Flames of War General

I don't think many people even play Great War.

I know The War Store was practically giving it away free with any Battlefront order for a while.

For future reference, the scans database does have a folder full of thread banners.

They're decent: you can get Command Panzerfaust teams, Veteran Guards Churchills, FV Cromwells and CV M10C Achilles in support, etc. Airlanding can also get Shermans as well, and you can field British Paras or Canadian Paras... but stuff is obviously expensive points-wise as it's all CV or FV.

Market-Garden is probably more "competitive", but I like the NJ Digital briefings as they allow you to build quite different lists from Normandy or Market-Garden with some cool equipment (Airborne Recce with Carriers and Dingos!).

Emergency BMP

Right, back. My list for beach defence is attached. Two strong-ish fortified platoons, rockets, and... er... that's it. 1400 points just doesn't go that far. I would have loved to have brought a trio of Marders or something, for a bit of mobility (and also AT), but couldn't really find anything I was comfortable cutting.

To be fair, for a beach assault, you shouldn't be seeing too much armour. You've got three AT10 guns and an AT9 (no matter what Forces says, the AT7 is a typo; Atlantik Wall over-rides that).

AVREs are FA8, SA7, which is tough; but Shermans are only 6/4, so you have a good chance against those.

Great War's main problem(s) is limited right now to trench warfare, and 4 nations. French and Americans only recently were released, and the US are (once again) better than they have any right to be.

I'm holding out for the more cavalry focused middle east and eastern front.

Guys I have my first IS2 mostly painted. Pretty pleased with the results

It came out well. A few unit markings and perhaps a touch of weathering and it'll be a lovely command tank.

...

...

Can someone who owns Normandy Battles crack it open and see if there's any major differences in running the Airborne Missions between it and D Minus One?

Bump for German Late War Lists of 1420 points

A bit more spare points than I generally like, but there's nothing to fill them with.
Advantages:
You have 13 medium tanks with Schurzen, 3 recce psudo-tanks, and one decent-sized mechanized infantry unit that all get a spearhead or recon move, and you Always Attack. Only the cheap smokers don't get a free move. You have enough decent AT, combined with your free move, to fight it out with medium armor or flank and disable/kill heavy armor (or just smoke them). Schurzen and the mounted infantry give you ways to assault opponents off objectives. You've got Recce and Smoke. Lots of tanks, so easy to build and paint.

Disadvantages: Your troops are trained, not veteran, so expect them to be hit more. You HAVE to hit hard, hit fast, and hope you've already won by turn 4 or so. Your tanks are even more vulnerable to flanking actions than normal, thanks to that slow traverse. If your enemy DOES spam heavy tanks, a bunch of infantry with full-on AT guns, you are going to have issues dealing with them effectively.

Options: You could swap out the little bit of smoke for a pair of Ostwinds, but either is going to have relatively limited impact. The smoke will buy you a turn if you use it right, which is probably the better option with this list. You can also swap out one of the Panzer platoons for another Panzergrenadier platoon, and use the spare points to upgrade to a battery of 10.5cm howitzers that can provide more smoke and more effective conventional bombardments.

Does anybody here even own Normandy Battles?

I don't even think we have it in the database.

1500 ot LW FV Hohei Chutai. Judge me!
1 Hohei Hq w/ standard 125pts
3 Hohei pltns w/ 2 sqds ea. w/banners 765pts
1 Hohei MG plan w/ 4 guns 160pts
1 Hohei Bttln Gun pltn w/observer 80pts
1 Hohei Rpd-Fire Gun pltn (type94) 45pts
1 Hohei Rgmntl Gun pltn w/observer 150pts
1 Naval Gunfire Support (destroyer) 150pts
1 Naval Air/Sea Support (destroyer) 25pts

I literally own 1 more HMG platoon and 6 Nikuhaku teams.

I think it is better to play 2 full platoons instead of 3 small ones. And since you are playing that much infantry, a regimental standard would probably be a good pick.

Always bring the Regimental Standard. Auto-passing Morale and always being able to Auto-Warrior save the banner is amazing.

