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.

I have just purchased the 3 tank churchill platoon as well as thee open fire box-set, trading out the germans with a friend, leaving me with 2 sets of open-fire tanks and the churchills. What is the best set up for them? The Churchil IV, VI, AVRE or the V CS.

I am intending to use market garden and will probably end up fighting panzer grenadiers regularly.

Thanks and sorry if this sounds extremely naive, i haven't even gotten a game but it looks cool and the models are sweet .

If you are planning in using market garden your only option is Canadian armoured/ armoured recce with church AVRE's in the breaching groups

As far as I can tell, there are no Market Garden lists that allow anything more than Churchill Crocs or AVREs, and even those lists are few and far between. Since Churchills form Tank companies and platoons, and Shermans form Armoured Companies and Platoons, you'll be hard-pressed to find a list that allows the use of both in the same force outside of using a single small platoon of each as some form of support platoom.

The closest you'll probably find is a Rifle Company from the Overlord book, but even then it's limited to two support platoons, so you can have 4 Shermans and 3 Churchills, or 8 Shermans, or 6 Churchills in the same force.

The first thing you should do is head to EasyArmy

Once you've made an account you can pay a small fee (usually $2, so under £2) to get access to all the lists from any book available, and it's completely legal, having gotten the thumbs up from Battlefront. Since you seem to be into British armour, getting the lists from both Market Garden and Overlord would probably be your best bet, and you can use them to plan your forces and future purchases with a bit more precision. Just a little warning: list-making gets addictive.

Thanks guys! will sign up as soon as i get time. Also love the mallorean reference!

 Holy_Dakka_Cow wrote:
I have just purchased the 3 tank churchill platoon as well as thee open fire box-set, trading out the germans with a friend, leaving me with 2 sets of open-fire tanks and the churchills. What is the best set up for them? The Churchil IV, VI, AVRE or the V CS.

I am intending to use market garden and will probably end up fighting panzer grenadiers regularly.

Thanks and sorry if this sounds extremely naive, i haven't even gotten a game but it looks cool and the models are sweet .

Build standard Churchills.

What I would do here is see this as the beginning of two lists.

Get some PSC British infantry and their heavy weapons boxsets when they come out, use the Churchills with them as they are Infantry tanks anyway. Use a platoon or two of the infantry as backup for the Shermans and your set.
Three lists:
Infantry company with MG mortar and Churchill platoons in support, and off board artillery and air support.
Armoured company with infantry platoons and mortars in support, and off board artillery and air support.
You can legally add both companies together for larger games.

Job done. Now the panzergrenadiers wont know what they are facing and your collection will have the ability to play very differently with only minimal add ons. The PSC British infantry and heavy weapons will be out soon, and you will need one box of each, thats all. The only other thing you need are bases and artillery spotters, its nice to add 25pdrs to your lists, but they can be off board, all you need to produce are the spotter elements, which can be specially designated Sherman tanks or infantry stands. Air support is advised for allies both for point of authenticity and can be depicted by a counter if needs be as their presence on the tabletop is momentary, though it would be nice to add Typhoons later.

Brit artillery can be off board?

 psychadelicmime wrote:
Brit artillery can be off board?

80"/200cm range, so why not.

 Orlanth wrote:

 psychadelicmime wrote:
Brit artillery can be off board?

80"/200cm range, so why not.

Because unless otherwise stated, teams must be deployed in the deployment area or come onto the board from reserves as directed, and I don't believe (although may be wrong) that there is a blanket rule that allows artillery to both be deployed off-table and to fire from off-table. Battlefront sell artillery models for a reason, and that reason is because they have to be deployed on the table unless otherwise specified.

Yep, first thing is take a look on EasyArmy and find a list that has what you wish! From there, make a rough list up and we'll fine-tune it

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 psychadelicmime wrote:
Brit artillery can be off board?

80"/200cm range, so why not.

Because unless otherwise stated, teams must be deployed in the deployment area or come onto the board from reserves as directed, and I don't believe (although may be wrong) that there is a blanket rule that allows artillery to both be deployed off-table and to fire from off-table. Battlefront sell artillery models for a reason, and that reason is because they have to be deployed on the table unless otherwise specified.

I'm almost POSITIVE that was a joke. The original comment may not have been, but the reply was seeing as 80" is pretty much off-board if you play on a large enough space.

Correct.

For someone without the models denying the logical use of offboard artillery when its position and range can be agreed upon would take a 'That Guy' opponent.

It goes something like this.

"I want to include an 8 gun battery of 25pdrs offboard."
"Sure we can consider them 36" away from this corner."
"I was thinking 24"."
"Split the difference at 30", so you can count 50" from this corner, ok?"
"Ok."

Most artillery should be off board unless they are mortars or the scenario involves shooting them. Play the period, not the rules.

 Orlanth wrote:
Play the period, not the rules.

So, play a different game, then?

Most people who play FoW will play by the rules, if you want to pick'n'mix with them then find another system or gather a group of like-minded people; don't advise someone who is obviously new to FoW to go around ignoring and creating rules.

In FoW, artillery is deployed on the board unless stated otherwise; this forum is not about FoW: Orlanth's rules.

