@CWO:
It is good time to be a fan of axis and allies!Â
Yes, this is a good time to be an A&A piece junkie. When I compare all the goodies we have now (both OOB and from HBG) with the limited range that we had in the early days (both OOB and from folks like Table Tactics and Xeno Games), the difference is worlds apart. Back then, when I wanted to give an existing nation a unit type that didn’t exist OOB, or when I wanted to create an equipment set for a country that wasn’t yet officially part of the OOB game (France, for example), I had to make do with sculpts cobbled together from other sources – usually with very unsatisfactory results. Over the years, as more and better pieces (representing more unit types and issued in more colours) have become available, I’ve been able to correct a lot of those deficiencies. The inventories of the primary nations have been upgraded, while the “make do” sculpts have gradually been withdrawn from those inventories: they’ve either been reallocated to minor powers or retired altogether. It’s a bit like what happens to military equipment in real life, come to think of it. When (as an example) America’s military equipment starts showing its age, it’s replaced with new and better material and the old stuff gets given to the Marine and the National Guard, or it’s given or sold to allied countries. Those countries in turn sometimes re-sell the stuff as it ages even further, and so on, sometimes to the point where the weapons leave state control entirely and end up in the hands of revolutionary groups or similar organizations. I guess you could say that a very rough index of a military force’s status in the world is how many times its hand-me-down hardware has changed owners before they acquired it. Hmm…that’s a potential idea for what to do with all my retired-from-service sculpts: give them to the little revolutionary/nationalist groups that originated during WWII and that started campaigning against the colonial powers once the war ended.  :wink:
Yes, several people have showed me pictures of the old pieces, and you can tell a world of difference between the pieces then and now. I guess you could use your older pieces for nations like Portugal, Siam, Iraq and Brazil, until the Global sets fill those needs. Romania and Hungary will be getting a Global set in the near future as well as Brazil, so it is not far off. :-)
Wow George, you’ve painted a bunch of units there. When did you get yours? :-D
I received them last week, I had ordered 6 sets.
I received them last week, I had ordered 6 sets.
You must of started painting them, immediately. Your like the US war machine, pumping them out of the factory as fast you get them and getting them ready for war. Nice! :-D
Thx John I appreciate your kind words, lets say I ve had a lot of free time the last 3-4 days,lol
Hey Guys. Sorry it took me so long but I got a few pics. I got my sets during the work week so I didn’t have a lot of time to play with them until now.
First, this is a complete set of the Japanese Expansion in all 4 colors.
Next, here are our new Kikka jet fighters alongside some of the Me262 fighters from the German Expansion.
Now we got the different new ships along with OOB pieces. New HBG pieces are in the front.
Upper left are heavy cruisers, we have 2 types now. The HBG Mogami is just a little longer than the OOB Takao, but with much better detail of course.
Upper right are the destroyers, we have 3 types now. The HBG Kagero is similar in size to the OOB 1941 Akitsuki and both are a little longer than the OOB Fubuki. It seems to me like the Kagero has similar features to the Akitsuki. I wonder if they spawned from similar classes.
Lower center are the submarines, we have 3 types now. While the OOB “I” Class and OOB 1941 Kaichu Class are similar in size, HBG’s I-400 is quite a bit bigger. Personally, I would use the I-400 as a Super Sub.
Next are the Capital Ships.
Upper center are the Fleet Aircraft Carriers, we now have 4 different types. The OOB Shinano we are all very familiar with. The OOB 1941 Akagi is a very nice ship. The HBG Kaga is outstanding and the best in my opinion. The HBG Unryu is an excellent carrier sculpt and seems a little shorter than the Kaga, like it sits a little lower in the water. I am guessing the reason for this is that the Kaga was converted from a battleship design in accordance with the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 while the Unryu was built as a straight carrier. The Unryu is a fantastic sculpt, I just like the Kaga a little better.
Lower Left are the Yamatos. As you can see, HBG’s beautiful new Yamato is significantly larger than the OOB Yamato. WOTC never should have used the Yamato for Japan’s basic battleship sculpt as it was considered a “super” battleship and not in the norm for Japan’s battleships of the time. The HBG sculpt is absolutely gorgeous in my opinion. I love that you can see individual gun barrels even at this scale.
Lower right are the standard battleships. We have 2 or 3 depending on your playing style. The HBG Fuso (top) was designed smaller to represent lesser powered early war battleships. While I understand HBG’s idea and logic behind this design, I personally don’t care for it. I think the Fuso should have been bigger than what it is.
The HBG Nagato is a fabulous battleship sculpt. Excellent detail and good size, right in line with other battleship sculpts. In the middle is the OOB 1941 Kongo which itself is a pretty decent sculpt even if it does lack the detailing of HBG’s pieces. I was using the Kongo in my games, but will switch to the Nagato now.