I split them to 3 platoons for versatility. It gives 6 platoons for games and each still has 9 FV teams minimum not counting hq, hmg, and observer teams attached. My reasoning could be flawed of course.

My list does have the standard. It's too good not to take!

The Normandy Battles book has this version of the mission: flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Scenarios/Airborne-Assaults.pdf

I'm not familiar with the version from D Minus One, I'm afraid.

Also, while I'm at it, the current version of Hit The Beach from Normandy is also online here: flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/Documents/Scenarios/Amphibious-Assaults.pdf

Finally finished painting and putting my Canadian infantry on bases. Not the prettiest paint job ever, but I'm just happy to be done with it. I'm not going to be painting anymore infantry for a while.

Bump on the road...

They look pretty good.

All they need is some nice basing, and you'll have a really nice looking force.

>The Normandy Battles book has this version of the mission:

I'm fairly certain that's the same airborne assault rules that we've had since Version 1.

I don't think it's ever actually been updated.

...

In people's experience, how big a thing in this game is exploiting friendly model positions and hit allocation to kill targets you want?

Can't say, since 90% of my games are against Germans, who field homogeneous units and against whom picking out the platoon commander is pointless.

most units are homogeneous, as the guy above said, (aside from some tank platoons where the gun tanks rule minimizes position exploitation) so not a big thing, except for command teams.

I've been mostly building up my late war Russians, but the KV-2 looks so good in this scale I got a couple along with a KV-1 and a KV-3!

So umm, what book do I get for mid war Russians?

Get Eastern Front.

Although the KV-3 is in Mid War Monsters, and never went into production (or battle).

If it's possible, I've seen people do it to snipe off platoon commanders, particularly when playing against Soviet tanks. Even had it happen to me before I learned how to bury my commanders within the formation. It almost seems like a right of passage for newb Soviet players.

Thank you for the recommendation, there seem to be so many supplements it's hard to know what to get. The KV-3 is a novelty, I can see purists not wanting it though!

There are rules for hit allocation that try to limit the ability to snipe out specific things.

That being said, poor placement of the stands in a platoon can cause important things like platoon commanders or bazookas to wind up as valid targets.

I was watching a US/Ger game, saw someone positioning things to pick off the 76mms. It looked really game-y to me and not very sporting.

Are there any plans for adding China?

Failing that, what's the most incompetent army list that is Reluctant/Conscript and has the worst equipment?

Italians have a chance to be Reluctant Conscript, Romanians do as well, but they've got pretty good equipment shockingly.

China has been an eternal bugbear.

It might get in now that not all the printing is in china, but previously there were problems since the chinese crack a fit at any depiction of china not being ALL GLORIOUS RED.

At least one game was put into dire straits because it depicted formosa/taiwan as under japanese control... In the 1920s.

Usually you don't find Relucrant and Conscipt together.

You'll usually see Reluctant Trained, Reluctant Veteran, Confident Conscipt, or Fearless Conscript.

Polish Home Guard might work, it's all conscript level and low level german stuff which Nationalist China imported. I think

You obviously shouldn't take any Panthers and the like. I believe China imported some halftracks and Sdkfz so you could use those.

That I think completely denigrates the broad spectrum of Chinese troops that existed. You've got the Communists, and the Nationalist, presumably in different trainings, levels of experience. Captured Japanese tanks, weapons, the mix of equipment from different nations.

I don't think it's necessarily about being a purist, but rather more that many players (*cough* German) don't particularly like seeing an opposing Panther show up with Firepower 2+ in MW, even if it does have ROF 1.

Although if you really want to watch someone squeal, bring the unkillable monster that is the KV-5. Sure it's still got a crappy ROF 1 Panther gun (at Firepower 2+), but not even a real Panther's getting through that front armor.

Thoughts on this 2k list for a one-off game tomorrow?

