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.

Having played a fair bit of WoT, it's opened my eyes for the numbers of prototype vehicles and such that never went into production.

It would be fun and entertaining to have Lowe's and Leopards on the Battlefield.



Such an amazing looking design, like a mini-panther. It would be interesting to ponder on the purpose of this tank? Would it have been a replacement for a 234 or 222 or 250 in Aufklarung Swadron? Or fielded like Panzer III?

It would allow a bit more freedom from BF to wield some more interesting designs and weapons, like British Tortoises etc. It's a wishful thing but with Mid-War monsters I don't see it as too much of leap to say they could do it again in Late war?

I'd like to see some of the american heavy tanks (cough cough t30) that would allow me to go toe to toe with the big german cats. It'd be a nice change from essentially hiding whenever a tiger so much as shows its ugly mug

You know looking at that? I might make my own using a Spare Puma Turret and the spare Hull from a Panther on the PSC Sprue, also a spare set of tracks off a PSC 251.

Made a similar topic a few weeks ago. It may be plausible, but theres a lot of things BF could do

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/431003.page

I prefer to call it Late War Leviathans (and Early War Experimentals )

IMO, no they wont. Mid War Monsters was poorly received, and from what I can tell the books are no longer being printed and the minis are no longer being produced or sold by Battlefront.

mwnciboo wrote:Having played a fair bit of WoT, it's opened my eyes for the numbers of prototype vehicles and such that never went into production.

It would be fun and entertaining to have Lowe's and Leopards on the Battlefield.

Make a set of rules to basically emulate WoT as a tabletop wargame?

Call it 'Heavy Metal' or something, where you can make a 'team' of tanks from different nationalitiies? Army lists split into different types of tanks - Lights, Mediums, Heavies, Experimentals (Prototypes?), SPGs, Tank Destroyers?

WoT in TT form would be pretty fun

AT least you wont have to deal with being stuck with a team full of KV1's going against King Tigers

I think it would make a better fan project than a BF one.

AT least you wont have to deal with being stuck with a team full of KV1's going against King Tigers

This isn't so bad if all the kv's have the 152mm gun

Due to an early leak, it was confirmed that a few months ago, BF was planning to do a 1946 book.

Not sure what would be in it, but I suspect some experimentals, better Pershings, Panther 2s, etc...

Vertrucio wrote:Due to an early leak, it was confirmed that a few months ago, BF was planning to do a 1946 book.

Not sure what would be in it, but I suspect some experimentals, better Pershings, Panther 2s, etc...

I would like to see the super heavy Maus and IS-3s:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_VIII_Maus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iosif_Stalin_tank

The LWL and EWE ideas have been floating around the community for awhile, but I personally would prefer if they updated some of their current books and added to the current range first.

chaos0xomega wrote:I prefer to call it Late War Leviathans (and Early War Experimentals )

IMO, no they wont. Mid War Monsters was poorly received, and from what I can tell the books are no longer being printed and the minis are no longer being produced or sold by Battlefront.

This seems true, at my FLGS there are still about 5 copies of MWM and almost all the minis released with it.

Whereabouts is your FLGS? I see you're in NJ as well

chaos0xomega wrote:Whereabouts is your FLGS? I see you're in NJ as well

My FLGS is the Gameroom in Brick Township, Ocean County.

chaos0xomega wrote:I prefer to call it Late War Leviathans (and Early War Experimentals)

Is it because Battlefront already used those names?

Ghaz wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:I prefer to call it Late War Leviathans (and Early War Experimentals)

Is it because Battlefront already used those names?

Heh true

Although that was said in 2009. Doesnt seem they're budging any time soon

Personally I'll give them until they 'finish' late war before I decide they're not going to do Late War Leviathans.

chaos0xomega wrote:I prefer to call it Late War Leviathans (and Early War Experimentals )

IMO, no they wont. Mid War Monsters was poorly received, and from what I can tell the books are no longer being printed and the minis are no longer being produced or sold by Battlefront.

I have to disagree, and I have a couple of reasons for doing so.

First is that some of the Late War players prefer that time period because that's when all of the "big stuff" shows up. If your primary motivation is to play with vehicles that have high FA and high AT, then you're going to naturally gravitate toward LW, because that's where things like King Tigers are going to be found.

Second is that the subject matter of the hypothetical Late War Leviathans will be stuff that people are already interested in. How many people knew anything about the Panzer IF? How many people cared about the Tiger (P)? Compare that with the number of ears that perk up when you start talking about the Maus. People are interested in the Maus, JS3, etc... So there's a natural audience for it that wasn't present with MWM.

Now having said the above, there are two changes from MWM that Battlefront could make to help the sales of this hypothetical LWL.

The first change involves packaging. MWM vehicles were only available in platoon-sized boxes. If you wanted one of the vehicles in the book, then you had to shell out for an entire platoon. Making them available in blisters makes it easier for people to experiment with the vehicles and determine how much they want to play with them before going all out. That's particularly useful if you've only got a small budget. It also gets the collectors involved; if you'd a model of the Romanian Marasel, but don't think you're going to use it in a game, then you can just buy a single vehicle in a blister instead of purchasing a box of 3 (that number is based off of the typical Romanian platoon size).

The second change involves the contents of the book. MWM contained write-ups of all of the vehicles in the book that talked about how they were deployed in World War 2. The problem is that the write-ups were all complete fiction. Flames of War is a game based on something that actually happened, and even if you disagree with elements of the rules or lists, the books typically contain some good historical material regarding battles and deployments. MWM threw that out the window with made-up combat histories for all of the vehicles. Particularly glaring was the fact that Battlefront included these made-up histories even though about half of the vehicles in the book actually saw combat, and thus had real combat histories that BF could have included (note that some of the vehicles that saw combat didn't do so until the LW period, which is why the vehicles in question are "Monsters" in mid-war). So instead of making up a fictional combat history for the vehicles, Battlefront should have provided factual information about what happened to the vehicles in question. And if those vehicles never made it off of the blueprint table, then they should have mentioned that too.


You're never going to get the purists on board no matter what. But I do think that there's a valid market for LWL.

I think the biggest issue that forced away adoption/success is that it was billed an 'unofficial supplement' or what have you, and the general perception was that the contents of the book were overpowered and broken. People are going to be less likely to invest in stuff that can only be used in limited circumstances if they can convince their opponent to agree upon it, and even less likely to invest when convincing others is nearly impossible due to the perception that its broken. Forgeworld had the same issue for a number of years, and though the situation has improved, its still obvious that a large portion of the 40k community is reluctant to agree to it (as witnessed by the arguments that pop up everytime someone posts a thread about it).