Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

https://www.seawarstore.com/NavalEnsignsDlx.htm

This site offers dedicated military flags that are placed on the table for each player.

Hello? I put some pics up! replies? :?

Hey All,
I’ve had time to play a couple of games of the new Fortress America. Aside from the new pieces, the game is pretty much the same as the older version. Here are the most noteable differences:

The USA’s Partisan cards are spelled out quite a bit clearer than the old ones. These tell you EXACTLY what territories, units and actions are involved. Most of the cards are really the same as in the old deck, except of course one that deals with Colorado Springs, which wasn’t in the old game, but the new cards seem to spell out what you are supposed to do in more detail. They even tell you to discard the card after you are done.
After I compared the new and old cards, I can see that some of the old cards could have been misread. Specifically, the MAJOR AIRLIFT card. With the old game, I always played it by taking ALL US units anywhere on the board and moving them as I wished. The new MAJOR AIRLIFT card specifically says that you pick ONE territory and can move the units from that territory to anywhere on the board that doesn’t have enemy units (even enemy controlled, unoccupied city territories). So, the USA player is basically limited to a maximum of 5 military units that he/she can move around like this. While this can still be a big plus for the US, especially if the invaders have left a lot of cities unoccupied, it isn’t so devastating to the invaders that it might be a game ender. Since then, I have gone back and re-read the MAJOR AIRLIFT card in the old deck and realized that I think I have mis-played it all this time. I think it might have ALWAYS been just one territory of units, not ALL US units. The way it is worded could go either way.

Another big difference is that the Mobile Units are much more useful now. If you have a Mobile Unit and an Infantry (or Partisan for the US) in the same territory, that Mobile Unit can transport that Infantry/Partisan with it in the Maneuvers phase (normally Infantry/Partisans have no movement in the Maneuvers phase). This happens on a 1:1 ratio. So if you have 2 Infantry and 1 Mobile Unit, then only 1 Infantry may travel with the Mobile Unit. That makes Mobile Units much more valuable now. In the old game, they were more or less mobile cannon fodder to me.

Finally, the biggest difference is that now there are cards for the Invaders. Each Invader has a deck of 8 cards that can give them certain advantages if certain conditions are met. During the reinforcement phase, each Invader must decide to get 8 new units or get only 5 new units and draw a card. Each card has certain advantages which could boost their forces’ movement or attacking power or cause a detriment to the US’s abilities (like depriving them of the laser attacks for a round). To gain these advantages, certain conditions must be met, like holding certain cities, or simply a certain number of cities and/or holding certain resource territories (agriculture, mineral, oil). Some cards are one time use and others are “Remain In Play” which the invader that holds that card can use even if the original conditions are no longer met. For example: Say the Western Invader draws a “Remain In Play” card and the conditions are that he has to own Los Angeles, 2 Agricultures and 1 Mineral. Then later on he loses one of the Agricultures, or the Mineral, or even Los Angeles, he can STILL PLAY THAT CARD. Also, even once the Invader’s reserves are depleted, they can still draw cards during the reinforcements phase. If you get a card for which you haven’t met the conditions yet, you simply keep it face down in front of you until you can use it. So, theoretically, Invaders could possibly use several cards in the same turn, provided all the conditions are met for each card.
Frankly, while some of the advantages in the cards are pretty good, I think overall they are more of a detriment to the invaders as well as the overall game experience. As an invader, you might end up becoming too fixated on trying to accomplish the conditions on a card so that you can gain that advantage that you end up not doing other things that would better defeat the USA forces. As for the game, it really takes more time for the invaders to keep checking their cards to see if they meed the requirements. Also, losing that 3 extra pieces each turn so you can draw a card may not seem like a lot, but I think it could be just enough for the USA player to get just enough of an edge that they don’t lose all 18 cities. The longer this game goes, the more forces the US will have and the less the Invaders will have, thus it will be that much harder to gain the 18 cities and defeat the US. Plus if you keep getting cards that you can’t use, then is it really worth losing those extra 3 units each turn. It seems to me like a lot of the conditions, while not impossible, are pretty hard for the Invaders to accomplish. For Example: there are two or three cards for the Eastern Invader where one of the conditions is an Oil Resource. The nearest one for them is clear over by Memphis. That’s a lot of territory to conquer.

Well, there is my report. It’s a pretty cool game, but VERY similar to the old game. If you have the original, unless you just really want the new pieces and map or really want to try out the new Invader cards, I would say save your money and play the original some more becasue except for the few points above, they are basically the same game.

DFWSupertrooper,

Obviously with my Color mapboard being 4’ x 9’ and in two pieces I had planned for my “Gaming Table” to also be in TWO PIECES that could be combined,…or FOLDABLE for transport purposes.

@Tall:

My “A&A Gang” currently are using our 48" x 108" Black & White map mounted on gator-board and laid onto the tops of two tables.

On my version I planned on having a solid 1/2" A/C plywood base that has 1" x 2" lateral and longitudinal wood braces underneath w/furniture grade wood framing around everything and a glass top over the map.  On the bottom I planned to include mounts for detatchable legs to make it versatile.  These are my interests and I’d be interested in your opinions or options for building this for me.  Thanks for your time.

I just wanted to let you know I’d possibly be interested in a two-piece board that could be folded up for transport purposes.  Obviously the glass on top of each mapboard would also be in two pieces.  Let me know of any ideas/opinions you may have on this subject.