B Squadron, 15th/19th Hussars from Nachtjager (CV) - 1995 points
>Headquarters
Command Platoon - CiC Cromwell IV, 2iC Cromwell VI CS, Cromwell VI CS, Sherman ARV - 245 points

>Combat Platoons
Challenger Platoon - Command Challenger, Challenger - 285 points
Cromwell Platoon - Command Cromwell IV, 3x Cromwell IV - 380 points
Cromwell Platoon - Command Cromwell IV, 3x Cromwell IV - 380 points

>Weapons Platoons
15th/19th Hussars Recce Patrol - Command Daimler Dingo, 3x Daimler Dingo - 120 points

>Brigade Support Platoons
Lorried Rifle Platoon - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG - 180 points

>Support Platoons
Field Battery, Royal Artillery - 2x Command rifle, Staff, Observer rifle, OP carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr - 185 points
Field Battery, Royal Artillery - 2x Command rifle, Staff, Observer rifle, OP carrier, 4x OQF 25 pdr - 185 points
AOP - 25 points

Unless I've miscounted, I have 8 platoons for deployment and such (2iC platoon, 3 combat, 1 weapons, 1 brigade, 2 support). Mainly limited by the models I have. Models owned and not used: 2 Cromwell IVs, 2 Cromwell VI CS. I realize I can save 65 points by using one field battery with two troops instead of two seperate troops, but I don't really have any other options for filling that points gap and having one staff team per troop has proven to be pretty useful with the AOP.

My store is doing the Firestorm: Overlord campaign on June 5th and I'm trying to put together a 1500 pt list for it. How's this look?

British Assault
Infantry Company, 3rd Canadian Division, from Overlord, page 60

Compulsory Assault Company HQ (p.61) - CinC Rifle, 2iC Rifle (25 pts)

Compulsory Assault Platoon (p.61) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (150 pts)

Compulsory Assault Platoon (p.61) - Command Rifle/MG, PIAT, Light Mortar, 6x Rifle/MG (150 pts)

Assault Carrier Platoon (p.62) - Command Universal Carrier, 2x Universal Carrier (80 pts)
- Equip with PIAT (5 pts)
- Equip with additional hull mounted MG (5 pts)
- Equip with additional hull mounted MG (5 pts)

Assault Mortar Platoon (p.63) - Command Rifle, 3x Observer Rifle, 6x ML 3” Mk II mortar (145 pts)

Assault Anti-tank Platoon (p.64) - Command Rifle, 2x OQF 6 pdr gun (late) (65 pts)

Assault Machine-gun Platoon (p.65) - Command Rifle, 4x Vickers HMG (120 pts)

Desert Rats Armoured Platoon (p.81) - Command Cromwell IV, 2x Cromwell IV, Firefly VC (360 pts)

Independent Armoured Platoon (2nd Canadian Armoured Brigade) (p.130) - Command Sherman I, II or III, 2x Sherman I, II or III (195 pts)

Commando Company (p.46) - Command Rifle/MG, 6x Rifle/MG (195 pts)

1500 Points, 9 Platoons

...

I'm personally not a fan of the 3" mortars, I much prefer 25pdrs. Also, those 6pdrs could do with a boost, you want at least 4.

I posted a few threads ago about one of my friends bringing a KV-5 into a game. It was the only time a model has been thrown against the wall.

>mfw I bought 3 of them

So one 1/4 of the entire production run?

That's not unusual for some of the stuff BF makes.

"There was only ever 3 of these made? It MUST be included in the game and people MUST be able to field all 3!"

How useful are HMG carriers compared to the HMGs by themselves?

They're fantastic. Bullet proof, mobile HMGs. What's not to like?

Better than yet another list with all the usual boring stuff. Hell, considering the average infantry company had something like a single ATG assigned to it, on average, FoW does horrible things to the procurement and presentation. Of course, that means very little because those sorts of weird weapons are often desperately needed to break up the monotony.

Finnish armour, for instance, would be even more dull if they didn't let you field the ISU, or both KV-1s, or any of the other things they allow you to field basically all of.

A modern mounted assault by fearless conscripts?

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=aM3ElTvF52I

God Dammit Abu Hajaar.

>he tried his best

why are they rolling along, is this ArmA?

To be fair, the KV-5 is Soviet. So it's NOT an option unless you're opening up Mid War Monsters. Ditto to the T-43, even though a brigade of them supposedly saw combat. There's also the T-50s which saw combat, and one was even captured and used by the Fins. And of course the SU-100Y which was used at Moscow, and survived.

