HBG US Sculpts

Glad to help.

-Midnight_Reaper

Had to bump this. I’m looking forward to this set.

2004 UK Revised green (celery)
2009 UK Tan
2010 ANZAC Grey
2012 HBG Neutral Light Grey
2012 HBG Neutral Ivory
1986 AA Classic Forest Green
or 2010 Chinese Yellow-Green

@Yavid:

nations with an “old bb” piece from HBG I’ve replaced improved mech inf. tech with heavy battleship tech. HBG become the standard BB and used at set up and can be purchased until you get the tech. After you get the tech you can buy the OOB battleships as heavy battleships. These Heavy Battleships are 4/4/2/20 units just like standard but take 3 hits to sink and roll two dice in combat taking the best roll and using it.

Interesting idea, though I’m not sure if I want to make it a “tech” thing, especially since all the nations had new BB’s already in production before the war started.  I’d be more inclined to make it a “tech” ability to create a TRUE SBB along the lines of Yamato, Montana or H-class (and perhaps Sovietsky Soyuz, and, perhaps even more arguably Iowa, Vanguard and Lion), of which the Yamato is the only one we’re likely to have a piece for any time soon (and of which only the Yamato was ever actually built)… I might try something along these lines, along with maybe a “super-cruiser” and/or “super-carrier” tech if and when I ever decide to try using some of my painted NAVWAR or Panzerschiffe pieces on a very big map like GW1939… but I don’t see the likelihood of having AA-scale pieces of any of the other true SBB’s any time soon.

Another idea: perhaps old BB’s could be a 3/4/2 unit or a 4/3/2 unit; the rationale here is that the “real world” speed difference may not be enough to make a difference in the category of strategic mobility (which is what speed really represents in game terms, and most especially on the smaller board versions) but rather that the old/new speed difference should be understood as more an issue of “tactical” mobility which could put old BB’s in a combat disadvantage on either defense or offense?  If so, though, in which of the two would the lack of tactical mobility be more important?  I’m leaning toward it being a bigger disadvantage on offense, but I’d be interested in hearing other opinions.

In any case, keep in mind, for all of you out there who plan to use some sort of “old BB” house rules, that classic BB pieces are about perfect for this while we’re waiting for HBG to get to all of the nations’ version of one.  Similarly, the classic version’s carriers are almost perfect for generic CVE’s.  Variable or Coach, do you guys have classic pieces available for these two unit types for most of the relevant nations for those who don’t have oodles of them lying around?

I loved everything about the pieces and I like HBGs inf size more than FMGs which I believe is a little too small.

Yeah, i looked at the site and i saw everything Thanks everyone  :-D :-D

Hallo guys, I would like to share something about this topic.

Thank you for reading.

I have created SITREP, The day after… It’s basically Axis and Allies in a modern setting, starting the day after 9/11.

Modern units, a complete redesigned worldmap. It is all there.

In this boardgame, six powers are involved.

United States of America, United Kingdom, NATO at one side. On the other side, there are The Arab league, Russia and China.

I spend lots and lots of time to translate the ‘real’ situation into an Axis and Allies setting and according play style.
So far, I am very pleased and satisfied with the result.

I have recently created a new website to share the details with other players.
The introduction may be Dutch
The game rules however, are written in English.

See my website for some details, and feel free to comment.

sitrep-the-day-after.jouwweb.nl

Hicks

Post some pics!