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 dislike the BA force org,So i am going to using the FOW intel list as a builder.In the rulebook they say feel free to change to represent a more historical force.
what i was wanting know if anyone else has changed or tweeked the lists.

I think that it is impossible to make a truly historical simulation in 28mm - or else the lists would be just hordes of infantry and nothing else.

From what I understand, FOW gets a little closer to it than BA, but to get a truly historical combined arms force, I think you would need to go up to Division level. I am no expert, but it seems as if you can only realistically get up to that level when playing with 6mm and having each miniature representing several actual infantry/tanks.

And batteries of artillery from 10 miles back that would swamp the other side with fire and smoke until counter battery fire forces them to shift.

FoW is pretty good. I think the infantry company data sheets would work fine if you remember you are building a platoon and having some of the extras as detachments. Ie. your infantry company has an attached tank platoon and your platoon for BA has a tank out of that element for support. In theory you could fudge the squads to spread things out to get two platoons and have a full tank section acting in support. I don't know how they did it in WW2 in this case but when I was in we often would get backed up by a two tank section.

I just use the basic BA list but limit my choices to what was historically available.

You can find information online from sites like: http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/
or from books. Research can be fun, for my Japanese I found a few websites and bought myself two books.

We are playing in 15mm using alot of left over flames of war models,rite now we are playing 2000 pts.
As for a table size we play on a 8x10 sized board.

Col. Dash wrote:
FoW is pretty good. I think the infantry company data sheets would work fine if you remember you are building a platoon and having some of the extras as detachments. .

This is essentially what the FoW Firestorm rules (which are for big multi-company battles) do. Anything from the combat or weapons columns is treated just the same as in a regular game of Flames of War. Anything from the support columns is treated as independent platoons.



As for working with BA lists -

Be aware that some of the BA lists have long-identified historical issues that Warlord Games has never bothered to correct. If you want to create your own lists, I would advise starting from scratch and only using the existing lists for points costs.

I would rather a historically accurate list with the point cost values from the BA rules. As long as opponents can agree on said lists.