2023 Retrospective

2023 has been another relatively quiet year for me hobby-wise. I started the year with five goals

Have a good clear out of the random junk in the hobby cupboard.

This I achieved. I had a really good tidy-up in October, bought some new storage solutions, and offloaded some old bits and pieces.

The remaining objectives weren't met: I didn't play any non-FOW games, and didn't make any progress on my ALDG projects.

I played in three FOW tournaments during the year.

ValleyCon was 111pts Late War held in April. I painted a new army for it: a Soviet Rifle Regiment from Berlin: Soviet.

Rifle Regiment - Berlin: Soviet

Regiment HQ

Rifle Company (mid strength with panzerfaust and 1 x Maxim)

Storm Group (full strength with panzerfaust, Maxim and flamethrower)

82mm Mortar Company (6 x 82mm mortar)

120mm Mortar Company (3 x 120mm mortar)

Heavy Tank Killer Company (4 x 76mm gun)

Armoured Car Platoon (3 x BA-64, with 2 x PTRD)

M4 Sherman (76mm) Tank Company (5 x M4 Sherman (76mm)) 

IS-2 (Late) Guards Heavy Tank Company (4 x IS-2)

Unditiching Logs command card (IS-2)

Total Cost: 111 pts

The list was great. It was my first time playing Soviets in FOW since 1st Edition, and while you can argue that Careful troops aren't exactly the classic Soviet experience in FOW, it was still a nice change from Western lists. I won three games, drew two games, and finished tied for 4th place.

The second tournament was Panzerschreck, held in July. This year it was 140pt Late War doubles. I partnered with Bede again, running lists from Berlin: German. My half of the list was four 10.5cm FlaK39 railway cars, and a formation of Fallschirmjager from Fortress Europe. We tied for third out of 18, but lost the dice-off so finished in fourth place again.

The final event was Remember December. This was 60pts Mid War, book points, no Top Armour 2, and only one Support unit. I ran a British Rifle Company:

Rifle Company - North Africa

Company HQ

Rifle Platoon (full strenth)

Rifle Platoon (minimum strenth) 

Rifle Platoon (minimum strenth)

Mortar Platoon (4 x 3-inch mortars)

Anti-tank Platoon (3 x 6-pounders)

Universal Carrier Patrol (3 x Universal Carriers)

Universal Carrier Patrol (3 x Universal Carriers)

Valentine III Death or Glory Troop (3 x Valentine III)

Captured Tank command card (Rifle Company)

Cavalry Commander command card (Valentines)

Total Cost: 60 pts

I started pretty well with two wins, but fell apart in the final game. The Rifle Company played well- I definitely needed all of the infantry, but the Valentines weren't quite as tough as I'd hoped they'd be. The Captured Tank card was a bit of fun: I managed to capture an AB41 in Game 1 and a Stuart in Game 3.

I've continued writing for No Dice No Glory, but my output slowed during the year due to work pressures:

• An overview of Berlin: Soviet
• An article on my Canadian Rifles list from ValleyCon 2022
• A review of the Battlefront Sexton/Ram kit
• A piece on assembling the Battlefront 10.5cm railway car

For 2024, I'm going to keep over a couple of the goals from 2023.

1. I want to paint my ECW Royalists for ADLG-R.
2. I want to play two rulesets that aren't FOW.

FOW has a couple of new things coming out this year, with "Late War Leviathans" adding prototype and 1946 tanks to the game, followed by "Clash of Steel" as an alt-history spinoff. The models look cool, but I'm not sure how much interest there will be locally. 

Tournament-wise, ValleyCon is likely to be Mid War FOW this year, so I'll be looking to put together a new army for that. I can't play at Panzerschreck this year, but hopefully I can make an appearance at Call To Arms in August instead.

ValleyCon 2020 Thoughts

As usual, the gaming year began with ValleyCon earlier this month. I played Team Yankee, which was 100pts on 8x4 tables using the 2nd Edition rules.

I was originally planning on runnings Syrians using the lists in 'Oil War', and started repainting my T-72s for this purpose. The thinking here was that Soviet T-72s aren't a particularly strong choice relative to later books. In the end, the Syrian force was too large a challenge in the time I had available, so I painted up my remaining T-64s and went with Soviets instead.

