Just bought World at War - Comments and Questions

[Murphy]

I was at my local wargames convention (Vapanartak in York) last weekend and I picked up a copy of Battlefield Evo: World at War. It was a bit of an impulse buy really, but I've always been tempted by 1:72 scale models for wargaming as a cheaper alternative to white metal 28mm.

I'm impressed by the rules, the system of 4 basic actions and each unit getting 2 actions a turn is straight forward. The actions themselves are straightforward and it takes very little time to get a good grasp of the rules. The reaction system looks like a good mechanism to allow the non-moving player a chance to respond.

Obviously the simple rules are made more complex by the Traits system, I like the way these override the basic rules. But I find it a little odd the way some are grouped into the Traits section of the book, some are in the Special Rules section of each list and some are in the unit descriptions. This isn't too bad, but some of the general traits are rarely used (eg. Independent) while some of the Unit Description rules such as Co-axial, Tank Assault, Supporting Artillery are repeated over and over wasting a lot of space. This space would have been better used for examples of the rules in play.

I've also picked up the Soviet and German vehicle compendiums from AD Publishing, these are a truly fantastic addition to the game. Nice pictures, great range of vehicles backed up by colour pictures (plus the black and white printing option and unit cards!).

Ok, now some questions:

Are there any restrictions on which units can ride in transports? T
Can multiple infantry units get into the same transport vehicle? Can a unit get into 2 different vehicles eg. a ten man unit gets into 2 jeeps?

The M8 and M20 (page 135) seem a little inconsistent as they have the same chassis I would expect them to be the same size. The M20 scout car is just an M8 with the turret taken off, how can it be bigger? Also I think the M20 should be Wheels/19" not Tracks/19"

The vehicle compendiums allow some vehicles to be taken as units eg. "Up to 2 extra Möbelwagen may be added to the unit for +95 points each." Do these vehicle units have to declare a leader and stay within 6" of the leader as infantry would? Or do they operate as separate units on the table top?

Finally, if a vehicle has the accurate trait on one of it's weapons and moves. Accurate weapons will re-roll misses and according to the advanced rules moving vehicles re-roll hits. There's also a general rule that a dice roll can only every be re-rolled once. I think the simplest would be to assume that the two traits just cancel out, roll the attack and don't re-roll?

Anyway, back to assembling my new US Armoured Infantry army.

Jonathan

 

[Agis]

I was at my local wargames convention (Vapanartak in York) last weekend and I picked up a copy of Battlefield Evo: World at War. It was a bit of an impulse buy really, but I've always been tempted by 1:72 scale models for wargaming as a cheaper alternative to white metal 28mm.
I'm impressed by the rules, the system of 4 basic actions and each unit getting 2 actions a turn is straight forward. The actions themselves are straightforward and it takes very little time to get a good grasp of the rules. The reaction system looks like a good mechanism to allow the non-moving player a chance to respond.

Hi Murphy, welcome aboard!

Obviously the simple rules are made more complex by the Traits system, I like the way these override the basic rules. But I find it a little odd the way some are grouped into the Traits section of the book, some are in the Special Rules section of each list and some are in the unit descriptions. This isn't too bad, but some of the general traits are rarely used (eg. Independent) while some of the Unit Description rules such as Co-axial, Tank Assault, Supporting Artillery are repeated over and over wasting a lot of space. This space would have been better used for examples of the rules in play.

The decision was made during editing and layout.
The initial draft had all traits, special rules and so on pressed into one section. It was all very tight and efficient (aka “the German way”) but also a bit boring to read.
The bad side of this was that you had to flip the book constantly to look these up. In the end we went for the existing compromise.

I've also picked up the Soviet and German vehicle compendiums from AD Publishing, these are a truly fantastic addition to the game. Nice pictures, great range of vehicles backed up by colour pictures (plus the black and white printing option and unit cards!).

