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.

New Battlefront Plastics...

http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&art_id=3220

i'm not impressed.

WOW,that one is pretty GENERIC.What did they do have ZVEZDA design them and to beleive i was waiting on this one.I was hoping for some British TAnks.

I think they look ok. I wonder if they're gauging the plastics' reception so they can expand into the area. PSC have shown how popular they are. How much will the Achtung set retail for? I could take the stugs and sell the shermans on eBay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just seen all the answers in another thread.

From a modelling perspective they look pretty good to me. They won't have the track patterns that PSC have managed to incorporate, but I can see some rather nice items of stowage and they look a bit chunkier (which means they're likely to be better suited to wargaming). A lot will depend on how well they go together. It's a shame that they've done vehicles in plastic that are already available from PSC.

I would assume their goal is to make a box set that is easy to get into for beginners: Time to go from opening the box to being able to play the game is the priority.

They look reasonably detailed for 15mm models, though. Not as many parts/options as others, but I'd guess these would be good 'rank and file' Shermans, with maybe other BF or other company's versions for leaders, special variants, etc?

Yeah, not sure what people were expecting with these. I mean the Sherman is the FoW Space Marine. It was everywhere and with everyone...chances are if you are playing allies you are playing or can play Shermans.

The StuGs are about the same. LW, short of Hungarians and Romanians StuGs can be found in pretty much every list.

Sure the "neat" factor would be up if it was plastic ISU-152s and Elephants, but it really wouldn't help sell the game.

By comparison to PSC, these blow.

Yeah,i was also one hoping for some new type of skirting for the tanks.Along the PSC style but,i really do not care for the of them being molded to the vehicles.I guess i will have to wait and see if PSC ever does a German tank accessory sprue.

I think you guys are forgetting this is a STARTER SET.

The old Open Fire! StuGs were single piece blocks of resin that you glued the barrels into. The Shermans weren't that much more difficult, with the body being a single piece.

Of course these tanks aren't going to be multi-piece assemblies like PSC or Zvezda.

That's the same minirulebook they have away for free. Seriously, I am not impressed. If I could find someone to split the contents and take Shermans with books and dices, then maybe I could live with two Stugs for 8 pounds. But taking five PSC Stugs is still cheaper and all lists require at least three Stugs.

CainTheHunter wrote:That's the same minirulebook they have away for free. Seriously, I am not impressed. If I could find someone to split the contents and take Shermans with books and dices, then maybe I could live with two Stugs for 8 pounds. But taking five PSC Stugs is still cheaper and all lists require at least three Stugs.

You may not be the target market. From what I see, this is aimed at people who just got interested in FoW and want to try it with minimal cost. Utility for someone who wants 3 vehicles from it is not really a concern.

Though I am not excited about the starter set (I notice the die don't have symbols in the new starter set) or the plastic minis included in it, I think the minis themselves are fine for a starter set, seeing as the starter set is meant for new players, and thus it makes sense to have un-complex minis.

Balance wrote:

CainTheHunter wrote:That's the same minirulebook they have away for free. Seriously, I am not impressed. If I could find someone to split the contents and take Shermans with books and dices, then maybe I could live with two Stugs for 8 pounds. But taking five PSC Stugs is still cheaper and all lists require at least three Stugs.

You may not be the target market. From what I see, this is aimed at people who just got interested in FoW and want to try it with minimal cost. Utility for someone who wants 3 vehicles from it is not really a concern.

Yeah, I must admit that a couple of months ago I was really considering getting the "Open Fire" set, but now I am glad that I did not.

Whats wrong with the kit? It looks the exact same as the other one, but in plastic and it has the new rules?

Starter sets arnt meant to be huge and awesome you know, just something simple to get people into the game.

They had to do this sooner or later. I think BF thought they could bury their heads in the sand and ignor the plastic revolution, and I'd guess that their sales have taken a noticable hit.

Finally someone has seen the light, this is a good thing for gamers, the more choice the better. You only have to look at GW to see what happens when 1 company gets a monopoly, silly prices.

CainTheHunter wrote:That's the same minirulebook they have away for free.

i hope not, the free rule books look like they are bound with PVA glue, mine started falling apart before I had even finished reading it.