My final list was:

T-64 Tank Battalion - Red Thunder

Battalion HQ - 1 x T-64, 6pts

T-64 Company - 3 x T-64, 13pts

T-64 Company - 3 x T-64, 13pts

T-64 Company - 3 x T-64, 13pts

BMP-1 Motor Rifle Company - Medium size plus SA-14 Gremlin, 15pts

BMP-2 Recon Platoon - 3 x BMP-2 Scout, 5pts

SA-13 Gopher Platoon - 2 x Gopher, 2pts

Shilka AA Platoon - 4 x Shilka, 4pts

2S1 Carnation SP Howitzer Battery - 6 x 2S1 Carnation, 10pts

Hail Rocket Launcher Battery - 6 x BM-21 Hail, 8pts

BMP-1 Observation Post, 1pt

Hind Helicopter Company - 4 x Hind, 10pts

Total Cost: 100 pts

The thinking behind this list was:

• I only have ten T-64s in my collection, and running them in three groups of three saves 5pts relative to having two larger units. 
• The Shilkas are a must have, and I went with Gophers over Gaskins due to the extra range being of use on the wider table.
• 2nd Edition gives a big bump to the effectiveness of artillery, so I decided to maximise this by taking both Carnations and Hails, plus the observer.
• I have found minimum sized infantry units to be too small in the past, so have gone up a size. The Gremlin was a cheap addition to further boost my AA cover.
• The BMP-2 scouts are extra AT-21, plus Spearhead for the few missions that can use it.
• The big unit of Hinds was to provide an alternative to having to punch through the front of high armour targets.

In the end I placed second, with three 7-2 wins, a 2-7 loss, and a 2-3 time-out (after about 10 turns, so you can't accuse either of us of trying to play for a draw). There were a number of thoughts coming out of the event.

The standard of painting was very high across the board, making it one of the best looking competitions I can remember playing in.

This was the first Soviet build that I felt has worked for me. Largely this is because T-64s are good. Very good. That extra point of front armour, plus the 14" tactical move, makes them far superior to the Soviet T-72, and the three platoons of three definitely felt better than two larger platoons. The biggest problem I had was when I ran into McBeth's Stillbrew Chieftains - the 7-2 loss. Front 18 at range is tough for AT22 to crack. Ten tanks vs eight, but harder to hit and firing twice as many dice in return. That's a matchup that I'm going to need to rethink, even more so as we start to see Front 20 Challengers make an appearance.

I think the behaviour of NATO tanks (with the exception of the Chieftain) is something that TY gets wrong. It doesn't seem right for M1s and Leopards to be encouraged to knife-fight, but that's exactly what ROF 2/2 does.

I had too much artillery. Over the weekend they killed:

• a platoon of Fliegerfaust (both batteries repeating on them for a couple of turns), 
• a couple of Sheridans (Carnations with lucky armour saves), 
• a platoon of T-64s (shotgunned in the back by the Carnations arriving from Reserve)
• a landed Blackhawk (Hails), and 
• a few infantry teams caught in the open (Hails). 

It wasn't a significant benefit for the 19pt investment. Carnations were more useful, and I would look to keep them at full strength and drop the Hails. The new artillery rules make them scary, but it was the wrong mix for my list.

Getting the right quantity and mix of air defence is tricky. I had 7pts of it, and it simply wasn't enough in the two games where I ran into aircraft. This particularly relates to my final game against Pooch. He had brought 34pts of air: four A10s and four Cobras, and my air defence just didn't faze him. This was underscored late in the game when, hunting a company break, he rolled his A10s directly at my Gophers and GAUed them out of existence without even being scratched. I had benefitted in the same way in earlier games, ending up not too worried about Humvee Stingers, and I was even okay against Pooch's VADS, which I managed to get running from left to right throughout the game, minimising their shots and keeping rolling saves for my Hinds. It all came apart when they finally got 28 shots off in a turn, but it highlighted two problems: the short range of gun AA (which was a major factor on our 8x4 tables), and the number of dice you need to be rolling to make FP5+ AA effective. Playing the same format again, I would probably look to move another six points into AA: two more Gophers and a pair of Geckos, funded by dropping the Hails. It's 13pts that is wasted if my opponent doesn't bring air, but it's better than feeling helpless in the few games where they do.

