If you can’t find Esci there’s this lot from Hat:
Tac Bombers and Mech units?
-
I like the burnt orange (current) over the yellow but that might be just me, Clown Nose Red was Horrible. My complaint is from Yellow to Red to Burnt Orange. can we pick one and stick with it please? Same goes for USSR and UK to a lesser degree.
Well, given that HBG is planning a very full line-up of Japanese pieces in all three colors, it looks to me like we’re all going to get our wish! I’ll probably buy several sets in all three, just as I have pre-ordered several sets of all four colors of his upcoming EW Soviets. I hope he does an equally good line-up of French units (INCLUDING NAVAL UNITS AT LAST!), and then some great sets of UK units in an equally wide range of colors… followed by some late-war Soviets in all four colors and late-war Americans in at least two… Then we’ll finally have the full range of options. But that seems to be his plan, near as I can figure. If so, in another year or two we’ll be there at last! After waiting 20 years for such options, a couple more years isn’t so bad a time to wait. Go HBG!
Meanwhile, whatever happened to FMG? I wish FMG and HBG would coordinate better. Looks like they’re both doing a Tiger I, right after AH finally did one, while neither is doing a Panther. And why is FMG doing both Tiger I and Tiger II? I thought they were going to do a “heavy” and a “light” for each country? Seeing as HBG is doing Panzer IV and Tiger, it would make so much more sense for FMG to do Panther and Tiger II!
-
I wouldn’t mind the new units if they would stay stocked up on the staple units first.
-
I like the burnt orange (current) over the yellow but that might be just me, Clown Nose Red was Horrible. My complaint is from Yellow to Red to Burnt Orange. can we pick one and stick with it please?
I’m glad that WotC has finally been staying consistent with its colours for the last several games. I always think of those Japanese pieces from Pacific as being Cherry Red, which connects them with Japanese cherry blossoms, so they don’t bother me too much. The red infantry pieces are useful as Special Naval Landing Force troop units.
-
@CWO:
I like the burnt orange (current) over the yellow but that might be just me, Clown Nose Red was Horrible. My complaint is from Yellow to Red to Burnt Orange. can we pick one and stick with it please?
I’m glad that WotC has finally been staying consistent with its colours for the last several games. I always think of those Japanese pieces from Pacific as being Cherry Red, which connects them with Japanese cherry blossoms, so they don’t bother me too much. The red infantry pieces are useful as Special Naval Landing Force troop units.
Ive been thinking about using clown nose red japanese as communist china. I never liked one country having two different color units (old pacific marines come to mind). To me color of the unit is the Number 1 way of telling nations apart. What the piece is shaped like should tell you what type of unit it is. And never between the two shall meet. I use HBG inf. with the flamethrower in OOB American Green as my marines.
-
Ive been thinking about using clown nose red japanese as communist china. I never liked one country having two different color units (old pacific marines come to mind). To me color of the unit is the Number 1 way of telling nations apart. What the piece is shaped like should tell you what type of unit it is. And never between the two shall meet. I use HBG inf. with the flamethrower in OOB American Green as my marines.
If shape is important to you as a delineator, I can’t understand why you’d use Japanese infantry as Chinese infantry.
As for me, I don’t mind having 2 colors for the “major powers,” 1 for standard troops and 1 for elites. Thus, I rather like using the black Germans as elites and the HBG “early war” Germans and the classic MB/ EotC piece set in dark grey as standards, as well as having 2 shades of green for the US, tan for the UK, and red/ brown for USSR, etc. I still haven’t decided whether I’m going to keep using red for Japanese elites or switch to yellow when HBG makes that an option. (In my recent tournament, one student expressed that it was confusing to him that both the Russians and the Japanese were using red elite infantry.) …In any case I’m quite happy that HBG’s planning on giving us those options.
For me, these pieces are so small that depending entirely on shape to distinguish pieces that are at all similar-shaped is not ideal. This isn’t a problem when distinguishing a tank from an infantryman or fighter, of course… but certainly can be when distinguishing 2 infantryman or 2 tanks or 2 fighters from each other. For the minors, this isn’t much of an issue, but for the majors, this becomes an issue the moment you have any sort of elite or special unit. (Perhaps this is especially true for me, since I often play with beginners.)
-
HAHAHA!
