@Adam514
And the rules list the facilities under the “unit profiles” heading and mentions that they are placed in the “Mobilize New Units phase”.
But otherwise I could not find it referencing them as “units”. So thanks for the clarification
Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread
-
BISMARCK,
ah, now ive got it! -
The Bismarck had a shelf life of about a week. Then it sank. Then they made a game that takes place during 1942 which is a year after it sank.
Does not seem like a candidate for a basic German battleship to me.
The Tirpitz didn’t even really get out of port. It has no story other than target practice for British planes.
Scharnhorst and ships like it have a very colorful story full of adventures that went thru the war.
Now Graf Spee did get sunk in 1939, but its just one ship of a class of about 4 others, so it could be a decent candidate.
Anyway Germany should be done as the second set.
-
@Imperious:
Anyway Germany should be done as the second set.
No, I think Norway should be done next, then we can talk about effectively doubble the inventory of units, and design many new house rules.
If you dont want to play with Norway as a power, you could use the inf as german mountain troops or skii troops.
-
Yea Norway and Sweden
-
Hey IL, I get what you are saying about the more “iconic” pieces. I personally disagree because I think we would want the best, most powerful and most modern class to represent our ships, but I also understand where you are coming from. Just curious, what models would you prefer for US and British battleships?
Also, I thought Jeremy said that JAPAN was coming after Italy.
-
I see what IL is saying about the molds being of the more commonly used ships at that time. I was just stating it is rediculous to make a statement like the BISMACK and YAMATO are not iconic warships.
NORWAY or SWEDEN next? Not a bad idea. I would buy them, but i dont know how many poeple would.
What color would they be? -
NORWAY or SWEDEN next? Not a bad idea. I would buy them, but i dont know how many poeple would.
What color would they be?Sweden would fit yellow, since it is both in their flag, and their morale.
-
Sweden would fit yellow, since it is both in their flag, and their morale.
OOOooooh! Slam! Someone’s not a fan of Sweden. Do you feel that way about all neutrals?
-
OOOooooh! Slam! Someone’s not a fan of Sweden. Do you feel that way about all neutrals?
knp7765 meet Razor, Razor meet knp7765
-
OOOooooh! Slam! Someone’s not a fan of Sweden. Do you feel that way about all neutrals?
knp7765 meet Razor, Razor meet knp7765
I think knp7765 just met Adlertag and Bizarro Tag as well
-
-
he is.
-
@Imperious:
he is.
I thought so. Both
appear tohate SwedenWhat does yellow morale signify?
-
-
@Brain:
What does yellow morale signify?
cowardly
I guess he’d prefer a country to be occupied and many of its people dead than stay neutral and thus only have to suffer mild restrictions on free trade.
-
@Brain:
What does yellow morale signify?
cowardly
I guess he’d prefer a country to be occupied and many of its people dead than stay neutral and thus only have to suffer mild restrictions on free trade.
Well if every country took that stance, we would all either be speaking German of Japanese.
-
@Brain:
@Brain:
What does yellow morale signify?
cowardly
I guess he’d prefer a country to be occupied and many of its people dead than stay neutral and thus only have to suffer mild restrictions on free trade.
Well if every country took that stance, we would all either be speaking German of Japanese.
But the US and UK were not really in danger of being occupied, and the USSR was attacked. Sweden was not
-
@Brain:
@Brain:
What does yellow morale signify?
cowardly
I guess he’d prefer a country to be occupied and many of its people dead than stay neutral and thus only have to suffer mild restrictions on free trade.
Well if every country took that stance, we would all either be speaking German of Japanese.
But the US and UK were not really in danger of being occupied, and the USSR was attacked. Sweden was not
This is really OFF TOPIC… but why would Sweden join the Allies if they were powerless to help Finland against the USSR and hopeless in helping Norway against the Germans? The Allies didn’t lift a finger to help Denmark or Poland either!?!?! Seems like suicide to me for a lost cause (At the time). In addition Sweden had a great trade deal going with Germany so there was no need to join that side. I think Sweden made the right decision.
[PERSONAL OPINION - Not reflective of FMG]
-
I agree. I think the Swedes knew they were on their on if it came to war with Germany.
The prewar Scandanavian alliance was hopeless.The Czechs/Poles received little aid.The
States were sitting it out.Who could they trust?
Back on subject,they would make the best neutral for the game.GHQ and Navwar make
Hungarian armor.The Toldi 1/2 and Nimrod were all Swedish designs built on licence.The
Bofors 15CM also.I have the Navwar types and use them for both countries. -
I agree. I think the Swedes knew they were on their on if it came to war with Germany.
The prewar Scandanavian alliance was hopeless.The Czechs/Poles received little aid.The
States were sitting it out.Who could they trust?
Back on subject,they would make the best neutral for the game.GHQ and Navwar make
Hungarian armor.The Toldi 1/2 and Nimrod were all Swedish designs built on licence.The
Bofors 15CM also.I have the Navwar types and use them for both countries.I wanted to use this for the NEW AA Gun re: Bofors 15CM . It is the only weapon used by all Axis and Allied Nations in the Second World War.
Thoughts?
Suggested Topics
