much of the interior you needed to shave off.

Where battlefront take away they also give. The rougher uncrisp stowage is much more reasonable than the crisp neat perfecrt stowage on PSC kits. The roughness of detail adds character, PSC tank detailsc are IMHO sterile and Battlefront's bitz add a lot of depth of quality otherwise lacking.

The Battlefront infantry are also very nice, better than all but the newest PSC infantry kits. I got extra infantry sprue to have enough Huns for my Panzergenardierkompanie being so m uch nicer than the onces PSC were selling, though I now hear they are redoing the German infantry boxsets.

 Krinsath wrote:

On that note of designs, I'll vouch that PSC's kits are fairly nice overall as well. The tracks are annoying to work with at first due to a lack of easy part identification on the sprue, but you'll eventually figure out the at they only go on the tank properly one way without big gaps. An annoyance at first but fairly minor overall. The kits are designed well enough that you can generally dry-fit the tracks with ease to make sure you're putting the right ones on.

The tracks do fit only one way, but dryfit first and you will be ok. My main problems is that details are in real scale, and thus many important pieces are damn fiddly. I lost two hull MG's from my Shermans and one from my Stuarts while cutting them out. They all zoomed off onto the carpet and I never found them. I should have learned.

 Krinsath wrote:

Also, don't believe Big P's pictures are typical examples; normal humans cannot paint like that. He is an alien or super-mutant from the future sent back in time to make us all feel inferior. The PSC infantry are nice from what I've seen, I just find I prefer BF's "chunky" styling to PSC's more "real" proportions. Different strokes and all that. I think some of the later PSC stuff is beginning to slide a little bit more towards "heroic" proportions, but I could have entirely misheard that news.

You would be surprised, try it for yourself. Use tank sprays as one coat primer/maincoat, add metal detail and leatherwork and then inkwash, dust over for any mud or dirt, keep it sparing. Ends up a very thin paintjob thus preserving the majority of the small detail. Its also so simple a paintjob you might feel you are being lazy about it. Post 41 Germans are trickier as you need to paint the hulls over a primer and thus lose the edge of the crispness.

All next-gen PSC infantry are more chunky...

 Orlanth wrote:
So they went cheap, thats too bad, the mini rulebook was necessary. Looks like buyers should get an older Open Fire set, the earlier tanks are salvagable and PSC is better anyway.

No because as has been stated every time this subject comes up, Open Fire! is now a different game. Its designed as a beer and pretzels game for those who just want to push around some tanks and as an introduction to Flames of War as it shares the same basic mechanics.

One quick correction regarding British special rules -

There are national rules for British tanks. Most of them are for Early War and Mid War, though. The one that's available in Late War is the semi-indirect fire rule, which makes it easier for British tanks to hit targets at long range.

Eumerin wrote:
One quick correction regarding British special rules -

There are national rules for British tanks. Most of them are for Early War and Mid War, though. The one that's available in Late War is the semi-indirect fire rule, which makes it easier for British tanks to hit targets at long range.

It was better to tell the truth that there are none, than hope with the lie by reading the special rules available only to find that none of them apply in Late War, except tow hooks.

"Battlefront's bitz add a lot of depth of quality"
What? They don't have straight gun-barrels even on the stock photos, you have to work an hour on a tank to make it stand correctly all tracks down, hard to get turret in place (1 mm off, that would mean 10 cm IRL, that's never happen) ...
Their new plastic stuff is great, but the resin is meh.

Those models look fantastic. Granted, they're already painted and thus already even better (that quality is something I aspire to one day). I'll make sure to mark my calendar in case, discounts are always fantastic and being able to fill out most of a list is great. Might get some tanks and infantry, because I'll probably be able to build both a Armored and a Infantry list. (Or I might be stupid and buy a pack of Tigers because...Tigers.) I really like what I'm seeing and don't quite mind the, as Orlanth put it, "sterile" look. They don't look so sterile when painted and built.

Also, really, the special rules like Broadside don't apply to late tanks? That's pretty sad. That sounds like such a great rule for flanking tanks. Forcing enemies to hit front armor even though it's the side. And tow hooks seems...kinda odd. Given that more than likely your tanks aren't close to your towed guns. I can understand it if you don't have any towing capability or are desperate, but it seems...meh.

Regarding the rules, I think I'd agree with Ghaz here. Showed the actual rulebook to a few of my friends interested and they were just turned off. But after playing a bit of Open Fire with their light ruleset for some fun, I think I've gotten a few more interested in the actual game.

On a side note, generally how picky are people about "What You See Is What You Get?" Am I going to get a lot of gak for proxying? I ask this because I love Crusaders and wouldn't mind picking some up, but they're not in late war (for obvious reasons). If I could I'd take em as the two command tanks simply because they're so iconic.

Lathor wrote:
"Battlefront's bitz add a lot of depth of quality"
What? They don't have straight gun-barrels even on the stock photos, you have to work an hour on a tank to make it stand correctly all tracks down, hard to get turret in place (1 mm off, that would mean 10 cm IRL, that's never happen) ...
Their new plastic stuff is great, but the resin is meh.

"Barrels.....tracks"

From context I was describing the stowage and add ons for the Stug and Shermans, which were eagerly gobbled up to add character to PSC Shermans (with the StuG stowage awaiting reuse).

"resin is meh"

From context I was describing the first run of plastic Open Fire models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blitzfenrir wrote:


On a side note, generally how picky are people about "What You See Is What You Get?" Am I going to get a lot of gak for proxying? I ask this because I love Crusaders and wouldn't mind picking some up, but they're not in late war (for obvious reasons). If I could I'd take em as the two command tanks simply because they're so iconic.

