Yes, Japanese Tiger Tanks are the best…
I’m also fond of the 1941 game’s green and tan IS-2 tanks. Having the Americans and the British operating Russian heavy tanks named after Joseph Stalin is a splendid tribute to Allied wartime cooperation between the decadent capitalists and the godless communists…er, I mean between the gallant Anglo-Americans and the heroic Soviets.
@CWO:
Yes, Japanese Tiger Tanks are the best…
I’m also fond of the 1941 game’s green and tan IS-2 tanks. Having the Americans and the British operating Russian heavy tanks named after Joseph Stalin is a splendid tribute to Allied wartime cooperation between the decadent capitalists and the godless communists…er, I mean between the gallant Anglo-Americans and the heroic Soviets.Â
Indeed… 1941 is a very odd game… for every five national units of any given type (fighters, bombers, tanks, etc), TWO nations get it right, and THREE nations get it wrong.
I can, however attest to the fact that there is at least several Mitsubishi Tiger Tanks, General Motors and Rolls Royce IS-2 tanks sitting at the bottom of a Florida land-fill somewhere.
You got it right the first time, Marc.
I hate that the Tanks are wrong and have not used them, although I am not sure I would go as far as you, Wolfschanze, by throwing them away. I can live with the ships and aeroplanes being wrong, just. Tanks being my thing.
@wittmann:
I hate that the Tanks are wrong and have not used them, although I am not sure I would go as far as you, Wolfschanze, by throwing them away. I can live with the ships and aeroplanes being wrong, just. Tanks being my thing.
Well 3 nations out of every 5 have the wrong units for each unit-type in 1941.
Why did I throw them away? Why would I keep them is the better question! Simply put, I can NEVER see a scenario where I’m going to say to myself “Gee… what this game needs is more Japanese Tiger Tanks” (or American IS-2s or so on and so on). If it’s flat-out something a certain country never ever used, I’m just not going to have it in my game… however, some things that are “wrong” in 1941, actually aren’t all that wrong, thanks to Lend-Lease… they used the American P-40 Warhawk for all Allied Nation’s fighters in 1941… as much as WotC tried to screw me over on that one, last laugh is on them, because I kept my UK and Soviet P-40s since both flew them under Lend Lease. American IS-2 tanks? Nope, in the dumpster they go.
The only logical reason I can see for holding onto all these ‘wrong’ units is because you have no other choice but to use them… like someone who ONLY owns 1941 and never bought extra units or combined it with anything else… then ya… Japan needs SOMETHING to represent tanks, so Mitsubishi Tigers for everyone! In my case, 1941 is not my only copy of the game… if Japan needs tanks, I use the Type-95 Ha-Go’s from 1942.2, and I bought extra to boot from HBG (I think Japan has 30 Type-95s in my bins)… same goes for any other nation that got something “wrong”, it was replaced and/or reinforced from 1942 and HBG… so (for me anyways) there’s absolutely no reason to hold onto my Mitsubishi Tiger Tanks… if anybody wanted them, they should have spoke up! :wink:
What a sad lot you are! :roll: Stop retaining your posteriors and get a life! :-P
so (for me anyways) there’s absolutely no reason to hold onto my Mitsubishi Tiger Tanks… if anybody wanted them, they should have spoke up!
I wish I had. :-D
I keep all of my A&A sculpts, which I think of as collectibles as much as playing units, and I deal with national incongruities via the sorting process for my collection. About half of my A&A sculpts are sorted into nation-based trays that I regard as the primary units for each player power; this more or less corresponds to the Global 1940 Second Edition array of sculpts, plus any sculpts from other games which are identical to them in terms of basic design (e.g. a Spitfire), of current design version (e.g. the current flat-winged Spitfire, as opposed to the older uptilted-wing one) and of colour and shade (e.g. the current light-tan Spitfires).