The PSC kits have around the same number of bits (discounting bits you can't use) and to be honest the PSC kits do look better, it is hard to tell though without a clearer picture of a finished model.

This was always going to happen, I'm actually surprised that BF has been so slow.

Palindrome wrote:

CainTheHunter wrote:That's the same minirulebook they have away for free.

i hope not, the free rule books look like they are bound with PVA glue, mine started falling apart before I had even finished reading it.

Well, hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

Take a look at this.

It looks kinda familiar, doesn't it?

So dull dice, sub-par tank kits, and a rulebook doomed to fall apart. And at the end of it, when they go to V4, anyone using this kit will be Untermensch and 'obviously not care about the game'. Still, the booklet looks nice, I suppose.

You guys do know that the book in the old Open Fire! boxed set was given away for free when they released 2nd edition, right? Including the mini rulebook in the starter set isn't really a new thing. That said, I hope that they fix the binding issue for the intro sets, but I'm guessing they probably will. Haters gonna hate, but if Battlefront has done one thing right over the past few years, it's that they've listened to and responded to the concerns of their customers.

As for the plastics, as others have said, it's an intro set. It makes sense for them to keep things simple. I'm guessing before too long they'll be releasing armor kits with all kinds of bits. I've got to say though, although I certainly understand the draw for multi-part armor kits in plastic, I don't really see the draw for plastic infantry in 15mm. It's not really any more easy to work with, and it seems like plastic at 15mm is a lot more fragile and fiddley.

I understand that price is a significant factor, and if the plastic infantry is waaaay cheaper, then that's fine, but personally I prefer the heft of a stand of four or five metal minis, and if it came down to paying the same or even a bit more for metal infantry, I'd still pick the metal. Note that I'm not saying that as a BF fanboy either: I'll gladly use metal infantry from Battlefront, Peter Pig, Old Glory, Forged in Battle, or other companies if they suit my purposes, and I like mixing poses from different manufacturers as much as I can.

Well both the tanks and the rulebook are superior to the ones from the old Open Fire set. It's not really of interest to me because it's unlikely to be cheaper than picking up a box of PSC StuGs or Shermans and I already have the rulebook.

As a starter set it is an improved product and if priced right it should sell well. As a hint that BF have woken up to how PSC and Zvesda have revolutionised the market it is less good. Because based on the product shown PSC are still miles ahead.

Maybe BF will realise this when Zvesda suffer stock shortages when BF release Barbarossa.

I don't think its because Battlefront has seen anyone "revolutionize" the industry so much as they've finally reached the tipping point to where plastics are becoming economically feasible.

Hordini wrote: I understand that price is a significant factor, and if the plastic infantry is waaaay cheaper, then that's fine, but personally I prefer the heft of a stand of four or five metal minis, and if it came down to paying the same or even a bit more for metal infantry, I'd still pick the metal. Note that I'm not saying that as a BF fanboy either: I'll gladly use metal infantry from Battlefront, Peter Pig, Old Glory, Forged in Battle, or other companies if they suit my purposes, and I like mixing poses from different manufacturers as much as I can.

Just wait a bit and we'll see the FoW infantry being FINEly reCAST in resin

CainTheHunter wrote:

Hordini wrote: I understand that price is a significant factor, and if the plastic infantry is waaaay cheaper, then that's fine, but personally I prefer the heft of a stand of four or five metal minis, and if it came down to paying the same or even a bit more for metal infantry, I'd still pick the metal. Note that I'm not saying that as a BF fanboy either: I'll gladly use metal infantry from Battlefront, Peter Pig, Old Glory, Forged in Battle, or other companies if they suit my purposes, and I like mixing poses from different manufacturers as much as I can.

Just wait a bit and we'll see the FoW infantry being FINEly reCAST in resin

Man, I hope not! Resin infantry at 15mm seems like it would be horrible. I don't even want to think about cleaning it up, or how easy the rifles would snap off. If it came down to 15mm plastic infantry and 15mm resin infantry, I think I'd choose plastic in that case.

The scuttlebutt is that BF aren't planning any kind of big plastic changeover.

that's a shame, i guess PSC will just get all of my money then.

Amen to that.

What am I saying? PSC are already GETTING all my money.