Oh, but the only Super Pershing ever made is available any lists from Remagen, and let's not forget how Barbarossa just HAD to have both Sturer Emil ever produced.

Also the Turan was issued to combat units early in 1943. I don't know if they saw combat that year, but I'm not sure if ANYONE knows.

>SU-100Y
Literally 1. The prototype, at that. And then the design was seen no more.
>T-43
Finished tested, but was never used in combat as the design was considered obsolete.
>Super Pershing
Of course it is, it's a great novelty. Like an Allied KT.
>Barbarossa
Given the increased likelihood of running into T-34s, KVs and suchlike, giving the Germans them gives them some choice. They're quite unlike the other options, visually and tactically. And of course, otherwise Barbarossa would be quite a bland offering, German armour wise. The Soviets get those ghetto Zis-30 things, and they were an ad hoc, short run design as well.
>T-50s
Great, another tank almost identical to the T-60 and 70, and not that different to the other lightly armoured death boxes the EW Soviets used. Rare, like a lot of other stuff, tactically uninteresting, and not particularly special in it's development or use. No need to include.

...

Hey guys I'm thinking of making a new Marine rifle platoon since i come from a kine of US marines and since I'm too fat to enlist this is the next best thing. How's my list?

Bumpan for great glorious Fatherland

West German preview is on the official site now.

I'm not seeing anything.

Well seeing how that user couldn't be bothered to direct link

>team-yankee.com/Default.aspx?tabid=867&art_id=5205

>
>West German preview is on the official site now.

>team-yankee.com/Default.aspx?tabid=867&art_id=5205

Sweet!

>Coming in July

So, given BF's usual delays it'll be out just in time for Christmas. :-P

>So, given BF's usual delays it'll be out just in time for Christmas. :-P

The book will be out, but I'd expect the product release dates to probably stretch that far, considering most of the summer is already dedicated to the Pacific Theater.

...

T-43s didn't make it into combat but the germans were aware T-43s were being designed and assumed the T-34-85 was the -43 when it first appeared, so there's erroneous reports of them.

The T-44 /did/ see combat, albiet on a trial basis, so there's an argument for having three of them in one guards tankovy unit, maybe. Some units were fully re-equipped with them but never reached the front before the end of the war in Europe.

>it's important germany gets even more neat toys but soviets can keep playing with T-34s

If Germany can have both Dicker Maxes the Soviets can have their SU-100Y.

>Leopard II
So it's an Abrams with a boxier turret?

The Panzeraufklärungs might be interesting, at least, but I'm anticipating a lot of very samey western tanks...

The armor stats look similar enough to the M1. F: 18, S: 7, T: 2 instead of 18, 8, 2.

The gun is the 120mm of the M1A1, so expect an AT boost of probably 1 or 2 over the M1's gun. So probably AT 21 or 22 for the Leo 2.

And we haven't seen enough to comment on stuff like mobility, special armor rules, training and motivation, etc.

And the images are too small to clearly read the points value next to the HQ Leo.

Hopefully the stats are different enough to make the Germans not feel like an exact copy of the Americans.

I'd be excited for more Warsaw Pact nations too, particularly East Germany and Czechoslovakia. But they used a lot of Soviet equipment, so I don't know how different their playstyle could possible be.

maybe older soviet equipment/vehicles, like t-34s or t-55s

Warsaw Pact nations are going to have a mix of newer and older Soviet equipment though a few nations did use their own native designs here and there (mostly stuff like IFV's). East Germans and the Polish had T-72's but still employed a lot of T-55's.

BF will need to put out kits for a few soviet APC's (presumably the BTR-60/70) and T-55 before we see other PACT forces. I have no info on this but I would guess we won't see this until after Brits are out.

Not sure about the East Germans but the Poles did use a different doctrine than the soviets did, supposedly one closer to what you would have expected a NATO nation to use. So there are few players in my group interested in seeing how different the Poles will be from the Soviets.

>SU-100Y
>Literally 1. The prototype, at that. And then the design was seen no more.
Yes. 1.

