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.

So I know the set markets the allied army as british forces with u.s. paratroopers, but can the shermans actually be used in a us army? I'm not too sure of this as I neither of any of the books nor am I a history buff. Though i'm pretty sure the firefly is exclusively british forces.

The firefly was a british tank, but the rest are just M4A4 Shermans with 75mm guns.

The only difference really is a mild difference in the shape of the hull (I believe it's welded and wider) and some improvised armor plates stuck on the sides). I wouldn't have an issue but check with your buddies. (there shouldn't be a problem though)

There are only minor cosmetic differences that most people wouldn't even notice.

Allegedly the US made use of M4A4 Shermans during/after the battle of the Bulge so if this is true even the most rabid rivet counter couldn't object to their use in a US list.

 Palindrome wrote:
Allegedly the US made use of M4A4 Shermans during/after the battle of the Bulge so if this is true even the most rabid rivet counter couldn't object to their use in a US list.

Well not according to Zaloga anyway, unless he has turned up something new since his last book on Shermans. Though the rumour crops every now and then that they drew some from British depots to replace losses. I've yet to see any proof that it happened, though I do have one pic of a whitewashed M4A4 in action around the Ardennes, but it cant be positively identified as US. It could have happened... Did it? I dunno.

The M4A4 had the Chrysler engine so as the others had Ford or Continental engines, they would have to find spares from the British... Which given the difficulty in logistic already in the ETO, would have been a nightmare. They also had a number of other differing parts that would have caused issues. The only M4A4s that I can confirm were 'borrowed' from the British were those with Dozer Blades.

But tank 'swopping' did go on, though generally in regards to specialist vehicles such as the dozer and crab variants.

Personally, in 15mm, one Sherman with a 75mm looks pretty much like another to me!


As for the Firefly, it was a British conversion. They US did convert some that arrived in the ETO in May 1945. Around 80 were converted for use by the US with forty a piece planned to go to Ninth and First Armies. The suggesttion is they may have been used for occupation duties but no record of their issue exists... But one for those playing 1946 games though.

But the US did use Sherman Fireflys... C Company of the 555th Tank Battalion had 12 Fireflys in April 1945 in Italy. Whether they used them in action is debateable but there exists an order dated 9 May 1945 in Cameri, Italy asking them to turn in their Fireflys. Its unlikely they ever used them as there is a note to that order that the crews were 'dissapointed' at giving them back as they hadnt had a chance to use them. It does however show that in Italy, which had even more logistical difficulties than Western Europe, exchanges of vehicles did happen.

If you shave down the ridges on the transmission housing then the tanks will resemble M4A3(Early)tanks.

AndrasOtto wrote:
If you shave down the ridges on the transmission housing then the tanks will resemble M4A3(Early)tanks.

And if anyone told me to do this I would smack them...

Aside from the fire flies, the other shermans in the Open Fire! box will work just fine as baseline model sherman tanks for the US leading up until the introduction of the 76mm shermans, the easy 8s and other upgunned and up armored shermans. While the occasionally crazy anal person will complain that your model is an M4A4, which should be an M4A1 for your list, no one is going to be bothered because a sherman looks like a sherman.

Skriker

Do we really have to be offensive about those who want to be historically accurate?

This hobby appeals to all comers, I see no reason to denigrate one set over another.

Its a personal hobby so perhaps let people do it how they want to...

I had someone refuse to play me because I had my Russians painted in a camo scheme that was never actually worn by the Russians, but I thought it looked cool and wasn't over the top (was a simple grey/black mix). I was a bit....weirded out by it, but I respected his call.

I mean, everyone to their own I guess.

But yeah, that was an extreme case. If someone really knows what they are talking about, you may get a comment about it but it's not like the models are so different that it changes gameplay so I don't see anyone refusing to play you

Big P wrote:
Do we really have to be offensive about those who want to be historically accurate?

There is historically accurate and there there is historically accurate.

I make historical lists myself but given that we are talking about 15mm miniatures (and FoW) here getting over excited by some barely visable details is far from sensible.

Never said it was, merely suggesting that rather than be insulting, maybe just let people persue the hobby in the way they wish.

Do you want someone telling you how to conduct your hobby?

I know I don't.

So if someone wants to correct their Shermans to be accurate, then let them do what they want. If they don't, then again that's their choice.

Don't see why some FoW players get so riled up against being historically accurate in a historical wargame...

Its a game. Let people enjoy it how they want.

Big P wrote:
Never said it was, merely suggesting that rather than be insulting, maybe just let people persue the hobby in the way they wish.

Do you want someone telling you how to conduct your hobby?

I know I don't.

So if someone wants to correct their Shermans to be accurate, then let them do what they want. If they don't, then again that's their choice.

Don't see why some FoW players get so riled up against being historically accurate in a historical wargame...

Its a game. Let people enjoy it how they want.

100% Percent agreed,i think that with all of ex 40k players, that they would be more forgiving. In my opinion it mainly boils down to your oppents and club. Especially for the new player on a tight budget. But atleast you should try to paint them Accurately.

Big P wrote:
Do we really have to be offensive about those who want to be historically accurate?

Who is being offensive? I said I would smack someone, but the laughing smiliey at the end shows that this is what we in the internet world call a *joke*. I play this game because it is based on such a large historical event, but it is *still* only just a game and not an accurate recreation of history by any means, so demanding some crazy level of required equipment accuracy because you don't like that someone is using a LW sherman M4A4 in a battle instead as British Sherman IIs from the desert, when they are painted the right color and are *only* representing that particular model is being more than a little extreme. I found myself with 6 of the Open Fire! shermans recently, but have no need for them in LW. I already have my Irish Guards armoured company built using PSC minis just fine. So I will be adding them to my British MW heavy armoured platoon for the desert. Anyone who stops a game with me because they are M4A4 models specifically, even though there is zero confusion as to what they represent in a MW list is silly. They are my minis to do with as I will.

The detail at 15mm is already suspect and hardly an exact representation with different manufacturers seeing different detail aspects as more important to represent on their models. I will be even less accepting of an opponent complaining because I use M4A4 models from manufacturer A, as opposed to M4A4 models from manufacturer B because B's are more "properly" detailed to them.

When it comes down to it the vast majority of players aren't going to care if one uses M4A4's as earlier model shermans.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Big P wrote:
Never said it was, merely suggesting that rather than be insulting, maybe just let people persue the hobby in the way they wish.

Do you want someone telling you how to conduct your hobby?

I know I don't.

So if someone wants to correct their Shermans to be accurate, then let them do what they want. If they don't, then again that's their choice.

Don't see why some FoW players get so riled up against being historically accurate in a historical wargame...

Its a game. Let people enjoy it how they want.

Hey P, the only people who tell others how to enjoy the game are those who are so anal about the accuracy that they won't play games with you because your camo isn't an historical pattern or anything like that. I am not stopping anyone who wants to convert their M4A4 models to more accurately represent M4A3s instead if that is their goal. Nor would I ever consider doing so. My only issue are those who refuse to play against me because I am using my M4A4's as Sherman IIs or M4A3s, but the models are "clearly" M4A4s and therefore to their reckoning, wrong or they demand that I modify my models to appeal to their sensibilities.. The OP was asking if there would be a problem with using the tanks as something else as is which is what folks are ansering to.

Skriker