Thanks, honest thanks for the nice comment.
A lot of work from my and Court Jesters side went into these. Good if it shows… 8)

Are there any restrictions on which units can ride in transports? Can multiple infantry units get into the same transport vehicle? Can a unit get into 2 different vehicles eg. a ten man unit gets into 2 jeeps?

There are no restrictions as far as I know.

The M8 and M20 (page 135) seem a little inconsistent as they have the same chassis I would expect them to be the same size. The M20 scout car is just an M8 with the turret taken off, how can it be bigger? Also I think the M20 should be Wheels/19" not Tracks/19"

Yup, a typo sneaked in.
The M20 should be size 2 and the M8 should have Wheels/19”. The upcoming US Vehicle Compendium is already correct.

The vehicle compendiums allow some vehicles to be taken as units eg. "Up to 2 extra Möbelwagen may be added to the unit for +95 points each." Do these vehicle units have to declare a leader and stay within 6" of the leader as infantry would? Or do they operate as separate units on the table top?

Funny coincidence: See here: http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=38667

Finally, if a vehicle has the accurate trait on one of it's weapons and moves. Accurate weapons will re-roll misses and according to the advanced rules moving vehicles re-roll hits. There's also a general rule that a dice roll can only every be re-rolled once. I think the simplest would be to assume that the two traits just cancel out, roll the attack and don't re-roll?

Official: Just follow the rules word by word; so Re-roll the misses because of accurate and re-roll the hits because of the advanced rule.
However, your house rule also sounds OK to me! :wink:

 

[Murphy]

Hi Agis,

Thanks for the response.

The initial draft had all traits, special rules and so on pressed into one section. It was all very tight and efficient (aka “the German way”) but also a bit boring to read.
The bad side of this was that you had to flip the book constantly to look these up. In the end we went for the existing compromise.

I think the compromise approach is reasonable, there's perhaps a few of the repeated rules I would have moved to the special rules or traits sections. I guess we can all agree on the best layout for the rules

The unit cards in the vehicle compendium makes life much easier. Either the rule is on the card or the page reference is shown, it's so annoying to have to search in 3-4 places to find the special rules for a unit (a certain Codex: Space Marines springs to mind).

Yup, a typo sneaked in.
The M20 should be size 2 and the M8 should have Wheels/19”. The upcoming US Vehicle Compendium is already correct.

Good, at least I won't have to glue tracks on the Greyhound model I'm building. I'm looking forward to the British and US Compendiums, as they include older units from earlier in the war it really opens up the options for plying in other periods. Mid-war North Africa would be a nice addition if you ask me.

The vehicle compendiums allow some vehicles to be taken as units eg. "Up to 2 extra Möbelwagen may be added to the unit for +95 points each." Do these vehicle units have to declare a leader and stay within 6" of the leader as infantry would? Or do they operate as separate units on the table top?

Funny coincidence: See here: http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=38667

Oops I thought I had checked the forums to see if the question had been asked already. Taking weaker vehicles in units will definitely make them a more attractive option, otherwise they might just be seen as a waste of a Support or Armour Asset choice.

Are there any plans to extend the AT guns and artillery in the same way as the Vehicle compendiums have? For example the British had the 2-pound and 17-pound AT guns, plus the 25 pound artillery gun. Actually most of the stats for these guns should be in the vehicle compendiums, all that's missing is the points costs I think?

 

[Rabidchild]

Welcome Murphy!

Agis answered everything very well, I can only add that I use the same house rule as you do with an accurate weapon moving. Re-rolling all hits and all misses means the first roll doesn't count at all! The only thing that might change is if the roll of a 1 cannot be re-rolled. I know the shooting section says these are set aside as jams or ammunition shortages, but they are also misses so... I just say they cancel. It's easier that way.

As for AT guns, I am contemplating this as the next addition to the Tread-Head line. It'll give those tankers a bit more to fear from those soft creatures without tracks, that's for sure!

