Getting frustrated

[60buick]

I'm starting to get frustrated with the Americans. I have been playing them religiously for about 2 years. When I started, I lost every game but gradually got better. I saw a learning curve. I went from bad to average and wins were about 50/50. I never saw the games as anything other than fair until about the time Bloody Omaha came out. That's when heinous list started to show up in the game that get special rules or advantages making a win possible for the "other guy" but very difficult if not unlikely. Now as an average player with a list that is based on what I bought 2 years ago I have gone from winning some times to only winning if I get very lucky and losing the rest of the time. Almost every list I have can be built from FE1, mostly because there isn't much being given to the American player. I am feeling the same catch up game that plagues 40K if you don't spend money on new toys you are at a disadvantage. If I want to be on a level field an army change is needed.
Maybe a US list can still win but I don't think it can happen in the hands of an average player going up against what most people are running now. I don't think my skill is getting worse it is that other armies are getting much nastier while mine stay pretty much the same. My list used to be fun, forgiving, at times even easy and able to dish out some damage while soaking up casualties. Even if I lost I was able to do some damage so I felt like I won. Now it is to fragile, eager to burn and can not hurt half of what it faces and makes me want to pull my hair out. They get gutted just about every game. I am seeing David's frustration at times to, that never happened before he started to face what he has been facing then last few months He has to work very hard for a victory and often bleeds to get it. I see an arms race and the US is being severely outclassed. I see bringing a US list about the same as bringing a MW army to a LW game. Just my 2 cents.

Any thoughts?

[Tiger505]

I still think your army isnt so bad. You should remember that you won two games at a tournament with a list we would crush every Sunday. The armies that run at HT are not that typical of what I normaly see at the tournaments I go to.

[60buick]

My old tournament list was nothing more than a US version of Soviet Strelk. I did lose with it all the time when playing at HT. The reason was I only played the Festung Company. The Festung Company was perfect for chewing up infantry and about as broken as they get. How do you kill a bunker that can't be templated and can only be assaulted one stand at a time drawing defensive fire from all bunkers (about 40 dice). When I did go to the tournament The only game I lost horribly to was the Festung Company and I destroyed the Soviet Tank Horde with a 6:1 and had gutted the German Fallschimjager list but no one claimed an objective. I think my Soviet victory was due to the other players not knowing how to use his list and the German player was out numbered 10 to 1 but it was close. The game played very well and no one had any significant advantages. Everyone was on en even foot with a different nationality that had to learn its strengths and weaknesses. The Festung Company was different, I was dead before the game started. I do think the list has faults and can be beat but it is specialized to combat the 29th Assault company that has the tools to beat it. Both list come out of Bloody Omaha and are designed to be played against each other in a beach assault.

When Cobra came out the American got some needed 155's but it is expensive, easy to kill and ASSAULTS win games. Not arty. The Germans got SS which are heinous in assaults and you can build some pretty nasty stuff.

FE2 has the exact same stuff as FE1 but they included the 155's and AOP. I was expecting more 76's at a minimum. The British got some pretty nice options and I think they are more than a match for most list. But the Americans got boned.

Now we have another book that is specialized giving the Soviet and German players some very nice options which are great against each other. But for the American player what do you do to combat either of the new list.

What do you do with 15 Sherman's that now face 10 IS-2's.

What do you do with Sherman's that can't see Germans until you get close enough for a few cheap infantry stands with panzerfaust to kill half you tank force and the rest having to deal with very nasty AT and brutal infantry. The list is nasty enough with out dirt cheap fortifications but an equal to the new Soviet list.


How do you deal with arty and tanks killing your arty while you have 3 trained platoons of 10 assaulting as many veteran troupes with flame throwers and machine guns in bullet poof cover that can move and not lose dug in?



I just feel like I am being forced to run other things because the army of choice is being over looked in New Zealand and so dated it is no longer competitive.