If it were 40K I would agree with you, but as its a historical game the question why cant artillery historically used for long range fire support on board only?

Its not 'Orlanths rules' vs FoW, its common sense vs rules lawyering.

Attention Flames of War community, following the rules is now rules lawyering; please ask Orlanth on DakkaDakka about what you can and cannot now do when playing the game. Thank you.

Don't be an ass, with historical games the watchphrase is, use the rules when the rules make sense. Historical wargaming is all about the house ruling by agreement to better cover the tactics and wargear of the period..

Many players use off board artillery, independently of each other, or do things like modify force orgs to account for actual conditions where research is available.
Historical gaming has always been about modifying the rules to account for history, thats why its called historical wargaming. You know history, gettit.

It doesnt matter if a massive gun in 40K has a laughable range as that the game, but say you want to use the game to fight a battle where artillery was used at long range (this will account for most accounts where artillery was used; must you deploy the artillery on board at rifle ranges? Talk it through with your opponent, see if you can come to an agreement.

Say two players wanted to fight a scenario of their own making based on a historical account but horror of horrors the arrm lists didn't match what they had available. What must they do.
Can they have the correct tanks and wargear according to the records of the fight, or must they use the forge orgs to the letter in case will you turn up to throw your rattle out of the pram and scream hysterically at the "cheating" you have exposed. Wah, wah, wah.

The only condition you should always play a historical ruleset literally in defiance of the facts is in a tournament (for a level playing field), for teaching new players (to avoid confusion) or if you don't know any better.
At all other times rules lawyers should butt out

Next FoW game I play, I'm going to bring every single model I own because back in WW2 armies weren't based around points costs, and therefore the whole posts-cost system doesn't make sense.

I'm frankly surprised that you manage to get any FoW games in at all given just how much BS you're spewing and just how much pick'n'mixing you want to play with the ruleset.

I feel sorry for anyone who asks you for a game, because they're going to be playing Flames of Orlanth instead of Flames of War.

Guys not asking for houserules, he's asking for help in building a list.

There's nothing wrong with houserules agreed upon by both players, but without both players agreeing to play to them, then you go by the standard and accepted rulebook.

 Avatar 720 wrote:
Next FoW game I play, I'm going to bring every single model I own because back in WW2 armies weren't based around points costs, and therefore the whole posts-cost system doesn't make sense.

I'm frankly surprised that you manage to get any FoW games in at all given just how much BS you're spewing and just how much pick'n'mixing you want to play with the ruleset.

I feel sorry for anyone who asks you for a game, because they're going to be playing Flames of Orlanth instead of Flames of War.

You really are a pedant. Its simple really, an example of how historical wargamers do things.

"Fancy a game of Flames of War."
"Sure, which period."
"I have an old wargaming magazine article on the attack of Eben Emeal, shall we convert it over."
"Ok,..........hold on. the Fallschirmjager list doesnt match what the Blitzkrieg book says you can have."
"Never mind, take what the magazine says they have and convert that into FoW teams."


You see historical wargamers look at the material given as a guideline for a fun game, not a set of loopholes to exploit as win buttons. If you cant get around the idea that using historical ranges is something other than 'BS', then not only are you pretty stupid (real artillery had ranges of several kilometres, and this was used), but you are also obviously incapable of working things out with an opponent lest you give away some advantage!


As for artillery its mainly a case of allowing off board for any artillery over a certain actual range, both groups I have been in contact with who play FoW use off board artillery and neither group is in formal contact with the other. If someone wants to play stock rules fine fair enough, at other times they add stuff like off board artillery either for realism or cost and sometimes recreate real scenarios. Air units dont need representation either, its nice to but not essential. Would you whine if someone rolled for and brought on some stukas and just measured out the templates without temporary placing a plane on the table for the duration of the dice rolls.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Guys not asking for houserules, he's asking for help in building a list.

There's nothing wrong with houserules agreed upon by both players, but without both players agreeing to play to them, then you go by the standard and accepted rulebook.

A fair comment. Hence the reply saying that hre could include artillery by declaring it off board and designating some spotters from the stuff he has available.
The OP mentioned only having two Open Fire Shermans (16) and some Churchills.

With that he can have a Sherman force of three or four platoons plus HQ and can spice up the army by declaring two other Shermans as observer tanks and add some 25pdrs. It would take a first rate pedantic whiner to say he couldnt have any artillery.
He has the tanks, hasn't much else and artillery observer tanks are historical and make sense. Its not like its an attempt to minimax or cheat.
It's an option to talk through to make a small force with limited utility and make it go further for a good game. Reasonable when you think about it.

Her is what the OP could have without having to spend any more money

Armoured Company HQ - 2x Sherman V
Armoured Platoon - 2x Sherman V, 1x Sherman Firefly
Armoured Platoon - 2x Sherman V, 1x Sherman Firefly
Armoured Platoon - 2x Sherman V, 1x Sherman Firefly
Armoured Platoon - 2x Sherman V, 1x Sherman Firefly
Field Artillery Battery - 2x (4 gun section (off board), 1x Sherman OP Spotter)
The Churchills don't fit in with this, but can fit in as an alternative tank support for any infantry bought.