Hordini wrote: Haters gonna hate, but if Battlefront has done one thing right over the past few years, it's that they've listened to and responded to the concerns of their customers.

With varying degrees of attentiveness, BF has had issues with its book bindings for years now and it hasn't been addressed as far as I can tell. It is quite ironic that BF evidently paid a lot of money for what is essentially a free book and then scrimped on the binding to the extent that the book is nearly useless without ripping all the pages out and getting them bound yourself, at least they made an effort.

If BF rein in their relentless 'codex' creep (at £30 a time) then I will be more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Palindrome wrote:

Hordini wrote: Haters gonna hate, but if Battlefront has done one thing right over the past few years, it's that they've listened to and responded to the concerns of their customers.

With varying degrees of attentiveness, BF has had issues with its book bindings for years now and it hasn't been addressed as far as I can tell. It is quite ironic that BF evidently paid a lot of money for what is essentially a free book and then scrimped on the binding to the extent that the book is nearly useless without ripping all the pages out and getting them bound yourself, at least they made an effort.

If BF rein in their relentless 'codex' creep (at £30 a time) then I will be more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

You are right that book binding is an issue that Battlefront has struggled with for awhile. What I find interesting (and I'm not really sure what could be the cause of it) is that some people seem to have horrible luck with their Battlefront books, and some people don't see to have any trouble at all. I've heard stories of people who have had books fall apart on day one, and I've heard other people who have never had a single problem. I'm not trying to make it sound like I think it's not a problem, because obviously it is. It just makes me wonder what specifically could cause such inconsistency in binding. I think it's also worth pointing out that Battlefront has also given a free blister to anyone who has gotten their free mini-rulebook re-bound. While it doesn't address the primary issue (the need to improve book bindings overall), I think it does show that Battlefront is paying attention and generally tries to respond to these kinds of concerns and at least attempt to make things right when they mess up.


However, I do challenge your assertion that Battlefront suffers from or encourages codex creep. Do you have any specific examples of this? In my experience, lists from the older books can be just as competitive and effective as lists from never battle books or theater compilations. One of the advantages of Flames of War is that it tends to be a well-balanced game overall, and doesn't suffer from codex creep in the way that games like 40k tend to.

BF has a nasty habit of reducing in period points costs in subsequent books; generally speaking a force from Grey Wolf will cost significantly less (and will therefore be larger/better equipped) than the same force from Festung Europa. Codex creep is inevitable in such an environment.

The rules and stats generally stay the same so its not as overt as, for example 40K, but later books are simply more 'competitive' than earlier books.

CainTheHunter wrote:That's the same minirulebook they have away for free. Seriously, I am not impressed. If I could find someone to split the contents and take Shermans with books and dices, then maybe I could live with two Stugs for 8 pounds. But taking five PSC Stugs is still cheaper and all lists require at least three Stugs.

And that is all well and good, but as an experienced and established FoW player you are *not* the target market for the starter set. Don't need the book or the shermans, then by all means buy the box of 5 PSC Stugs instead. Dissing the starter set for not being something other than a starter set is kind of pointless.

Also for the overall comments in this thread I don't recall the original resin pieces in the previous Open fire box being anything to right home about. The shermans were basically a sherman shaped lump of resin and hardly the greatest models ever. The Stugs were the same way and often had the schurtzen broken in annoying curved pieces. These plastics will do fine to intro the uninitiated into the game. That *is* their purpose.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Skriker wrote:

CainTheHunter wrote:That's the same minirulebook they have away for free. Seriously, I am not impressed. If I could find someone to split the contents and take Shermans with books and dices, then maybe I could live with two Stugs for 8 pounds. But taking five PSC Stugs is still cheaper and all lists require at least three Stugs.

And that is all well and good, but as an experienced and established FoW player you are *not* the target market for the starter set. Don't need the book or the shermans, then by all means buy the box of 5 PSC Stugs instead. Dissing the starter set for not being something other than a starter set is kind of pointless.

Also for the overall comments in this thread I don't recall the original resin pieces in the previous Open fire box being anything to write home about. The shermans were basically a sherman shaped lump of resin and hardly the greatest models ever. The Stugs were the same way and often had the schurtzen broken in annoying curved pieces. These plastics will do fine to intro the uninitiated into the game. That *is* their purpose.

Skriker