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.

It seems like vehicles are very popular in the FoW scene near me... What do you most often use? You can comment with more details.

None of the above, I play all in equal measure. Choosing any one is unfair to the others

I mostly play tank companies. Part of me wants to try an infantry company at some point, but I get the feeling from a lot of FoW players that infantry companies are generally annoying and/or boring to play and play against, especially if they're at least half-competitive.

The downside there is that my own tank companies (Brits and Soviets) are generally so ineffective and completely one-dimensional respectively, that they're boring me anyway. Deploying my Brits, knowing full well that any 17pdrs will be sitting under smoke the entire game, or be instantly gun-tanked to death, and the remaining Cromwells will be unable to really do a whole lot, is boring. Trying to build a competent Tankovy that isn't 21 T-34-85s or a medium artillery company made of SU-100s, is annoying as all hell.

With Brit Infantry, there are so many choices and ways of using them, but also so many people who bemoan playing against them, or any infantry company.

It makes me wonder if I'm in a bit of a Lose/Lose situation. Either I keep on having no fun with my tank companies as I get stomped on whilst trying to become better at playing them, or my opponents have no fun playing my infantry companies.

I think you can have competative and interesting infantry lists - but to me only brit infantry really fills that niche as the combination of night attack and Ram kangaroos give them that ability. German mech is great fun for the same reason

Generally infantry, usually Confident-Trained, I like having a decent number of bodies and they can surprise some people when played aggressively.

Teaching myself to use Confident-Veteran panzers in mid war with varying levels of success.

only lists I've not really played are Mechanised ones, only one I have are DAK in trucks who only just count really as not overly armoured, not overly got the hang of them but hopefully an upcoming event will shake that out.

Infantry can be fun, but if you just dig in and sit there is a drag of a game, the bods have feet, unless its suicidal I let them use them, soooo many players see a C-T grenadier list and expect to kill them in foxholes - then get caught out when 10+ platoons on foot start moving on turn one, the panic is wonderful to see.

You kind of expect Soviet hordes to try that, but Germans do it very nicely as well

You left a few out. I have an army to fit all of the above plus a Recon, Tank Destroyer and Motorized.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:
You left a few out. I have an army to fit all of the above plus a Recon, Tank Destroyer and Motorized.

There's only the four types of companies (Flames of War 3rd edition rulebook, pg. 257).

Boss GreenNutz wrote:
You left a few out. I have an army to fit all of the above plus a Recon, Tank Destroyer and Motorized.

All lists, regardless of what they're actually individually called, fall into one of the four types listed in the poll. The list might be called 'Tank Destroyer Company', but it will still fall under one of the four aforementioned types, which in the case of a US TD Company, is Mechanised.

I have enough figures for the US and Germans to play all types.

I'm not sure what to respond. I love the look of Mechanized lists on the table, but I'm not convinced they're especially effective. I certainly have more Tank Companies than anything else, but a lot of that is how (comparatively) easy it is to collect and paint a tank list versus an infantry list.

True but it gives a false impression of what is actually out there since a tank destroyer list plays way different than a pure tank list.

Not saying the poll is wrong but just not really complete.

It is complete. The four company types he's listed are the only company types that exist in the game. He asked what company type do you play, not what kind of force. Two totally different questions.

 Avatar 720 wrote:
I get the feeling from a lot of FoW players that infantry companies are generally annoying and/or boring to play and play against, especially if they're at least half-competitive.

Only if you are playing against tank companies as infantry effectively can't leave their foxholes if tanks can get within MG range.

Infantry Vs infantry games are a lot more interesting.

I think Infantry vs. Tank games can be long, but I don't feel it isn't fun. I don't mind a 6 hour game.

I mainly play the mechanized company of cossacks, btw. (I accidentally voted for infantry...)

I really think Cossacks should be classified as infantry. They don't take anymore vehicles than a Strelkovy company and are always attack anyhow, so it wouldn't change their rules.

Can you have this poll so we can choose multiple options to reflect we don't just play one company type?

 Reaver83 wrote:
Can you have this poll so we can choose multiple options to reflect we don't just play one company type?