=How about the HVAP rounds that were run in 44' and could penetrate a Panther at long range.
=How about the "Zippo" Sherman's. (flame throwers).
=How about the Pershing.
=How about more 76mm Sherman's and intermixed in the tank platoons as was in history.
=How about cheaper points cost since they were far more numbers on the battle field than the game replicates.
=How about cheaper veteran troupes since we have been here for a while now.
=More Bazooka's since they were more common.
=extra weapons platoon, a lot more equipment was used in some situations
=specialized equipment, grenades ,explosives etc.
=Flame throwers, rare but used.
=larger platoons, they did have more boots on the ground and often picked up stragglers needing somewhere to be before getting back with there unit.
The list keeps going......................

[Tiger505]

David check me on these facts.

HVAP rounds where issued first to TD units and the 76mm Sherman was actually held from the Normandy landing at first due to them wanting time to train in their use. Also you have to remember that even with new ammo types coming into service they would still issue and use the old stocks which where substantial. Even at the end of the war US troops where being issued older ammos types.

The US army went into Normandy under the illusion that they didn't need anything bigger. The Pershing had been placed on a back burner due to the views of the generals in the ET. You will get the 90mm gun on the Jackson and the Pershing. As soon as you get to the late fall of 44 and beyond it. The US army would use artillery, air, and maneuver to gain its objectives. It doesn't mater what you get there is always going to be a Soviet, British, or German tank as big or bigger than you.

As for more infantry, well there was a reason they had stragglers. The US military in WWII gambled by maximizing their air and naval forces but to do so we shorted our ground forces. Many units in both theaters had to cannibalize their support troops to fill in the ranks of the rifle units. During WWII 70% of the casualties occurred among the infantry. The infantry made up less than 20% of our total force. If I remember right its more like 16% of the total.

The US force in FoW is a force of different tools. It is meant to be used as a lever not a hammer. Find the chink and apply one of the many tools it has to unhinge what you need to move.

If you are curious about the history of the US armored force I would go read the following.

The Forging of Thunderbolt. A history of the forces that drove and shaped the formation of US armored divisions before and into WWII.

Death Traps. A book written by a US supply officer who had to collect, repair, and reissue Shermans in action.

An Army At Dawn. This covers the very first actions of Old Iron sides in Tunisia and shows you how US tankers in Stuarts kicked some German arse. It is also a good overview of how the US adapted at first to handling the German war machine.

There is another book Tank something I need to go home and find but it is a quick guide to the evolution of tank tactics and technology from WWI until the present.

As a German I must admit I want my PzGr 40 ammo. Can you say AT 15 Tiger Is and at 20 Tiger IIs =)

[threadhead]

What list do you use? I played a six platoon US Italy Veteran rifles last year and they were pretty tough against all lists. WW II was an arms race in general - but a solid infantry list with some small additions or changes can really stand up against most of the new lists.

Consider Vet infantry with 105MM, TD, tank support and a few P47's. On the defense - pretty tough - and not to shabby on the offense either....

Larry

[firsttofight]

Hang in there 60 Buick. I think your lists are fine. Maybe you can tweek them a bit.

I agree that the M4 Sherman, medium tank, can't stand toe-to-toe with the heavy tanks and assault guns. Thats not what they were designed to do. Shermans are a mid-war tank that performs very well, if not better than their pz mk III and mk IV counterparts. The US military was designed around the infantry with the support of artillery, armor, and air superiority.

That being said, use the oodles of support to free up and cover your Shermans. They are there to exploit the terrain and weaknesses in the enemies lines. Not to go charging in headlong like the 7th Cavelry. Their strategy was to out run, out manouver, and out number the Germans. Get in close and scap it out using weaker side armor. The Tank Destroyers were deployed from the regimental level where needed the most. Kind of like independent platoons.

