FRANCE and ANZAC COMBAT DICE - HELP us design them!

Personally, I’d rather see one with the blue/blue SEAC roundel for India.

Hey Jeremy, great to hear from you regarding this project. Do you have a copy of the new AA1941 yet? If so, how do you rate the new Tiger Tank units? And how do they compare to your FMG German Combat Unit Tigers? Many thanks.

Yeah, I do like the Tigers from 1941, but they are pretty “plain Jane” as far as detail goes. Pretty much like all the OOB tanks. I’ve seen pics of the prototype sculpts for both FMG’s and HBG’s Tigers and they look fantastic.
One thing about the OOB tanks. While they lack detail on the hull and turret, they always seem to do a really good job on the wheel/track area. That one area on the OOB tanks has incredible detail, yet most of the hull and turret is almost smooth. I guess it’s because the OOB molds are side to side while FMG’s and HBG’s molds are top to bottom. Although, both these companies also have great detail in the wheels/tracks area (showing individual road wheels, suspension, etc.). I can’t explain how they are able to do that.
I am really liking the extra detail. I have replaced my OOB Shermans with the olive drab Shermans from the HBG Marines sets. The color is a little off, but the tanks look so much better.

Good post knp7765, I appreciate your thoughts. I for one would certainly be interested to see the OOB 1941 Tigers compared in a photo next to the FMG Tigers, just so we can see the difference in size.

Well, we have to get the FMG Tigers first. There was a pic of two of the prototype FMG King Tigers with an OOB Panther to give you some idea of size comparison.
The HBG Shermans are a bit smaller than the OOB Shermans, which I think makes them look more realistic compared to the OOB Panthers. The OOB Shermans were a little too large in my opinion. The Panther was a pretty big tank.
However, I think WOTC made the Shermans this way because all OOB pieces seem to be within a certain range for each different type of unit. For Example, all Aircraft Carriers are 64mm long, all battleships are between 58 and 62 mm long, and so on. I think all the tanks were between 20 and 22 mm long. I think this was WOTC’s way of keeping some sort of continuity between sculpts. So while the Panthers and Tigers look okay, Shermans look a little too big. That’s especially true with Japan’s Type 95. On the board, it’s as big as a Sherman yet in real life, the Type 95 was a tiny tank. Not nearly as big as a Sherman and not even close to the size of a Panther. I think if a Type 95 was made to the same scale as the Panther, the piece would be around 13-15mm in length and end up looking like the tiny mech inf units.

I got $5 that says that Panther holds out…

@knp7765:

Well, we have to get the FMG Tigers first. There was a pic of two of the prototype FMG King Tigers with an OOB Panther to give you some idea of size comparison.
The HBG Shermans are a bit smaller than the OOB Shermans, which I think makes them look more realistic compared to the OOB Panthers. The OOB Shermans were a little too large in my opinion. The Panther was a pretty big tank.
However, I think WOTC made the Shermans this way because all OOB pieces seem to be within a certain range for each different type of unit. For Example, all Aircraft Carriers are 64mm long, all battleships are between 58 and 62 mm long, and so on. I think all the tanks were between 20 and 22 mm long. I think this was WOTC’s way of keeping some sort of continuity between sculpts. So while the Panthers and Tigers look okay, Shermans look a little too big. That’s especially true with Japan’s Type 95. On the board, it’s as big as a Sherman yet in real life, the Type 95 was a tiny tank. Not nearly as big as a Sherman and not even close to the size of a Panther. I think if a Type 95 was made to the same scale as the Panther, the piece would be around 13-15mm in length and end up looking like the tiny mech inf units.

Hey KNP, the OOB Sherman in the AA50 is smaller and pretty much the same size as the HBG Sherman (btw).