Just to add an extra comment here: I’m not sure I’m understanding the original question correctly, but if it means “what is the footprint (length x width) of every sculpt in the game?” my reaction would be that this information a) would take a lot of work to compile and b) is unnecessary for designing a custom map. To make sure that a custom map is large enough, all that’s really needed are three measurements: the dimensions of the Anniversary game board, the dimensions of the largest naval sculpt in the game (which is probably either the Japanese battleship or the American aircraft carrier), and the dimensions of the largest sculpt in the game which can be positioned on a land territory (which I think would be the American B-17 bomber). If custom map’s sea and land territories are big enough to handle those large sculpts, then they’ll be big enough to handle the smaller ones.
Plastic Playing Pieces
-
MY list:
Fortification unit ( like a blockhouse but rather a nice roundish concrete thing with a narrow slit and a gun sticking out
General unit: Not a figure, but a new building structure ( like wolfs lair) with a flag that players can use to stick the flag above. its really a HQ unit
Bombed out factory to denote damaged factories
Replacement Italian pieces that were messed up from AA50: Bomber, BB, CA, Artillery
Soviet Artillery ( katyuska?)
Mechanized Infantry ( just 2 sculpts)
V-1 Rockets
Heavy bomber?
New sub for Germany and Italy.
new fighter-bomber plane in 4 new sculpts, except don’t need German or American ( already have stuka and P-38)
generic airborne infantry ( 2 sculpts)
not sure about transport plane
thats already like 17 new pieces.
-
@Imperious:
new fighter-bomber plane in 4 new sculpts, except don’t need German or American ( already have stuka and P-38)
so just make a mold from these existing pieces?
-
IL
Earlier FMG said he was planning on making the following units.
So far I think these should be:
a) The Truck or Half track unit
b) The bunker unit
c) The commander unit
d) The Rocket unit (Maybe… I just think it is cool)
e) Transport Plane
f) Other…Huh (we will all figure this out)Letter “C” says “The Command Unit”. This is what I was asking about. I know what a bunker unit is but not a commander unit.
Personally though, I think bunkers are worthless. Look how much time and money Germany spent building the Atlantic wall. And how long did it hold off the allies, one day.
I am not sure if the COMMANDER unit is covered in this forum (Im sure it is somewhere) There are several expansions (One that I am creating) where you can purchase a COMMANDER. This unit gives the army attached to it special abilities and access to certain DOCTRINES.
It adds something to the game as WW2 was full of clashing commanders, Rommel - Monty… etc…
If I make the unit I will publish all these ideas at that time.
-
@Imperious:
new fighter-bomber plane in 4 new sculpts, except don’t need German or American ( already have stuka and P-38)
so just make a mold from these existing pieces?
For our own Legal protection we can not just “copy” the existing units. We have to make new sculpts and/or change the existing units in some way so they are unique from the WOTC pieces. Also we want to make them BETTER than these existing units.
-
yes no copy of existing junk. Thats the whole purpose which is to offer something better.
-
How many of what units do we think we need per set?
I was thinking that we should count the total’s up from both '41 & '42 scenarios and use the highest number from each and do this country by country.
Example lets say Russia has 21 INF in '41 and 25 INF in '42 we will have 25 INF come in the set.
If Russia has 29 ARM in '41 and 18 ARM in '42 we’ll go with 29.Bottom line what I would like to see is if I don’t want to use chips in the starting set up I don’t have to.
Maybe I’m putting the cart before the horse… :|
-
I am not sure if the COMMANDER unit is covered in this forum (Im sure it is somewhere) There are several expansions (One that I am creating) where you can purchase a COMMANDER. This unit gives the army attached to it special abilities and access to certain DOCTRINES.
I understand now thanks.
A couple of questions. Now when you say you will make them of better quality. Do you mean better than anything A&A has produced or make them of equvilent quality of the previous A&A games such as the revised addition?
If you are going to make Mechanized Infantry and Fighter (Dive) Bombers. here are the units I would like to see.
Mech Inf
US/Russia - M3 Halftrack
Germany - SdKfz 250
British - Bren (Universal) carrier
Japan - Truck or SdKfz 250
Although Japan did develop and armored APC (Type 1 Ho-Ha) They felt they were too slow and so built very few and primarily used trucks (However, trucks are classified as “Motorized” infantry. If you wish to give Japan an APC then I would use the Sdk fz 250
Italy - Krauss-Maffei KM m 11 or Autoblinda 41
Italy did used and produced a licence version of the German KM m 11 but were bigger users of Armored cars such as the Autoblinda 41If you plan to make Fighter (Dive) Bombers I recommend the following.