“Tall Paul”

I took a careful look at the Global War 1939 board that Coach is selling over on his new site… and I bought it!  I think it might be my favorite board that I’ve yet seen, and it might be big enough to combine with a complete Panzerschiffe navy.  When it arrives, I’ll break out my Panzerschiffes and check for compatibility.  If it works and if no one out there seems to have a more full naval line-up by this summer, I’ll probably start gradually working on adding to and painting my Panzerschiffes to create my ultimate navy.  Meanwhile, I’m going to wait and see what sort of piece sets are available by then between Coach, FMG, & TT before pulling the trigger…

@Dylan:

Turn Order: Russia, France, UK, Austria-Prussia.

Russia=Blue
Austro-Prussian Alliance=Yellow
France=Black
UK=Red

UK’s Setup
England= 3 Swordsmen, 1 Riflemen, 1 Calvary, 2 Cannon, 1 General.
Scotland= 1 Calvary
Ireland= 1 Swordsmen
Sweden= 3 Swordsmen
Portugal= 1 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon
Gibraltar= 1 Swordsmen
Malta.

France Setup

Paris: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Rifleman, 2 Calvary, 1 Cannon, General
Southern France: 2 Swordsmen, 1 Rifleman, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon
French Coastline: 2 Swordsmen, 2 Calvary, 1 Cannon
Central France: 1 Swordsman, 1 Rifleman
Holland.
United Netherlands.
Denmark: 3 Swordsmen
Norway: 1 Swordsman, 1 Calvary
Switzerland.
Italy: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon
Naples: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon
Etruria
Hanover
Warsaw: 1 Swordsman, 1 Rifleman, 1 Calvary
North Spain: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Rifleman, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon
South Spain: 3 Swordsmen
North Germany: 2 Swordsmen, 1 Cannon
South Germany: 3 Swordsmen

Austria-Prussia Alliance Setup

East Austria: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon, 1 General
West Prussia: 2 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary, 1 Cannon
West Austria: 2 Swordsmen, 1 Cannon
Central Prussia: 2 Swordsmen
East Prussia
Central Austria

Russia Setup

Western Russia: 2 Swordsmen
Moscow: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary
Central Russia: 2 Swordsmen
Ukraine: 2 Swordsmen, 1 Cannon
Belarus: 2 Swordsmen, 1 Calvary
St. Petersburg: 3 Swordsmen, 1 Rifleman, 2 Calvary, 1 Cannon, 1 General
Northern Finland: 2 Swordsmen
Southern Finland: 2 Swordsmen
Siberia: 2 Swordsmen

Well we know the color change, but the setup is different

England: 3 Infantry, 1 Cannon, 1 Calvary, 1 General
Scotland: 1 Calvary
Ireland: 1 Infantry
Sweden: 3 Infantry
Portugal: 1 Infantry, 1 Calvary
Gibraltar: 1 Infantry

Paris: 3 Infantry, 1 Cannon, 2 Calvary, 1 General
Southern France: 2 Infantry, 1 Cannon, 1 Calvary
French Coastline: 2 Infantry, 2 Calvary
Central France: 1 Infantry, 1 Cannon
Denmark: 3 Infantry
Norway: 1 Infantry, 1 Calvary
Italy: 3 Infantry, 1 Calvary
Naples: 3 Infantry, 1 Calvary
Warsaw: 1 Infantry, 1 Cannon, 1 Calvary
North Spain: 3 Infantry, 1 Cannon, 1 Calvary
South Spain: 3 Infantry
North Rhine: 2 Infantry
South Rhine: 3 Infantry

Austrian-Prussian Alliance
East Austria: 3 Infantry, 1 Calvary, 1 General
West Prussia: 2 Infantry, 1 Calvary
West Austria: 2 Infantry
East Prussia: 2 Infantry

Russia
Western Russia: 2 Infantry
Moscow: 3 Infantry, 1 Calvary
Central Russia: 2 Infantry
Ukraine: 2 Infantry
Belarus: 2 Infantry, 1 Calvary
St. Petersburg: 3 Infantry, 1 Cannon, 2 Calvary
Northern Finland: 2 Infantry
Southern Finland: 2 Infantry
Siberia: 2 Infantry

Very similar.

The pieces are risk

Infantry: 1 Unit (risk)
Cannon: 5 Units (risk)
Calvary: 3 Units (risk)
General: 10 Units (risk)

I’ll try to do a better map.

I’m also making a second game World War I.

My copies are of the 2nd version, otherwise I wouldn’t have recommended it.

The pieces are in the primary colours: red, blue, green & yellow.

Also the board is simpler, as you get a “console” for each player to store units, reserves etc:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/82252/power?size=original

Also browsing around my collection I noticed these planes from Airways:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/525846/airways?size=medium

Just wondered if people would prefer aircraft mounted on stands like this; you could have them on a peg that slotted into the stand or into a corresponding slot on a carrier.
More expensive to produce, but gives a more imposing impression of air power.

:-o
May I suggest a possible infantry change based on historic facts. Russians had more men, Germans had better equipment and training for their troops not to mention their skill at combined arms tactics. So, why not let the Russians have their cheap infantry buys while giving the Germans a bonus in attack strength, say 2 in attack and 2 in defense when combined with armor or air units, ( no need for Artillary). Now that is what I call an easy fix. Since the germans start out with more tanks and planes than thier opponents they will kick butt early. But when the allies start to build up their combined arms, Germany will be overwhelmed in numbers. So the axis better do a lot of damage real quick to win.
    Should be more fun though.
If someone does play-test this in a game could they let me know how it worked out? Thanks.

:roll: Crazy Ivan

If something doesn’t work right,
                  fix it!
    I can’t help it, I’m left handed