HBG german set painted

https://www.facebook.com/pg/Landing-Vehicle-Tracked-LVT4-2017381051873202/photos/?tab=album&album_id=2201403350137637

@Modest_Proposal:

carsonbparker -

So, considering you are trying to make a full GHQ set, do you find the battleships, carriers, and heavy bombers (without stands) to be too large for the standard Global and/or Anniversary map?

Perhaps if I tactfully choose only a few large battleships and carriers and stuck mostly to the medium-smaller ones + support carriers.

,David

I think with the bombers is were the real problem would be.  In the average game there usually aren’t tons of carriers and battleships littered across the board so even though they’re a little big its doable.  A big carrier like the Yorktown or the battleship Yamato or Bismark can easy be longer than an individual sea zone.  The destroyer size is perfect and cruisers and smaller battleships fit nicely. The Yorktown for instance is a quarter longer than my middle finger so they’re close to 4 inches long.  But I just finished the Japanese Escort carrier Ryujo and it’s honestly a great size (maybe more like 2.5 /inches). Tanks are perfect, mechanized infantry is just right, fighters are a tab bigger but good size.  Bombers now can span more that a whole country.  For instance the German HE-11 bomber has a wing span of about 2.5 / 3 inches.  On the ground they would virtually take up all the space of say Western Germany.  The magnet flight stands I use have a nail shaft to hold them up (they’re kinda heavy compared to plastic) and the pewter base I use is around the circumference of a quarter so the stands them selves still take up some room.  As the gentleman noted as well the pieces are a bit heavier bit I like the solid feel they bring and they’re kinda tacky on the board which is cool.  Regarding the bigger ships I’ve never been one for shying away for using task cards or zones.  The big navies always use these anyways in my games so they’re not much of a problem.  I’m also going to be to be using a bigger board soon so that will help with the pieces being on the bigger side.  It’s just the tactical and heavy bombers that need to be lifted to make room for the pieces on the bottom.

Thank you for the positive feedback! I forgot to say that in the previous post, and it’s very important that I do. It’s very encouraging and motivating to get good feedback, and we certainly appreciate it. The above mentioned four Essex class carriers are complete, a long with several other ships of the US Navy, so its time to update the thread. Just ships by FOlewnik in this post. More aircraft are almost done but I haven’t put magnets in them yet (so not really done), so no aircraft pictures this post.

We’ll start with the two “odd men out” of the HBG sculpt Baltimore Class Heavy Cruisers. Why “odd men out”? Because in the below picture we have on the left, the USS Unnamed Baltimore Class Cruiser Wearing Measure 31a, Design 9C, and on the right is the USS Columbus (CA 74), which wasn’t commissioned until June 8, 1945. The cruiser with the long name is wearing a design that was never used, but was taken from a period design found at https://www.wikiwand.com/en/World_War_II_US_Navy_dazzle_camouflage_measures_31,_32_and_33:_cruisers. The USS Columbus is wearing a Measure 12 Modified designed by FOlewnik to match the pieces we’ll be using for the US Atlantic fleet. These will get aircraft added, but at the time of the photographs the decals on the wings of the aircraft were drying.
DSC_0510a.jpg
DSC_0511a.jpg
DSC_0512a.jpg
Pattern_sheet,_MS-31a_9C_for_Baltimore_class.jpg

Next up are some metal destroyers from GHQ. Below on the left, the very brave USS Johnston (DD-557) painted in MS-3_/6D as it looked when it was “Sunk by Japanese Warships off Samar October 25 1944,” and next to it is USS Van Valkenburgh (DD-656) painted in camouflage Measure 31, Design 9d. All Wartime photos taken from Navsource.org, a great resource for US Navy history buffs.
DSC_0514a.jpg
DSC_0515a.jpg
DSC_0516a.jpg

Below, the real USS Johnston shortly before her final battle, and the official design sheet:
DSC_0516a0555715.jpg
Pattern_sheet,_MS-31-32-33_6D_for_Fletcher_class.jpg

A great wartime picture of the USS Van Valkenburgh, which is the same on both sides:
DSC_0516a0565603.jpg

Now on to these two. From GHQ, USS The Sullivans (DD-537) painted in Measure 1, and the HBG sculpt light cruiser USS Marblehead (CL-12) who always wore Measure 2 throughout the war. If I can get FOlewnik to put the Shamrock on the first stack of The Sullivans when he puts the scout aircraft on the Marblehead, as seen in the below wartime photograph, I’ll come back and edit the post.
DSC_0520a.jpg
DSC_0522a.jpg
DSC_0519a.jpg
DSC_0520a0553740.jpg
DSC_0520a0401208.jpg