Note: On a strategic level I classify Fighter, Torpedo and Dive - Bombers in the same groups because their primary mission was to attack surface/ground targets.Russia - Il-2M3 Shturmovik
Germany - Stuka
British - Hawker Typhoon or A-31 Vengeance
U.S.A - SBD Dauntless
Japan - Aichi DA3 Val
Italians - Breda 65
If you want to combine. The Italians used the Breda Ba-201 which looked very similar to the Stuka -
Mechanized and Motorized Infantry ( elite infantry)
US/Russia - M3 Halftrack
Germany - SdKfz 251
British - M3 Halftrack
Japan -SdKfz 251
Italy - Krauss-Maffei KM m 11 or SdKfz 251Fighter-Bombers
Russia - Il-2M3 Shturmovik or PE-3
Germany - JU-87
British - Hawker Typhoon
U.S.A - SBD Dauntless
Japan - Aichi DA3 Val or Kate
http://www.air-and-space.com/20051022 Edwards/DSC_1620 Harvard Mk IV N2047 Kate left rear taxiing l.jpgor judy http://www.cv13.com/d4ylat1.gif
Italians - JU-87
Bombers:
Italy
Savoia Marchetti sm79-1Italian naval pieces:
BB: http://www.regiamarina.net/arsenals/ships_it/battleships/battle_us.htm ( prefer Littorio Class)
CA: http://dadamo.us/arsenals/ships_it/cruisers_heavy/crui_heavy_us.htm (prefer Zara)
DD: I dont think you need one.
AP: dont think you need one
SS: dont think you need oneArtillery:
i saw that they have and it really looks too close to the Japanese artillery. So save the money.Self Propelled Artillery:
Germany: http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/elep_1.jpg (elephant)
Soviet: Katyuska or SU-122 http://www.battlefield.ru/tanks/su122/su122_1.jpg
American: M-10 or M36 tank destroyer
Italy: http://k53.pbase.com/u45/kuklabubs/upload/34640934.ItalianTankDestroyerSemovent4732.jpg
Japan:http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/japan/JapanHo-NiType1TankDestroyer.jpg -
i think the Wespe would be a better choice for a German self-propelled artillery piece: http://www.figuren-modellbau.de/fahrzeuge/matchbox-40077-wespe-panzer-artillerie.jpg
-
nooo not that silly wespe. take the bigger gun pls. the hummel!! :roll:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:SdKfz165.jpg&filetimestamp=20060502074613 hummel = Bumblebee
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:SdKfz124.jpg&filetimestamp=20060730212132 wespe = waspadolf actually forbid the use of theese names, cuz they were too cute :)
-
those pieces look so similar i don’t think it matters if you go for one or the other (when you take them down to the scale of the models used in A&A you can see what i mean). i know just over a 100 more of the Hummel were built than the Wespe, but i think the Wespe is more iconic :-P
-
i know your right, but we all like bigger guns, dont we? :D
-
Yes old style telephones. The kind they use on Combat! Starring Vic Morrow. Use them to communicate orders to teammates.
-
id really like to see this done in plastic. A perfect replacement for the blockhouse
-
that’s pretty much how i pictured the block house to look :-)
-
Of course they dropped the ball as the original post mentioned. But this is a board game under a certain price that most (or hopefully at least some) will pay If you want realism check out: http://www.ghqmodels.com/.
-
That belongs in the ultra mega deluxe premium edition of axis and allies. ;)
-
exactly. nice models though
-
Mechanized and Motorized Infantry ( elite infantry)
US/Russia - M3 Halftrack
Germany -SdKfz 251Bren Carrier
British - M3 Halftrack
Japan -SdKfz 251
Italy - Krauss-Maffei KM m 11 or SdKfz 251Sorry IL, the British have to have a Bren Carrier :-)
I also like the SdKfz 251 but I thought the 250 looked closer to the Japanese one and this could be shared by both. I have a friend in Arizona that owns one. (Actually these are OT-810s. These are the Czech built version of the 251).
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/gracefuldragons/Feb23-252007CampNavajo.jpg037.jpg
If anyone want to see nice pictures of a real one you can go here.
http://www.sdkfz251.com/Fighter-Bombers
Russia - Il-2M3 Shturmovik or PE-3I really like the PE-3 too but my concern was that it could be mistaken for a Bomber but on the other hand the IL-2M3 can be mistaken as a fighter. One way to avoid confusion with the PE-3 is to make it the same size as a fighter. Anyway, I was using the following criteria for selecting Fighter/Dive Bombers.
1. Avoid choosing a plane that looked too much like a fighter or bomber to avoid confusion with those units. This was easy except for the British. They were the only country who really did not have a successful dive bomber that was built in large number. They made great fighter-bombers but look too much like fighters.
