OK, here’s my first attempt at a suped-up naval line-up suggestion
One thing I’m not sure of: since the late-30’s light cruiser designs tended to be full-size treaty cruisers with 12-15 6" guns instead of 8-10 8" guns, perhaps a light cruiser would make more sense if we’re talking something like an Atlanta Class rather than the “classic” examples like the Cleveland Class. Anyway, my first attempt…
USA
Superbattleship: Montana or Iowa Class
Battleship: South Dakota or North Carolina Class
Supercruiser: Alaska Class
Heavy Cruiser: Baltimore Class
Light Cruiser: Cleveland Class (or Atlanta Class ?)
Supercarrier: Midway Class
Fleet Carrier: Yorktown or Essex Class
Light Carrier: Independence Class
Escort Carrier: Casablanca Class
UK
Superbattleship: Lion Class
Battleship: King George V Class
Battlecruiser: Renown Class
Heavy Cruiser: County Class
Light Cruiser: Town Class (or Dido Class ?)
Supercarrier: Audacious Class or Malta Class
Fleet Carrier: Illustrious Class or Implacable Class
Light Carrier: Colossus Class
Escort Carrier: Bogue Class
Japan
Superbattleship: Yamato Class
Battleship: Nagato or Ise or Fuso Class
Battlecruiser: B65 Class
Heavy Cruiser: Myoko Class or Post-Conversion Mogami Class
Light Cruiser: Pre-Conversion Mogami Class (or smaller class ?)
Supercarrier: Shinano Class or Taiho Class
Fleet Carrier: Zuikaku Class
Light Carrier: Zuiho Class
Escort Carrier: Chitose Class
Germany
Superbattleship: H41 Class
Battleship: Bismark Class
Battlecruiser: Scharnhorst Class
Heavy Cruiser: Hipper Class
Light Cruiser: K Class or Liepzig Class
Supercarrier: NA
Fleet Carrier: Graf Zeppelin
Light Carrier: Seydlitz Class
Italy
Superbattleship: BB1936 Class (basically a scaled-up, 16”-gun Littorio)
Battleship: Littorio Class
Battlecruiser: Project 1929 Class (6x 15” guns, 23,000 tons)
Heavy Cruiser: Zara or Bolzano Class
Light Cruiser: Condottieri Class
Supercarrier: NA
Fleet Carrier: Aquila Class
Large Escort Carrier: Sparviero Class
France
Superbattleship: Alsace Class (basically a scaled-up version of the Richelieu)
Battleship: Richelieu Class
Battlecruiser: Dunkerque Class (8x 13” guns, 26,000 tons)
Heavy Cruiser: Algerie Class
Light Cruiser: La Galissoniere Class
Supercarrier: NA
Fleet Carrier: Joffre Class
Light Carrier: Bearn Class
USSR
Superbattleship: Sovietsky Soyuz (basically a scaled-up, 16”-gun Littorio)
Battleship: NA
Battlecruiser: Kronstadt Class (6x 15” guns, 36,000 tons)
Heavy Cruiser: Kirov Class
Light Cruiser: Chapaev Class
Supercarrier: NA
Fleet Carrier: NA
Light Carrier: Project 71A Class
I buy anything that has the same size as the regulare A&A pieces
I will buy anything that’s the same size as A&A, the same colours as A&A and also has Infantry pieces that resemble A&A.
It’s good to see TT back in the game, Jack (pun intended :-D)
I put in a starter order of 1 of each just to show my support and check them out to see if I want more.
Nothing like muddying the waters here, but…
I’m reserving judgement on the size issue until I see them. I’m thinking that maybe, if the pieces are worthy of completely replacing the previous tank units, the size difference would be irrelevant. I think I’m more concerned about color. Also, if the units are sized down, would that make the lighter tanks too small? That was one of the major problems with that Superpowers game: microscopic tanks that were so tiny, I was afraid that they’d get lost in a shag carpet!
I really like the ships idea, but I’m thinking something a little different. Forget all the smaller ships; the subs and destroyers can pretty much stay generic cannon fodder. But making a light carrier (or escort carrier), fleet carrier, supercarrior, light cruiser, heavy cruiser, battlecruiser/supercruiser, battleship, & super battleship variant for each country (that actually had and/or planned them) would be super-cool. Scale them to exactly the same scale as FMG (who, I understand, is creating a basically standard battleship/fleet carrier/heavy cruiser line up for each) rather than standard AA, which gives insufficient room for detail, and in the exact same colors as FMG.