>T-43
>Finished tested, but was never used in combat as the design was considered obsolete.
At least get your facts straight. Kursk showed that the existing T-34 was fine, and that the gun was what needed improving. So the T-43 turret was used and modified to hold a bigger gun, which saved them from having to retrofit their factories. It wasn't "obsolete", just not what they really needed.

>Super Pershing
>Of course it is, it's a great novelty. Like an Allied KT.
Literally 1. And it wasn't even a prototype, at that.

>Barbarossa Sturer Emil
Given the increased likelihood of running into T-34s, KVs and suchlike...
...They're quite unlike the other options, visually and tactically. And of course, otherwise Barbarossa would be quite a bland offering, German armour wise.
Bland like the entirety of LW Soviets? Not even minor nations get that bad.

>The Soviets get those ghetto Zis-30 things, and they were an ad hoc, short run design as well.
100 Zis-30s were made, shitty as they were. Which is more than the Jagdtigers. Woohoo, 1 limited run vehicle in makes an appearance for Soviets.

>T-50s
>Great, another tank almost identical to the T-60 and 70, and not that different to the other lightly armoured death boxes the EW Soviets used. No need to include.

By that argument, there's no need to include the miriad of different panzer marks, or excedingly rare German equipment either (Sturmtiger).

Aside from your biased opinions, the T-50 actually would be quite different from a T-70. It had a higher top speed, and a high hp/weight ratio. Armor, meh. Gun is the BT-7s.

Regardless of your hair splitting, it is fucked that single model or prototypes get used for German/US, but we're supposed to just pretend that they were the only ones who did that. Ditto to the looted tanks.

>T-43
IIRC the weight was also an issue. Either way, the design wasn't appropriate for contemporary conditions. Cannibalise and start again with something else.
>Pershing
Like I said, it's an excuse to give the Americans a heavy tank, and for some novelty. It's also a cool story.
>Barbarossa
We're not talking about LW, and there's not much that can be done about that in any case. The Soviets have everything they fielded that wasn't a LWL case.
>Zis-30s
Yeah, but both are interesting enough, and tactically relevant enough to be included. And the Jtiger is right at home with generally shitty German LW production levels. The Zis-30 is an easily justified SPG style vehicle for the Soviets, that breaks things up a bit. It's unlike other things they have.
>T-50s
The Sturmtiger's weird enough to warrant inclusion, even if nobody uses it.
As for the Panzer marks, there's at least 2 or 3 major changes that demands the difference. CrapArmour/Crapgun, then BetteArmour/CrapGun, and then BetterArmour/Bettergun. And in EW and MW, those differences can be fairly noticeable, and game-changing, within the scope of likely armour, and the critical nature of the North African/Barbarossa based arms race.
>T-50 quite different to the T-70
Not by much. At best, it's something like the Bt-7. Now the AA version might be cool, but the Soviets are already saturated with variations on the same mostly crappy EW light tank.
>Looted tanks
Soviets get looted tanks, though. They get just about everything they actually fielded, same as everyone else.

You can see near the top it says Chobham, and it's 11 points for the HQ. Can't read the stat block though.

The main difference between most NATO nations, I expect, is going to be in their infantry and, if included, support vehicles (Hesitant to suggest this since the Americans didn't get a ton of support kit, but hey). The fact there's a luchs outline in the army list makes me hopeful for the latter at least.

>>Pershing
The Pershing was already a heavy tank, though. It didn't get redesignated to Medium until after the war when tanks were designated by gun caliber instead of weight.
>>T-50 quite different to the T-70
The T-50 as a T-70 with Light Tank, weaker gun and lower front armour would be meaningfully different, and it'd also give the soviets an actual Light Tank option that's not the stuart. Particularly since the soviets somehow ended up in a universe where none of the BTs or T-tens ended up counting as Light Tanks.
They also lack T-80s late war, which should be part of artillery regiments.
>>Looted tanks
Soviet looted tanks are pretty awful, eating a recce slot despite not being recce and being a mandatory placement. Also, for some inane reason they're RoF 1, probably because soviets need to be forced into having a move-and-shoot penalty regardless of if it makes sense.