2. Recognition.
3. Numbers built.Self Propelled Artillery:
Personally I don’t think SPA are needed as a separate unit. I usually consider them as part of the mechanized infantry which usually comprised of light tanks, halftracks, armored cars and self propelled artillery.However if SPAs are made. I would prefer pieces with open tops. Again this will help confusing SPAs with tanks. So here are my choices for SPAs
Self Propelled Artillery:
Germany: SdKfz16 or SdKfz 124 Wespe
Soviet: SU-76 http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/russia/su76_marjorana.html
American: M-7 Priest http://planetarmor.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3132
Italy: Italian Tank Destroyer Semovent 47/23
Japan: Ho-NiType1TankDestroyer -
I’ve never posted here before (I generally prefer to read what others have written), but the possibility of obtaining high quality pieces in a new variety of molds is too interesting a topic to pass up. I’ve never felt too discontented in regards to the quality of AAM pieces since Revised, but they could stand to be improved (although I have not yet purchased AA50, I have seen pictures of its pieces online and see that a few have indeed decreased in quality, particularly the T-34). As well, even if the quality of the pieces was high, I am not entirely satisfied with some unit choices and would be happy to see them replaced with others.
As I understand Field Marshall Games’ earlier post, the plan is to produce a complete set for each nation, regardless of whether certain pieces are currently deemed acceptable by the community at large. Thus, as an example, a new UK set could not only include a new destroyer mold, but a new carrier mold (even if the UK carrier was almost universally accepted as being adequate as it stands; as noted, this would provide purchasers with a more balanced number of units for each nation and avoid the need to pick and match parts from various games. With this in mind, I will list my own preferences for each nation in regards to each unit type, then post my 15 top wants at the end (I realize that although each nation will receive a unit mold for each type, some molds of deemed lesser importance will be shared between nations, but this list is best-case scenario for me). I also realize that by now, FMG is probably already beginning production and is no longer noting ideas, but I feel like posting anyway, if only for fun:
USSR:
- BB - Sovietskaya Ukrainia - I posted my thoughts on a Soviet BB on Larry Harris’ forum a while ago; Although none of the ships of this class were completed in RL, I think that a Soviet player actually building BB units in A&A would be analogous to the class being completed in RL. Thus, this would be the most appropriate class to include as a plastic unit. If it would be preferable to include a class which actually saw service, then maybe the Petropavlovsk class would be more appropriate.
- CV - A Soviet CV mold is a very low priority for me; I would be quite content to see them share a UK or German mold (German Graf Zeppelin might be best, since the Soviets did capture the wreck of this vessel in 1945). I would like to note that I recently read a post on an AAM-related forum that the Soviets did indeed engage in their own carrier designs, but none of these left the drawing board. However, as noted, considering the low importance of a Soviet navy in A&A, and the purely hypothetical nature of such designs, these should receive very low priority.
- CA - Kirov or Maxim Gorkij (indistinguishable at this scale).
- DD - Type 7
- SS - S IX (low importance to me)
- AK/AP - Either a generic freighter, or use US Liberty Freighter (low importance to me).
- Tank - T-34/76.
- Artillery - most artillery pieces look the same at this scale; I see no pressing need for a unique Soviet piece.
- Fighter - Yak 1 (there are actually several Soviet Yak or Mig fighters which would be OK with me).
- Heavy Bomber - PE-3 (although again, there are several that would be OK).
UK:
- BB - King George V class.
- CV - Illustrious class.
- CA - Southampton class (I feel these would be the best representation of modern UK cruiser construction, but I do acknowledge that the County classes are more iconic - I thus would not complain if we received a generic County class CA instead. Also, yes - I do realize that most sources list the Southampton class as a CL…)
- DD - Tribal class (I never understood why the UK never received its own DD mold, considering the iconic importance of its DD’s during the Battle of the Atlantic - I also believe that the Tribal class is the best choice, as it was used by the UK’s two largest naval power Commonwealth allies; Australia and Canada - thus, when one builds a Tribal class DD at a Canadian or Australian IC, it will be all the more appropriate).
- SS - T Class
- AK/AP - North Sands class
- Tank - Mid-war Churchill.
- Artillery - 6 pounder anti-tank gun.
- Fighter - Mid-war Spitfire
- Heavy Bomber - Halifax or Lancaster
US:
- BB - Iowa Class (South Dakota class would be OK too, if an earlier-period BB was thought more appropriate).
- CV - Essex Class.
- CA - Baltimore Class.
- DD - Fletcher Class.
- SS - Gato Class.
- AK/AP - Liberty Class.
- Tank - M4 Sherman (any sub-variant).
- Artillery - 37mm gun would be OK.
- Fighter - F4F Wildcat.
- Heavy Bomber - B17.
Japan:
- BB - Yamato, Kongo or Nagato class - I would normally point to the Yamato as being representative of any newly constructed Japanese BB’s being placed upon the A&A game board; However, they were not generally representative of most IJN BBs. The Nagato class, with its tall pagoda and single funnel would be fairly representative of the six ships which collectively comprised the Fuso, Ise, and Nagato classes, at least at this scale, so there is an argument there as well. Plus, one can easily argue for the Kongo class, since with four members, this was the most numerous single class of IJN BB, and these vessels tended to see more surface action than other IJN BBs. As an end result, I cannot really make up my mind on which would be best, although I do rather hope for a class other than the Yamato class (we already have some decent Yamato models with our current boardgames and some variety might be OK).