Now here is a neat pic comparing all the HBG and OOB sculpts for Battleships and Aircraft Carriers. HBG’s new pieces are at the top of the lines. Coach has done really good at keeping both sculpts in line with the size range of OOB sculpts.
The Aircraft Carrier sculpts on the right all measure out at 64 mm each. HBG’s Kaga and Unryu follow this trend exactly. The only differences are the Italian Aquila and ANZAC Majestic from OOB Pacific/Europe 1940 2nd Edition and the Kastromitinova from OOB 1941. Those three measure 66 mm.
The Battleship sculpts tend to vary from 58mm to 62mm. HBG’s Yamato is the exception here measuring in at 68mm, but of course it is not just a regular battleship. Here’s my list:
HBG Yamato = Japan = 68mm
HBG Nagato = Japan = 61mm
OOB Yamato = Japan = 59mm
OOB (41)Kongo = Japan = 60mm
OOB USS Iowa = USA = 62mm
OOB Bismarck = Germany = 62mm
OOB HMS Royal Oak = UK = 58mm
OOB (41) HMS Hood = UK = 62mm
OOB Gangut = USSR = 61mm
OOB Littorio = Italy = 60mm
OOB HMS Warspite = ANZAC = 60mm
Finally is a fun pic of the different carriers we have with aircraft. From left to right:
OOB = Akagi with D3A Val and A6M Zero
HBG = Kaga with B5N Kate and Ki-61 Tony
HBG = Unryu with D3A Val and Ki-43 Oscar
While I would like to see a Zero from HBG, it occurs to me that you could sub the new Oscars for Zeros as at this scale they look very similar to me.
Lower Left are the Yamatos. As you can see, HBG’s beautiful new Yamato is significantly larger than the OOB Yamato. WOTC never should have used the Yamato for Japan’s basic battleship sculpt as it was considered a “super” battleship and not in the norm for Japan’s battleships of the time. The HBG sculpt is absolutely gorgeous in my opinion. I love that you can see individual gun barrels even at this scale.
Thanks for the pictures and for the size calculations! Yes, the new Yamato certainly looks great. I especially like the excellent job HBG did at depicting the ship’s distinctive scalloped stern, which on the OOB sculpt is excessively pointy. As fond as I am of the Yamato class, I agree that it was a debatable choice as Japan’s OOB battleship, just as the Wasp was as the American OOB carrier. It’s odd that on the one hand some of the questionable OOB sculpt choices (like the Stuka as a fighter and the 88mm as field artillery in the early games) were made because the units were “iconic”, but that on the other hand some of those choices (like the one-off Wasp) had nothing iconic about them. The Yorktown or Essex classes would have worked much better, since they were produced in larger numbers and since they had very active and distinguished service histories. Yamato was certainly iconic because of its great size, but that same element made it an anomaly among Japanese capital ships. On the other hand, the Yamatos were the only new capital ships produced in the 1930s-1940s period; the rest of its battlewagons and battlecruisers in WWII were of WWI vintage (though some had been upgraded / rebuilt in the interwar period). So I’m a bit torn on that one. Fortunately, the 1941 game provided us with an OOB Kongo class sculpt, so that helped, and HBG’s new lineup helps even more.
Nice pictures Knp, showing us the differences in sizes of all these ships. Your right, the Kaga carrier is awesome. It is my favorite of the Japanese carriers. :-)
One thing that I noticed in particular with this set is how well the battleship turrets are molded. They actually look like individual turrets as opposed to raised boxes from the deck. Very, very good improvement.
I noticed the turrets as well. This set has great detail.
I noticed the OOB medium tanks are bigger than the HBG ones.
Was this on purpose to bring everything back to scale?
Hi John,
I wanted to reply to your remark about the tanks. You see, WOTC had a certain scale when making their pieces. Check out my post about the Battleships and Carriers. I used to have the measurements for all the different units but I would have to go back and measure them again. All Carriers were 64mm in length, all Battleships were within a range of 58-62 mm in length and so on. However, the ACTUAL ships were way different. The Yamato of course was huge, and the Iowas were nearly as long as the Yamato (just not as wide or heavy). The Bismarck was a little shorter than the Iowa class. The Royal Oak and Gangut were of much earlier design and were much shorter than the Yamato, Iowa or Bismarck classes. In fact, the Gangut was even shorter than a lot of the heavy cruisers of the time.
So, when making the tank pieces, WOTC tried to keep on the same scale originally. Think about the pieces back when the Revised edition came out. Back then they had the M4 Sherman for USA and England, T34 for Russia, Panther for Germany and Type 95 for Japan. WOTC made their tank sculpts all very close to the same size, like their ships and planes, in an effort to create a visual depiction on the board so that players would automatically know what was a tank, a fighter, a destroyer, etc.