Everything else gets sorted into auxiliary trays. In terms of the 1941 tank sculpts, for example, the black German Tiger tanks and marroon Russian IS-2 tanks reside in a set of trays that could be described as “supplementary special units of particular nations, having the correct design and colour”. The wrong-colour green, tan and orange 1941 tanks are in another set of trays that could be described as “current-design sculpts that are the right colour for a particular country but which are the wrong design for that nation.” That’s actually a large number of trays because it’s not just the 1941 pieces that have that problem; for example there’s the French equipment pieces, which are a mixture of Russian and Anglo-American designs (or the mainstream non-British UK transport ship, or the maintream non-Russian USSR aircraft carrier, both of which I’ve replaced in the primary-units tray with their correct-nation 1941 counterparts). I also have a tray of what I call “collector’s variants” sculpts, where I put oddities like the alternate-version Russian and German artillery sculpts.
Getting even further and further away from the primary trays, I have trays of 1940 American sculpts that are the right design and the right colour but the wrong shade (yellowish-green as opposed to medium green), and I have trays of older sculpts which are in obsolete older colours and/or which are older designs (like the “pre-refreshed” infantry sculpts that were used in the first few A&A games). And then I have trays of statistical outliers like the 1914 sculpts and the generic equipment sculpts from the Milton Bradley edition of A&A. (I also have quite a few trays of sculpts that aren’t official A&A pieces, like for instance the ones from HBG, but we won’t get into that.)
From a practical point of view, all of the above is unnecessarily complicated…but as I said, I view my A&A sculpts as collectible items, and it’s not unusual for collectors (of anything) to pay attention to the fine details of the multiple variations and subcategories of models that have been produced of whetever item they’re collecting. Part of the payoff for this kind of obsessiveness is that a collector will take great satisfaction from owning a rare or unique version of something (like a coin with a minting error), even if a non-collector might miss the point completely (“What’s the big deal? That’s just a nickel and these days a nickel is hardly worth anything”).
@Private:
What a sad lot you are! :roll: Stop retaining your posteriors and get a life! :-P
And you call me anal retentive? Did you read how CWO Marc organizes his units? I bet he uses a label gun (seen below) to annotate each of his unit bins with accurate descriptions.
I have six nation bins… five for the major powers and one “neutral” bin that stores my factories, chits and I think I tossed my Italians in there too. If its the current color and the right equipment for that nation, its in that bin… that means the Germans have both Panthers and Tigers in their tank bin… the UK has both Matildas and Shermans (lend-lease) in their tank bin… England has Spitfires, P-40s, Hurricanes and Swordfish in their fighter bin (don’t talk to me about Swordfish being “fighters”, but as they are the only planes that can land on Carriers in 1941/1942, they look awesome on British Carriers). So on and so on.
The only units NOT in my nation bins are either because they just didn’t “work out” for me (some too small or too big HBG units, though I sold most of those off), and/or something I decided I just didn’t like for one reason or another (the uber-flat German assault transports from 1942 I never liked… I first replaced them with the 1941 German transports, and later the new HBG German transports… so now both my 1941 and 1942 german transports are not in the national bins). All my units that didn’t make it into the nation bins are unceremoniously tossed into small ziplock bags by country (one bag with all black units, one bag with all orange units, etc, etc) and then those bags are tossed into a bigger ziplock bag… simply known as my “bag of unloved units”. They sit in of my game boxes and just don’t get used or need to be used as my national bins (of loved units) are quite full… I didn’t go nuts in subdividing like CWO Marc and his embossing gun did…
Well, what I’m going to do is add 1 IPC value to every territory. Course I’m not going to play it except to teach my younger siblings…
Quote from: Benito Mussolini on July 05, 2017, 02:15:43 pm
CAN’T WAIT FOR THE TIGERS!!!Yes, Japanese Tiger Tanks are the best…
Let me rephrase: CAN"T WAIT TO PAINT THOSE JAPANESE TIGERS BLACK!!!
Did you read how CWO Marc organizes his units? I bet he uses a label gun (seen below) to annotate each of his unit bins with accurate descriptions.
Actually, I hand-write my box labels with a felt pen on peel-away sticky envelope labels, whose top edge I trim with scissors to make them fit the box edge where I need to apply them. I don’t own an embossing gun. (Nor do I have particularly neat handwriting, even though do I try to make an effort to make my handwritten labels look more or less decent.) The box labels aren’t terribly complex; they say things like “USA-1” “USA-2” for multi-tray nations and “FRANCE” for single-tray nations. The boxes don’t even have flag labels on them (unlike the ones on your trays, which incidentally look quite nice). Some of the trays aren’t yet labeled (they just have a handwritten note inside) because I’ve been too busy for a while to complete some of the sorting work…which is probably just as well, given that the Anniversary reprint allegedly contains new sculpts which may require a bit of rejiggering of the auxiliary trays.
