Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

@dadler12:

Agreed.  The Essex is hardly a tech piece.  There were more Essex class carriers used in WW2 than any other class.

I like IL’s other choices though.
I wonder about the B-29 as a Tech piece, but it could be.

@coachofmany:

@knp7765:

I just don’t think that one of FMG’s tanks should duplicate the OOB Sherman.  We have tons of them already so both of FMGs tanks should be something different.

What about a “Grant” medium tank?

It would be great for an “early-war” oriented set, but a lousy fit for FMG’s overall line-up.  I mean Grant’s vs. Tiger II’s!?!  He’s already done pretty much the best that Germany had to offer (…though it would have been nice to have an FW-190 instead of an Me-109, though the performance of each improved greatly over the course of the war as each got new engine upgrades, so it’s not as though the 109 is really a BAD fit; it’s just that it seems like a missed opportunity to stray from the oob norms without downgrading…) but anyway, seeing as how he’s giving us all of Germany’s best, it seems backwards in the extreme to go backwards rather than forwards.  I see how some think the Pershing is a “bridge too far” for some, though I still think the perfect line-up would be late-war Sherman and Pershing, with the M36 as an acceptable compromise for second tank.  M18 is then my 4th choice (or perhaps, as my 3rd choice for second tank; I certainly think that one of them needs to be a tank rather than a TD), with early-war Sherman and M10 being ones I truly hope FMG doesn’t do.

@coachofmany:

@knp7765:

I just don’t think that one of FMG’s tanks should duplicate the OOB Sherman.  We have tons of them already so both of FMGs tanks should be something different.

What about a “Grant” medium tank?

The Grant was the one with the 75mm gun mounted on the side and a turret mounted 37mm gun, right?  That would be cool for FMG to make along with some sort of SPG/TD for the second armor.  Of course, Dr Larsen is right that we would be taking a step backwards in that case.  Since you are making the M5 Stuart, I think a late war Sherman would still be the best bet, like the M4A3.  Didn’t some Shermans come out with something like an 85mm gun to try and match the Tiger’s firepower?  And the turrets on those were a little different from the earlier M4A1 Shermans with 75mm guns, I think.

Well, Shermans came in a confusing variety of versions, but from a visual standpoint the two key changes that will distinguish it from the oob version are:

1. Welded rather than cast hull; this gives a more squared look.  (This characteristic isn’t necessarily an improvement per se, but does lend a very different look than the highly rounded cast-hull look)

2. 76mm rather than 75mm gun (which involves both a longer barrel and a different turret, again giving a significantly different look for FMG to mold.)

The difference in capability between the 75mm and 76mm Sherman is very analogous to the difference between the short-barrelled and long-barrelled Panzer IV or between the T-34/76 and T-34/85.  There were Shermans with even bigger guns, “Super-Shermans” if you will, but they were mostly a post-war tank and used mainly by allies and not the US itself because the US had already moved beyond the Sherman to the M-26… to the M-46… to the M-47 but by this point we’re deep into the Korean War.

There were also suspension changes, perhaps the biggest being the HVSS suspension, typified by the “-E8” variants referred to by the troops in a deliberate pun as the “Easy 8” both because of their smoother ride and “Easy” being the military shorthand for the letter “E.”  And, of course, there were numerous engine variants, though this would hardly be visible in a game piece.  In theory, I suppose, any given M4 Sherman can be found with any given combination of hull-type, gun-type, suspension-type and engine type, though of course in practice the ones that worked better gradually  replaced the ones that didn’t work so well, so that the HVSS suspension models tended to have the later gun and engine versions since it was one of the last innovations to come into use… The “-A3” (or “-A1” or “-A2” or “A4” or “A6”)  designation after the M4 in the terminology was mostly about engine type, rather than being a simple linear improvement, so an “M4A4” isn’t necessarily better than and “M3A3.”  Probably the definitive war-time variant was the “M4A3E8(76)W,” which incorporated all of the improvements learned by war-time experience.

@knp7765:

@coachofmany:

@knp7765:

I just don’t think that one of FMG’s tanks should duplicate the OOB Sherman.  We have tons of them already so both of FMGs tanks should be something different.

What about a “Grant” medium tank?

