Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

Ah, so the sculptor is working on the moulds for the units now, and sent you those Panzerschiffe pictures as an example of the classes he is going to produce for you. As well, he has chosen the Aquila Class CV, Littorio Class BB, and Zara Class CA for the Italians - all excellent choices, IMO.

In terms of prototypes, I indeed see your point. However, later in the production stage, if you feel like posting some of the actual sculpts sent to you by your modeller, by all means feel free to do so. Of course, you may also decide against doing so; any decision on whether and when you can show us some sculpts is entirely in your court. I am just glad to hear that everything is going OK with the set at this stage. 8-)

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with land (or any) sculpts, as I am not a sculptor. Hopefully, someone else here can help you with that. :|

BTW - If you are considering using the Sovyetskiy Soyuz Class BB for the Soviet Union instead of the old Gangut class (which I certainly hope is the case), maybe this picture will help, as sources for this class are a little harder to find than for most other classes:

@Imperious:

The bases should all be round and a little bit larger than AH.

If these are dedicated A&A pieces the bases should stack integral with the chips. ~ZP

@Zero:

@Imperious:

The bases should all be round and a little bit larger than AH.

If these are dedicated A&A pieces the bases should stack integral with the chips. ~ZP

Great idea, but which chips?  We use the chips from Revised, Europe, and Pacific when we play AA50 as there are never enough chips that came with AA50.

Fatter submarines are needed please; and yes, the differentiation between the BB’s and the cruisers are a necessity.

I’d even suggest a squared off stern on each cruiser, even at the expense of historicity so that at a glance one can tell the difference immediately. I had to paint a white dot on top of each cruiser in AA50 so that everyone would be able to tell them apart without too much trouble.

This is a great idea! Am eagerly waiting for further developments!

i would like all the units the same as the axis and allies scale, except the battleship, the battleship could be bigger,
there should be contrast between the different national artillery pieces

@Shakespeare:

Fatter submarines are needed please; and yes, the differentiation between the BB’s and the cruisers are a necessity.

I agree; I’ve never had trouble distinguishing A&A cruisers and battleships myself, but I’ve heard that some others have had problems. Current submarines are definitely a little too thin.

@Shakespeare:

I’d even suggest a squared off stern on each cruiser, even at the expense of historicity…

:-o

I’m sorry, but there is no way I could ever accept a set that cut historical appearances that badly, even if it was for the sake of identification convenience. I’d prefer to deal with BB-CA differences through size distinctions; since the pieces are merely representative of large groups of ships on a world-scale map, I don’t expect them to be perfectly in historical scale with each other, as I would expect for a tactical wargame with individual ships on a map consistent with their own scale (such as War At Sea).

The submarines in AA are not that much of a problem folks.  Fat submarines would be objectionable.

I recommend you glue a clear plastic disk as a base to the bottom of your submarines if you don’t like them tipping over that much.  A single piece of clear plastic that would do for the job is probably in your trash can right now.  Just get an Exact-o-knife and some clear plastic cement and you’re in business.

But that does bring up a new subject …

Could you throw in a set of blue and red AA chips to add to these figures?  Then we could have grey (ones), red (fives) and blue (tens) to stack under our infantry and armor.  I hope this would not raise the cost too much, but if it did then forget it.  I’d rather keep this project affordable for a large audience.

I’m sorry, but there is no way I could ever accept a set that cut historical appearances that badly, even if it was for the sake of identification convenience. I’d prefer to deal with BB-CA differences through size distinctions;

I agree with Shakespeare.  Another way to help distinguish ships are by the number of barrels per turret.  BB - 3 barrels, CA - 2 barrels, DD 1 barrel.

Submarines - Fat like the original subs.

IDK they’d have to be at a fairly low price

2nd 100th POST!

I will post pictures of the finished Naval sculpts one they are ready.  I am told it will be a few weeks to complete.  We are still looking for models for the LAND units so please PM me if you have anything to offer.

I am watching this thread everyday so all your posts and recommendations are being taken seriously.  Thanks for the continued interest.

CLARIFICATION: The Italian sculpts I posted earlier are NOT the sculpts we have or will be using.  They were just posted to demonstrate the ship classes and the level of detail we are aiming for with this project.  We do not have any physical sculpts to display at this time but will post as soon as we do.

I have a question. Other than the naval units, do we have a consensus on each nations land/air units? Are you still taking suggestions on these units Field Marshal?

Just a few quick ideas and suggestions for the pieces.

Iconic units! AA50 did a reasonable job at this, but ensure that the right piece is used for each nation. British fighter = Spitfire, Russian tank = t34 etc etc.

