Plastic Playing Pieces

[losttribe04]

Comment about legal issues:

A good friend of mine is a lawyer that specilizes in business / corperate law.  When I presented our case (pun intended) he said look at what the company Mad Catz does with Nintendo Wii, Microsoft X-Box 360 and Sony Playstation.

They simply make “tools” that work with those systems that the owning companies do not.  They don’t pretend to the official company they got there logo’s stamped all over their products.

He also said the same goes for aftermarket parts for vehicles.  He reminded me of what my company did this year.  My company wanted to buy fog light upgrades for 6 new Toyota Tundra’s we bought this year.  Toyota doesn’t make any such kit.  You get it from the factory with or without them.

We purchased aftermarket kits through a local Toyota dealer and they installed them.

Long post short:  You / we just can’t come across like we are the official Avalon Hill / WOTC / Harris Game Design groups.  We have to clearly state that we are (or Field Marshal Games in this case) is who they are and are not pretending to be another legal entity.

LT

[FieldMarshalGames]

@LT04:

Comment about legal issues:

A good friend of mine is a lawyer that specilizes in business / corperate law.  When I presented our case (pun intended) he said look at what the company Mad Catz does with Nintendo Wii, Microsoft X-Box 360 and Sony Playstation.

They simply make “tools” that work with those systems that the owning companies do not.  They don’t pretend to the official company they got there logo’s stamped all over their products.

He also said the same goes for aftermarket parts for vehicles.  He reminded me of what my company did this year.  My company wanted to buy fog light upgrades for 6 new Toyota Tundra’s we bought this year.  Toyota doesn’t make any such kit.  You get it from the factory with or without them.

We purchased aftermarket kits through a local Toyota dealer and they installed them.

Long post short:  You / we just can’t come across like we are the official Avalon Hill / WOTC / Harris Game Design groups.  We have to clearly state that we are (or Field Marshal Games in this case) is who they are and are not pretending to be another legal entity.

LT

Thanks for looking into this for us.  It was a big help.  Being “the little guy” I dont want to kill this company on one product.  I have also been advised that you can use the term “for (Enter product here)” and you are safe.

Also you can’t use any copyright LOGOs, art work etc…

My mind is being set at ease.  I am excited to get moving on this.

[Imperious Leader]

You have to state:

“This is not an authorized Axis and Allies expansion.”

And also don’t mention AA or any of its rules except very briefly.

Many official company’s make AA products for many years.

[Bob_A_Mickelson]

As for me the pieces i am most interested in and will pay for are the following  (all in AA50 Colors of course)
  Italy Navy/Air force/ Artillery
and these additional pieces for each country.
  Half tracks (mechanized infantry)
  Blockhouses (or some other shore defense unit)
  Troop Transport Plane (used for paratroopers, Bombers shouldn’t and didn’t carry paratroopers)

Other Notable pieces I would love to buy, but are perhaps slightly less marketable so you would probably produce in a smaller quantity
Soviet Navy
Nation specific allied destroyers and artillery
Technology Pieces like Jets, rockets, ect. (nation specific would be nice)
Blue French Pieces may not be a bad idea either, but perhaps you should poll this one first.

I would suggest that you sell the product in two sets.
Set #1 - Includes Italy Pieces (and any other sculpts you make for existing countries like new allied destroyers & artillery)
Set #2 - Expansion Pack for peoples own Creations which would include everything else you decide to make, presumibally the most commonly added pieces mentioned above as well as pieces for technology upgrades.

Your product will have the most market appeal if you create nation specific pieces in AA50 colors.

[tin_snips]

i still think set one should be re-casting the original pieces in a better quality, and bolstering the number of a few (i.e. italian navy). the whole point of this was because many people were not happy with the quality of the current pieces that came with the game

set two should consist of your pieces such as mechanised infantry, jet fighters, and so forth

[Adlertag]

I think there is a market for blue french pieces too, because there is some games out there, like The Struggle and The Wargame, and they dont come with french pieces. You have to purchase your pieces from other companies. So there are a market.

[Black Fox]

First I would like to thank the guys at Field Marshal for taking on this project.  Please count me in for one set.

Well I posted a list of units I would like to have.  It’s something that I created a while back so there are no Italians.  It is a wish list of course and I don’t expect to ever get all of these pieces.  In all reality I’d be lucky to get one of each type.  So I listed my favorite choices for each category on the top of each list.

Three units that I really would like to see are Mechanized Infantry (represented primarly by halftracks), Medium bombers and surface attack (Dive Bombers).  For easy of identification I would like medium bombers to be represented by 2 engine and heavy bombers be represented by 4 engines.  Last surface attack aircraft.  In other words, aircraft who’s primary role was to attack ground or naval units such as dive & torpedo bombers and attack aircraft.