I know, easier said than done on a small game board and your opponent watching your every move. While it seems improbable, it is not impossible to deceive or surprise your opponent. Historically, one likes to have at least a 3-1 ratio when attacking. However, you are able to drop templates "Danger Close". This is a real advantage as long as you don't roll a mess of 1's and 2's.

Yes, these tactics will be very bloody and Shermans will be burning. That's reality. My Grandfather fought in Europe under Patton in WW II. Many of his troops refered to Patton as "Old blood and gutts, our blood and his gutts". Often, a leader must sacrifice some troops in order to defeat the enemy.

Remember, try to have fun. Many things happen during the course of a game. Battle is almost always fluid and battleplans rarely go according to the plan. Especially, when dice are involved. That goes for BOTH sides. If you do get demolished, that leaves more time to line it up and try again.

[60buick]

Flames of war is a game loosely based on history. You could fill a book with all the stuff that is logical and would make the game more of an accurate simulation. But it is not a simulation, just a game. No game is fun when you can't win and no game is fun when you are almost assured victory every time. Keeping an even playing field for the 4 nationalities would seem kind of important.

I am seeing the game as going from pretty level to very lopsided against the US. I did a few hours research and don't like things I found in Operation Cobra.

Cobra is for July and August of 1944.


The guys in New Zealand are pushing the game as a simulation so why not give the Americans the upgraded 75mm Jumbo Sherman's which came out in June 1944 and was supplied for Operation Cobra! Before rarity is mentioned over 250 were built which is far more than the 100 155mm GMC's. They had twice the armour of the regular Sherman.

A quote from Wiki. "The (rare) M4A3E2 Sherman Jumbo variant had even thicker frontal armor than the Tiger I. Intended for the assault to break out of the Normandy beachhead, it entered combat in August 1944".


Give us the HVAP, it was used in Operation Cobra.

Another quote. "Hypervelocity Armor Piercing HVAP ammunition, standardized as M93, was developed for the 76 mm gun in July 1944. This new projectile could penetrate the front turret of the Panther at longer ranges than standard ammunition. Its distribution was, however, prioritized to US Tank Destroyer units."

"This ammunition was also supplied to the Tank Destroyer Units for Operation Cobra" (in reference to HVAP)

"was also in the 76mm Sherman's during the Normandy Breakout." (in reference to HVAP)

More 76's please.

"2d Armored Division's firepower had been stepped up to some extent. About half the division's M4's were armed with the 76-mm. gun.14 With this gun, firing the new but scarce tungsten-carbide-cored HVAP ammunition, the tankers could penetrate the front belly plate of the Panther at 300 yards and at 200 yards had a sporting chance (about one to four) of penetrating the front slope plate" (in reference to Cobra)


"Although American tanks were less powerful than the heavy German tanks, US armored forces ultimately triumphed because of numerical superiority, a more consistent supply of fuel and ammunition, and the allied air superiority (with aircraft being the biggest danger to the lines of supply for German tank units)."

OK numerical superiority. That is more than 15 tanks. I am thinking the Soviet pricing from FE1 is what is needed. You can get 10 Sherman's for 480 points as long as they are Russian. 10 US Sherman's are almost 700 pts and they are broken up into 2 platoons.

And Air: As much as the US relied on Air support I think you should just get air no cost. The Germans got trenches give us airplanes. I think you should be able to spend 190 points on a second air strike using the standard rules. Two cheap anti air half tracks and you will not get one air strike in all day long so its not that much of an advantage.


As for Hero's.

The Germans get Barkman. The book gives a brief history on him and he was a great tanker.
He will get.
"He always re rolls misses"
"always gone to ground"
"when you kill him he comes back on a 5+!"

The US gets Pool. I have read a lot about pool and he was awesome in his tank. The cobra book says "yet his combat career was so successful that many historians consider him to be not just the greatest tank ace of World War II but the greatest tank ace ever. He destroyed 258 enemy vehicles and twelve tanks (mostly Panthers) while capturing 250 enemy soldiers." He did all that in 80 days!

