Posts made by AG124

I like IL’s suggestion of light yellow for the Spanish.

I was just scrolling down the thread to suggest turquoise for the Turkish (I had suggested for the Australians in the past before grey became the established colour for them) when I saw that Redking beat me to it. :-D Anyway, I do think it would be a good idea, if not for the Turkish then at least for another nation.

In relation to Red, I think I should point out that the FMG Soviet pieces will match the FMG Soviet dice, which are solid red and not reddish-brown.

While we are discussing colours, maybe we could suggest a list of possible remaining colours for HBG pieces, if more are needed (some of these have been suggested here previously):

Dark Grey-Green
Orange-Red (different enough to distinguish from FMG Soviet Red and OOB/FMG Japanese Orange, as necessary)
Yellow-Orange
Turquoise
Dark Navy Blue
Pale Grey-Blue
Pale Orange
Dark Yellow (but as dull as possible)

I would prefer to avoid bright and/or neon colours, together with pink and purple (although a dark or grey-ish purple might work if one was desperate for a new colour).

@ coachofmany - Good work; the detail on those models is great, and the colour works well. I think that I’ll definitely pick up at least one set when you get them on sale. 8-)

It’s also good to see that your company and Field Marshall Games are cooperating to provide the community with different units, rather than compete with the same choices. I think it will probably increase each of your respective sales in the long run; I know that I personally will buy pretty much every set produced by each company to get as many different models as possible. :-)

@ coachofmany - I apologize for any misunderstanding; I usually read opening thread posts more comprehensively than that. :|

I would personally like to see a Dutch cruiser, destroyer, and submarine (although I think Polish ship sculpts could be skipped in favour of Dutch sculpts, if cost is an issue). For Dutch naval sculpts, I would prefer to see a De Ruyter-class CL (although a Java-class CL would be acceptable), an Admiralen-class DD (which could also be printed as a British A/B-class DD at this scale, and any early-war submarine class which saw active service under Dutch control.

I would also suggest that Polish tanks should take preference over Dutch tanks, if we have to choose (the Dutch had only a few obscure light tanks anyway, as per my understanding). I would choose a 7TP, and maybe a Renault R-35 (which could also be usefully printed in French and ‘Axis Minor’ colours).

@knp7765:

When we were discussing Axis bombers on the FMG combat units discussion thread (quite a while back), someone gave some ideas for large Japanese and Italian bombers.  I think the planes mentioned only got to prototype stage or very few were actually built, but at least they were some ideas.

Two proposed four-engined Japanese heavy bombers that I can think of include the G5N “Liz” and the G8N “Rita” - only a few of each were completed, although a few G5N’s were actually used as transports. I would personally be satisfied with the choice of either of these as Japanese heavy bomber, although I would choose the G5N over the G8N.

@FieldMarshalGames:

We are developing a relation ship with HistoricalBoardGaming.com.  We will do the main sets, and they will do all the expansions and additional sets.  This is very expensive and time consuming.  We are glad to have the Help.

Excellent, excellent.  8-) I have noticed that there has been a great deal of cooperation and coordination between Field Marshall Games and Historical Board Gaming (coachofmany); in the end, I believe that this would benefit both of your companies, and the AAM boardgaming (and the general WWII-boardgaming community) as a whole.

Right now, it appears that HBG is concentrating on land units, but if the demand is present, I hope coachofmany will consider producing at least a light or escort carrier for each major nation, together with a pre-war battleship. In relation to these two specific units types, is it possible that FMG will coordinate with HBG to split up the units in an appropriate manner? For example, perhaps FMG could concentrate on modern BBs and fleet CV’s, and HBG could produce a pre-war BB units and a CVE/CVL unit. In the case of the USSR, for example, FMG could produce a Soyuz-class BB and ‘Project 72’-class CV, while HBG could produce a Gangut-class BB and ‘Project 71’-class CVL. (As a side note, there are plenty of line drawings of the Soyuz-class, Project 72, and Project 71 online to serve as guides for sculpts).

[Also, I realize that I have not really distinguished between a CVE or CVL class of unit; it remains to be concluded whether such a class should be CVE, CVL, CVE/CVL, or separate CVE + CVL.]