One idea about making sculpture is that if there is already a suitable piece out there, just make a copy then modify a little so you don’t have to worry about copy rights.  Just a thought.

Once again, thanks for taking this on.

TANKS
Russians
T-34/76
T-34/85
German
Panzer 3J
Panther A&D
Tiger
British
Cromwell IV
Valentine Mk III
Churchill Mk VII
U.S.A
Sherman M4A1
Stuart M5
Japan
Shinhoto Chi Ha
Ha-Go Type 95

MECHANIZED INFANTRY (Primarily represented by halftracks)
Russians
SU-57
M-17
Germany
SdKfz 250/1 Alt
SdKfz 251/D1
British
Universal Carrier Mk IV
M5A1
U.S.A
M-3
Japan
Type 4 Ka-Tsu
Type 1 Ho-Ha

ARTILLERY
Russians
ZiS-2 57mm
ZiS-3 67.2mm
German
PAK 40 75mm
PAK 43 88 mm
British
6 Pounder 57 mm
BL 5.5
U.S.A
M-1 57mm
M-2 105 mm
Japan
Type 1 47 mm Anti-Tank Gun
Type 94 75 mm Mountain Gun

FIGHTERS
Russians
Yak-9T
IL-2
Germany
ME-109
FW-190
British
Spitfire
Hurricane
Fairey Firefly (Navy)
U.S.A
P-51D
P-47
P-40
P-38
F6F (Navy)
Japan
KI-44
Zero(Navy)

Dive/Torpedo/attack
Russians
Il-2 Shturmovik
Germany
Stuka
British
A-31 Vengeance
Hawker Typhoon
U.S.A
SBD Dauntless
Japan
Aichi DA3 Val

MEDIUM BOMBERS (represented by two engine bombers)
Russians
Petlyakov Pe-2
Tupolev Tu-2
Germany
Heinkel He 111
Dornier Do 217
Junkers Ju 88
Junkers Ju 87 Stuka
British
Vickers Wellington
Bristol Beaufort
U.S.A
B-25
A-26
Japan
GM4 Betty
Nell

HEAVY BOMBERS (represented by four engine bombers)
Russians
TB-3
Tu-4 (B-29)
Germany
Junkers Ju 290
Junkers Ju 390
British
Lancaster
Manchester
Halifax
U.S.A
B-17
B-24
B-29
Japan
Mitsubishi Ki-21 Sally
Nakajima G10N

BATTLESHIPS
Russians
Vanamoinen
Arkhangelsk
Germany
Bismark class
Sharnhorst
Lutzow
Graff Spee
British
Hood
King George V
Nelson
Prince of Wales
U.S.A
Iowa
South Dakota
Arizona
Japan
Yamato
Kongo
Nagato
Ise
Huso

CARRIERS
Germany
Graff Zeplin
British
Ark Royal
Eagle
Implacable
Victorious
U.S.A
Yorktown
Enterprise
Essex
Japan
Kaga
Akagi
Shokaku
Ryuzyo

CRUISERS
Russians
Kirov
Markarov
Krasnikakaz
Germany
Prinz Eugen
Nurnburg
Lepzig
Lutzow
British
Sussex
Ajax
Belfast
Southhampton
Cumberland
Suffolk
U.S.A
Portland
Atlanta
Cleavland
Baltimaore
Japan
Kako
Atago
Ahigara
Isuzu
Kuma

DESTROYERS
Russians
Opitni
Gromki
Lennengrad
Germany
Beitzen
Mowe
Narvik
Maass class
British
C-Class
Cambelltown
Cossack
Hotspur
Narvak
Hunt
U.S.A
Fletcher
Gearing
Allen Summers
Mahan
Gridley
Japan
Kagero
Asashio
Hubuki
Kuri

SUBMARINES
Russians
K-Class
P-Class
V-Class
Germany
U-boat Type VII
U-boat Type IX
British
S-Class
T-Class
U-Class
V-Class
U.S.A
Gato
Balao
S-Class
Pike
Japan
I-15
I-1
I-53

CARGO
Russians
Isar
Neva
Smolensk
Germany
Altmark class
Erwin Wassner
Weichsel
British
Bacchus
Reliant
Abbydale
U.S.A
Liberty
Victory
Japan
Kamikaw Maru

[Black Fox]

One other thought.  If it becomes too expensive to make all of these then I would concentrate on units that you can’t already get from the other A&A games.  Units such as mechanized infantry, cruisers and so on.  Also let’s say someone wants naval aircraft. (You only really need them for the US & Japan) Well you can simply add P-51 & KI-44 to represent land base aircraft.  But if you want to throw one in for the British you can give them a Fairey Firefly. Of if you want to add ground attack aircraft, you add one for every nation except Germany since they already have a Stuka.  Anyway, I’m sure you get the point.  I hope this helps.