If I have an entire platoon retreat off the field (such as a platoon of Wasps after they have fired all their flamethrowers), do they count as destroyed, or are they just ignored for company platoon totals?

If the group was routed they're destroyed, if they went to the rear for whatever reason like the wasps you mention they're ignored.

So how much does Italy suck? Looking at their special rules and unreliable morale, they seem pretty damn bad. You'd think you'd at least get to find out the skills of your troops (which seem pretty biased towards "you suck" results) before deploying them, and Avanti/Unknown Hero both seem pretty bad. I mean, if they can make Japan competitive with the crazy night attack and infantry in Banzi, why do the Italians get shit?

>The Pershing was already a heavy tank, though.
Yeah, but it's in the same ballpark as the Panther.
>T-50
If they didn't give the BT light, I doubt the T-50 would get it. Either way, they're not very different to either the great mix of light tanks and armoured cars, and I doubt anyone would give them a second glance at the moment. They're something to check off the list in terms of 100%ing WW2, but beyond that...
>T-50
More of them same. Very similar to the rest of the crap by FoW standards. A BT-7, maybe with a nod to recce duties, perhaps. Which is what most of the BA-XYZ's are, more or less.
>T-80s
Which were slightly fiddled with T-70s, and were quickly phased out in any case. Irrelevant enough not to be included, although I'm sure one of these days they'll be there as a list-stuffer. Not exactly much of a priority, though, by any standard.
>Looted tanks
And yet included they are, with the typical issues looted tanks tend to have.
>ROF1
Lack of experience, lack of ammo, getting used for decoy rather than medium tank stuff. Which fits, because the Soviets made bugger all use of captured tanks in a serious combat capacity. No surprises why, why bother when you have more than enough tanks of your own of comparable performance, and you never captured too many of the mostly either smashed or unreliable German tanks. They're there as decoy tanks, and that's a pretty elegant excuse for including them.

They don't. Git Gud, or even better, actually play them. Paul Collins plays them all the time, and he's one of the best players of the game.

>You suck
Very cheap, but still with lots of guns, you mean. You get huge numbers, lots of dakka, and enough quality to get you through things.
>Avanti
It gives you an extra 4 inches on your charge distance, user. That's awesome. Unknown hero's a great little rule as well, considering how cheap the average platoon is. Having a reluctant or confident platoon go to 2+ is a great advantage.

I take it you only play LW?

Yes, and I'm admittedly pretty new to the game as a whole (only been playing a few months). Was looking into early/mid and the random ratings just seem horrible to deal with. Might be after too much experience with Orks in Battlefleet Gothic, which also have random mechanics everywhere.

>Yeah, but it's in the same ballpark as the Panther.
So? Most heavy tanks are in the ballpark of the panther. If you're judging heavy tanks by King Tigers you're going to be disappointed.
>>T-50
>If they didn't give the BT light, I doubt the T-50 would get it.
You're right but this is just another thing Battlefront fucked up. It's crazy none of the soviet light tanks are actually light tanks yet stuff like the Challenger is.
>More of them same.
I don't understand this post, please clarify.
>Which were slightly fiddled with T-70s, and were quickly phased out in any case. Irrelevant enough not to be included
Yet Germany gets every variant of armoured car and Pz II observer/recce.

>And yet included they are, with the typical issues looted tanks tend to have.
No, the soviets get pretty uniquely screwed on that. German captured tanks are never RoF 1 and never have punishing rules like "Must deploy", and they rarely take up vital slots with no other replacement. Hell, they get captured tank lists. Likewise other eastern front countries often have captured tanks without the problems soviet captured tanks have.

>Lack of experience, lack of ammo, getting used for decoy rather than medium tank stuff.
Or the more important rule that everything soviet absolutely must have a RoF 1 movement penalty...

>Which fits, because the Soviets made bugger all use of captured tanks in a serious combat capacity. No surprises why, why bother when you have more than enough tanks of your own of comparable performance, and you never captured too many of the mostly either smashed or unreliable German tanks.
This suggests pretty significant ignorance of use of captured tanks. Later on, yes, the soviets have an adequate supply of tanks, but early and mid war there should be copious captured tank lists, including captured tank conversions like the Su-76i.

