Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

I dont know about having bother trucks and half tracks, sounds like much of a muchness to me.

Half tracks and self propelled artillery would be much cooler. Just my 2 cents.

Cost of Trucks?

Cost of heavy tanks?

Also, what of the two kinds of infantry?

You could have an elite commando unit, like marines or SS, but they’d cost 4.  Why waste 4 IPCs on a 2-2-1 unit when you can buy a 2-2-2 unit for the same price?  They’d have to have some other special ability, wouldn’t they?

@Imperious:

Mech does not carry infantry…, that makes it too powerful. just a 2-2-2-4 unit except id allow them to blitz.

Yeah, I figured if Mech could carry infantry, I’d have to beef up tanks and artillery, too: Artillery bombard in opening fire, tanks carry 1 infantry (riding on top) and support infantry +1 attack.

I am very interested.  I’ll be in on 1 set for preorder.

Could anyone help direct me in the direction of a good AA50 map that I could plot?  I have access to a very nice plotter and possibly the laminator.  I need a gameboard that is easier to travel with than the one the game comes with.

–------------------------

Edit:  Not sure if you are still looking for ideas on sculpts or not.  I was thinking that perhaps 2 different sculpts of planes would be a better idea than 2 different armour sculpts.  1 Fighter that was land based for each and 1 fighter that was CV based.  This would particularly be best for the US and Japan actually.

A few sculpt suggestions:

Russian Bomber: Tu-2 or Pe-2
Russian Fighter: Yak-9u or La-5
US Bomber: B-24 for a 4 engine bomber or A-20 if your looking for a 2 engine bomber
US Fighter: the F6F would be a good one if looking for a CV based fighter or the p47d40 for a land based army airforce plane
UK Bomber: Lancaster
UK Fighter: Tempest (upgraded typhoon)
German Fighter: FW190A8 or the long nosed 190D9.
German Bomber: JU88 or HE-111 would work
Japan Fighter: A6M5 for cv’s, Ki84 for airforce
Japan Bomber: Mitsubishi G4M “Betty”
Italian Fighter: C205 or better yet the Fiat G.55 Centaur
Italian Bomber: Savoia-Marchetti SM.79 Sparviero

-peace!

I voted very interested but i will pre order for sure.

It’s been awhile since we heard anything on the pieces project. @ FMG - is everything alright with the pieces project and with you guys in general? I hope nothing is wrong, but I tend to fear for the worst in many cases.

Or is this maybe the ‘calm before the storm,’ so to speak? I.e. are we about to receive a large update on the status of the project; maybe even some pictures of the prototype sculpts from the sculptor?

Yeah, I figured if Mech could carry infantry, I’d have to beef up tanks and artillery, too: Artillery bombard in opening fire, tanks carry 1 infantry (riding on top) and support infantry +1 attack.

Upside-down Turtle

Keep in mind that units are general representations of Divisions, Airwings and fleets.  In this case the Halftrack is representing Mechanized Infantry.  As IL pointed out, most Mech Infantry divisions included, halftrack, armored wheel vehicles, light tanks AND infantry.  So to allow a Mech Infantry unit to carry infantry would be distorting the power of that unit.

Also, what of the two kinds of infantry?

Personally, the way A&A is set-up, having two or more infantry is not practical.

Commando units for example did not operate in Division size units.  At the most they were no bigger than than several brigades in size.  Also, commando units in WWII were created to perform a specific task.  These special tasks are harder to integrate such units on a large Strategic game like A&A.  However, these unit might find some use in games like D-Day and Guadalcanal which are much closer to a tactical game.

Now there were specialized infantry divisions such as Airborne, SS, Russian shock Troops and to a lesser extent Marines (But I personally wouldn’t classify them as such.  They are simply a naval infantry).  So if such unit were created then they should have some limited specialized ability.  Airborne can be transported by plane, SS have a special attack or defense against armor, Russian shock troops get a +1 attack on the first assault, Marine get a +1 attack on the first wave of a beach attack and so on.

Now, if you create such units they should obviously cost more.  However, now you run into another problem, cost.  If infantry is 3 IPCs, Mech Infantry-4 and Armor-5.  Where does that leave special infantry?  The most logical choice would be 4 IPC but in most cases the mech infantry will be superior to these special infantry divisions.  With this in mind, the only unit I see of any value under these condition would be Airborne divisions if they are allowed to move underspecial conditions without using aircraft unit (I would assume that airborne divisions would included aircraft for transportation).