Pool will get you
"no +1 penalty when using stabilizer"
"if he moved at least 6 inches toward an enemy team and is hit the hit is ignored on a roll of 5+"

ooooooooh, what a benefit for the greatest tanker of all time. I played Pool a few times and the one time he went against Barkman's ghost tank he died in the first turn.

I don't know what to give pool but they should have at least made him worth having. Greater AT at a minimun since he was using HVAP.

[Tiger505]

OK I don't have exact figures on how many 76mm M4s went into cobra. The HVAP round I am going to comment on. If you have to be inside 200 yards to have a 1/4 chance of penetrating the front armor of a Panther then why is a 1/6 chance at short range unreasonable? Consider the fact that 200 yards in FOW even with the telescoping scale is roughly 2 inches? There is no way to exactly calculate what the scale is but if you look at the different weapon ranges then your getting a 16% chance of bagging a Panther out to around 600 to 800 meters. The AT rating is not set for the best nor for the worst ammo the tank could use. The best I can come up with is that its an average. I have read more than a few accounts of Sherman tank crews bagging Panthers. The majority of those accounts revolve around terrain and flank hits. I could even point you to a battle where a 75mm gun knocked out a KT on the nose. It used a WP round to smoke the crew out without harming the KT at all.

As for air I have only one thing to say. GIVE THE P47 FLYING TANK! Well I have more but I wanted that out there first. The biggest thing about air is that it forces me to by AA. That dosnt seem like much but being forced to buy a unit that is so fragil and only good against infantry or air is annoying. I also cant AA US arty strikes and the redlegs have a long history of being the American hammer.

Almost all medium armor in the game costs to much when it has to handle heavy armor Mk IVs, Cromwells, M4s and even the T34 76s. They excell at blitzing infantry formations. They excell at manuver. They do not survive alot of 75mm plus hits nor do they carry large guns. These are MEDIUM tanks they where designed to exploit pentrations, to overrun the enemy rear areas, and to encircle his formations. Medium armor at a tactical level is just plain out classed. As a US tanker you have to be able to use a combined arms force. If your not up to tacticly solving problems then a US armoed force is not for you.

[60buick]

I know how the telescoping scale works in this game, int can get confusing. But lets look at tank ranges since in theory all tanks should be appropriate to other tanks.

A Tiger 1 had a range of about 2000 Meters. If the ground scale were correct a Tiger 1 would have a range of about 65 feet. To scale the tiger to the correct range it would have to be 1/1968 scale or just shy of 3/16 of an inch long from the tip of the gun to the rear of the tank. That is about the distance from an infantry stands elbow to his fingertips. Imagine a tank that tiny having that kind of range, it seems impossible to be true. To have correct ground scale the tanks are to small for gaming.


"the tankers could penetrate the front belly plate of the Panther at 300 yards"

Basically at 300 yards a hit below the belt line on the nose of a Panther will penetrate. It doesn't give odds it just says it will go in being that is is weaker Armour. 300 Yards is not that far for a tank duel so a direct hit would be easy. So looking at a game table a 76 mm Sherman should penetrate a Panther with ease at 36 inches. The problem is that is the telescoping ground scale does shrink that range to about 2 inches. It would penetrate if I parked a Sherman 2 inches away but it doesn't work in the game.



"200 yards had a sporting chance (about one to four) of penetrating the front slope plate"


200 yards is almost on top of each other and could definitely be considered short range which is under 16" in the game.

A hit on the easier to hit upper portions have a 25% chance of penetration.

That should give the HVAP Tanks an AT of 13 if the upper and lower Armour are averaged together for the Panthers rating of 10.

But by doing the same calculations using the penetration ranges and Armour ratings and the M79 AP rounds the AT rating of 12 is right on the money.

The rating of 10 should be right as well since the 75's could not penetrate the Panther on the nose nor did they try. I couldn't find any figures to do the math.