>Most heavy tanks are in the ballpark of the panther
Yeah, but the US only gets the Pershing. Now it has the Pershing and the Super Pershing.
>Light tanks
Controllability, reliability, and suspension. Top speed isn't a reliable indicator of how agile they were.
>more of the same
The T-50 wouldn't really have a niche. It's too close to the million other Soviet things that are very similar to it.
>Germany
They get a tank OP, you mean? That's not rare. Scout car wise, They mostly get the 8 rads and the 222s. A few novelty types because they look cool and BF likes to trick people into running AC companies.
>Soviets
Yeah, because the Germans grabbed them with both hands and used them as MBTs, even staging raids and operations specifically to get more ammo for them. Particularly at Barbarossa when they were desperate for decent tanks.
>ROF1 Movement
Paranoia and hyperbole.
>captured tanks
>Copious
At best, that's hyperbole. What's more likely is that you frantically wiki'ed the article trying to find evidence of it actually happening. Which considering the example, you probably did. Either way, another SU-76 equivalent, in MW, is not on anyone's give a fuck radar.

The Random ratings are a pain, but they do tend to cluster around certain results, as you can see.

And these aren't random like Orks. These are uncertain, but they're certainly not whacky and plan destroying like the lulrandom GW Orks. When you deploy the unit, you roll rating. You can work around unfortunate results, and sometimes it means a very cheap platoon gets a pretty decent rating. Remember you pay for what you get, so the Italian platoons aren't really changing their value that much one way or another because their probably/possible low ratings is reflected in the cost.

Are we getting East Germany too?

Not yet. Brit supplement first, IIRC, and more Russian stuff.

>Now it has the Pershing and the Super Pershing.
What, everything needs a mini-tiger or it's not competitive? Most nations don't: The soviets have a panther-like, and the UK only gets the churchill VII. Ultimately it's not an issue; it did appear in the war. But it's yet another example that the game should be fine with rare one-off vehicles.
>Controllability, reliability, and suspension.
Unreliabile vehicles get "unreliable", which soviet vehicles of the BT period have. Vehicles with overloaded suspension have "overloaded", which wasn't the case with the BT (it was a classic christie). There's no real compelling reason for the only fast tank in the line to be the M3 stuart.
>The T-50 wouldn't really have a niche. It's too close to the million other Soviet things that are very similar to it.
If it was a Light Tank it would.
>>Germany
>They mostly get the 8 rads and the 222s. A few novelty types because they look cool and BF likes to trick people into running AC companies.
Again it is another case where the game permits everything under the sun.
>>Soviets
>Yeah, because the Germans grabbed them with both hands and used them as MBTs, even staging raids and operations specifically to get more ammo for them. Particularly at Barbarossa when they were desperate for decent tanks.
The soviets also lost a shitload of tanks, and had to use captured vehicles where possible.
>Paranoia and hyperbole.
It's almost like the soviets are the only army in the game with a special rule that gives everything ROF 1 movement...
>you frantically wiki'ed the article... Either way, another SU-76 equivalent, in MW, is not on anyone's give a fuck radar.
Are you trolling me or really dense? The SU-76i is in game already, check Eastern Front. It's another example of a place where limited and "weird" vehicles are in game.

There is no compelling reason to not to give the soviets the SU-100Y in Barbarossa.

They already make T-55s, so you'd think it'd be an easy sell.

I mean, TY is going to need more opfors than it has; the soviets aren't full of wehraboo appeal like the germans are in vanilla flames, so maintaining a faction balance is going to be important and the warsaw pact gives them a route to that.

I think part of the problem is the resin kits for stuff like the T-55.

Look at the release pattern for Team Yankee so far.

Americans - Plastic Tank, Plastic Transport, Plastic Helicopter

Soviets - Plastic Tank, Plastic Transport, Plastic Helicopter

West Germans - Plastic Tank, Plastic Transport(?, I'm not entirely certain what the Marder is), Plastic Helicopter

So it looks like they're trotting to stick to that pattern for future Team Yankee releases.

Maybe this means we'll see plastic T-55s or plastic M60s at some point.