I love the aircraft stands. This would be fun to use even in a regular A&A game.
Poll: FMG U.S. aircraft
-
I think that FMG should just go ahead and make every weapon ever used in WWII to satisfy the mob :-D
-
@Brain:
I think that FMG should just go ahead and make every weapon ever used in WWII to satisfy the mob :-D
As a member of the mob I will not be satisfied until the units can move under their own power. Boo inanimate objects, boo I say!
-
@Brain:
I think that FMG should just go ahead and make every weapon ever used in WWII to satisfy the mob :-D
I actually agree with you on this one. We are brothers in arms.
Maybe next year, if the current piece project of FMG is successful, and the A&A community still want more units of new weapons, then FMG start a new project ? As long as it pays off, I see no reason why not.
Any way, I votet for the Mustang as fighter, the Mitchell as Tac, and the Liberator as Bomber. I think the Superfortress is way too big. No other nations had any plane that size. Maybe US should get this plane as an extra ? They did have the largest airforce of the world after all.
-
Usually the only thing that Razor and I agree on is that we both need our heads examined. At first I made that statement as a light-hearted joke/wish. Now I am actually hoping that it is a possibility. Hopefully the game piece project is a big enough success to make something like this possible. Who knows? It could happen.
-
Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?
-
Although the poll is already going this way, I thought I throw out a bit more conjecture on the fighter debate. Inspired by other posts, I looked up the service record of the P-38. It in fact saw the most action in the Pacific. That means BOTH the US fighters are Pacific theatre aircraft. We absolutely need a European theatre fighter - what better than the P-51.
I’m still pushing FMG to make us Corsairs too. No comments on my question above?
-
Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?
I would.
-
I aint gonna do that
-
-
Question: Would you prefer to have two US Fighters rather than two US Tanks? This is not written in stone. Italy is, but US is still open.
My purpose in making two infantry and two tanks was to add flavor to the board… although I know some will use extra rules for these units.
-
Imperious Leader '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10last edited by Apr 1, 2010, 7:08 PM
definatly two different tanks!
either early war or late war
medium and heavy tank
very important
-
Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?
No way. All the countries should have the same type of pieces so that we can add new rules to the game using the new pieces.
-
@Imperious:
definatly two different tanks!
either early war or late war
medium and heavy tank
very important
I support IL, as usual.
Hang in there you too, BD, we still do agree.
-
@Brain:
Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?
No way. All the countries should have the same type of pieces so that we can add new rules to the game using the new pieces.
Okay, as a house rule guy myself, I see the validity in this. I guess I was just trying to stay open and test the waters with different ideas. I’m with you guys though, I’d like these pieces to open up as many new house rule options as possible.
-
Imperious Leader '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10last edited by Apr 2, 2010, 5:08 PM
early war soviet tanks could be 3-2 and cost 5
then latter they can start building 3-3 tanks or 3-4 tanks
-
@Imperious:
early war soviet tanks could be 3-2 and cost 5
then latter they can start building 3-3 tanks or 3-4 tanks
We are going to need house rules for all the new pieces for all of the countries.
-
DEFINITELY an “early war” and a “late war” tank piece, as well as the OOB one.
So the Germans would have the Panzer III and Tiger as well as the OOB Panther -
Imperious Leader '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10last edited by Apr 3, 2010, 5:42 AM
OOB will be OOB. The other two choices should be different so FMG makes 2 and WOTC makes 1
Then we get early, mid and late war
So Panzer 3,4,5 with FMG doing 3 and 5 and 4 is default.
IMO this should be the plan for all units… no duplication with OOB pieces so we never have anything to worry about.
-
_definatly two different tanks!
either early war or late war
medium and heavy tank
very important_
No, 3 different type.
Medium & heavy tank and……self-propelled gun!
For USA, USSR and Germany it’s a must…About the US fighter.
2 different type. US army = P47 (I love that monster)
US navy = Vought Corsair -
_definatly two different tanks!
either early war or late war
medium and heavy tank
very important_
No, 3 different type.
Medium & heavy tank and……self-propelled gun!
For USA, USSR and Germany it’s a must…About the US fighter.
2 different type. US army = P47 (I love that monster)
US navy = Vought CorsairI love the idea of a self propelled gun.
The fighters…. not so much. All are radial engined fighters, and along with the OOB F6F Hellcat would look indistinguishable compared to each other.
Suggested Topics