On this note, an 88mm flak gun is not an artillery piece. Either use the 10.5cm field gun, or the Wespe/Hummel self propelled artillery, I hate those flak gun models.

National variation. The Italian pieces really disappointed me because the fleet was identical to the Germans. This just seemed lazy to me…. so very lazy.

decent molds! The aa50 molds are rubbish, the seams are really pronounced on some models to the point where you cant remove them without destroying the figure. I dont mind some flash, and minor seam lines, but the AA50 pieces are just a bit too crap in this regard.

I will buy “at least” an Italian set, I am currently painting my current models and if this pack is a far higher quality than the original I will ebay my painted models and start again entirely. (And probably make enough off my lovely high quality painted set to buy a new one with some change)

personally i like the 88mm flak piece for german arty. i mean, it was used in this role  :-P

BUT, if most people want a change, then stick with the iconic and make it a pak 40

I will definitely buy a set of these, maybe two sets. Keep up the good work field marshal!

@ FMG - I know that you have stated previously in this thread that you are still working with the modeller to choose the naval sculpts which are to be used, but I was wondering if any had been settled upon yet. I gather that from the images sent to you by the modeller, the Italian CV, BB, and CA will be the Aquila, Littorio, and Zara classes, respectively, but the others are still unknown. I don’t mean to be annoying, so if you don’t want to (or can’t) share this info with us yet, please feel free not to. I can’t help but ask such questions, as this is an exciting project which just seems better as more info trickles out to us.

EDIT - I see three new posts have been made while I was typing all of this stuff up; it may no longer be relevant, as I haven’t had time to read the new posts yet, but here is what I have been writing intermittantly for the last half hour or so.

EDIT 2 - National colours, as suggested by Imperious Leader could work as well; just switch units upon capture. It depends on what would work better for FMG, especially in terms of cost.

On another note, if this set is successful, do you plan to do a “common unit” set, with a new IPC, AA Gun, and maybe some other units? I know it is a bit much to expect now with the vast effort and expense which you are committing to the current set, but it could be an idea for the future (if the current units are successful, as noted). You could possibly even produce two different IPC’s; a small-scale one [maybe with a peaked roof, as in the old A&A PC Game, and one stack], and a larger scale one (with a longer rectangular shape, the multiple horizontal peaked roof parts of the current unit albiet with more detail than the current ugly 1930s-cartoony-looking one, and two or three stacks); house rules could perhaps be developed as to their output levels. The current AA gun is OK for a shared unit, but I never seem to have enough of them, so it doesn’t hurt to have more (and with a better mold).

Other ideas for shared units could include a shipyard (required for production of naval units, although this might over-complicate the game and make production too expensive. I would suggest a shared bunker/pillbox unit, but you are already providing one per each nation already.

Another idea I had was for an incomplete capital ship piece; one would have to purchase the incomplete hull for a certain amount of IPC’s (maybe 7?), and then either complete it as a CV or BB for the remaining amount the next turn, or suspend or cancel construction next turn, as the military and economic situation of one’s country allows. This could be representative of Germany’s large scale cancellation of Z-Plan ships in favour of more important strategic needs, or the USSR’s similar suspension of a number of its own BBs and CBs upon the commencement of Operation Barbarossa. As well, incomplete hulls could be captured by occupying powers, much as Germany managed to capture a number of incomplete hulls from France, the Soviet Union, the Netherlands, and Italy upon occupation of those nations. The greater amount of time needed to produce large fleet carriers would not only be historically accurate, but could make a new class of light or escort carrier a more viable strategic option (as was the case for Japan, or to a more limited extend for the US). I don’t know how much support there is from the community for such a unit, though.

I assume that if a common unit set is released, it would be a flat, light gray, as the current A&A common units are coloured. If not, then likely a flat white, as per the common units of the original MB A&A common units.

@tin_snips:

personally i like the 88mm flak piece for german arty. i mean, it was used in this role  :-P

BUT, if most people want a change, then stick with the iconic and make it a pak 40

It was used in an anti-tank role, not a convention artillery “Shell them till the go deaf, then shell them some more” kind of way. A pak 40 is also an anti tank gun and not an artillery piece.

I just find it an odd selection for an artillery piece, and would prefer to see an actual piece of German artillery instead.

Plus a Hummel or Wespe model would be Hawt.

http://www.hpwt.de/2Weltkrieg/Hummel.jpg
http://www.figuren-modellbau.de/fahrzeuge/matchbox-40077-wespe-panzer-artillerie.jpg

Although self propelled artillery models may confuse people who aren’t familiar with WW2 machinery.

This is very exciting! I would be in for a set of these!