For planes, pick key planes in different categories that FMG wasn’t able to do. (e.g., if he does a P-51, you do a Hellcat or a Corsair and vice versa…If he does a dive bomber for a tac-bomber, you do a topedo bomber, and vice versa…
You comment on tank size was where I was originally. When I looked at my 3D models at full scale some of them were really small. Then I tried to make a scale when I guess I could have just used 17mm / 20mm / 23mm for small, medium, large and maybe drop the Tiger.
I like the Corsair & Hellcat but once you shirk them down to 1 inch you tend to lose detail.
Now could I get away with generic carrier’s?
Hmm, I think I might have mixed them in with some old wider panthers. I don’t know if I noticed any difference vs previous wider panthers, but maybe I wasn’t looking close enough. The bottom line is that for me to use it, a tiger/JSII class tank MUST be at least noticeably bigger than the wider version of the panther to make sense and avoid heavy/medium tank confusion. That probably means creating a Pershing that is a little larger than scale. Same for a Cromwell if that’s what we’re stuck with for UK heavy tank, though the Cromwell was actually in the Sherman/Panzer IV/T-34 class. The UK should really use Cromwells instead of, or as an equivalent option for, Shermans in the medium class. The UK could then use Comets for a size-up heavy. (The Panther was actually heavier than the Sherman/Cromwell/Panzer IV/T-34 class of tanks; you could argue that a US Pershing and/or UK Comet was more an equivalent of a Panther than of a Tiger or JSII, but having 4 sizes is definitely too many; I’m not sure if I’d even really use more than 2 in my own house rules.)
No one else even had a tank in the heavy class that I know of.
The older wide ones didn’t have skirts.
Hmm, I think I might have mixed them in with some old wider panthers. I don’t know if I noticed any difference vs previous wider panthers, but maybe I wasn’t looking close enough. The bottom line is that for me to use it, a tiger/JSII class tank MUST be at least noticeably bigger than the wider version of the panther to make sense and avoid heavy/medium tank confusion. That probably means creating a Pershing that is a little larger than scale. Same for a Cromwell if that’s what we’re stuck with for UK heavy tank, though the Cromwell was actually in the Sherman/Panzer IV/T-34 class. The UK should really use Cromwells instead of, or as an equivalent option for, Shermans in the medium class. The UK could then use Comets for a size-up heavy. (The Panther was actually heavier than the Sherman/Cromwell/Panzer IV/T-34 class of tanks; you could argue that a US Pershing and/or UK Comet was more an equivalent of a Panther than of a Tiger or JSII, but having 4 sizes is definitely too many; I’m not sure if I’d even really use more than 2 in my own house rules.)
No one else even had a tank in the heavy class that I know of.
This is where rules need to be made. The Sherman was a higher profile and would have a lesser defense then a Cromwell or Crusader. The Japanese tanks were kings of the battle field until another tank showed up. Now a new pricing system may need to be put in place. Sherman tanks were cheap, fast and burned easy. :-o While some low profile diesels may not have had much of a gun for offense.
@Table:
I buy anything that has the same size as the regulare A&A pieces
I will buy anything that’s the same size as A&A, the same colours as A&A and also has Infantry pieces that resemble A&A.
OUCH! but I hear my infantry make nice pill boxes. :cry:
Don’t get me wrong. Your armor units are great! They’re just the wrong size. But your infantry is just not my cup of tea.
Umm - FMG is making pieces in the exact same scale as Axis & Allies pieces.
There is plenty of room for detail in a piece of that size.
I know Table Tactics will do an amazing job with the upcoming French set. I think that the best use of mold money would be to make 5 pieces total: 3 tanks (discussed previously), an artillery or mech infantry unit, and a fighter. No infantry/gun units needed.
Umm - FMG is making pieces in the exact same scale as Axis & Allies pieces.
There is plenty of room for detail in a piece of that size.
I know Table Tactics will do an amazing job with the upcoming French set. I think that the best use of mold money would be to make 5 pieces total: 3 tanks (discussed previously), an artillery or mech infantry unit, and a fighter. No infantry/gun units needed.
Does France need 3 tanks? It only starts with 1 tank and isn’t going to build more
@Table:
I buy anything that has the same size as the regulare A&A pieces
I will buy anything that’s the same size as A&A, the same colours as A&A and also has Infantry pieces that resemble A&A.
OUCH! but I hear my infantry make nice pill boxes. :cry:
Don’t get me wrong. Your armor units are great! They’re just the wrong size. But your infantry is just not my cup of tea.
Many have asked for different types of infantry. In this forum Imp. Leader asked for paratroopers. How would you suggest some different units should be made?
Possibly with different shaped bases.
1. Square base- marines
2. Triangle base- paratroopers
3. Round- regular infantry
4. 5 pointed Star base- commander
I actually don’t need any different types of infantry.