This scheme might work

C   M      A D  Special
Airborne          4   1       2 1    2 or less opneing fire shots when airdroped, drops cost 4 ipcs each   
Waffen-SS      4   1       1  2  can target tank units (Germany only)
Shock Troops   3   1      1  1   attacks at 2 the first round of combat (SU only)
Marines           4   1      2  1   attacks at 3 the first round of an amphibious assault ( US only)
Static division  2   0      0  2   (Germany Only) can be built in any orginally own terriotry, up to as many as the ipc value
mech/motr inf  4    2      1  2  can blitz, can be supported by artillery

All of these units have their own historically accurate purpose not fullfilled by the mech inf unit, while the mech inf is still usefull for high speed cannon fodder

I just found out that the Nova edition of the game allowed for each side to have “Commandos”.  I’ll have to look into it some more.

Emperor Taiki

That’s not a bad system you’ve created and I kind of like it but I see two draw backs.

The first is your stats for your Mech/Motor Infantry.  Mechanized and Motorized Infantry are two different things.  Motorized Inf. is essentially infantry that is moved by a large number of trucks.  Mechanized Infantry is infantry that moves in armored transports and supported by light armor vehicles and tanks.  The stats you created I think are well suited for Motorized Inf. but not Mech Inf. I would give Mech Inf, the following.

C M A D
Mech Inf.  4  2 2 2

But here lies the problem.  As I mentioned earlier, if you do this, you pretty much make all the other units worthless.  The only way to really solve this issue is to essentially create a new cost system.  For example make standard Infantry 2 IPC, Specialized Inf 3 IPC and Mech Inf 4 IPC.

The other drawback is that it adds a lot more complexity to the game.  One nice thing about A&A is it’s simplicity.  If you go that route with Infantry, you can easily do the same with armor, heavy, medium, light, tank-killers and aircraft too.  Where would it stop?  The biggest problem though is where would you find all the units to represent them?

One other thing I would change with your stats is the Marines.  I would only give them a 2-attack for the first round of a beach assault.  A 3 attack is simply too strong in my opinion.

The Nova game did not have elite infantry to every nation, it had one National Advantage, like Marines to USA, Radar to UK, SS-Panzer to Germany, Kamikaze to japan and mobile factories to USSR, if I remember correct.

If each nation should have an elite infantry, should this unit have the same ability for every nations ? US and Uk had large units of both marines and paratroopers, but Japan and USSR had almost none paratroopers. Should we split it ?

All elite infantry cost 4 IPC and move 1 space.

USA - Marines, attack at 2 in first combat round in Amphibious Assalt
USA - Paratrooper, attack at 2 in first combat round when dropped from a bomber.

UK - Commandoes, attack at 2 in first combat round in Amphibious Assalt

USSR - Partisan, defend at 3 in all USSR home territories

Germany - Fallschirmjaeger, attack at 2 in first combat round when dropped from a bomber
Germany - Panzergrenadier, attack at 2 with a matching tank

Japan - Imperial Marines, attack at 2 in first combat round in Amphibious Assalt

Italy - Alpini mountain divisions, defend at 3

or like this

US/ UK/USSR/Germany/Japan/Italy:
Elite infantry - cost 4, move 1
-Attack at 2 in first combat round in Amphibious Assalt
-Attack at 2 in first combat round when dropped from a bomber
-Defend at 3 in every home territory.

Is this balanced ?

Another way is to give special units to some nations:

USA

• Heavy bomber. Sculpt of Superfortress. Cost 20, move 8, roll 2 dice
• Marines. etc

UK

• Radar tower. Fighters in this terr. defend on 5 or less.
• Commandoes

USSR

• Heavy artillery. cost 6, move 1. Attack on 3.  Defend on 4 or less.
• Partisan. Defend on 3 or less in home territory

Germany

• Panzercorps. sculpt of Tiger. cost 6, move 2. Attack on 4, defend on 3 or less
  -Fallschirmjaeger
  -Rocket
  -Jet fighter. sculpt of me262

Japan
-Kamikaze. sculpt of zero fighter. target capital ships on suicide raid

• Banzai suicide submarines
• Human wave suicide attacking infantry

Italy
-White flag units. may retreat when defending

I think elite infantry are too complex to insert into the game.  The stats presented earlier by Emperor Taiki don’t work because they give the special infantry a defense of 1.  I wouldn’t want to defend the point that US Marines defend at a lower value than standard infantry, nor would I want to say US airborne troops defend at a 1 (consider Bastogne <sp?>).  I think Black Fox makes the correct point that game balance would be very tough to get right.  Even with his system, a Mech unit costs 4, moves 2, attacks and defends on a 2.  I doubt folks would buy artillery, except to take islands because any extra movement is lost in an amphib attack.  If grunt infantry were reduced to a cost of 2 IPC, then tanks and artillery go down in value, a lot.  I just don’t see the way to keep play balance, and the additional complexity would be tough to control.  Also, if I have to deliver airborne troops with a bomber, do I lose a bomber attack of 4 in the process?  A bomber attacking at a 4 is much better than an airdroped infantry that attacks at a 2 (or 3) the first round.