Good news for you then. Crusaders are in Late War, They are AA tanks attached to Company command. You can normally take up to two of them in many Armoured Company lists. The BAOR still used Crusaders well into the 1950's as engineering vehicles.

AA tanks are cheap, and while you likely wont need them, if Jerry does field flyers and you don't intercept them they may come in handy. Looking though Overlord....... Ok. You can take Crusader AA platoons of two tanks for 85pts, nice armament 16" ROF 5 AT 5 FP 5+. That will do very nicely against half tracks, light tanks and infantry, A pair will make a real mess of a platoon of Hanomags. They are fast tanks but unreliable, probably due to discontinued manufacture. Armour 2 front and sides is not great but workable for what they do. I think they can be worth while even if you never see a Stuka.

You up to convert the turret front and armament?

 Orlanth wrote:
Good news for you then. Crusaders are in Late War, They are AA tanks attached to Company command.

Actually they're a Weapons Platoon. Armoured and Tank Companies can have a platoon of two Crusader AA tanks, except for the 6 Guards Tank Brigade which can take four.

I had no idea they used them for so long, given that they were unreliable. I knew they were used as trainers, but as engineering? Fascinating.

I could probably get a friend to help me design and make a conversion. He's got access to 3D printers and some other small fabricators. I actually wouldn't mind having AA crusaders now that I think about it. I could get a lot of utility out of it. I take it that Stukas aren't that great late war.

On a random note, how do they balance late war between late war books? Like Pershings vs M4s (not 76) seems really...no contest. How's the balance for that? Is it better if I just go back to midwar and do Africa?

 Ghaz wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Good news for you then. Crusaders are in Late War, They are AA tanks attached to Company command.

Actually they're a Weapons Platoon. Armoured and Tank Companies can have a platoon of two Crusader AA tanks, except for the 6 Guards Tank Brigade which can take four.

Actually they are both. The ones IO read out from Overlord were weapons companies

" You can take Crusader AA platoons of two tanks for 85pts,..."

Some are part of comapny command.

Armoured Recce companies, with Cromwells often take them as Company command, some like 11th Armoured Recce have them as both, allowing four Crusaders two in the HQ and two as a weapons platoon.

 blitzfenrir wrote:
I had no idea they used them for so long, given that they were unreliable. I knew they were used as trainers, but as engineering? Fascinating.

Unreliable is a games term, in 1944 they were out of production yet still in service, hence lower supply stockage.
Post war that didnt matter so much. Crusaders had a lot of advantages as engineering vehicles, they have a fairly powerful engine for the chassis size as a cruiser tank, cruisers tanks were long obsolete yet there was always need for a chassis on tracks for towing things and carrying things.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

I could probably get a friend to help me design and make a conversion. He's got access to 3D printers and some other small fabricators. I actually wouldn't mind having AA crusaders now that I think about it. I could get a lot of utility out of it. I take it that Stukas aren't that great late war.

Stukas are fething nasty all through the war. But Germans cant get enough wings in the sky. In later lists Germans can have sporadic jet support, and one of the advantages of that is it is too fast to be intercepted, so 1945 scenarios see a last return of Luftwaffe fire support. Your Crusaders can help deal with that, but the main reason to consider taking them is the ROF 10 for two vehicles and 85pts. You need that as you get ROF 4 AT 2 FP 6+ machines guns on each Cromwell or Sherman, less if you have Fireflys, you can have more firepower, but have to pay extra for .50 cal unlike the Americans, who just get it and lots of it. British armoured cars are not well armed either, in fact I cant think of anything with a similar firepower profile anywhere in the lists except artillery barrage. Those Crusaders can provide medium range direct fire to rip up light vehicles and infantry and are armoured enough to laugh at return HMG fire unlike recon units, and have a fair chance to stop a 3.7cm shell, though I would avoid those if I were you.
As supplementary anti infantry firepower Crusader AA have a lot to offer and can keep your tanks from being swamped.

 blitzfenrir wrote:

On a random note, how do they balance late war between late war books? Like Pershings vs M4s (not 76) seems really...no contest. How's the balance for that? Is it better if I just go back to midwar and do Africa?

Late War has a lot of subsets, if you are running things from a 1945 book they should really only come up against the lists from the book they echo. However the points are there for open play so you could have any Late War list fight any other in a tournament or casual game. This has its advantages as its allows you to shoot at Americans, Soviets and other British lists with your tanks.

If facing an open field it pays to take air support. Pershings and ISU-122s are nasty opponent for you but a flight of Typhoons can make a mess of any tank in the game,l and you will have numbers on your side if you face supertanks. You could always add some Comets to you list if you still aren't happy, and have your own time with the elite toys.

Which list in Overlord allows you to take Crusader AA tanks as a part of the company command? The only option I see for the Armoured Recce Squadron HQ is a Cromwell ARV.

They're only available as part of HQs in Fortress Europe and Turning Tide as far as I can see.

Pershings vs sherman is harder than you think
First shermans are cheaper and have smoke.
In late war any heavies are not worth it exempt a couple, RV/RT king tiger and jadgtiger because the heavies will get smoke, and the amount of At 15 fire everywhere

bobjoerock wrote:
First shermans are cheaper and have smoke.

Shermans are indeed cheaper than Pershings, but they both have smoke. Having said that, I agree that the cutting edge Allied tanks (Pershings and Comets) are generally too expensive. You'd be better off with the workhorse Shermans and Cromwells.