So, here would be my revised list based on the experience of the weekend:

T-64 Tank Battalion - Red Thunder

Battalion HQ - 1 x T-64, 6pts

T-64 Company - 3 x T-64, 13pts

T-64 Company - 3 x T-64, 13pts

T-64 Company - 3 x T-64, 13pts

BMP-1 Motor Rifle Company - Medium size plus SA-14 Gremlin, 15pts

BMP-2 Recon Platoon - 4 x BMP-2 Scout, 6pts

SA-13 Gopher Platoon - 4 x Gopher, 4pts

Shilka AA Platoon - 4 x Shilka, 4pts

2S1 Carnation SP Howitzer Battery - 6 x 2S1 Carnation, 10pts

BMP-1 Observation Post, 1pt

SA-8 Gecko Platoon - 2 x Gecko, 4pts

Hind Helicopter Company - 4 x Hind, 10pts

Total Cost: 100 pts

It’s largely similar, reflecting how well I think it performed overall. I haven't really resolved the high Front Armour problem yet, with the temptation being to chuck in a platoon of Storms, but that's not a huge gain: two or three dice at 4s or 5s to hit, with Firepower 3+, so you would still be lucky to kill one tank a turn, and they're easily hit in return. And I would also like a few more T-64s, maybe upping the platoons to four tanks each, but that's 18pts that I simply don't think I can spare - everything else has an important role to play.

Next week is the end of January, so I will post an update about how I am progressing with my goals for the year.

Remember December

On Saturday we had the club's annual Remember December event. This year it was Team Yankee, based on a 45pt Firestorm Red Thunder campaign. I ran Afgantsy, which was a change of plan from my original East German intentions.

Air Assault Battalion - Red Thunder

Battalion HQ - 1 x AK-74 team

Air Assault Company - Minimum size plus AGS-17 and AT-4 Spigot

Air Assault Company - Minimum size plus SA-14 Gremlin and AT-4 Spigot

Hind Assault Helicopter Company - 2 x Hind

Hind Assault Helicopter Company - 2 x Hind

T-64 Tank Platoon - 3 x T-64

Shilka Platoon - 2 x Shilka

BMP-1 Recon Platoon - 3 x BMP-1 Scout

The thinking here was that the infantry is really good, with Spigots and plenty of RPGs for dealing with light armour spam, T-64s are really good, the Shilkas are needed to protect the T-64s, and the Hinds are a potential game-winner. On the whole, I thought it was a pretty decent list.

The List

I won't subject you to a blow-by-blow account of the day, but it didn't go well for me. I was run over by LAVs in a Free For All in game one, had to attack Dutch YPRs and Leo 2s in a failed Counterattack in game two, and was unable to hold off a very well-executed attack by West German Marders and Leo 2s in a No Retreat for game three.

The Afgantsy come under fire from a Spectre

I still think the list was good. In the first game I struggled with rallying the infantry (on 2s and 3s), which crippled my AT-4s, and the rest of my infantry had too short a range to avoid being shot to pieces by the LAVs. 

In the second game I failed to concentrate my attack on one objective. The Dutch didn’t have huge numbers on the board, and their reserves were coming on from miles away, so I should have been able to use my infantry to overrun the objective while my armour watched their back. 

The third game was the one my list was designed to play, but my opponent exploited a flaw in my deployment and slipped a platoon each of Leopards and Panzergrenadiers down the flank and onto the back objective. I was annoyed at my stupidity, as this was absolutely a game that I should have won, but on reflection it showed exactly what is so good about 45pts on a 6x4: you simply couldn't pull that kind of attack off against the density of units that you get at 100pts.

The top Warsaw Pact list was ten T-64s, which I did not expect. The first few times I played TY, helicopters dominated tanks because we didn't have any air defence units. Here, it was a brilliant play to the meta: 45pt red-vs-blue games, and NATO helicopters are expensive. And it paid off, with only one NATO list having a pair of Cobras.

In terms of list breakdown, we had a really good variety:

• 1 x Afgantsy battalion
• 2 x T-64 battalions
• 1 x BMP-2 battalion
• 1 x Soviet T-72 battalion
• 1 x Polish T-72M battalion
• 1 x West German Leopard 2 company
• 1 x West German Marder company
• 1 x Dutch YPR company
• 1 x Marine M60 company
• 1 x Marine LAV company
• 1 x British Mech company (the competition winner)

No M1s or Leopard 1s. No French, Canadians, Australians, East Germans, or Czechs. No strike aircraft.