[tin_snips]

@Black:

One other thought.  If it becomes too expensive to make all of these then I would concentrate on units that you can’t already get from the other A&A games.

i don’t agree. they need to be released in batches. first batch, standard units. focuse on the non-standard ones later. the only reason i state this again is because a large amount of people were dissatisfied with the quality of the pieces in AA50, and it isn’t possible to order replacements directly from the makers of the game to bolster the already low numbers for some nations

the first batch should just consist of the same amount of units for each nation, the number of each unit type voted upon. so, for examples sake, 20 infantry, 15 tanks, 15 fighters, and so forth in country-specific molds also voted upon

once this first batch is a success, and if there’s plenty sold so it’s worth FMG’s time and effort to make a second, then you can worry about your additional non-standard molds such as mechanised infantry. i think it’s fair to keep in mind that some people don’t own every game, or just don’t want to chop and change their other A&A’s to make up the unit count

[crsluggo]

@Black:

Germany
Lutzow
Graf Spee

It should be noted that these are sister ships. The Lutzow(originally Deutschland) was the first in the class of panzerschiff (armored ship). She was followed by the Scheer & the Graf Spee

[FieldMarshalGames]

These are all GREAT ideas!  We are going to boil them down to a set in a week or so after everyone has had their say.

Does anyone have any sculpts for these units?  (All sculpts/ models will be returned after production)

Thanks

[TG Moses VI]

I’m with tin_snips.  Making custom units like mechanized infantry and air transports would be a terrible mistake.  Factor in the chances of unlocking mechanized infantry and paratroopers guarantees these “extra” units will hardly see play.

Right now you want to go for the broadest market appeal, ie – people who want better looking A&A pieces for their core game.  Most players play with the original rules and don’t add extra units or rules to the game.

The most expensive part of making the pieces are the molds – not the plastic.  A lot of molds grantees a large startup price.

[Imperious Leader]

I think that list above is a bit too much. Financially just start with no more than perhaps 8-15 new molds

I think the game needs a bombed out factory to designate the fact that you got damaged Factories or for use on scorched earth rules.

New Italian BB and CA, bomber, artillery. keep the fighter as it is

so we are at 5 new sculpts

Now we need a halftrack piece and a truck piece for both axis and allied mech infantry

now at 7

give the japanese the kongo battleship (BB) and the Soviets its own artillery unit

we at 9

one new sculpt for jet fighters one axis ( me-262) one allied ( glouchester meteor) and a V-1 rocket for techs

12 total for first set. done.

[Black Fox]

It should be noted that these are sister ships. The Lutzow(originally Deutschland) was the first in the class of panzerschiff (armored ship). She was followed by the Scheer & the Graf Spee

C_Strabala
I’m aware of this.  I have Jane’s Fighting Ships of WWII.  Even though they are sister ship they all look different.  That’s why I listed them.

Making custom units like mechanized infantry and air transports would be a terrible mistake.

TG Moses VI
We all have our own ideas of what we like and not everyone is going to agree on the same thing.  If you have a disagreement with someone that’s fine but be nice about it.  But don’t insult me or others by calling their idea a “Terrible Mistake”.  Just because you post on here frequently doesn’t mean all of your idea’s are always correct or the most popular.  For the most part, everyone on this forum are nice people and respectful of one another, even when they disagree.  I would appreciate if you followed this lead.

Now my reason for wanting special units are because I want pieces that are difficult to find.  That will entice me to buy these.  If it’s just the same old pieces then I probably won’t buy it because I already have them.  The only exception to this is if the pieces are of high quality like the GHQ miniatures.  Then I will buy them.

Since FMG will be making them.  Ultimately the decision will be theirs.

[Black Fox]

I think that list above is a bit too much.

Well I did say it was a wish list.  No harm in shooting for the moon.  :-D

[Imperious Leader]

Lets give them practical suggestions. Pretend you had a budget only for 12 new molds. Decide and fill the obvious immediate problems and add a few other candidates. Dont be concerned with the actual pieces at this point ( Graf Spee, SU-155 etc).

The first batch has to have maximum success in order for other sets to follow. The molds cost thousands so they need the best choices and not wish lists.

just my suggestion.