Eh, I'd rather a vote represent a person. If you play multiple, just choose what you're enjoying the most at the moment, and you can explain that you play more than that in the comment.

 Krinsath wrote:
I'm not sure what to respond. I love the look of Mechanized lists on the table, but I'm not convinced they're especially effective. I certainly have more Tank Companies than anything else, but a lot of that is how (comparatively) easy it is to collect and paint a tank list versus an infantry list.

A lot of the mid-war soviet Mechanized armored transports lists seem to have that curse. The basic combat companies seem horrendously overpriced. Which is a shame, cause the actual mechanics seem pretty interesting. You get a lot of choices in lists like that. You can do the "redeployment" thing, where you can get normal-ish rifle infantry situated in a good spot before dismounting, you can have a bunch of soviets leap out of their transports with SMGs, or use the vehicle MGs to just be light vehicles. Tis a shame.

 Krinsath wrote:
I'm not sure what to respond. I love the look of Mechanized lists on the table, but I'm not convinced they're especially effective. I certainly have more Tank Companies than anything else, but a lot of that is how (comparatively) easy it is to collect and paint a tank list versus an infantry list.

I don't know if it's still the case. But for a while in V2, the US Armored Rifle Company was considered one of the better companies in the hands of a skilled player (though if you weren't a skilled player...).

I play late war Canadians, an infantry company with the Ram Kangaroos really forces your opponent into a choice, unless he dedicates a significant anti-tank to the mech infantry they often find a full company of vets in assault range and ready to dig out those objectives. I have always found a balanced force fought well will overcome most single axis builds (with a few exceptions and also depending on terrain :( )

cheers

Papasmurf

Currently in love with my US Armored Rifles. 3x Max (14 stand) platoons full of bazookas, plus attachments? Yes please. Makes anyone think twice about coming across the table after my objectives. Just so much fun when you roll a 5+ Bazooka firepower!


Edited for spelling.

I've dabbled in Mechanized, Tank and Infantry companies.

My Brits are armoured, with a fair bit of infantry support, almost enough to run a mech infantry list; my Soviets are pure infantry and I've played around a bit more with my Germans, from a purely infantry list to a StuG company to what I'm working on now which is mechanized recce infantry with lots of armoured cars.

All of the above are late war Normandy (except the Soviets, obviously, which are mid war.)

I have a US Armor company, and am beginning to build up my Gepanzerte Panzergrenardiers.

With US Armor, I keep them basic, lots of Sherman M1A1's with 75's and Stuarts, though I have turret swaps for 76's and 105's. Basic Shermans and Stuarts with an Armored Rifle Platoon, an Armored Patrol, and a diecast metal P-48 for giggles. My lists are based on 3rd Division Normandy, Confident Trained, so they are dirt cheap. My tactics revolve around the 'American Horde' rather than specialist tanks with specialist rules like Easy Eights and Jumbos; need none of that, just more and more armour and the Swiss army knife ARP.

In EW I have Finnish infantry and armour, French mech and armour
In MW I have Brit infantry, and paras, German infantry, mech and armour, Finnish infantry and armour
In LW I have Brit infantry, paras, mech, armour, armoured recce, German infantry (multiple types) mech, armour, Schwere armoured, and Finnish infantry and armour.

Tanks. Because im poor and im a noob.

 Reaver83 wrote:
In EW I have Finnish infantry and armour, French mech and armour
In MW I have Brit infantry, and paras, German infantry, mech and armour, Finnish infantry and armour
In LW I have Brit infantry, paras, mech, armour, armoured recce, German infantry (multiple types) mech, armour, Schwere armoured, and Finnish infantry and armour.

Dang Reaver i do not know who is worse me or you, i need to see how many i have i know it is more than 6,
Btw are you still playing Blood Bowl?

No not played blood bowl for a few years, lost the love.

2016 is ew German and LW US

Late war German Panzergrenadiers (Infantry) and Soviet T-34 Tankovy (Tank) and Forward Detachment (Mechanised).
Early war Soviet T-35 Tankovy (Tank) and Slovaks (Infantry).
Six Day War Jordanian Centurions (Tank).
Spanish Civil War Republican and Nationalists (Infantry).