The Firestorm format worked really well, and it's something that I hope we will use again for both TY and FOW. A huge thanks to Pelarel from The Regiment for pulling it together. A possible refinement might be giving the sides a choice about what posture each of their lists should take, rather than attack/defence being decided by random draw. The aim would be to get a bit more teamwork going into building lists, planning the strategic element, and picking matchups.

Next week: I look ahead to summer painting plans. I have some reflection I need to do about where to next with TY, but that will be a post for later in the summer.

Thoughts on the Warsaw Pact lists for Team Yankee

Now that the new Czech and Polish lists have been published for Team Yankee, I thought I would take a look through the four Warsaw Pact nationalities that are now available. On the surface they are all very similar, but there are some differences that will affect the way they play on the table.

Infantry

The easiest comparison between the lists is on a BMP1 company, being an option in all four . All four nations have the same unit structure and a To Hit stat of 3+. All have a different combination of skill/motivation stats, and there are a couple of minor weapons stat differences as well.

Warsaw Pact Infantry Unit Stats

	Soviet	East German	Czechoslovak	Polish
Courage	4+	4+	5+	3+
Morale	3+	3+	4+	4+
Rally	3+	4+	5+	3+
Skill	5+	4+	4+	4+
Assault	5+	5+	5+	5+
Counterattack	3+	4+	5+	3+
Weapons Difference	FP5+ AK-74 teams	-	-	FP 5+ AKM teams, No RPG-18s or AGS-17
Mid Size Price	14pts	14pts	10pts	16pts

To summarise what this means on the table, we have:

• Soviets: hard to break, rally easily, good at clearing out entrenched infantry due to their ROF3 FP5+ AK teams and good counterattack rating, but poor at skill-based orders.
• East Germans: hard to break, but otherwise average.
• Czechs: poor in assaults, don't rally well, but are significantly cheaper.
• Poles: Aggressive due to passing Follow Me orders on a 3+ and having FP 5+. Hard to keep pinned, reasonable in assaults, but expensive and lacking the AT14 RPGs and AGS-17 grenade launchers of the other nations.

In all cases, you need numbers due to the poor To Hit and Assault ratings. A minimum sized company only gives you four teams with Assault 5, and the rest either Assault 6 or Heavy Weapons teams. Full size companies seem quite unwieldy, particularly as they result in units of  12 BMPs running around, so the mid-size two platoon option seems optimal.

Looking at the transport for the infantry companies, the Soviets are the only nation that can take a battalion of BMP2. The others get the option of a company of BMP2s as part of a BMP1 battalion. The Soviets also have the most flexibility for transporting the infantry supporting their tank battalions.

Warsaw Pact Tank Battalion Infantry Support

	Soviet	East German	Czechoslovak	Polish
T-64	Any	-	-	-
T-72/T-72M	Any	BMP1	BMP1/BMP2	BMP1/BMP2
T-55	-	BTR	BTR/OT-64	BTR/OT-64
T-62M	Any	-	-	-

My favourite infantry option is still the Afgantsy, with Assault 4+ and a consistent 3+ across all motivation stats. If running a BMP company, the choice between nations will be influenced by game size: I would only run Czechs in larger games where I can make the most of their lower price, while probably favouring the Soviets in smaller games due to their Firepower and motivation.


Still the best Warsaw Pact infantry, limited only by Formation size

Tanks
A major difference between the Soviet and other lists is the tank technology. The Soviets have the better equipment, while the others have the lower-quality T-72M and T-55AM2. This has changed slightly with the release of T-62M cards, giving the Soviets a cheaper option (six for the price of four T-72, or seven for the price of four T-64). It's an interesting call: a few extra dice that are almost as effective as those of the more expensive tanks, but vulnerable to AT19. I'm not yet sure what my opinion on it is.

Warsaw Pact Tank Stats

	T-64	T-72	T-72M	T-55	T-62M
Front	17	16	15	14	14
Side	9	8	8	9	9
Top	2	2	2	2	2
AT	22	22	21	17	21
Tactical	14"	10"	10"	10"	10"
Terrain Dash	16"	16"	16"	14"	14"
Crosscountry Dash	24"	24"	24"	20"	20"
Cross	3+	3+	3+	4+	4+
HEAT Protection	BDD Armour	BDD Armour	Bazooka Skirts	Bazooka Skirts	Bazooka Skirts
Point of Difference	Advanced Stabiliser, Brutal	Brutal	Brutal	Slow Firing	No Stabiliser
Optional Extra	AT-8 Songster	-	-	-	AT-10 Stabber

The T-64 is much more effective while only being slightly more expensive than the T-72, so would be my preference for Soviet lists. I haven't used them, but on paper I don't rate the T-55. Sure you can get huge numbers, but unless your fighting Leopard 1s or AMX-30s, they need to get into the flanks to do any damage, and Slow Firing really hampers them there. My pick of the bunch is probably the Volksarmee T-72M for the overall package of armour, gun, price, and motivation stats.