For my part, I would rather have a Chinese infantry piece and an Aussie infantry piece.  It might be nice to have an Afrika Corps German infantry piece also.</sp?>

@Black:

Emperor Taiki

That’s not a bad system you’ve created and I kind of like it but I see two draw backs.

The first is your stats for your Mech/Motor Infantry.  Mechanized and Motorized Infantry are two different things.  Motorized Inf. is essentially infantry that is moved by a large number of trucks.  Mechanized Infantry is infantry that moves in armored transports and supported by light armor vehicles and tanks.  The stats you created I think are well suited for Motorized Inf. but not Mech Inf. I would give Mech Inf, the following.

C M A D
Mech Inf.  4  2 2 2

But here lies the problem.  As I mentioned earlier, if you do this, you pretty much make all the other units worthless.  The only way to really solve this issue is to essentially create a new cost system.  For example make standard Infantry 2 IPC, Specialized Inf 3 IPC and Mech Inf 4 IPC.

The other drawback is that it adds a lot more complexity to the game.  One nice thing about A&A is it’s simplicity.  If you go that route with Infantry, you can easily do the same with armor, heavy, medium, light, tank-killers and aircraft too.  Where would it stop?  The biggest problem though is where would you find all the units to represent them?

One other thing I would change with your stats is the Marines.  I would only give them a 2-attack for the first round of a beach assault.  A 3 attack is simply too strong in my opinion.

I agree, playing with elit infatry really is not a good idea , i have played with many complex house rules and even bought mintures to represent units, but most of the time i still chose to play thre regular game ( i dont even like playing with the NOs now). i was just giving a possible list that would work if you had a enough time on your hands to play such a complcated game

Emperor Taiki don’t work because they give the special infantry a defense of 1.

I totally spaced that one.  I agree with Dino that all infantry should have at least 2 in defense.

The only real specialty infantry I would use is paratroopers since they have big strategic value and I would make it available to all.  I have created a rule for the use of paratroopers that uses existing pieces. Let me know what you think.

Paratrooper Rules Version 1
Each nation may choose to deploy airborne infantry.  To activate, players must purchases an airborne marker for 1 IPC for each infantry unit that will be deployed by air. 
A maximum of 3 Airborne markers may be available for use at any one time. 
An Airborne unit may be deployed up to a range of 3 space (One way) from a friendly territory.
Airborne units are deployed in the attack phase.
Airborne units may be engaged by anti-aircraft guns as if they were aircraft. 
An Airborne unit attacks on a 2 the first round.  After first round.  Airborne units operate as normal infantry.
If supply line rules are used, Airborne Inf. is not affected.  Keep airborne marker with infantry to identify unit.

My thought here is that paratroopers were not used very often.  One reason was that they were expensive.  Two, they were not heavily equipt and designed for prolonged engagements.

The purpose for paying to use them is to essentially to pay for the use of the aircraft.  Also, it is to prevent them from being abused.  People will think twice about using them if you have to pay for it.

Let me know what you think.

the main porblem with those rules is that you have made transports obsolete

id dont like the idea of upgrading units with paratorroper abilites in the feild, it is not what happened in the war and airbourne units are very differently equiped from infatry units.

I now think airbourne should cost 3 and the “airboune marker or transport” should also cost 3 and can only be used once. airbourne units should also have range of only 2, i dont see any historical situation of airbourne use that would justify a 3 space range.

they also cannot capture terriotry( but perhaps they can still stay in auncaptured terriory after a battle), and the 2 or less attack the first turn should be able to pick its causaulty if it results in a hit. This represents paratroopers ability to attack behind the lines where every they land and take out stratigic targets.

I also defend the airbourne units having a defence of 1, airbourne units are lightly equiped and can only take and hold terriotry if supported by other units. Bastogne is one example that is an exception, but even there the defenders were only rescued by armor and air support.

these rules stimulate historical play. paratroopers are very powerful weapons but only when supported by other units.

Perhaps i do not understand Blck Fox’s rules but the way i understand it is i have the option

paying 8 ipcs( 6 FOR TwO INF +2 for two markers) and have a range of 3 and a 2 or less first strike.

or i could pay 15 ipcs(3 for inf, 5 for tank, 7 for tran) + i have to pay for all the ships needed to defened the tran from air and sub attacks in order for me to land two units with no first strike ability.

hard joice huh :roll:

i would also get rid of the limit, although IL’s are symetrical i have yet to hear the historical reasoning behind them.

a good game limits units by their utility not by some artificial cap.

also, if dont c how tanks keep airborne soldiers from getting to the rear and executing their first strike ability.

i would like to hear some more critisim of my airborne units, for i think they are much more balanced and provided for deeper historical and stratigic play.