The final product looks great - can’t wait to receive my order and see the pieces in person. :-D

On a side note, I do hope that in the event that this project is financially successful, FMG will consider producing extra unit types, including a Pre-War Battleship, Light or Escort Carrier,  Heavy (4-Engined?) Bomber, Self-Propelled Artillery, and maybe even a third Tank/Tank Destroyer option for each nation. (Of course, coachofmany could already be making some of these himself).

Just placed my order for a set - looking forward to seeing the units in person for the first time when they are done. 8-)

‘ROMMEL’ discount code didn’t work for me though (I did enter it using all capital letters). :cry:

I would have preferred a Panzer IV over a Panzer III, for the reasons stated previously by myself; however, the Panzer III is a respectable and logical choice too, and appears to have garnered approval in this community at least. I think it will be fine.

For the second tank, I would still prefer a Tiger I. Iconic, produced and used in significant numbers, visually different from the Panzer III, different choice from the WoTC OOB Panther, and a popular choice within this community - seems like an appropriate choice to me.

@ FMG - Any confirmation as to which Panzer III variant will be represented by your sculpt? An early Ausf. A-D variant, or one of the later variants? Personally, I would choose a E/F variant, but I do admit that most Panzer III variants would look very similar at this scale.

Yes, it appears that I was (thankfully) incorrect about the Opel Blitz as Germany’s Mechanized Infantry unit. However, it looks like the USSR really does use its own mechanized infantry unit (a ZIS Halftrack conversion) instead of sharing the US/UK M3 Halftrack sculpt. If one checks Preview 2 on the front page of this site, one can see the new USSR halftrack sculpt in French blue (except for its new infantry sculpt, France seems to share all of its sculpts with the USSR for some reason - I would have combined the USSR sculpts with a few UK sculpts, personally).

After observing some of the new AAA Europe 1940 photos posted by some players, it appears to me that the USSR does indeed receive a unique mechanized infantry sculpt instead of using the US sculpt. The sculpt appears to be either a ZIS truck variant, or a ZIS halftrack conversion variant? Can someone else confirm as to whether this is accurate?

As well, it appears to me that (very surprisingly) the German mechanized infantry sculpt is the Opel Blitz truck sculpt from AAA Battle of the Bulge, and not the new Sd Kfz 251 sculpt specifically developed for this purpose (and already used by Japan in AAAP40). Again, can someone confirm whether this is actually the case?

Link:

http://yfrog.com/n73gdj

A little less than 300 were produced, actually.

I understand the attachment to and interest in the KV-II, expressed by some other board members, but I think there are far superior choices for Soviet armour sculpts. Aside from individual subjective approval of the tank’s appearance and limited combat success, as evidenced through individual unit results, the vehicle was an awkward, unreliable, and poor design, and was produced in very limited numbers for about a year.

In relation to the use of armoured cars to represent mechanized infantry divisions, I am in agreement, where such a representation would be historically accurate and representative of the most commonly used support vehicle for such divisions.

In the case of the Italians, I agree that indigenous halftrack production and use was far less extensive than that of armoured cars, and so an armoured car sculpt would be the best representation of this Italian unit. The AB41 is, in my opinion, the best choice for the sculpt as well, given the scale of its production and status as one of the more historically well-known Italian armoured cars.

In the case of the Soviet Union, while FMG indicated that a halftrack would perhaps be the best sculpt to represent Soviet mechanized infantry, I would be willing to accept an armoured car for this unit as well.  Soviet armoured car designs were more widely used and effective than Soviet-built halftrack designs, and while the USSR did make extensive use of Lend-Lease US halftracks, I would personally prefer an indigenous Soviet design.  My preference for an armoured car here would be for a BA-64.

I have to disagree with FMG regarding the alleged inappropriateness of a halftrack to represent Japanese mechanized infantry. Development of Japanese halftracks began much earlier in the war than 1945; I believe development and production began in 1940 or 1941. The Type 1 Ho-Ha was in service as early as 1941, although it was later in the war until they were produced and saw action in large numbers. To me, this is the real-life representation/equivalent of a hypothetical ‘Japanese player’ choosing not to produce many mechanized infantry units in favour of other units (such as aircraft and infantry) - the decision of this ‘real life Japanese player’ (for lack of a better term)  not to produce more Ho-Ha’s earlier in the war does not necessarily have to translate into board game play; the board game player may produce more Ho-Ha’s and sent them to the front, and in doing so, alter the historical choices of the ‘real life Japanese player.’ Overall, I do not see the choice of the Type 1 Ho-Ha as an inappropriate choice for Japanese mechanized infantry by FMG, and I shall stick to this choice (although I certainly wouldn’t refuse to buy the set if FMG chose a different sculpt). Finally, no Japanese armoured car design has ever struck me as being particularly inspired or iconic. I suppose FMG could use a tankette, but I personally wouldn’t want to see another tank mold used to represent any nation’s mechanized infantry, even if it was just a tankette (just my subjective opinion though).