@CWO:
The boxes don’t even have flag labels on them (unlike the ones on your trays, which incidentally look quite nice).
TY, there’s a little anal-retentiveness in all of us… having said that…
Somehow, I think if Marc went fishing, it would go a little something like this…
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/anal-retentive-fishing/n9787?snl=1
I don’t fish either. Never saw the point. Though I’ve heard that this activity is somewhat popular among various folks here and there.
@CWO:
I don’t fish either. Never saw the point. Though I’ve heard that this activity is somewhat popular among various folks here and there.
I was just “fishing” for an excuse to post that video… it’s damn funny.
I was just “fishing” for an excuse to post that video… it’s damn funny.
The irony is that I use plastic tackle boxes as my sculpt storage trays.
Wow, you guys make me feel ashamed about the hundreds of A&A classic games that I have played with those "one shape fits all " units. But, I get it….we have all come a long way since those “good old days”… I too find the punkin Orange Tigers a little unusual…but I will find a good use for them …if I live long enough.
@Loose:
But, I get it….we have all come a long way since those “good old days”…
We certainly have. My collection includes several trays of those old cheap plastic Xeno clones of the original Milton Bradley A&A units, in a variety of colours, and to me they are a reminder of the Dark Ages, when the Xeno sculpts were more or less the only thing available to supplement the (at the time) small array of official A&A sculpts, for example in order to add extra countries like France. By contrast, the number of official A&A sculpts available today is very large indeed. (France even has two sets of official A&A sculpts nowadays: the ones from 1940 and the ones from 1914, which are virtually the same colour and which are useful for, let’s say distinguishing Free French / Vichy units.)
@Loose:
Wow, you guys make me feel ashamed about the hundreds of A&A classic games that I have played with those "one shape fits all " units. But, I get it….we have all come a long way since those “good old days”… I too find the punkin Orange Tigers a little unusual…but I will find a good use for them …if I live long enough.Â
For the record, I still have way more games of Classic 1980s A&A under my belt than all games of 1941 and 1942 combined and multiplied a few times. Now that I have the fully upgraded and much-customized “way more cooler” version today than I had in the 80s… I lack the number of friends that want to play a board game in the 21st century compared to what I had back in the 20th century.
I appreciate everything you said, we are in the same boat. I got the gear…getting more time available, but like you finding folks in my area (Eastern Shore Maryland ) is the hardest part of the challenge.
So have we come up with a solution to the purchasing problem? Or do I just bin it all and teach my 9 year old 42.2 or 50? I’d love to make this version work as it would be great for a pub battle. I’m tempted to do the +1 to every territory.
So have we come up with a solution to the purchasing problem? Or do I just bin it all and teach my 9 year old 42.2 or 50? I’d love to make this version work as it would be great for a pub battle. I’m tempted to do the +1 to every territory.
IMHO, 1941 is more a learning tool to introduce people to the game than a staple of the series. Once someone has the basics down, you’d be better-off moving-on to either 1942.2 or the new Anniversary Edition, then you don’t have to worry about “fixing” the money issue in 1941.
@Nowhere:
So have we come up with a solution to the purchasing problem? Or do I just bin it all and teach my 9 year old 42.2 or 50? I’d love to make this version work as it would be great for a pub battle. I’m tempted to do the +1 to every territory.
IMHO, 1941 is more a learning tool to introduce people to the game than a staple of the series. Once someone has the basics down, you’d be better-off moving-on to either 1942.2 or the new Anniversary Edition, then you don’t have to worry about “fixing” the money issue in 1941.
Well, I agree with your assessment of the games and will do so with my son. But we don’t always have time for the larger games so I was looking for a way to get more purchasing power into a small quick game. I like the simplicity of this one over, say, Revised. It takes a lot of the “level 2” rules out which is great for him. But I want him to explore more complex buys.
