Warlord Games General Historical Discussion

[buglips*the*goblin]

I'm a touch annoyed by the grenadier plastics, there's not enough equipment so troops are going to be short entrenching tools and gas mask canisters.  At first I thought this was because the starter set had fewer sprues (there are actually not enough parts, either bodies or equipment, to make the troops as illustrated in the starter guide) - but the main grenadier platoon box is just the same sprues in greater number.  This means that for every 6 bodies per sprue, there are only TWO entrenching tools per sprue.  I know by this stage there were supply issues, but I should think more than 1/3 of them ought to have common kit.  In any case, were my soldiers so unfortunate as to be cut off from their plastic supply train, this should be voluntary on my part and otherwise enough kit provided so that I might exercise my discretion to field a unit more particularly blessed by the angel of logistics.  (Shovels for EVERYONE!)

 

The British Infantry set, clearly older, had a separate equipment sprue - I liked that.  But my chief complaint with that set is that it's designed so that their entrenching tools (pickaxe and spade) are attached to the outside of the backpack - when it should be worn inside, between the backpack and the soldier's back.  I hollowed out some packs and cut the tool handles to fit properly, but it was a lot of needless work to get the King's army properly dressed when Warlord, being British themselves, ought to have done it right to start with.  

 

I mean, the sets aren't terrible and the cost isn't outrageous, they just seem beset by odd and unfortunate design choices that IMO limit their utility.  

 

 

[Glitterwolf]

10 hours ago, buglips*the*goblin said:

I'm a touch annoyed by the grenadier plastics, there's not enough equipment so troops are going to be short entrenching tools and gas mask canisters.  At first I thought this was because the starter set had fewer sprues (there are actually not enough parts, either bodies or equipment, to make the troops as illustrated in the starter guide) - but the main grenadier platoon box is just the same sprues in greater number.  This means that for every 6 bodies per sprue, there are only TWO entrenching tools per sprue.  I know by this stage there were supply issues, but I should think more than 1/3 of them ought to have common kit.  In any case, were my soldiers so unfortunate as to be cut off from their plastic supply train, this should be voluntary on my part and otherwise enough kit provided so that I might exercise my discretion to field a unit more particularly blessed by the angel of logistics.  (Shovels for EVERYONE!)

 

The British Infantry set, clearly older, had a separate equipment sprue - I liked that.  But my chief complaint with that set is that it's designed so that their entrenching tools (pickaxe and spade) are attached to the outside of the backpack - when it should be worn inside, between the backpack and the soldier's back.  I hollowed out some packs and cut the tool handles to fit properly, but it was a lot of needless work to get the King's army properly dressed when Warlord, being British themselves, ought to have done it right to start with.  

 

I mean, the sets aren't terrible and the cost isn't outrageous, they just seem beset by odd and unfortunate design choices that IMO limit their utility.  

 

 

 

I know it is threading into a grey area, but in this case I would use some Instant mold to create a few more canisters and tools.

If they would sell these separately I wouldn't consider this, but I think they just didn't include enough for the whole kit from what you say.

The quality will be less, but for tabletop purpose it might help.

 

Like I said, not a gamer but I have been looking at these to flesh out my Conquistadore Army in my Lost World.

They could fit in.

 

[lowlylowlycook]

@Glitterwolf, I've got that boxed set and it's a nice bit of kit.  I wonder how the weapon ratios would work for forces fighting outside of Europe.  

 

Then again, if I was up against a T-Rex I'd want the longest pike I could find.  

[Glitterwolf]

2 hours ago, lowlylowlycook said:

@Glitterwolf, I've got that boxed set and it's a nice bit of kit.  I wonder how the weapon ratios would work for forces fighting outside of Europe.  

 

Then again, if I was up against a T-Rex I'd want the longest pike I could find.  

 

Thx!

Since it's a Fantasy project I don't worry too much about historical accuracy, I try to use historical facts and names and all that, but in the end a pike or cannon more or less won't hurt much.

Unless you're on the receiving end of course..

[Rob Dean]

3 hours ago, lowlylowlycook said:

@Glitterwolf, I've got that boxed set and it's a nice bit of kit.  I wonder how the weapon ratios would work for forces fighting outside of Europe.  