- CV - Shokaku class.
- CA - Takao or Mogami class.
- DD - Kagero class.
- SS - Type B1.
- AK/AP - ‘Standard Merchant’ (with aft engines).
- Tank - Type 97 Chi Ha
- Artillery - 70mm Artillery
- Fighter - A6M2 Zero
- Heavy Bomber - G3M ‘Nell’ or G4M ‘Betty.’
Germany:
- BB - Bismarck Class.
- CV - Graf Zeppelin
- CA - Admiral Hipper Class (and please make a better mold than the horrible one which we currently have).
- DD - Type 1936.
- SS - Type IXC (although the Type VIIB and Type VIIC were more widely used, I think a type IXC would look better and would be more easily handled at this scale).
- AK/AP - A unique German transport or freighter is needed here, but I don’t really have a preference.
- Tank - Panzer IV (F2 or G, although any F2, G, H, or J would probably look exactly the same at this scale).
- Artillery - 88mm flak gun.
- Fighter - BF109.
- Heavy Bomber HE 111.
Italy:
- BB - Littorio Class.
- CV - Aquila (I do want to see a unique Italian CV).
- CA - Zara Class.
- DD - Soldati Class or Navigatori Class.
- SS - Marconi Class (again, not my highest priority).
- AK/AP - Either use an Italian liner converted to a transport, or share a unit with Germany).
- Tank - either M11/39 or M13/40.
- Artillery - Don’t have a preference for Italian artillery.
- Fighter - C202 Folgore.
- Heavy Bomber - SM79 Sparviero.
France (assuming France will be added):
- BB - Richelieu Class.
- CV - Joffre Class (For the same reasons as my choice for the Soyuz class Soviet BB, although I would be generally OK with the Bearn as well).
- CA - Suffren Class.
- DD - Le Hardi Class.
- SS - Redoutable Class.
- AK/AP - Generic freighter, or use UK mold.
- Tank - either Char I Bis, or Somua S35.
- Artillery - Don’t have a preference for French artillery.
- Fighter - Dewoitine D520.
- Heavy Bomber - F-222, not high priority choice.
I didn’t mention infantry, as I assume each nation will receive an accurate and unique infantry piece.
- Colors - I definitely believe that it is important to keep the colors of AA50 and AAR (for the most part they are the same, although Germany in AAR has varied through metallic blue, grey, and black, and the UK has received a variety of different colored pieces in the past, including light tan, white, and ugly lime green. You may want to keep some of these varieties in mind - there are a number of pictures on Boardgamegeek comparing varying AA colors that you may want to observe. Some new colours, such as navy or light blue, light yellow, and dark brown may be of some interest to some players as well (particularly those who do not like the current ones) so this should be kept in mind as well - unit trees should be able to be ordered in different colours.
New Unit Classes:
- I would prefer to see the following unit types introduced (or re-introduced); Half-Tracks/Mechanized Infantry, Trucks, Fighter-Bomber or Medium Bomber, and Blockhouse or Bunker. Other possibilities could include light or escort carriers (carry only one aircraft), light tanks, or heavy tanks. I never really thought much interest in commanders, but I have to admit, the idea is beginning to intrigue me. I also like the idea of specific pieces for techs, but I can’t think of appropriate ‘super sub’ pieces for any nations other than Germany and Japan (with Type XXI and I-400, respectively); the US, UK and France each had large ‘cruiser subs,’ but none were ‘cruiser subs’ in terms of performance.
Anyway, for Half-Tracks:
- USSR - prefer a unique HT, but lend-lease M3 will do.
- US - M3.
- UK - Universal Bren Carrier.
- Italy - Can share German mold.
- Germany - SD Kfz 251
- Japan - Type 1 Ho-Ha
- France - no preference.
Trucks:
- USSR - ZIS-5 3 Ton (low priority).
- US - CCKW.
- UK - Bedford QL 3 ton.
- Germany - Opel 3 ton.
- Italy - Fiat.
- Japan - Type 97 Isuzu.
- France - Renault.
Top 12 Molds (as differing from AAR/AA50, although I realize that none will be copied from those games):
- 1. UK DD.
- 2. IT BB
- 3. IT CA
- 4. IT DD
- 5. IT Bomber
- 6. IT CV
- 7. IT Fighter
- 8. JP CV
- 9. UK SS
- 10. UK Tank
- 11. SU BB
- 12. SU CA
That’s all for now, I can’t think of anything else I want to say at the moment.
Suggested Topics