The Grant was the one with the 75mm gun mounted on the side and a turret mounted 37mm gun, right?  That would be cool for FMG to make along with some sort of SPG/TD for the second armor.  Of course, Dr Larsen is right that we would be taking a step backwards in that case.  Since you are making the M5 Stuart, I think a late war Sherman would still be the best bet, like the M4A3.  Didn’t some Shermans come out with something like an 85mm gun to try and match the Tiger’s firepower?  And the turrets on those were a little different from the earlier M4A1 Shermans with 75mm guns, I think.

I think you’re thinking of the Sherman M4A3’s equipped with 105 mm howitzers. These really didn’t see action until the US was already in Germany.

@dadler12:

@knp7765:

@coachofmany:

@knp7765:

I just don’t think that one of FMG’s tanks should duplicate the OOB Sherman.  We have tons of them already so both of FMGs tanks should be something different.

What about a “Grant” medium tank?

The Grant was the one with the 75mm gun mounted on the side and a turret mounted 37mm gun, right?  That would be cool for FMG to make along with some sort of SPG/TD for the second armor.  Of course, Dr Larsen is right that we would be taking a step backwards in that case.  Since you are making the M5 Stuart, I think a late war Sherman would still be the best bet, like the M4A3.  Didn’t some Shermans come out with something like an 85mm gun to try and match the Tiger’s firepower?  And the turrets on those were a little different from the earlier M4A1 Shermans with 75mm guns, I think.

I think you’re thinking of the Sherman M4A3’s equipped with 105 mm howitzers. These really didn’t see action until the US was already in Germany.

No, there were assault gun versions with the 105mm’s, but there was also the 76mm versions and the earlier M3 Lee/Grant that had the 75mm in the hull and a 37mm in the turret.  Oddly enough, the one with the 105 looks more like the “typical” early war version than the one with the 76mm.  The ones with the 105 were rare, but I’m not so sure that they were strictly late war.  In any case, it was a very short 105, which is part of the reason why they didn’t look so different…

Hey FMG,
Any word on the France and ANZAC combat dice?

Can you buy the French and Anzac seperately or as a grand global 40 set.

when?

@knp7765:

Hey FMG,
Any word on the France and ANZAC combat dice?

Very soon.  Within a month I am told.

Thanks!

We are getting close to launch on the pieces I hope all is still on. The tiger picture was awesome if you have more FMG we are dying to see them. Thanks

Great Tank choices, FMG.  The Pershing tank didn’t even get a chance to fight in the war.  Tank destroyer all the way.

Don’t forget the US Mechanized unit.  How about the LVT?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landing_Vehicle_Tracked

@coachofmany:

@Imperious:

American Tech set:

Tank: Pershing
Fighter : Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star
Bomber: B-29
SPA: T-92 240mm SP Howitzer  (http://www.battletanks.com/t92_sp_240mm.htm)
Submarine:Tench class
Carrier: Essex

Tech Carrier should be “midway” class,
There were 18 Essex class carriers in use during WW2.

I served on the USS Midway.  So that gets my vote :-D  Besides that, I do agree that the Midway class would be best for a US Tech carrier.  This was the last carrier class to be built and launched in WWII (But were all commissioned just after the war ended.)

Greeting gents, I’ve been out of the loop for a while.  Hope you can fill me in on the status of the FMGs Combat Units.  I went to FMGs web site to go buy some but it says “Out of Stock” for both the Germans and Italians.  Did they finally released them and sold out or are they still in Pre-Order?  I didn’t see any “Buy” icon.  Can someone give me an update as to what the status is?

Thanks

By the way IL, I miss Klink :-D

Black Fox  you came back just in time. I believe FMG said he expected the pieces in late April and he expects Germany and Italy to go at about the same time. We did a pre order on Italy to help his expenses on the project. If I am wrong on this one some one can chime in.

No, the Combat Units will NOT be ready in late April.  Late April is when the factory should have the defect in the mould corrected.  Then they have to get the mould back to the factory and should start production of the Italian units around mid-May.

You are right that the German units should come out very close to the Italian units.  If they come out close enough together, Jeremy said that they might take orders for the German units and not charge shipping so they can ship the Germans and Italians together.  Man, won’t that be a fantastic surprise one day.  You get a package and you have all your Italian AND German units ready to go.  I’m getting 5 sets of each so I will be swimming in combat units.

lol

Thanks KNP

Thanks, Sanches, KNP.  Much appreciated.