I really enjoyed seeing the above video. I could empathize with him, grin.
“Tall Paul”
-
Ive been thinking about using clown nose red japanese as communist china. I never liked one country having two different color units (old pacific marines come to mind). To me color of the unit is the Number 1 way of telling nations apart. What the piece is shaped like should tell you what type of unit it is. And never between the two shall meet. I use HBG inf. with the flamethrower in OOB American Green as my marines.
If shape is important to you as a delineator, I can’t understand why you’d use Japanese infantry as Chinese infantry.
As for me, I don’t mind having 2 colors for the “major powers,” 1 for standard troops and 1 for elites. Thus, I rather like using the black Germans as elites and the HBG “early war” Germans and the classic MB/ EotC piece set in dark grey as standards, as well as having 2 shades of green for the US, tan for the UK, and red/ brown for USSR, etc. I still haven’t decided whether I’m going to keep using red for Japanese elites or switch to yellow when HBG makes that an option. (In my recent tournament, one student expressed that it was confusing to him that both the Russians and the Japanese were using red elite infantry.) …In any case I’m quite happy that HBG’s planning on giving us those options.Â
For me, these pieces are so small that depending entirely on shape to distinguish pieces that are at all similar-shaped is not ideal. This isn’t a problem when distinguishing a tank from an infantryman or fighter, of course… but certainly can be when distinguishing 2 infantryman or 2 tanks or 2 fighters from each other. For the minors, this isn’t much of an issue, but for the majors, this becomes an issue the moment you have any sort of elite or special unit. (Perhaps this is especially true for me, since I often play with beginners.)
I used to play classic and color was the only way to tell one nation from another. And when standing back looking at the map the color of the units is the fastest way to see one nation from another. That’s why I would use Red Japanese for Communist China. Americans with flamethrowers makes it really easy to see it’s a different unit.
-
Yavid,
I prefer having painted units with their national ensigns also painted on their bases. Here’s my UK-Pacific “Jacks”.
“Tall Paul”
-
@Tall:
Yavid,
I prefer having painted units with their national ensigns also painted on their bases. Here’s my UK-Pacific “Jacks”.
“Tall Paul”
Those really are amazing. Whose your painter agaain?
-
I use 1/72 chinese infantry fromage cesar product
Those figures have a great looking. -
As for me, I don’t mind having 2 colors for the “major powers,” 1 for standard troops and 1 for elites.Â
Same here. And in fact, for the countries that have 3 fairly distinct shades of troops available, I see them as potentially useful for representing three kinds of troops: standard, elite, and reservist / colonial / territorial / Home Guard / Volkssturm secondary units. For instance, if you use the normal medium-green US pieces as standard troops, and the dark green ones from the original Pacific as Marines, the olive-green Milton Bradley ones could represent units like Philippine army territorial troops (which fought under US command) – or alternately US Army Rangers, if you want to have two types of elite troops.
-
@Tall:
HAHAHA!
I really enjoyed seeing the above video. I could empathize with him, grin.
“Tall Paul”Yes, whoever put that video together was obviously very familiar with A&A games in general and with the Europe 1940 / Pacific 1940 problems in particular. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was somebody from this forum!
-
As for me, I don’t mind having 2 colors for the “major powers,” 1 for standard troops and 1 for elites.
When everything is finished I’m going to have 2 color schemes(Europe/Pacific) for “standard” troops of all countries(except China) plus another scheme for certain areas on the map. This doesn’t include the Special Forces units.
For example, the U.K. would have units in a “European” scheme, a “Far East” scheme(shown above), a “Desert” scheme, and specific schemes for their “Airborne” and “Special Forces” units.
America, Germany, France & Italy would also have “Desert” schemes.
Russia, Germany, & China would have “Winter” schemes.
Special Forces units galore.
Etc., Etc., Etc.Those really are amazing. � Whose your painter again?
“Allworkandnoclay” is my painter and I’m very happy with his work. I love his idea of painting the national ensigns of each country on their Infantry bases. I come up with what I want and pay for them and he paints them. As long as his eyes don’t go blind,…or I go bankrupt from paying for them, we’ll eventually get ALL of the units done. We still have a ways to go as all of the HBG and FMG units haven’t been produced yet.
“Tall Paul”
Suggested Topics
