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.
Thanks Knp. Might just do that.
HBG has a few games in the works. I think the next one planned will be Midway.
There is another called “Plan Orange” which covers a great naval conflict between the US and Japan in the 1930s that of course never came about. Apparently there were to be interesting ship classes that never actually got built. In the pictures to the side, they show a couple of Japanese battleship models that were planned but never built as well as the Kaga aircraft carrier with 3 flight decks. I would like to see that one, not only the sculpt but that would have been a really cool ship to see for real. I wonder how a 3 deck carrier would have worked. Just imagine the elevator system that would have to be in place.
HBG has a few games in the works. I think the next one planned will be Midway.
There is another called “Plan Orange” which covers a great naval conflict between the US and Japan in the 1930s that of course never came about. Apparently there were to be interesting ship classes that never actually got built. In the pictures to the side, they show a couple of Japanese battleship models that were planned but never built as well as the Kaga aircraft carrier with 3 flight decks. I would like to see that one, not only the sculpt but that would have been a really cool ship to see for real. I wonder how a 3 deck carrier would have worked. Just imagine the elevator system that would have to be in place.
Midway, is the one I’m interested in, but may consider the other. The German and Russian board game, I am interested, as well as the Civil War. Lots of great stuff, HBG has in the works.
Hopefully, someday, my Vietnam game, will be made as well. :-D
Maybe I’m imagining it, but I think there’s a Japanese Battleship/Carrier, AKA a battleship with a flight deck. That’s a cool if not impractical vessel.
Maybe I’m imagining it, but I think there’s a Japanese Battleship/Carrier, AKA a battleship with a flight deck. That’s a cool if not impractical vessel.
No, you are not imagining it. There were two battleship/carrier hybrids; the Ise and the Hyuga. They came about after the devastating loss of 4 fleet carriers at Midway. Japan was desperately trying to make up for the lost carriers. It was a novel idea, but I don’t think either one of the ships worked out very well.
No, you are not imagining it. There were two battleship/carrier hybrids; the Ise and the Hyuga. They came about after the devastating loss of 4 fleet carriers at Midway. Japan was desperately trying to make up for the lost carriers. It was a novel idea, but I don’t think either one of the ships worked out very well.
I likewise don’t recall those two hybrids being very successful. Battleships and aircraft carriers are too different to be amalgamated into a single ship serving both purposes. The WWI-era HMS Furious, as originally completed, had even worse problems because it tried to combine features from four different ship types: the size and speed of a battlecruiser, the light hull construction and thin armour of a light cruiser, a carrier-type flying-off deck, and an 18-inch twin-gun battleship turret comparable to the three-gun 18.1-inch turrets used on the Yamato in WWII. It turned out to be a lemon; the hull was so lightly constructed and its main guns were so powerful that sheared rivet heads would fall from the ship every time a salvo was fired. The Royal Navy eventually cut its losses and converted it to a full carrier.
Guys,
––I remember HBG had some time ago announced their future “Tank-Busting Stuka” to be in their future “KURSK” game, so here’s a pic. Enjoy!
Tall Paul
Maybe I’m imagining it, but I think there’s a Japanese Battleship/Carrier, AKA a battleship with a flight deck. That’s a cool if not impractical vessel.
No, you are not imagining it. There were two battleship/carrier hybrids; the Ise and the Hyuga. They came about after the devastating loss of 4 fleet carriers at Midway. Japan was desperately trying to make up for the lost carriers. It was a novel idea, but I don’t think either one of the ships worked out very well.
Slated for 2015