For German and the US, I would like to see a halftrack, and I would be fine with replicating the OOB units (the WoTC US and German halftrack sculpts were not particularly detailed, IMO, and I never want to use them again). If FMG really wants to change the German OOB sculpt, than the SD Kfz 250 could substitute for the SD Kfz 251, I guess.

For France, I would choose an armoured car, specifically the P178.

For the UK, I would choose the Universal Bren Carrier.

I don’t care much about China - just reprint an appropriate armoured car from another nation (maybe use the BA-10 for both the USSR and China).

Reprint the UK mold for ANZAC, and maybe Canada.

That’s all for now.

I would have no problem with the OOB T-34/76 replaced with another model, although I personally prefer to see it remain as a FMG Soviet piece due to its wide use and iconic status. The USSR is in the same metaphorical boat as Germany, however, in that it has a deep pool of iconic and widely used armour units from which to choose.

I would just personally hope that the two FMG Soviet tanks are chosen from the following selection:

• T-34/76A (or B)
• KV-I
• T-34/85
• IS-2
• ISU-122 (if a Tank Destroyer must be chosen)

I hope FMG does NOT choose to sculpt an IS-3, as it was produced far too late in the war, and likely saw absolutely no combat (possibly some very limited combat against the Japanese in Mongolia, but not 100% verified). Likewise, although I love the appearance of the KV-II, it was unsuccessful as a combat vehicle, being difficult to control and mechanically unreliable, and so was produced in very, very limited numbers.

Jeremy/FMG has stated (on numerous occasions) that the FMG pieces will indeed match the FMG Combat Dice, and not the most recent WoTC OOB colours. Most of the FMG are quite close to the OOB WoTC colours, but they do vary to different degrees - for example, the WoTC Soviet OOB pieces are various shades of reddish-brown in different A&A variants, but the FMG Soviet Dice are (and the FMG Soviet pieces will be) solid red.

The one exception to this will be the German set, which will be produced in both steel gray and black, due to an earlier controversy (of which I am sure everyone here is aware).

EDIT - I will post regarding the ‘Halftrack vs Armoured Car as Mechanized Infantry debate’ later - I will say that the new FMG Truck and Armoured Car look great though, as do the rest of the FMG pieces so far. 8-)

It seems to me that FMG will replace some OOB pieces where it seems reasonable, but I am certain that there has not been any commitment to replace all OOB pieces.  Allboxcars has already summarized FMG’s posts on the subject, but I would just like to add that one of the Italian tank molds has already replicated the OOB M13/40 from AA50 (albeit with far greater detail of course).

Although I wouldn’t mind a number of OOB models replaced where there exists a reasonable alternative (German tank, Japanese CV, US CA, US Fighter, most UK naval units), I don’t want to see every single piece replaced simply for the sake of replacing them for house rules. Many players, myself included, will never use the poor quality WoTC pieces with the new FMG ones - thus, I think we will want our one set of playable pieces (FMG) to make use of units which strike a good balance between being iconic, seeing widespread use, and representing large-scale national production.

More later…

My choices for USSR sculpts:

Tank #1: T-34/76A
Tank #2: IS-2
[Self-Propelled Artillery: Katyusha (any model)]
Mech.Infantry: Zis-33 Half-Track Conversion
Truck: Zis-5
Artillery: Any
AA: Any (Bofors for all nations would be fine with me)
Fighter: MIG-3 or YAK-1
[Jet Fighter: MIG-9]
Fighter-Bomber: IL-2 or IL-4
Bomber: YER-2 or TU-SB
[Heavy Bomber: PE-8]
Air Transport: LI-2 (USA DC-3 built under license)
Carrier: Project 72
[Light carrier: Project 71]
Battleship: Sovetsky Soyuz class
[Pre-war battleship: Gangut class]
Cruiser: Kirov class
Destroyer: Gnevny class
Submarine: Shchuka class
Transport: Any WWII design.