 

Loosely speaking, forces outside Europe had fewer pikes proportionally. The conquest of Mexico was earlier in the period, so there were also a lot of sword and shield footmen among the historical Spanish. I suspect they would be at a disadvantage against a T-Rex....

[Lars Porsenna]

What was the issue with the Warlord Pz IV Exhaust? I went & looked at the pictures & the exhaust looks pretty typical for this tank. The bigger issue seems to be that, like a lot of historical models, it doesn't build into a quite accurate model of anything (the PSC Pz IVs in 15mm suffer from the same issue). The F version lacks the smoke  grenade mount on the hull rear, & the H version still has the split commander's hatch (one-piece hatches were incorporated in the late-G models), the turret would need to remove the side visors & the auxiliary turret face visor in order to make an accurate G or H, etc. I don't know if the instructions specify these differences, but usually wargamers just don't care enough about those details.

 

The Warlord StuG IIIG is, to be fair, an early G produced in early to mid '43, so lack of a saukopf isn't as much as an issue if you build it as it comes in the box (assuming of course accuracy is at all a concern for you). One note: the promo pictures show the MG shield up with an MG mounted. IIRC the shield could only be deployed when the loader hatches were open... there was a hook on the forward hatch that engaged the shield to act as a support to keep it up. I see a lot of models built that show this deployed but it could not stand up on its own... the hatches MUST be open to model accurately. FYI.

 

Damon.

[buglips*the*goblin]

53 minutes ago, Lars Porsenna said:

The Warlord StuG IIIG is, to be fair, an early G produced in early to mid '43, so lack of a saukopf isn't as much as an issue if you build it as it comes in the box (assuming of course accuracy is at all a concern for you).

 

I could perhaps clarify that I would like for it to be a later StuG that would allow for a saukopf.  This is more aesthetic than anything else, I just like the look better.  So I would prefer if Warlord made (or had in addition to the current StuG) a later variant.  That said, I wound up with this one as an unboxed cheap deal so I'm not too bent out of shape over it and if I'd been looking for one at full price instead of as an opportunity purchase then I would have looked around more.  

 

But, since I have you here, what distinguishes early from late StuG IIIgs?  They all pretty much look the same to me, so I don't know what the tells are.  

[buglips*the*goblin]

14 hours ago, Glitterwolf said:

I know it is threading into a grey area, but in this case I would use some Instant mold to create a few more canisters and tools.

 

That's more trouble than it's worth, really.  For now I just distribute the equipment more to fire support squads and let the assault squads travel light.  This seems the best present logical compromise.  Although now that I think on it, I believe the Sdkfz 251/10 sprue from the starter set has 2-3 leftover gas mask canisters that I could use.  

[Doug Sundseth]

I don't know for sure about the Germans, but gas mask canisters for most armies in WWII tended to suffer very high rates of combat damage (scratched paint, for instance) that resulted in their being left along the sides of roads.

 

Terrible loss, that. 

[buglips*the*goblin]

2 hours ago, Doug Sundseth said:

I don't know for sure about the Germans, but gas mask canisters for most armies in WWII tended to suffer very high rates of combat damage (scratched paint, for instance) that resulted in their being left along the sides of roads.

 

Terrible loss, that. 

 

But... but how are you supposed to carry your lunch?  

[Glitterwolf]

6 hours ago, buglips*the*goblin said:

 

But... but how are you supposed to carry your lunch?  

 

Lunch?

A good soldier lives on patriotism !

Now MARCH!

[Corsair]

7 hours ago, Glitterwolf said:

 

Lunch?

A good soldier lives on patriotism !

Now MARCH!

...and in @Glitterwolf's case, doggie treats.

[Lars Porsenna]

18 hours ago, buglips*the*goblin said:

 

But, since I have you here, what distinguishes early from late StuG IIIgs?  They all pretty much look the same to me, so I don't know what the tells are.  

 

StuGs, like any piece of WWII equipment, is a study of evolution.