[TG Moses VI]

Black_Fox

I do not apologize.  And I have a difficult time understanding where you’re coming from.

We all have our own ideas of what we like and not everyone is going to agree on the same thing.  If you have a disagreement with someone that’s fine but be nice about it.  But don’t insult me or others by calling their idea a “Terrible Mistake”.

Notice, in my original post, I never mentioned you by name.  I merely responded to what I saw as a terrible mistake.

I made a statement that relying too much on tech-based units is a very bad idea financially.  I stand by this.  A nation unlocking a specific tech which would require a new unit (paratroopers, mech inf, rockets, jet fighters) is not that common.  Not when compared to the out of box units which are already on the game board.  I would rather concentrate on these base units, which have the broadest market audience and appeal not just to specialist A&A players.  Think FMG’s Battle Dice.  Broad market appeal.

Just because you post on here frequently doesn’t mean all of your idea’s are always correct or the most popular.  For the most part, everyone on this forum are nice people and respectful of one another, even when they disagree.  I would appreciate if you followed this lead.

WTF are you getting this from?  I’m insulted you would even say this.  Awful.

[TG Moses VI]

As far as a wish list goes:

I believe a Nation by Nation release would work the best.  Think A&A Miniatures – not in size or scope, but in terms of episodic content and timetable.   Lets start with Italy.

Replace all of Italy’s units with original sculpts (10).  To relieve costs Italy and Germany should share the same mold for aircraft carrier, U-boat, fighter, and transport.  Neither Italy or Germany had fully a worthwhile carrier.  Italy and Germany shared similar looking fighters.  The U-boat is questionable – how different were Italy’s U-boats from Germany?  The transport has to be redesigned – it looks UGLY right now.

I believe recasting all units (in more detail, with better plastic, and slightly larger) would solve these problems which I initially outlined:

1.  A few/many of the pieces have visible defects.

2.  Some of the nation colors are eerily similar (Italy/Russia)

3.  Italy uses recycled pieces from other powers

4.  Japanese and Chinese infantry are visibly smaller

5.  Cruisers/destroyers/battleships all look alike sort of.

6.  The plastic used in the molds feels cheap

7.  The pieces are too small

8.  The detail of the pieces isn’t there compared to previous editions

9.  Only TWO cruisers for Italy.

10.  The plastic used is prone to deforming (think Japan’s bayonet infantry)

Edit:  Even if it’s historically inaccurate, I would like there to be a way to easily differentiate the carrier and destroyer.  Normally I say the destroyers have a stern, though Italy’s and Germany’s cruisers violate this principle.  Every newcomer to A&A:50 I have played with has this problem.

Edit2:  Oh and the Italian color should be GRAY.  Reflects their uniforms and they’re easier to tell apart from Russia.

[Black Fox]

Lets give them practical suggestions. Pretend you had a budget only for 12 new molds. Decide and fill the obvious immediate problems and add a few other candidates. Dont be concerned with the actual pieces at this point ( Graf Spee, SU-155 etc).

I here you IL.  My list is primarily for reference.  If I were considering making new units those would be my choices.  Maybe if FMG can give us some parameters as to what is feasible then I think it would help us provide more useful suggestion.  If 12 new units is the most they can do financially for now, then I can narrow my list and suggestions to their needs.

By the way, I agree with most of your list but why do you want the Kongo for the Japanese when they already have the Yamato?  Just curious.

Field Marshal,
If you do make ships, here are my suggestions.  For BB I would choose ships with 3 barrels per turret or 2 barrels but with 4 turrets.  For CA, 2 barrels per turret with 2 turrets at the bow and 1 at the stern.  For DD, 1 barrel per turret and 1 turret at the bow and one at the stern.  And of course make the sizes more distinct between one another.  I think these features will help make the ships more distinguishable from one another.  My ship list above are already set with these conditions.

Thanks

[Imperious Leader]

By the way, I agree with most of your list but why do you want the Kongo for the Japanese when they already have the Yamato?  Just curious.

The Japanese had 2 Yamato class BB’s, the other 16 or so Battleships looked like the quintessential 'pagoda" style ship typified by the Kongo class Battlecruiser. The Yamato was a poor choice and id give Japan two types of BB to use making the Yamato a “super-battleship”

I dont think all of the Italian pieces should be redone. Nothing wrong with the tank, destroyer or infantry. Italy did use some Me-109 designs so its not needed, but the BB, CA, SS, and Bomber and artillery should all be redone properly.

Keep the original colors as the game. most people wont be repainting them Grey. And you will now be forcing everybody to repaint the original pieces.