A good all-round performer, at three for 7pts, then 4pts each.

Support

The Soviets have the most complete range of support, with the Storm, Acacia, and BMP2 scouts, plus the option of having tank and infantry companies as support units. The East Germans are hardest done by, not having the Gecko or Acacia due to the order of product releases, despite having used both.

The support unit most obviously missing is the towed mortar battery of eight 120mm tubes that each Motor Rifle Battalion included. For some inexplicable reason Team Yankee occurs in a universe where mortars do not exist unless they're bolted to an M113. This lack of cheap and historically plentiful indirect fire support is a fundamental flaw in the lists.

Looking at the artillery options that they do have, all of the lists have access to a regimental battery of 2S1 Carnations, plus support from a battery of heavy artillery (except the poor East Germans), and a battery of rocket launchers.

Warsaw Pact Artillery Stats

	2S1 Carnation	2S3 Acacia	DANA	BM-21 Hail	RM-70
Front	2	2	1	-	1
Side	1	1	1	-	1
Top	1	1	1	-	0
Artillery AT	4	4	4	3	3
Artillery FP	3+	2+	2+	4+	4+
Direct Range	24"	16"	24"	-	-
Direct AT	21	14	14	-	-
Direct FP	2+	1+	1+	-	-
Point of Difference	No AA MG	Optional Krasnopol	Autoloader	Salvo template, No AA MG	Salvo template

In the small 45pt games we are playing a the moment, I wouldn't take any of these. Dual-purpose everything is absolutely the name of the game there, and artillery is too specialized and sinks too many points to be viable. Far better to take an extra tank or two. I've tried a trio of Carnations in a small game before, but I lost them to infantry due to their lack of a self-defence MG. At 80pts I would look to take a full battery of six of something. Infantry hasn't been a huge part of the local meta so far, but it will come, and at that point I'll need to consider whether a second battery can be justified.

The most intriguing artillery option is the DANA. The Autoloader rule gives them a -1 to hit, which, combined with Skill 4, FP2+, and a further -1 for being in a unit of six, makes them a great antidote to Milan spam: veterans are being hit on 2s, at best 3s if they are gone to ground. The DANA's performance will be even better, edging ahead of the French AuF1 and British eight-gun M109 batteries, with the expected changes for next year's 2nd Edition. Rocket batteries will also become better, and it will be an interesting decision between a 10" template with FP4+, or a 6" template with FP 2+. Compared to how ineffective I see it as being now, artillery will become a thing to fear and will jump up the list of priority targets to be second only to air defence assets.

Arguably the best artillery in the game

For anti-aircraft, the Gecko is potent at ROF 3 and FP 3+, but with the advent of the French 'Gun Slinger' Gazelle they're terribly vulnerable, and the points are probably better spent on twice the number of Gophers.

Gun Slinger: Shoots before AA.

All of the other support options are pretty similar: Hinds, Frogfeet, Spandrels, and BMP1 or BRDM scouts, with the same variations in skill and motivation as discussed earlier. It would have been nice for the other nations to have the option of MiG23s or SU22s rather than being limited to Soviet SU-25s, but that's really just cosmetic. The only really differences would be worse save and a slightly less effective cannon, for a small points break.

Summary

I couldn't quite understand why the internet seemed so keen on more Warsaw Pact lists, given how similar the equipment was going to be. But now that the books are out, I appreciate the new models that have come with them, and the way that we have been given variety in the unit stats to create a number of distinct choices:

• Do I want the better tech options? Then I have to go with the Soviets.
• Do I want to build a list around the most effective (and best looking) artillery piece? It's a choice between the Czechs and Poles.
• Do I want to pay a premium for an aggressive list? Then it's the Poles.
• Do I want numbers, on the understanding that they won't hang around once they start to take damage? That would be the Czechs.
• Or if I am happy with middle of the road stats and prices, at the cost of a reduced variety of units to choose from, then it's East Germans.