I do think the rounds have been overlooked and are not figured into the AT 12 rating. They may be saving them for later books.
I don't know why the HVAP rounds are not in the game yet. They should have been in Pool's tank and the TD's for Cobra. An AT 13 is not much better but how much different would you play some situations if you had a 32% chance of success verses a 16% chance of success.

[Tiger505]

You can not assume every shot that hits will penetrate. The belly plate was also not exactly an easy target. Your talking about a reverse slope section of armor that is angled to deflect rounds into the ground. It is also the first section of a tank to be hull down. Even a Sherman has been shown to survive 88mm hits in the history books. What the data shows is that a short range 76mm gun could knock out a Panther if the circumstances where exactly right. In the game every 76mm gun has a 1/6 chance to knock out a Panther a short range. As for the HVAP well I want to PzGrn 40. The AT ratings are an average of the best and wost penetration date on the weapon.

You are having the same issue I did with hard data when I first picked up a historical game. The reports done by the ordnance departments on different ammo types are fine in a laboratory environment. Combat conditions are drastically different than those found in a lab. If we went by pure raw numbers then no Sherman would ever survive an 88 hit but 1 in 3 do because I fail the FP check.

[firsttofight]

Here's a US Armor CT Cobra list that can be very flexible.

140-HQ---75mm
275-1 Plt--75mm
265-2 Plt--76mm
190-3 Plt--Stuart
110-4 Plt--Arm Recon
240-5 Plt--ARP-Inf
240-6 Plt--Eng-Inf
185-7 Plt--AFAB-105mm
105-8 Plt--AMP-81mm
1750 pts

This is the 8 platoon list. You can condense it down to 6 depending on how you like to play.

My doctrine, once again, is infantry with tanks in support. I know, this is a armor company. A infantry company will not let me have the 76mm tanks and multiple armor support. However, I can play it as Armored Infantry. Since you still need to hit on side armor, I opted to use a Stuart platoon to get me up to 8 platoons total.

Because the M4 Sherman is a medium tank, I feel that their strength is offense. I have plenty of smoke to conceal or bombardment to pin and two large infantry platoons to contest or defend objectives (Cobra blue on blue).

If used properly and the dice gods are with you, 9 Shermans, 4 Stuarts, 9 bazooks (fire AT10 and/or assault 4), and 6 engineers (assault 3) can get the job done.

[60buick]

The list I am running is

HQ 140
5 Sherman 76's 445
4 Sherman 75's 275
5 Stuarts 235
Armored Rifle platoon 240
FAB 185
FAB 185
AOP 40

It is very flexible, fast and should be up to any task but it's Achilles heel is always going to be heavy armour or AT. That is where some Operation Cobra toys would be nice.

I took it to a the tournament Saturday and I was the only player running a US list and I think just about every one had heavy armour.

The first game was against a very skillful German player. the mission was encounter.

His list had 2 Tigers 4 stugs, pioneers lots of infantry, a Goliath, panzerfaust and Panzershreks, rockets and Pak 38s.

The Tigers were able to control the board while moving in on an objective never leaving any breathing room to get any kind of a shot with the 76's. The terrain was light not leaving much room to maneuver behind cover. The objective was in the open corner with a small hill behind it that ran to the edge of the table. My artillery was in that corner and the Stugs came up and burned them. My 76's sat in cover and ended up having a long range shoot out with some Stugs and I burned all but one. a platoon of 75's moved up to with the 76's to keep the objective under fire but the Tiger's would eat my tanks for lunch if I moved with in four of the objective. The Tigers and Stug survived all the fire I could bring on them and claimed the objective.

It was a 6/1 loss.

He said I played very smart. The Tigers dominated the board.


The second game was against a guy that had only been playing a short time and was inexperienced. He played well but did not have a feel for his Tigers yet and is still learning how to use them to their full potential. The mission was also very one sided to the attacker. He had an 8" deployment and started pinned and bailed. I rolled 4 dice for each team and started from that many inches up. I had 7 turns to take an objective.