The post previous to this post showed four Essex Class sculpts from HBG getting prepped and started with a base coat. Those are now completed and I had too much fun playing with them and the aircraft (that are complete so far) while I was taking photographs. I’m pretty sure I didn’t make any wooshing sea or aircraft noises or FOlewnik would have laughed at me. I was tempted though, and here’s why:
DSC_0524a.jpg
DSC_0525a.jpg
DSC_0526a.jpg
Above we have the first of the Long Hull Essex Class, USS Ticonderoga (CV-14) on the left looking as she did after her April 1945 refit from suffering a Kamikaze Attack on January 21, 1945, and USS Bunker Hill (CV-17) on the right. The Bunker Hill is wearing Measure 33, Design 6A, of which Navsource says, “Her port side camouflage pattern was the most intricate design applied to any carrier.” One glance can confirm that!
DSC_0526a021772.jpg

The final two Essex Class carriers are the USS Essex (CV-9) herself, and the USS Bennington (CV-20). The Essex is wearing a unique pattern, Measure 32v6, Design 10D, adapted from a destroyer pattern specifically for the long hulled Essex. The Bennington is painted in Measure 32, Design 17A.
DSC_0527a.jpg
DSC_0528a.jpg
DSC_0529a.jpg
DSC_0529aPattern_sheet,_MS_32a_17A_for_Essex_class.jpg
DSC_0529aUSS_Essex_(CV-9)_in_MS_32_6-10D_camouflage.jpg

Finally, some group pictures just for fun:
DSC_0531a.jpg
DSC_0532a.jpg
DSC_0533a.jpg
DSC_0534a.jpg
Thank you for checking out the post! If you liked it, please click the little heart. I’m trying to figure out why our post is only rated with a 2 when it seems it should be a bit higher if the other likes are any indication.

I’m considering replacing the default black pieces with the HBG grey German pieces. Does anyone have a picture of what that looks like setup on the board?

I have seen lots of people here use acrylics and I have on occasion. Most of my paints are enamels though. I find that is stays wet longer (which is a good thing) and doesn’t clump up nearly as much on your brush. I also use enamels in my airbrush. I find that enamels are actually much easier to clean than acrylics. While acrylics are water soluble, they don’t just dissolve, especially if already dry. It involves a great deal of scrubbing and scraping. With enamels, all you need is some mineral spirits cleaner and it takes the paint right off with very little effort. Cleaning acrylic paint out of my airbrush was hell the first time I did it… never using acrylics in there again. In terms of the finish, I can only assume that enamels hold up better to bumps and scrapes than acrylic paint does.

Someone once asked if enamels, by default, have a glossy finish to them. They do not, as long as you are using flat enamels, which seem to be the standard. I use flats and they have an excellent, non-shiny finish. I feel like enamel colors are a little deeper too, on the whole, but I suppose it depends on the brand of acrylic you use. Vallejo seems to be a popular choice for acrylics. I use predominantly Model Masters (Testors) enamels. In general, I would just said to find a brand you like to work with and produces the results you like. Don’t buy super cheap paint… you will get the results you pay for.

Good luck!

Redleg,

First, you have a beautiful family. Second, Your paint jobs look great. I have to really give applause to your freehand markings. It’s true decals are cleaner and sharper but I my self have used none on anything I’ve painted and I’m developing a way to layer and paint my own markings (It’s been holding up my project severely) I simply can’t afford to buy sheets of decals that I might only use a handful of.

One tip That I’ve adopted, is to use ultra-fine Sharpie permanent markers for small lines and details where a brush won’t do or may slop (canopy frames). Lastly I’ve learned from table-top gamers of much larger scale (Warhammer, Bolt Action) models that at the scale Axis & Allies models are you can “mass paint” with fewer details on many units to create large armies, fleets and air forces that will look phenomenal from eye level to table top . Anyway us A&A painters have our work cut out for ourselves. I salute you sir.

Anyway, keep on painting, Nice work.

Fellow A&A Gamers,

––This thread will eventually contain ALL of the Anzac units that I’ve had detailed & painted by the “WARMACHINE Team”.

––So far the list includes:

ANZAC

ANZAC ARMY
Anzac Infantry
––Anzac (Infantry, Rifle)…(Starting at message #1)
Anzac Armored Vehicles
––M-3 Stuart “Honey” (Tank, Light)…Outback Camo scheme…(Starting at message # )

–-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone.

----Here are the Anzac Rifle Infantry that Chad Coffman, a.k.a. “Allworkandnoclay”, painted for me. All 20 of the Australian Infantry, nick-named “Diggers”, after their WWI fight at Galipoli, are shown here in a group portrait just after completion by Chad. Note the intricate Anzac ensign he painted on their bases. This guys painting talent is simply awesome! So just sit back, put another shrimp on the barbie, and enjoy, mate.

“Tall Paul”
anzac_inf2b.jpg

Awesome!  Ready-for-the-desert scheme, sweet.