I been using for Japan the OOB color for reg fighters, red for veteran fighters, and dark yellow for naval fighters and dive bombers. US is using OOB color for reg fighters and dark green for naval fighters and dive bombers. I can tell pretty good what they are. Japan and US are the only countries that have those planes for now in game.
@SS:
I been using for Japan the OOB color for reg fighters, red for veteran fighters, and dark yellow for naval fighters and dive bombers. US is using OOB color for reg fighters and dark green for naval fighters and dive bombers. I can tell pretty good what they are. Japan and US are the only countries that have those planes for now in game.
Unless HBG add these to the bottom of Carrier Based Tac Bombers and a Bomb to fighter, so any ordinance would be carrier based.
Nice Coach!
Problem is we are all nerds (and perfectionists) here and if we have a group with whom we play, they wouldn’t be and it would be too much tfor them to understsnd and appreciate.
We can still dream and hope we can change the inaccuracies.
@wittmann:
Nice Coach!
Problem is we are all nerds (and perfectionists) here and if we have a group with whom we play, they wouldn’t be and it would be too much tfor them to understsnd and appreciate.
We can still dream and hope we can change the inaccuracies.
it makes the game more fun when one knows the hardware!
Guys,
––I don’t see being able to DIFFERENIATE between land and carrier based aircraft should be any problem at all. I figured out a solution a long time ago. To put it simply you use different PAINT SCHEMES to identify between land or sea based aircraft. You don’t have to go to extreme lengths to have them painted EXACTLY the right way,…just enough to represent it’s service.
----For example, for someone that is NOT an artist or doesen’t want to paint intricate paint schemes and might be playing a game with “rookie” players you can simply paint the naval-based aircraft with a spraycan of overall Blue. OR, you could paint just a part of the aircraft Blue, such as the nose and/or wingtips that would ‘mark’ them as Naval aircraft. This is the simplist method and leaves the overall color showing for that country.
––If you paint the entire naval aircraft you could use different colors of Blue for each country with naval aircraft that further differenciates them.
----With this method even if you utilized the SAME unit for both land and naval based versions there should be no confusion because the naval version is CLEARLY MARKED as such.
For example: in a game you have
A Black JU-87 Stuka,…and
A Black JU-87 Stuka with a large BLUE nose and wingtips ( or BLUE overall)
----I don’t think anyone should have any difficulty in determining that the Black Stuka, like all of the other Black unit is land-based, and the Black Stuka w/large Blue nose & wingtips was a Naval version.
----This solution seems very simple, effective, and easily implemented.
----I am going to have well detailed and painted versions including decals, etc.,…but that isn’t necesary in order to have aircraft that are EASILY differenciated between land and naval based.
----An example of Naval-based aircraft painted in Naval colors is below. Also, I plan to have both land-based and naval-based versions of my Japanese “Val” dive bombers,…and the PAINT JOB is what differentiates the two versions.
Tall Paul
%20Yel%20S%26N-01CC.jpg)
@coachofmany:
Unless HBG add these to the bottom of Carrier Based Tac Bombers and a Bomb to fighter, so any ordinance would be carrier based.
Awesome! Adding ordnance makes great sculpts even better! I am in love with the idea, however, I personally do not see the need to only have bombs on navalized aircraft. Why not do it on all of them? Otherwise, people will constantly be flipping planes over to check their gender, as it were. Seems like having such an identifying feature on the bottom is less than ideal. In either case, I love the concept and hope it is adopted.
I know there was talk of adding a torpedo to the Kate a while back, but as I understand it there were some balance issues involved. Which brings up another point of contention… how will bombs be implemented for aircraft that don’t have their landing gear out and have a flat bottom? Seems like the balance issue comes back again.
@Tall:
––I don’t see being able to DIFFERENIATE between land and carrier based aircraft should be any problem at all. I figured out a solution a long time ago. To put it simply you use different PAINT SCHEMES to identify between land or sea based aircraft. You don’t have to go to extreme lengths to have them painted EXACTLY the right way,…just enough to represent it’s service.
Agreed. Very easy to do and to recognize.
The issues I brought up dealt more specifically with pieces that would not be painted. Plus, I question how many people even on these forums could differentiate between an F6F and a P-47 … let alone closer comparisons like:
a Zero and an Oscar
or Val and a Kate
or an Avenger and a Dauntless
or Dauntless and Helldiver
or a P-40 and a P-51
I suspect many people in the customization area likely can, but perhaps not as many elsewhere.