@ Lozmoid - Although I see the logic in what you are suggesting, I don’t think that FMG would be willing to replace one of its tank sculpts at this late stage, due to cost and delay issues. I would personally be satisfied with the existing choices in light of those issues.

@ knp7765 - Here’s a picture of the Carro Armato P40 for you:

Here’s a blog with a bit more info for those not familiar with the tank:

http://anonymous-generaltopics.blogspot.com/2008/05/carro-armato-p-40.html

My choices for the FMG German pieces (Including some, such as Heavy Bomber, which will probably not actually be produced by FMG for the final release):

Tank #1: Panzer IV Ausf. F2/G/H
Tank #2: Panzer VI (Tiger I) Ausf E.
[Self-Propelled Artillery: Hummel]
Mech.Infantry: Sd-Kfz 251
Truck: Opel Blitz 3 Ton
Artillery: Any
AA: Any (Bofors for all nations would be fine with me)
Fighter: FW F-190A-2/3 (BF 109E would be OK, but prefer to replace OOB here)
[Jet Fighter: ME-262]
Fighter-Bomber: JU-87B Stuka
Bomber: HE-111 (any early variant) or JU-88A
[Heavy Bomber: JU-89 or JU-390]
Air Transport: JU-52
Carrier: Graf Zeppelin class
[Light carrier: Seydlitz class]
Battleship: Bismarck class
[Pre-war battleship: Scharnhorst class]
Cruiser: Admiral Hipper class
Destroyer: Type 1936/1936A
Submarine: Type IXB/C
Transport: Any WWII design, but it is NOT necessary to use a post war design such as the Westerwald class.

I think that each nation should certainly have a generic/non-nation-specific piece for minor and major industrial complexes, naval and airbases, and possible railway terminals. I hope that these pieces feature actual structures (at least the industrial complexes) and are not just chips with icons on them.

In addition to tech pieces for aircraft, and self-propelled artillery and light carrier pieces, I would truly like to see a pre-war and wartime BB for each nation. I feel that this would be very useful for houserules (particularly for smaller-scale tactical games such as AA Guadalcanal), and would allow for both iconic modern BB’s and well-used pre-war BB’s. I realize that there is a limit to what FMG can do for a reasonable cost, but these would be my BB choices for each nation:

Italy:
Pre-War/Older: Andrea Doria Class
Wartime/Modern: Littorio Class

Germany:
Pre-War/Older: Scharnhorst class (only other choice would be the useless and tiny pre-Dreadnoughts Schlesweig-Holstein and Schlesien, which had been downgraded to gunnery school ships by WWII anyway)
Wartime/Modern: Bismarck class

Japan:
Pre-War/Older: Kongo class
Wartime/Modern: Yamato class

France:
Pre-War/Older: Bretagne class
Wartime/Modern: Richelieu class

USSR:
Pre-War/Older: Gangut class
Wartime/Modern: Sovietskya Soyuz class

UK:
Pre-War/Older: Queen Elizabeth class (Warspite profile)
Wartime/Modern: King George V class

US:
Pre-War/Older: Colorado class (Colorado/Maryland 1942 profile)
Wartime/Modern: Iowa or South Dakota class

@ cminke:

Early models of both the Panzer III (Ausf. A/B/C/D) and Panzer IV (Ausf. A/B/C) were in service in 1939. The Panzer III ceased production in 1943 (last models were Ausf. M/N), while the Panzer IV remained in production until 1945 (simplified Ausf. J only - Ausf. H ceased production in 1944).

I would personally also like to see a Panzer IV as one of the two FMG models for Germany, although I would prefer to see a mid-war Ausf. F2/G/H model over the heavily simplified/cut down Ausf. J.

The second German tank model should indeed be a Tiger, Ausf. E, IMHO. I would agree to pass over another Panther model here. I don’t think that all OOB models should be replaced, but many of them should be replaced where reasonably feasible. Germany had many WWII tank designs which were both widely used and iconic/recognizable - I therefore believe that there are many reasonable alternative choices for FMG than the Panzer V/Panther.

Perhaps I’m getting off-topic though - I should probably post this in the FMG German pieces discussion…