His list was 4 Tigers, Whitman in a 5th Tiger 4 Panzers, 3 AT halftracks.


I deployed some 76's behind a hill by his 2 Tigers on an objective on a far side and sent some 75's up the middle into town and my Stuarts and ARP up the far side by 3 sleeping Tigers. He bailed in everything but the Panzers and shot down my AOP. I sent the 75's into the woods and burned 2 Panzers, His Tigers turned to shoot the 75's burning 2. My 76's came out from behind the hill and unloaded 10 stabilized short range shots into the Tigers butts and burned them both. The 75's pulled back, one bogged. His Panzers came after the 75's and burned the bogged one. The 76's burned the Panzers covering the retreating 75. While the Stuarts and ARP moved in to position behind a hill toward the second objective. He diverted two tiger to cover the open objective by the 76's The 76's retreated behind the hill and the Stuarts and ARP moved into the woods. The Stuarts killed the Halftrack while the ARP assaulted Whitman and killed him claiming me the objective on turn 6.

It was a 7/1 victory


The third game was against a very experienced American played who brought Germans to the tournament. That tells me something.

He had 3 Tigers and 3 Stugs and artillery, mortors, Pak 38s and 3 Platoons of infantry.

The mission was a fighting withdraw.

I sent my Stuarts forward to start machine gunning his infantry. I positioned My AOP to prevent his tigers from ambushing but The board left a few places to pop them and I had very little cover. He popped them on turn one and put 9 shots into the 76's burning them. His mortors smoked the Stuarts. My 75's moved into town and his artillery pounded them while his PAK 38's moved into range. His Tigers burned a FAB but not before they took a Stug and I had both batteries ranged in on the objective. He pulled his Mortors. I burned another stug and unloaded the Stuarts and Sherman's on the infantry. He pulled his Artillery. The Tigers parked on the hill in the middle of the board and had an open field of view on the whole table. He moved his Stug to close on the Sherman's. His pak 38's killed all but 2 Stuarts and the Tigers killed all but one Sherman. The remaining Sherman killed a Stug and the ARP emptied the halftracks and moved up behind the Stuarts. He pulled a Stug and the objective I needed. I shifted my focus on the one next to it. His Tigers killed the last Sherman 75 and an observer Sherman and the 2ic. I moved the Stuarts up close to assault range and moved up the infantry. The Artillery burned a Tiger. The tigers killed the Stuarts and started picking of infantry and he pulled another objective. That was pretty much game. The tigers dominated the whole table. the rapid fire on three Tigers against US armour that can't hide is bad. I had one FAB and some empty half tracks and one ARP against 3 platoons of dug in gone to ground fearless vet troups.

It was a 6/1 loss.

Ironically when talking to the last guy I played asking about which he liked better the US or Germans he said I was at a disadvantage with medium armour and when they bring Jumbo's out "again" it would even out the US tank list. He also said they were in the first version of the game and there is a rule that all hit go to the Jumbos first because they would put them in the front of the platoons because of the heavy armour.
I don't think I am a dumb player I think I have a good feel on how to use my army and I know how everything supports everything else. I know my strengths and weaknesses. My strength is flexibility and mobility with a little bit of everything I need to do the job my weakness is heavy armour and heavy AT. I can't kill it if the person with it knows how to use it and he goes threw me like tin foil. The trend now is heavy armour which leaves the US tank list dated. That has kind of been my point all along. we need something to combat the heavy armour threat whether it be Jumbo's, HVAP or something. Cobra would have been a good book to introduce some of the nastiness that the US could dish out in combat.

[Tiger505]

well if it has the rule to auto draw all AT fire then it should cut down on the damage done to a point. So you would need to ether hit the yanks alot or get a biggg gun lol both are easy options now that to soviets already force you to be the same way,