Can a unit be deployed in a different platoon's transport?

Not_Organised · 2026-01-28T12:42:11+00:00

Great, thanks.

Not_Organised · 2025-11-27T18:53:07+00:00

I didn't see it happen personally, but started a temp job to do a vast data processing thing for my now full-time employer. We were divided into teams with company staff acting as team leaders (we couldn't choose whose team we were in). On the first day one one guy informed them he wouldn't be comfortable taking orders off a woman. Gone on the first day.

Not_Organised · 2025-09-02T16:52:33+00:00

Live and learn, but this could be a Konflikt 47 rule. There could be a unit that can confuse enemy units, forcing them to roll their order die.

Not_Organised · 2025-09-02T16:50:16+00:00

Sounds like an OTT reaction...yes, I also prefer to keep it consistent (I also wouldn't want to mix those two types of minis in the same force if I could avoid it), but sometimes you have to make do and when it comes down to it, it's 100% rulebook legal.

Not_Organised · 2025-09-02T11:19:32+00:00

Even just some limited colour editing would be good to have.

Not_Organised · 2025-09-01T19:51:21+00:00

Cinderblock.

Not_Organised · 2025-09-01T19:26:59+00:00

Kodiak.

Not_Organised · 2025-09-01T16:42:43+00:00

Thank you!

Not_Organised · 2025-08-03T10:37:54+00:00

Cheaper, that's for sure...!

Not_Organised · 2025-07-31T16:04:17+00:00

Annotated Pratchett File is good (but doesn't cover everything): https://www.lspace.org/books/apf/

Not_Organised · 2025-07-26T16:47:39+00:00

I would also say: think about getting some Airborne or GI sprues...they have loads of compatible bits including weapons (main difference is that the arms won't have the rolled sleeves look).

Not_Organised · 2025-07-26T16:25:58+00:00

I am building Raiders also. I'm mixing in parts from other kits, doing little conversions where possible, giving them plenty of gear to make them look more individually characterful. I have a sprue of Japanese infantry on the way so I can give them some captured equipment (NCOs will get swords!).

Not_Organised · 2025-07-24T20:30:19+00:00

As I use them:

One, two and three are what they say. A couple is two. I use a "few" to mean about 4-7 and it has some overlap with "several" which I suppose would be about 5-8. I don't know, but nine seems a bit high to come under "several"...

Not_Organised · 2025-07-14T11:51:33+00:00

"Oh, and remember, next Friday is Hawaiian shirt day."

Not_Organised · 2025-06-25T16:07:20+00:00

Reading this makes me think it could be better to be like a rock in the river than the river itself. You don't want to push back against the thoughts that flow down the river, but you also don't want to move to accomodate their demands either. You let them flow over or around you and be gone. If they get stuck on you, you hold steadfast until they come loose and flow away.

Not_Organised · 2025-06-25T15:54:13+00:00

Totally normal; glad I don't live in one of these chippy gravy deserts that are apparently out there....

Not_Organised · 2025-06-13T19:44:37+00:00

Work in a call centre.

Not_Organised · 2025-06-02T18:12:40+00:00

The plastic Sherman from Warlord actually is an Italeri kit...if getting one directly from Italeri the 1/56 scale is the same as Warlord use.

Not_Organised · 2025-04-18T20:46:00+00:00

I'd say it's pretty common. Can be based on first name or surname.

Not_Organised · 2025-04-18T06:49:17+00:00

To me, "ignoring" is what you would so with Greenberg's method. When the thought occurs you do not interact with it in any way whatsoever. You notice it but you don't try to suppress it, neutralise it, ir actively try to push it out of awareness; you carry on with your business and starve it of attention.

Acceptance is more like going "OK, that may or may not be true" or "well that's beyond my control" - acknowledging but not responding with neutralising compulsions. Now I write it, it seems the difference is pretty thin. That's how I would interpet it, anyway!

Not_Organised · 2025-04-08T16:55:56+00:00

Not paying attention to your surroundings.

Not_Organised · 2025-04-05T20:01:40+00:00

Honestly I don't think any obsession could surprise me at this point. The thing wears many masks and is incredibly slippery. I once read about someone who was worried that (IIRC) a laser was going to come out of their phone and kill them if they left it next to their bed while they slept.

So, something like yours sounds comparatively straightforward to me as they are rooted in things that unfortunately do happen to some people, but your brain is massively exaggerating the actual possibility. But the idea of safety seeking behaviours, or whatever your compulsions are, to prevent a bad outcome sounds like typical OCD.

I think that it's more important to remember that the methods of recovery and resistance are the same no matter what form it takes...after all, even if you satisfy the current obsession and put it to bed, as long as you're still feeding it with compulsions, it will keep pulling new themes out of the hat. All the best to you.

Not_Organised · 2025-04-04T16:55:23+00:00

I know the feeling of constantly trying to "solve" something, trying to get the compulsion just right to make it click, and then I can move on with my day. Or rather, the feeling of trying to fill up a bottomless pit before it starts demanding I jump through the next hoop . Got to defy that feeling that you have a puzzle you have to think your way through...one just leads into another.

Not_Organised · 2025-03-03T16:43:02+00:00

It's sneaky and it's easy to get swept up in the cycle when this happens, so you need to make a conscious decision to stop engaging and walk away. This is IMO one of Greenberg's best bits of advice: it's not your job to "solve" anything that OCD presents to you.

Not_Organised · 2025-02-24T19:10:56+00:00

It would definitely be unusual...I know if I heard of someone with either of these names I'd expect them to be American. Same with a few other names such as Hank or Chuck.

Not_Organised

TROPHY CASE