 

The G model entered production in December 1942, though this kit is not that model (this very early G had the fighting compartment ventilator on the compartment roof, rather than the rear wall), so this would be a spring '43 production. Some of the features to look for include the smoke grenade launchers on the fighting compartment sides (which were discontinued in later production models, when they were replaced with an internal grenade launcher that could fire both close-in Apers grenades as well as smoke grenades IIRC). The external smoke grenade launchers tended to catch on fire when damaged in combat. The other distinguishing feature is what appears to be applique armor on the hull nose. Early Gs were produced with 50mm armor in these areas, just like the preceding F model. Bolt-on 30mm plates were added to make the frontal armor 80mm. Later production runs had the base armor built at 80mm. This model also is remarkable in that it lacks Zimmerit, which was added late summer '43 until September 1944. So out of the box it wouldn't be a vehicle produced later than around August 1943. 

 

Some other distinguishing features: the kit has skirt armor, which was not implemented until March 1943, so assuming this is not a rebuild, the vehicle would have to be a post-March '43 production. So it would ONLY be painted in Dark Yellow (No grey Gs with skirt armor...even if a rebuild this would have happened during an overhaul & would get a fresh coat of paint).

 

All of this IIRC. I'm working from memory. Tanks are my specific & particular interest. Ask me questions!

 

Another note: the block mantlet was kept in production till the end of the war. Late model Gs with the remote weapon station in the loaders position, travel lock & coaxial MG-34 had a hole drilled in the block mantlet for the coax. The block mantlet was available for both the StuG IIIG & the StuH 42.

 

I like the StuG IIIGs, but I like the StuG IV much better (I build 1/35 scale armor models; I have 3 StuG IVs & only one StuG IIIG, though I do have a StuG IIIF L/43 & a StuG IIIC rebuild with an L/48 that I haven't started yet). I'm ambivalent about WWII skirmish games because a lot of the figures are suspect (as some of the comments in this thread indicate). My pet peeve is German infantry without bread bags! A distinctive piece of kit for the German army, that is noticeable in its absence. Some companies sculpt them on, others don't. But admittedly I haven't been looking very hard recently.

 

Damon.

[buglips*the*goblin]

17 minutes ago, Lars Porsenna said:

I like the StuG IIIGs, but I like the StuG IV much better (I build 1/35 scale armor models; I have 3 StuG IVs & only one StuG IIIG, though I do have a StuG IIIF L/43 & a StuG IIIC rebuild with an L/48 that I haven't started yet). I'm ambivalent about WWII skirmish games because a lot of the figures are suspect (as some of the comments in this thread indicate). My pet peeve is German infantry without bread bags! A distinctive piece of kit for the German army, that is noticeable in its absence. Some companies sculpt them on, others don't. But admittedly I haven't been looking very hard recently.

 

I also like the StuG IV better, StuG IIIs came my way first in Flames of War (Open Fire Starter) and then this Bolt Action one that was a bagged deal (like $10, IIRC).  But prior to stumbling on them, I built Tamiya and Italeri StuG IVs in 1/35.  This may be why I'm partial to the Saukopf, actually.  

 

You may be happy to know that while the german grenadiers are short some equipment, they do seem to have their breadbags.  Which I guess also answers the earlier question about what to do about lunch.  

 

Thanks for the info on the StuGs.  I didn't choose the StuG Life, the StuG Life chose me.  

[SisterMaryNapalm]

4 hours ago, Lars Porsenna said:

Some other distinguishing features: the kit has skirt armor, which was not implemented until March 1943, so assuming this is not a rebuild, the vehicle would have to be a post-March '43 production. So it would ONLY be painted in Dark Yellow (No grey Gs with skirt armor...even if a rebuild this would have happened during an overhaul & would get a fresh coat of paint).

 

Oh yeah, the painting discussion. Wait a second ... wait a second ...

 

Here it comes:

 

 

They banned me from a German wargaming forum for being a heretic and painting my STUG in GRAY. And the reason for that is: I wanted to paint it in gray.

 

And every time I feel like I have to paint a tank in a color that suits my liking, I will do that again. I mean, in the end it is a game.

Edited April 16, 2019 by SisterMaryNapalm