HBG has always wanted to add simple ordinance just for this BUT, NOT everybody paints their pieces, NOT every knows their aircraft, NOT everybody even cares, they just want to play, so HBG has tried to offer many different pieces as well as sizes for the various players. Global 1936 WILL have optional rules for Land and Carrier aircraft so we will have some pieces showing the torpedoes and bombs.
@coachofmany:
HBG has always wanted to add simple ordinance just for this BUT, NOT everybody paints their pieces, NOT every knows their aircraft, NOT everybody even cares, they just want to play, so HBG has tried to offer many different pieces as well as sizes for the various players. Global 1936 WILL have optional rules for Land and Carrier aircraft so we will have some pieces showing the torpedoes and bombs.
That is awesome, Coach! :-D
@coachofmany:
HBG has always wanted to add simple ordinance just for this BUT, NOT everybody paints their pieces, NOT every knows their aircraft, NOT everybody even cares, they just want to play, so HBG has tried to offer many different pieces as well as sizes for the various players. Global 1936 WILL have optional rules for Land and Carrier aircraft so we will have some pieces showing the torpedoes and bombs.
Right on! More power to you guys. You certainly know what you are doing.
My point being that there are blurred lines here and it may be impractical to really try differentiating between land and carrier based planes in A&A. Particularly by the sculpt alone. I would say that of my regular play group, I am the only one who would have no trouble naming unit types/names/classes. While the others in my group are quite educated about the war, they are not technically knowledgeable and having to identify different fighters as land or carrier based would be an unnecessary burden on gameplay for them. I suspect this would be the case with 97% of people who would play Axis & Allies.
I must be lucky because I don’t have this problem. 90% of our group can recognize the pieces.(Including airplane)
Like some guys I repainted my naval and air force airplane
I don’t mean to shoot down ideas, but it does seem impractical from a number of standpoints. Granted, you can do as you please, and I will be differentiating naval and land based planes in my game through paint schemes. However, I doubt that I would institute a rule that a Mustang or a Jug couldn’t land on a carrier. Just simpler for everyone if I don’t go that deep. At least not at first.
Impractical? maybe for you but not for us. We play with different air plane for a decade…
I felt alone 10 years ago. HGB didn’t exist. I ordered a lot of stuff from different companies.
Now it’s easier to get what you want…
AL
Impractical? maybe for you but not for us. We play with different air plane for a decade…
I felt alone 10 years ago. HGB didn’t exist. I ordered a lot of stuff from different companies.
Now it’s easier to get what you want…AL
Hey, more power to you man. And good for your guys that they don’t call a B-29 a B-17 or call a P-38 a P-47. I still hold that 97% of Axis & Allies players would not be able to visually identify the majority of sculpts by their actual designations. Perhaps that is beside the point.
It is awesome to have a company like HBG around. I used to think it was awesome when OOB added a new unit type/sculpt because it meant more variety and usually detail. Now OOB is pretty useless to me. HBG is great beyond what I could have hoped for when I began playing A&A. I hope we never take them for granted.
Take for Instance the A1 Skyraider, we show a torpedo, which it did carry, and bombs and missiles. (Carrier fighter or Tac Bomber)
HBG will use it as a Tac Bomber in an upcoming set.
Hey, more power to you man. And good for your guys that they don’t call a B-29 a B-17 or call a P-38 a P-47. I still hold that 97% of Axis & Allies players would not be able to visually identify the majority of sculpts by their actual designations. Perhaps that is beside the point.
Well, I just hope they can recognized Germany and Japan units. :-D
But it will be really interesting to see panzergrenadier kick the ass of a IJN soldier…
AL
Ah,ah, I received my new order yesterday….
As usual…great stuff…
I started to paint my truck and Italian planes…
Thank coach.
@coachofmany:
Take for Instance the A1 Skyraider, we show a torpedo, which it did carry, and bombs and missiles. (Carrier fighter or Tac Bomber)
Very nice!
A tank busting Stuka with 37 mm guns would be cool too.
The G: my fav Stuka by far, Koba.
Yes, my favourite of WW2.
Just wicked.
Ok coach…you got me….
I’ve got the glider from shapeways…Not bad at all…
A little big compare to my others planes but I think I will order the full set…
AL
A tank busting Stuka with 37 mm guns would be cool too.
That piece is shown in the Kursk set. Look under “boxed games”. There’s also an Elefant Tank Destroyer and a KV-1 Tank.