I can seriously see myself playing lists from all of these nations from time to time. I definitely plan to get a couple of boxes of DANAs in the near future, but don't think I'll go down the path of T-55s, T-62s, or BTRs. A little way further over the horizon is 2nd Edition, which is likely to move the timeline along and open up an even wider range of options than we currently have, and I am looking forward to that.

More Soviets for Team Yankee

This week I managed to paint a set of Soviet Motor Rifle heavy weapons for Team Yankee. This was the new plastic set, of one AGS-17 team and two AT-4 Spigot teams. I was a little disappointed when I first saw the figures - my first experience of Battlefront's plastic infantry - but they grew on me and were pretty good to paint. I'd be quite happy buying more of them.

AGS-17 team.  At a truly ridiculous ROF 9.

AT-4 Spigot team. AT 19, ROF 3.

I have now completed a full Motor Rifle Company including heavy weapons The Spigots are not an option in the BMP companies, only the BTR company which I have no intention of doing. They will however find a use when running Afgantsy, and to this end I'll pick up another Gremlin team and an AGS-17 team for running two minimum sized companies in small games.

The other painting I did this week were three Spandrels. These came out of watching a game last week where the Soviets were trying to fend off about a million LAVs. It was a useful reminder that you can spend a lot of effort focusing on how to deal with the M1s and Leopard 2s, but there will be games where it's the volume, rather than quality, of shots that matters. You don't get that from T-72s. And so, three AT21 shots for 2pts seems like a good start.

The Battlefront model is a good resin and metal kit, crisp and nicely detailed, including suspension in the wheel wells where no one will ever see it.

The plan for this week is to paint up the BRDM-2s I had originally planned for this week (another strand in my "get more shots" plan), plus a couple of Hinds. Because you always need more Hinds.

Battlefront Mi-24 Hind

I had intended to do a build review of the Battlefront Hind, but there are lots of reviews and how tos out there so there's not really any point. To summarise my impressions of the kit, the model on the whole is pretty good. It goes together nicely, looks like a Hind, and is pretty impressive on the table. The join between the two fuselage halves follows the canopy framing rather than just running straight through the middle of the front windows, which shows someone put some thought into how it goes together. It hints at the characteristic twist in the Hind's fuselage without actually capturing it - undecided about this but it is probably a good decision for a game piece in this scale.

I was worried about the main rotors breaking, given their 170mm diameter, but there have been no problems so far. The blades come in three pieces, with a nicely detailed hub and three blades cast as one large piece, and two individual blades to attach and make up the five. Poly cement has done a good job of welding the blades together, but I used superglue for the mast as I didn't want to risk softening it. So far everything is holding together nicely.

As far as problems go, the tail rotor appears to have been cast backwards: on the original it rotates clockwise, but on the BF model it is set up for rotation in the opposite direction.

One of the red star decals delaminated slightly as I applied it - not a tear as the transfer was still intact, but part of the red printing seemed to come off. I was able to push it back into the right place with a brush and don't expect any further problems with them now the model is vanished.

The decals for the tail boom have misspelt  the warning "ONACHO" as "ONAOHO", and the decal for the starboard side has the lettering reversed. I have ended up painting them on by hand.

On the table, they are large beasts. It is difficult maintaining a 6" command distance without the visual distraction of having rotors overlapping. If I were to expand to a unit of four, I would vary the height of the flight stands for variety, with the added bonus being that they will be able to maintain command distance without looking ridiculous. In theory it would be possible to put a couple in line abreast and up to 16" apart, however while they would be In Command, there are a number of rules that have a 6" range, looking particularly at Good Spirits, Movement Orders and Replacing Leaders, so these won't apply even though you are In Command. I note that the equivalent rules in V4 refer to teams being In Command, rather than within 6", so would expect TY to be updated to match at some point. For the meantime, I'm happy with my two, and I'm looking forward to hunting more Abrams with them in the near future.

Mi-24 Hind for Team Yankee

I'll post some more detailed thoughts over the weekend, but for now this is just a couple of quick photos of my first Hind, as I'm relieved to have finally finished it. Suffice it to say that, having spent a week's worth of evenings painting a single helicopter, I don't see a VDV list in my future.

Of course I still need to do one more to complete a minimum-sized unit, but I have a few T-72s that I will be working on before I attempt another one of these.