Now, if you know something about WW2 history, you will know that the Panther tank nearly dwarfed the Sherman and T34. Also, the Type 95 from Japan was actually a light tank and was really tiny by comparison. It was even smaller than the US light tank, the M5 Stuart. The Type 95 had rather thin armor – .50 caliber bullets could penetrate the Type 95 armor – but that is another story.
What HBG has decided to do is try and keep their tanks and other vehicles closer to real-life comparisons, at least within reason. This is why HBG’s Tiger sculpt is pretty big for a board game piece when you compare it to some of the smaller tanks (Sherman, Panzer III, Type 97, etc.)
So, that is why the OOB tanks seem so much bigger.
One thing that I noticed in particular with this set is how well the battleship turrets are molded. They actually look like individual turrets as opposed to raised boxes from the deck. Very, very good improvement.
I noticed the turrets as well. This set has great detail.
I noticed the OOB medium tanks are bigger than the HBG ones.
Was this on purpose to bring everything back to scale?
Hi John,
I wanted to reply to your remark about the tanks. You see, WOTC had a certain scale when making their pieces. Check out my post about the Battleships and Carriers. I used to have the measurements for all the different units but I would have to go back and measure them again. All Carriers were 64mm in length, all Battleships were within a range of 58-62 mm in length and so on. However, the ACTUAL ships were way different. The Yamato of course was huge, and the Iowas were nearly as long as the Yamato (just not as wide or heavy). The Bismarck was a little shorter than the Iowa class. The Royal Oak and Gangut were of much earlier design and were much shorter than the Yamato, Iowa or Bismarck classes. In fact, the Gangut was even shorter than a lot of the heavy cruisers of the time.
So, when making the tank pieces, WOTC tried to keep on the same scale originally. Think about the pieces back when the Revised edition came out. Back then they had the M4 Sherman for USA and England, T34 for Russia, Panther for Germany and Type 95 for Japan. WOTC made their tank sculpts all very close to the same size, like their ships and planes, in an effort to create a visual depiction on the board so that players would automatically know what was a tank, a fighter, a destroyer, etc.
Now, if you know something about WW2 history, you will know that the Panther tank nearly dwarfed the Sherman and T34. Also, the Type 95 from Japan was actually a light tank and was really tiny by comparison. It was even smaller than the US light tank, the M5 Stuart. The Type 95 had rather thin armor – .50 caliber bullets could penetrate the Type 95 armor – but that is another story.
What HBG has decided to do is try and keep their tanks and other vehicles closer to real-life comparisons, at least within reason. This is why HBG’s Tiger sculpt is pretty big for a board game piece when you compare it to some of the smaller tanks (Sherman, Panzer III, Type 97, etc.)
So, that is why the OOB tanks seem so much bigger.
Ok, great, that is what I thought. I was curious because I knew each tank was different in size in real life. Now that HBG has made their tanks, I can start replacing different pieces. :-D
I got my email telling me my order has shipped today I’m very excited to see the new pieces.
I got my email telling me my order has shipped today I’m very excited to see the new pieces.
That is awesome! They made my day, when I got mine! :-D
just checked they are suppose to be here on tuesday I’m excited.
just checked they are suppose to be here on tuesday I’m excited.
That is awesome man! Happy for you! :-D
Can someone tell me which HBG tank is the same as the OOB German Panther, or has one not been made yet?
Is the one on the new German Axis Minor 2 set suppose to replace it?
I’m just confused on the names of the tanks.
Thanks for any help! :-)
John
Can someone tell me which HBG tank is the same as the OOB German Panther
“The same” in what sense? The one that’s closest in sculpt size? The one which representes the same real-life Panther tank? As far as I know, the only tanks which HBG has produced or is in the process of producing are:
German & Axis Minors Supplement Set 1
38t Light Tanks
Panzer III Medium Tanks
Stug IIIG Tank Destroyers
WW2 Germany Expansion Set
Panzer II Light Tank
Tiger 1 Heavy Tank
WW2 Axis Minor 2 (Not yet available)
PzIVG Medium Tank
Amerika (Not yet available)
Panther II
GW Panther
E-100
Flakpanzer
@CWO:
Can someone tell me which HBG tank is the same as the OOB German Panther
“The same” in what sense? The one that’s closest in sculpt size? The one which representes the same real-life Panther tank? As far as I know, the only tanks which HBG has produced or is in the process of producing are:
German & Axis Minors Supplement Set 1
38t Light Tanks
Panzer III Medium Tanks
Stug IIIG Tank DestroyersWW2 Germany Expansion Set
Panzer II Light Tank
Tiger 1 Heavy TankWW2 Axis Minor 2 (Not yet available)
PzIVG Medium TankAmerika (Not yet available)
Panther II
GW Panther
E-100
Flakpanzer
Do we have an HBG equivalent is probably how I should have asked the question?
Sorry, should have made my question more clear!
Do we have an HBG equivalent is probably how I should have asked the question?
I think that at the moment the answer is no, but the Amerika game is supposed to have a “Panther II” (whatever that is).