Think of the Axis & Allies Dice convention - we have too many units at the lower end of the scale. How would you slot addt’l infantry?
PLEASE make Corsairs i would love to have them part of my US airforce/navy plus I love coaches Idea about the infantry
PLEASE make Corsairs i would love to have them part of my US airforce/navy plus I love coaches Idea about the infantry
Personally that is my favorite US war plane.
To TT on Tanks:
You’re under-rating the Sherman and buying into some of the anti-Sherman mythology that’s out there. The Sherman’s high profile could be a disadvantage, true, but it’s sloped armor was overall at least as good as the Cromwell’s unsloped armor. The Brits were very happy to get Shermans, as they were clearly better than anything else they had up to the Cromwell, which was about as good, maybe incrementally better. The worst Shermans were at least as good as (probably better than) the worst Panzer III’s & IV’s and the best ones were about as good as the best Panzer IV’s, (which actually made up the bulk of German armor by D-Day.) Shermans also performed pretty reasonably well in Korea against North Korean T-34’s. Yes the Shermans had trouble with the Panthers, but Panthers were relatively rare in the West (and it must be noted that the Panther is really a much heavier tank, more a “medium-heavy” than a “medium,” being significantly heavier than Panzer IV, T-34, Cromwell or Sherman)
The Panther is actually as heavy as the M26 Pershing and considerably heavier than the UK Comet, which was basically an up-gunned Cromwell with very little armor improvement.
So you could have a 4-tiered system:
But I really can’t conceive of needing more than 2 (much less more than 3) levels of tank
What’s more, the fact that the AA standard has made the Panther the de facto “standard” German tank means that to have a German “upgrade” it would have to be a little bigger (though not much bigger; we’re obviously not talking TWG bigger) and be a Tiger or Tiger II to make sense. Unless we went a little down in size and did a Panzer IV and made the wider versions of those old Panthers (which seem to be the new standard mold) the upgrades… But I would think that more people would be motivated to buy an “upgrade” than a “downgrade” product… (Pure marketing psychology, but such things are important.)
So, if you create a carefully calibrated “Tiger” upgrade tank (which perhaps you already have; like I said, I’m reserving judgment until they arrive and I can actually compare them.), “Pershing” upgrade Tank, JSII upgrade tank, Cromwell upgrade tank, that would probably be as much as I’d use, realistically.
Then again, maybe FMG is about to roll out these very models as part of their new product line…
Reloader:
Actually, as I recall, FMG said his ships, at least, were going to be slightly bigger to allow for more detail.
Coach:
I like your idea, though I’d have some concern about the issue of piece stability (i.e., not falling down)
Also, when it comes to special units, certain distinguishing features would stand out in certain cases: unique helmets/ longarms for UK and German Para’s, StG 44’s could be used for German SS, etc.
For me, a key thing for Para’s is those unique UK and German Para helmets
Thing is, I already can get much of this dynamic by using off-the-shelf HO’s for Para’s and alternate color AAA pieces for elites. Here’s my current set-up:
Germany:
Standard Infantry: MB AAA pieces in grey
Elite Infantry: (SS) AH AAA pieces in black
Para’s: Airfix German Para’s in blue-grey
US:
Standard Infantry: AAA Standard
Elite Infantry: (USMC) AAA US Marines in Dark Green
Para’s: Airfix US Para’s in Dark Green
UK
Standard Infantry: AAA Standard
Elite Infantry: (Royal Marines) AH UK Infantry in light tan
Para’s: ESCI UK Para’s in dark brown
Japan
Standard Infantry: AAA Standard
Elite Infantry (SNLF): Early AAP Japanese Infantry in red
Para’s: ESCI Japanese Infantry
USSR
Standard Infantry: AAA Standard
Elite Infantry: (Red Guards?): AAA Russian Infantry in bright red (from an AAP Pacific set, presumably originally designed to be “Chinese” infantry, but same sculpt as Russians)
Para’s: Airfix Russian Infantry
FMG’s pieces show more detail, but at the same size as current pieces.
Check out his pictures of a transport side-by-side.
Reloader:
Actually, much earlier on in the FMG pieces project thread, in direct response to my question to this effect, FMG said that his ships (or perhaps it was just his BB’s?) would be slightly bigger to show details. But I haven’t followed every post since then, so maybe he changed his mind? IDK
Italy
Superbattleship: BB1936 Class (basically a scaled-up, 16”-gun Littorio)
I haven’t checked my copy of Garzke and Dulin’s reference book on Axis battleships, but I don’t recall Italy ever having planned to build any 16" uprated version of the Littorio class. Is this a fictitious design or, if not, could you let me know where the information on this projected class comes from?
Remember that was before 1942 came out with “bigger” ships.