 

[Agis]

I think the compromise approach is reasonable, there's perhaps a few of the repeated rules I would have moved to the special rules or traits sections. I guess we can all agree on the best layout for the rules
The unit cards in the vehicle compendium makes life much easier. Either the rule is on the card or the page reference is shown, it's so annoying to have to search in 3-4 places to find the special rules for a unit (a certain Codex: Space Marines springs to mind).

Yup, SM Codexes are a bad example. :wink:
The unit cards are IMO the perfect tool, especially for gamers who are still learning the units stats...

Good, at least I won't have to glue tracks on the Greyhound model I'm building. I'm looking forward to the British and US Compendiums, as they include older units from earlier in the war it really opens up the options for plying in other periods. Mid-war North Africa would be a nice addition if you ask me.

LOL! Glueing a track on the greyhound sounds like fun! 8)
The upcoming 2 Compendiums will be as full with vehicles as the first 2. Especially the British one is really cramped!

Are there any plans to extend the AT guns and artillery in the same way as the Vehicle compendiums have? For example the British had the 2-pound and 17-pound AT guns, plus the 25 pound artillery gun. Actually most of the stats for these guns should be in the vehicle compendiums, all that's missing is the points costs I think?

Eventually a Gun Compemdium will be published by A.D.Publishing.
But I fear that the 2009 release plan is already quite full.

 

[Murphy]

Thanks for the response both. I think I'm going to have plenty to glue together and paint, if you both keep adding supplements at he current rate I'll never keep up

I'm still getting used to the change from white metal models designed for wargaming (generally 28mm, but some 1:144) to plastic models aimed more at modellers. The parts are much more fragile and it takes longer to fit all the parts, they also don't seem to take the paint quite so well. Looks like I have a few new tricks to learn.

How well do 1:72 tanks hold up during play, my greyhound feels like it will need careful handling to avoid breaking it. Or should I be mounting it on a base of some sort to give it a bit strength?

 

[HyperBunnyFreakOut]

Although my tanks don't really seem to need them, I have taken to mounting all of mine on extra bases left over from SST Marauders. Though once those run out I will probably switch to using spare GW extra large round bases. I prefer the Mongoose ones because they are nice and raised just like the bases all my infantry are on. Keeps everyone and everything equally raised up.

 

[Agis]

snip...The parts are much more fragile and it takes longer to fit all the parts, they also don't seem to take the paint quite so well. Looks like I have a few new tricks to learn.

How well do 1:72 tanks hold up during play, my greyhound feels like it will need careful handling to avoid breaking it. Or should I be mounting it on a base of some sort to give it a bit strength?

It depends...
Basing is definately a must for me.
I am always basing my gaming tanks.

The recommended fast build Italieri or Armourfast kits are quite sturdy, but basing is still necessary as far as I am concerned.
The shown IS-2 is a fast build Italieri one (you get actually 2 per pack!), with added AB minis and a plasticard base.

Plasticard has the benefit, that you can cut is in the shape you need.
If you go for round bases you end up with a lot of base areas that are not covered by the model.

 

[DM]

It depends...
Basing is definately a must for me.
I am always basing my gaming tanks.

I've been playing with 20mm and 15mm models for many, many years (30+) and I've never used bases for vehicles, nor seen the need to.

Swings and roundabouts I guess

 

[Murphy]

The recommended fast build Italieri or Armourfast kits are quite sturdy, but basing is still necessary as far as I am concerned.
The shown IS-2 is a fast build Italieri one (you get actually 2 per pack!),

I've been looking at the Armourfast and Italeri kits, the M3 Halftrack and Jeeps from Italeri combined with M10 tank destroyers and Shermans from Armourfast should allow me to build my army up in a relatively cheap manner. Although I might need to get some Germans first unless I can convince someone else from my regular gaming group to start collecting them.

