Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

@John:

@Yavid:

@Imperious:

What we need is a master list of WOTC pieces and HBG/FMG pieces by type, then formulate stats but all separate

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33356.0

done I don’t have Anniversary and don’t know the units that came with that game so they are not on the list.

I pmed you the list. I hope that helps you, buddy! :-D

Thank you very much I updated adding the units from AA50 I did run into a couple questions for you and pm them to you.

Cannot find many threads that really get into this version of the game in great detail. Played 1 full game of it so far, and love it. (I was originally a Classic player all the way.)

Anyway, few questions to maybe spark some discussion on this:

Which official version is this map closest to? Also which “official” rule set does this variant use? Spring 1942 edition?

Bidding: on the few posts I found on the topic, it seems people think this map favors the Axis and they actually bid allies. Either I am reading posts on a different version or I just suck, because it seems like the Allies are in pretty good shape in this map from the beginning and they can do some things right out of the gate to slow what needs to be a rapid Axis assault. E.g. China being a distraction and the UK being able to defend most of its colonies for at least 3 turns.

I am still not entirely sure what the best opening moves are for the Axis, which is what I would really like to discuss in depth here if other folks have some more experience with this game. For instance, what odds should the German player take to try and take Leningrad first turn? It seems like their Northern fleet cannot last more than a turn against a good UK player, so should you just sacrifice it and take worse odds on a Leningrad assault if the Soviet player leaves you, say, a 70% chance? (I am usually the kind of player that only attacks with overwhelming odds, e.g., 90% and above. Even 85% makes me nervous…) How can the Germans ever keep their Northern fleet alive? Do they need to? (It seems like the English can kill it turn 1 no matter what the Germans do.) If you cannot take Leningrad T1, is it better to instead focus like a laser on a later round (T4 or 5) take over of Stalingrad with a huge mass of tanks and infantry that you slowly plod over there?

Is a rapid take over of Africa impossible against a UK player who adequately defends Syria and Egypt T1 and who rapidly stacks Gibraltar with numerous planes and troops? Should the Italians forego Africa and put everything into a Russian assault? Is Western Turkey a viable take-over to open up another avenue for Italian ships and/or tanks into Russia or Africa?

Do the Japanese sacrifice their fleet to kill the US at Midway or do they ignore them entirely and focus everything on India? It seems like focusing on anything else is ultimately a mistake, at least thats how my last game played out.

So many questions! What do you guys think is the optimum opening Axis move?

Okay gang,

Paul and I are going to start two separate projects from this point forward. Paul will do his best to preserve the info from this thread as it pertains to his game which you can follow here:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24848.0

As far as my game (simplified version using more or less OOB pieces) you can follow it in this thread:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24875.0

Thank you everyone and we both encourage full participation and idea sharing in both our ventures. As Paul says, we want to have MORE FUN!

I have been working on that stuff best I can. I would love to get some more play time in to expose any bugs, but there’s never enough time to do everything. I will keep working to improve it though!

@Tater_07:

Sounds like it could be interesting. I will have to get into miniatures and see if I like it. Thanks for the help!

My pleasure.  Something else to keep in mind is that there are additional differences between various game levels.  The higher the game level, the more the combat process is abstracted; conversely, when you go all the way down to skirmish level, the combat processes can be so finely detailed that they can involve the effects of individual weapons being fired at individual targets and inflicting specific damage on them.  Another difference is the level of command represented by the player himself.  Way up at the grand strategy level, the player basically has the role of a country’s national command authorities (the top civilian and military leadership running the war).  Down at the skirmish level, the player would probably have the role of a squad or platoon leader.

I recently got a copy of Conquest Gaming’s “A House Divided The Brothers War”.  It is an area movement game that uses miniatures and, because of the railroad movement in addition to regular movement, 6 distinct theaters (3 per side),general and event cards that modify the fighting troops abilities, is a very interesting game to play.  It is tough for the North to survive the opening rounds because of their relatively weak starting generals and troop levels, but because of the reinforcement advantage, if it can hang on the game becomes winable for it.  Another interesting and historical feature is that many of the South’s generals have good infantry, cavalry and artillery modifiers while many of the North’s generals are lesser, but all the main generals are represented so eventually the North draws Sherman, Sheridan, Thomas, Grant, etc. But, of course, the South continues to draw generals each turn so Longstreet, Stuart, Pemberton and Lee appear (Beauregard and Jackson start the game in play).  You have to provide your own pieces, the pieces from the Napoleon Risk will work, but I had enough pieces from Battle Cry to play the game.  The game is only $13 and with about $10 shipping is still are good buy for such an interesting game.

F-84