You really are a pedant.

No, I'm playing Flames of War.

I can tell you're not when you see the written rules as 'a set of loopholes to exploit as win buttons'.

This discussion became meaningless when you decided that the rules do not apply to you, and therefore do not apply to anyone should they wish so.

Remember that this thread started with a beginner to the game asking for advice. You are the one who advised him to start ignoring rules and subsequently stating that those who follow them are rules lawyers and people exploiting loopholes.

Flames of War is, first and foremost, a game with rules you must follow. Obviously mutual consent to add, alter, or ignore rules is perfectly fine, and at no point have I stated the contrary. You are, however, assuming that off-board artillery is a rule that will be unquestioningly accepted, because otherwise you would not advise a new player to avoid buying any artillery because of it.

People follow rules. Mutual consent to add, alter, or remove these is fine; in the absence of that - an absence which should be assumed when advising not only a new player, but a player from an area and club you are vastly unfamiliar with - assume that the rules as set out in the rulebook are being followed.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

I can tell you're not when you see the written rules as 'a set of loopholes to exploit as win buttons'.

Comprehension fail, you are overly worried over loopholes or you wouldn't have had any problems with including logical changes for historicity (and convenience).

 Avatar 720 wrote:

This discussion became meaningless when you decided that the rules do not apply to you, and therefore do not apply to anyone should they wish so.

Clearly you don't understand the concept of the 'spirit of the game'.
Completely different mentality to ignore oradd stuff so that fun is increased and just deciding the rules dont apply to 'me'. Of course the rules this is why you discuss things in advance.
If I turned up with OP Sherman tanks and didnt tell you I had off board artillery linked to them you would be rightly peeved, its all about logical inclusion.

However as this is a historical game, this type of inclusion is standard for the genre.
To spell out the obvious again for the hard of thinking. In a fantasy game play the rules, full stop. For a historical game play the history and when appropriate change the rules to better reflect history, all the more when it saves deploying batteries of artillery on board.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

Remember that this thread started with a beginner to the game asking for advice. You are the one who advised him to start ignoring rules and subsequently stating that those who follow them are rules lawyers and people exploiting loopholes..

I put forward an option to make his limited model collection go further that also made sense from a historical gamers perspective.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

Flames of War is, first and foremost, a game with rules you must follow. Obviously mutual consent to add, alter, or ignore rules is perfectly fine, and at no point have I stated the contrary. You are, however, assuming that off-board artillery is a rule that will be unquestioningly accepted, because otherwise you would not advise a new player to avoid buying any artillery because of it.

Tournament only.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

People follow rules. Mutual consent to add, alter, or remove these is fine; in the absence of that - an absence which should be assumed when advising not only a new player, but a player from an area and club you are vastly unfamiliar with - assume that the rules as set out in the rulebook are being followed.

If a new club plays historical waegaming at all first determine if they are historical gamers or GW based gamers who cant see past the ethos of SF/fantasy gaming. FoW is a hybrid system, which is proably why we are having this conversation, its not a sim, but its still historical and thus by convention its ok to look at the rules as guidelines to making a better game. Hell technically even Warhammer does that.

Most FoW players have some level of historical literacy, and are usually up to being understanding over circumstances, its part of the gamin subculture, in fact its the original wargaming subculture.

I think we are done here, this is getting heated. Do we agree over the Churchills?

Anyway, back on topic

I'd make a list up using the Shermans OP, play some games and learn the rules. That way you can build a few lists using Churchills later, and you'll be able to judge a list better yourself as you can tell what works and what doesn't.

Just out of curiosity how does one target this off board artillery? I run anywhere from 8-24 tubes in my brit lists and this seems like a great way to keep tanks from shooting at them.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:
Just out of curiosity how does one target this off board artillery? I run anywhere from 8-24 tubes in my brit lists and this seems like a great way to keep tanks from shooting at them.

Kill the observers.

I see what Orlanth is saying, on table artillery in a company level game is stupid. Howver it is pointed to be on table therefore you really need to run it as such. Off table artillery would actually be cheaper as it can't be used in direct fire (compare the vastly inflated costs in early war to late war or the cost of heavy mortar in comparison to 105mm artillery to see what I mean).

Just use a list with NGFS if you want off table artillery.

The OP should take a look at the FoW website, it has PDFs for at least one list purely for Churchill companies. There is defitintely one for North Africa/Italy and possibly one for Northern Europe.

You can pick Churchill for combat platoons (3x3 of varying flavours plus command) and back up with supporting infantry.

These are idea if like me you love Churchils. No room for namby pamby shermans though.

I recommend taking a look at the brilliant Plastic Soldier Company kits, im putting together a box of 15mm and 1/72 at the moment - so nice and at 5 for £20 they are not to be sniffed at!

If you want to run Churchills, I think Overlord is the best book to get.(Either Easyarmy .com or hard back from BF.)

It has some Infantry lists with Churchill support and Churchill Tank lists.

I agree with Not Prop PSC kits are very good value , the 15mm British Infantry 'next gen' look as good as the Churchill and Cromwell tank kits IMO.