I've been basing my infantry on 1 pence pieces (as recommended in Signs and Portent's) it's the cheapest way to give them a bit more weight to stop them falling over. The plasticard solution seems a good one for vehicles. The owner of my local model shop is beginning to recognise me....I'm not sure if that is good or bad

 

[Rabidchild]

I know what you mean Murphy, the difference in models feels drastic. I've recently ordered a couple AFVs from Sandsmodels.com as my first step into resin and they're quite nice. I'm starting to think that they're the way to go for old wargamers like you and me. No building or fragile parts. (I feel like my Greyhound is going to collapse if I look at it too hard!)

I'll second Agis' recommendation of the quick-build kits. (With the exception of the Armourfast T34-85 which is too big and thick.)

Any pictures of your forces?

 

[Murphy]

No pictures yet. I only bought the models at the weekend and a combination of work and two small children limits my model making time to an hour or two each evening, even at weekends.

I'll get the camera out at the weekend and give you an idea of where I'm up to.

 

[Agis]

I've been playing with 20mm and 15mm models for many, many years (30+) and I've never used bases for vehicles, nor seen the need to.
Swings and roundabouts I guess

For 15 or 20 mm wargaming minis there is certainly no real need (besides aesthetical reason) for basing.
But I understood the question targeted at 1/72 scale model kits used as gaming pieces. And here the added sturdiness of a bases is IMO most welcome.

But - all a matter of taste as you said! 8)

 

[Agis]

I've been basing my infantry on 1 pence pieces (as recommended in Signs and Portent's) it's the cheapest way to give them a bit more weight to stop them falling over. The plasticard solution seems a good one for vehicles.
The owner of my local model shop is beginning to recognise me....I'm not sure if that is good or bad

Coins as bases are IMO definately a very good way to stop the falling over... :wink:

Oh - and I know the "recognizing effect" too. It makes me worry. 8)

 

[Iain McGhee]

Most tanks and the fast-build kits are sturdy enough, but most wheeled kits (I'm thinking of my trucks and halftracks here) have relatively fragile wheel axles. I'd suggest using bases for those. I'm probably going to base my tracks too, so all my models are done the same way.

I've got quite a few resin kits now (mostly S&S) and they're far better for wargames use IMO, especially as they come with metal gun barrels and few parts.

 

[Murphy]

Any pictures of your forces?

The Greyhound (Italeri model) is now assembled, base coated, washed and dry brushed. I need to add the details next. 20 of the US infantry (Revell) is based up and base coated.

The Greyhound seems a bit more sturdy now its fully assembled. But I am having a bit of trouble with the infantry, the plastic is soft and bends. I've had a few issues with the undercoat flaking off the model as I try and paint the base coat on. Any suggestions?

I also dropped into my local model shop and picked up a box of German Infantry (Revell again) but couldn't find a Panzer III or IV to go with them. Looks like I will have to start asking the owner to order stuff for me, that won't help on with the whole "being recognised" thing

I've taken a couple of pictures, but now I can't find the cable to copy the pictures from my camara to my PC. I'll upload the pictures soon.

 

[Iain McGhee]

I'd suggest throwing away your Revell infantry

I'm only half joking, I had the same trouble with their German engineers. The Italeri plastics are much better detailed and use a harder plastic than the Revell ones (and all the others I've come across). Haven't had any problems with flaking paint or bent rifles.

 

[Agis]

Bendy plastic minis are a real pain in the aXX... :evil:
I used them, but in the long run they are not worth the effort.
If possible try 20mm metal minis, a bit more costy, but defiantely better ...

 

[Murphy]

Well, it's bit late now To be honest it was a case of buying was available in the shop at the time. I think they have some Italeri infantry in stock so I'll check for those next time I need infantry.

Now the basecoat is on the infantry they seem to be holding up a bit better. We'll soon find out when I start dry brushing!

 

[Rabidchild]

I'm no expert but I have seen some advice on 1/72 gaming sites. The only useful thing I remember right now was that several sites recommended coating the finished models in a thin layer of white glue after they're painted. Seems it's flexible enough to protect them and keep the paint where it belongs. Good luck to you!