Skip to toolbar

Flames Of War 4th Edition Boot Camp: Day Two

Community Games – John Vs Andrew

Supported by (Turn Off)

Community Games - John Vs Andrew

82 Comments

We see how John and Andrew are doing as they get stuck into their game which is taking place within a built up area.

This provides you with some more interesting options AND plenty of cover too which is cool. We will be catching up with oriskany soon to find out how the campaign has gone and where we're heading off to next.

Supported by (Turn Off)

82
Leave a Reply

60 Comment threads
22 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
61 Comment authors
andrew leastingray075Alex MurrayWilliam EversbergStephen Gibson Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
cbrenner
Member
1245xp

Nice and squishy!

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

I thought it was better to say that, what I really meant was fast but shite! All the resilience of a chocolate fire guard. 🙂

graysghost
Member
2xp

Do they mean 25pdr rather than 17pdr? And why isn’t any of the German Army painted? I know time has been short but that is rather disappointing considering the effort the British have put in. Where are the Italians? Aren’t they included in this campaign at all? The title image clearly shows them and it does seem a shame if they have been overlooked. Looks an excellent event, well done for the regular updates.

glitchingout
Member
31xp

Italians and Americans are coming down the line. Probably sometime into the fall, if I remember correctly. It’ll be nice to see things flesh out, especially for all of us waiting for Eastern Front stuff. But it’s kinda “soft release”. But Battlefront is only so big. Version 4 – Midwar will probably get momentum after the New Year.

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

I had both in my army list @graysghost, I had a bty of 2 x 17 pdrs (36″ range) and a bty of 4 x 25 pdrs (80″ range). The way the rules are now the 25 pdrs are more for counter artillery and to deal with infantry, they are no longer any good against tanks. You also need a good field of fire for them or a unit HQ to spot for you. My opponent John arrived late in the afternoon on Friday (as he had flown in from Germany) and that is why the Germans were not painted.… Read more »

rfernandz2001
Cult of Games Member
625xp

In a real life battle, would tanks get so close together and remain in formations like in the photos? Or is it a phenomenon of the game rules?

torros
Cult of Games Member
23802xp

I’ve only ever seen FoW and TY games

torros
Cult of Games Member
23802xp

Seen it I meant

eddie117
Member
35xp

I think they are just trying to keep out of line of sight from the anti tank guns and artillery

eddie117
Member
35xp

You can move furather apart it depends on whethere they are trained vetran etc

caledor2
Cult of Games Member
4268xp

I think it is the games rules. If you want to have all your tanks in cover and out of sight you will have to place them close together. But if you take in account artillery and air planes then you will want to spread them out more.

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

Whilst line of sight in built up areas tends to make you bunch your tanks together for the game the guys playing on the open desert tables tended to spread them out a bit more. This was pretty much the same for TY. In real life tanks tend to stay in their troops but can be spread out much further but in my experience never more than a few hundred meters and pretty much always within eye contact.

dorthonion
Member
1529xp

The 17 pounders were mounted on the 25 pounder carriage – they are a bit early for Alamein but there you go. The Allies have regular 25 pounders as well.
The density and type of cover is turning it into a bit of laser tag in a way… well, tank tag.

graysghost
Member
2xp

You mean they didn’t arrive in the Middle East until December, a full month after the battle you’re fighting? I hadn’t thought of historical gaming in fantasy terms before lol

Maybe I’m too far into the history side of my gaming. Having written my degree dissertation on Mechanised Warfare I do get very involved in the detail.

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

We were given the 17 pdrs to even things up against the 88’s after all battlefront weren’t about to give us the overwhelming numbers Monty had at his disposal for The 3rd battle of El Alamein. Plus I don’t think I could have survived mentally if I had to build anymore tanks on Friday!!!

neves1789
Member
4588xp

Looks like a fun game!

mo3355
Member
34xp

Whole lot of paint scratching not enough blowing up!

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

John and I were just warming up, there was plentiful of carnage by the end!

eddie117
Member
35xp

Come on Germans go get em

eddie117
Member
35xp

Looks like a good fight I like the desert rat dice

sircaroon15
Member
284xp

Man this is going to be a great battle. Luckily they Brit armour is mostly grants as they can hold their piece against PZ III and IV.

minty45
Cult of Games Member
628xp

Looks like a lot of armour will require new paint jobs 🙂

minty45
Cult of Games Member
628xp

I would of thought the tanks bunched up like that would make a very tempting target for the artillery?

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

In direct fire mode people quickly learnt to only approach artillery from the flanks, indirect fire is pretty much ineffective.

dimdim
Member
3xp

Still wish we saw some early stuarts and shermans though

troybuckle
Member
7xp

Another win for the British I wonder…

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

Yep! We had s bit of a Mexican stand off and I thought I was toast as John had laid down a very effective smoke barrage in front of my covering weapons but the dice gods did not approve and I managed to weather the storm.

sonbae
Member
121xp

Love the way BoW showcases the players as well as the game

cwen
Member
23xp

German Steel!

neaceul
Member
1xp

Squishy. Know about that from playing Shermans in FoW.

tibour
Member
1315xp

Something about the Grant/Lee I just really like that tank.

mwcannon
Member
618xp

I like to see the sides maneuvering, makes the battles more realistic.

I think in this case, the buildings are channeling the forces so they stay together, but the lack of a lot of air also allows for the vehicles in the units being close together.

BTW, is smoke not in the rules? I would have though that the 25lbrs would have kicked out a lot to mask the movement of the Crusaders.

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

Hi @mwcannon, yes you are allowed to lay down one smoke barrage a game. You pick your aiming point and if you make your test you can go 4″ per gun in any direction from that point in a straight line. Some other tanks can fire smoke (crusader CS 3″ gun) but you must not move and direct fire of smoke is only a 1″ marker per tank at a range of 16″.

panzertanker64
Member
593xp

Scratching the paint. Lol

bluetalon1974
Member
4xp

gotta love scratching paint

kr4ig
Member
4xp

Enough scratched paint, more tank destruction.

lawnor
Cult of Games Member
25920xp

Sure sound slike he’s having fun

caibre
Member
31xp

I like the ammo supply. The wash looks great!

72draco
Member
516xp

Noticed a reoccurring theme in the commentary. British are, understandably, concerned about the 88s and maneuver to avoid them and the 88s never get to shoot. Looks like a lot of thought has to be put into placement of those things or the German player is going to have a hard time.

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

Also if you use your 88’s to hold up a flank and your opponent takes them out with artillery then you suddenly get very exposed. I managed to do this to two opponents and it certainly gives them something to think about.

irontom
Member
15xp

The 88’s should be vulnerable to bombardments from the Brit 25pdrs and CS Crusaders. Maybe these are too busy fighting close in tanks?

brucelea
Cult of Games Member
7897xp

25pdrs yes, crusader CS no, as you would be taken out long before you could get into range and then have to sit stationary in order to fire a barrage (and re-rolling any hits due to formation numbers(1 x 2pdr and 2x CS per HQ troop))

Supported by (Turn Off)