Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

@FieldMarshalGames:

We were going to call them FMG COMBAT UNITS…?

Our new 3D sculptor is working on the final units now.  Once this is done we will move on to prototypes.  I will post pictures of these when they are completed.

/thumbsup!

FMG Combat Units works as well as anything!

I had best get working on my game table to coincide with these new pieces!  ;)

Has anything been set up for pre-order yet?  I don’t want to miss out being one of the first to own one of these sets.

Regards,
Captain Crunch

FMG,

Does it mean that there will be no special drawing?  What was the surprise prize?

Keep up the good work.

@gnasape:

FMG,

Does it mean that there will be no special drawing?  What was the surprise prize?

Keep up the good work.

ditto

I’m also wondering what the three “Special Surprise” pieces will be, each nation getting 3 of them.  Man, I really hope they are A-bombs.

@Upside-down_Turtle:

I’m also wondering what the three “Special Surprise” pieces will be, each nation getting 3 of them.  Man, I really hope they are A-bombs.

The Sushi Jalapeno War, produced by Xeno Games, comes with some pretty good nuclear mushroom clouds:

http://boardgamegeek.com/image/108844?size=large

CWO Marc

We will still have a Draw for a prize when the Pre-orders start.  And no…  teh special units are not A-Bombs or mushroom clouds.

The set will include these special units and maybe more:

Officers/commanders

Fleet Task Force Markers

Mech Infantry

DiveBombers

Naval Bases

Air Bases

More…???

@FieldMarshalGames:

We will still have a Draw for a prize when the Pre-orders start.  And no…  teh special units are not A-Bombs or mushroom clouds.

The set will include these special units and maybe more:

Officers/commanders

Fleet Task Force Markers

Mech Infantry

DiveBombers

Naval Bases

Air Bases

More…???

What about the Bunkers and Trucks(I dont mind if the trucks are gone, but I would apprecaite a peice for representing heavy forification)?

Other stuff that you could include

Rocket/self-propelled Artillery.
V1 and V2 style strategic rockets
Jet Fighters
2 types of Bombers( one medium and one heavy)
An advanced submarine piece
a Radar Instalation piece
2 types of Crusiers( one heavy, one light)
a Light Carrier piece

Also I am glad to hear there will be naval and air bases. :-D

Let’s remember if we want to keep the price reasonable we can’t possibly expect FMG to put every piece we all would like to see in the set.

I would like to know if there is a timeline as to when the launch is expected?  Before Christmas 2009, Summer 2010, Christmas 2010?  Any idea FMG?

Regards,
Captain Crunch

I’d like to see armoured trains for use in conjunction with rail transport rules, and possibly a big siege gun which is also moved by rail and can bombard adjacent territories.
Armoured trains would have no attack value (units cannot rail into combat) but would defend at 1/2? and confer defence against interdiction of rail movement. Each piece would have a transport capacity and would stop when unloading the last cargo, thus representing a certain limit on safe rail travel.

Heavy tanks: KV1, Tiger, Pershing; also SPGs: fight at 1-4?

Most of all I’d go for enough units to represent all plausible techs, as I firmly believe that techs should be separate units newly built rather than magic upgrades.

This includes standardising aircraft as:

single engine fighter - standard
twin engine fighter - long range

twin engine bomber - standard
four engine bomber - long range/heavy

Is there really a need for pieces to represent ports, air bases etc?

Is anyone seriously suggesting that a player can “build” ports in the middle of a game; surely these facilities are better printed on the map to begin with, and use counters to represent damage/repair status.  Allright we have factory pieces, but won’t more immovable objects clutter up all but the biggest boards?

This is now moving faster than before.  The EARLIEST date would be for Christmas 2009.

(Trucks & Bunkers are still included)

Let’s remember if we want to keep the price reasonable we can’t possibly expect FMG to put every piece we all would like to see in the set.

I agree.  I think for most people, it would be easier on the pocket book to buy pieces in smaller sets rather than a few large or one big package.

Is there really a need for pieces to represent ports, air bases etc?

I think if these are made, it would prefer that these would be made as markers rather than plastic pieces.  That way, you can place pieces on top of them.

Most of all I’d go for enough units to represent all plausible techs, as I firmly believe that techs should be separate units newly built rather than magic upgrades.

I strongly agree with this!

This includes standardising aircraft as:

single engine fighter - standard
twin engine fighter - long range

twin engine bomber - standard
four engine bomber - long range/heavy

I disagree with this approach.  I think the best way for this is to make the unit that it represents.  Perhaps additional ways to help identify technology pieces would be to make them a darker or lighter shade of color of the country they belong to or add a nation’s flag decal to them.

@Black:

Perhaps additional ways to help identify technology pieces would be to make them a darker or lighter shade of color of the country they belong to

Different shades of the same colour aren’t always easy to tell apart under all lighting conditions (daylight / incandescent lights / fluorescent lights).

CWO Marc

Submarine pens?

Naval fighters?

Motorized Infantry (Jeeps [US], motorcycles [Germany], Taxis [France])…?

Shore implacements?

Land and sea mines?

Ordered some of your dice, trying to get a holf of you, but no answer on phone and no reply by email.

I don’t think we should restrict the game to people who know that such-and-such an aircraft had X flying range; my suggestion is for a simple visual reference, e.g.

UK Spitfire - Mosquito
US Mustang - Lightning
G 109 - 110

@Black:

single engine fighter - standard
twin engine fighter - long range

twin engine bomber - standard
four engine bomber - long range/heavy

I disagree with this approach.  I think the best way for this is to make the unit that it represents.  Perhaps additional ways to help identify technology pieces would be to make them a darker or lighter shade of color of the country they belong to or add a nation’s flag decal to them.

@Upside-down_Turtle:

Submarine pens?

Naval fighters?

Motorized Infantry (Jeeps [US], motorcycles [Germany], Taxis [France])…?

Shore implacements?

Land and sea mines?

Motorized Infantry refers to infantry tranpsported by trucks FWI, so I dont know what french taxi’s would represent, but I like all those other ideas(that was a one time thing in 1914 after all!). Jeeps and motorcycles were almost soley used for recon and command purposes not motorizing large infantry units.

I also agree with flashman that the number of engines should indicate range.

basing range on number of engines will mean that jet fighters will get a decrease in range in that case…

@LuckyDay:

basing range on number of engines will mean that jet fighters will get a decrease in range in that case…

Jet aircraft are very regonizable so there range should depend on tech.