Re: 1950 Korea variant?20211219_071801.jpg 20211219_071710.jpg 20211219_071617.jpg
Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread
-
Jet aircraft are very regonizable so there range should depend on tech.
not necessarily, some jets, like the heinkel 280 looked rather similar to other german fighters, like the 100 or 112 or 113, save the split tail, but that’s more a detail that will be missed by many…
The problem is less with what the actual size ones look like and more with the fact that we are dealing with small plastic models that would miss out on the more recognizable details like the lack props on the front of the planes.Yah there are no props on A&A planes are there, thats a good point, but even if the model dosnt have swept back wings like the ME260, planes like the F-80 and Gloster Meteor just look different. Also I wound’t mind the American and soveit models to be a F-86 sabre and a Mig-15 even though they were a few years away, it would be awesome to have a Korean war A&A.
-
yeah, it really just depends on the model chosen, and there are plenty of jet fighter choices that would be noticeably different from non-jet fighters…. back to the choices… that’s the fun part and the drag, how about one of each?!
-
How about air troop transports
-
How about air troop transports
waste of mold in my opinion. I like units that kill stuff. An airborne infantry peice is needed much more; an if it needs transport you should just have that signified by a chip like the damage marker instead of another large air unit to clutter up board that dosnt even kill anything.
Although maybe not for the strategic game a minature for air transports could be fun to have in smaller scale A&A’s like D-day or if one was going to make there own A&A battle level game that involved heavy use of airborne units.
-
I’m don’t think it would be a “waste”, per sey. The only real limitation that there is on this project now is keeping the cost at $60 per set.
-
I would not mind transport planes if they also made an airborne infantry sculpt. I would like to see Airborne get a larger role. Very expensive elite infantry dropped off by air transport.
Limit builds to one per turn due to extensive training and give them some punch on round one. Also let transports ferry normal infantry during NCM. I would definatly like to see these.
among other things…
-
I would like to see transports too.
-
Gliders too?
-
airborne transport. definately yes. airborne infantry not necessary
-
Personally, I considder the “Paratroopers” tech in AA50 to be more like a Glider tech, since the bomber can still attack. A loaded bomber is merely towing the infantry beihind in the glider, thus explaining the range reduction.
-
With all these new pieces coming out, I think FMG is going to have to make a deluxe carry case to hold all of these :-D
-
airborne transport. definately yes. airborne infantry not necessary
you need to get your priorities straight.
A loaded bomber is merely towing the infantry beihind in the glider, thus explaining the range reduction.
yes, merely
turtle, WTF!
-
The leaders and Commanders will not be political leaders but military leaders. We are aiming at a General unit for each nation in historical Uniform.
-
airborne transport. definately yes. airborne infantry not necessary
you need to get your priorities straight.
A loaded bomber is merely towing the infantry beihind in the glider, thus explaining the range reduction.
yes, merely
turtle, WTF!
Merely, indeed. Of chorse a fully loaded bomber would have a lot of trouble hauling a glider!
What has become of the ancient art of sarcasm?
-
Sarcasm’s dead.
oh wait, let me try that again, didn’t come out right…
Sarcasm’s dead!
dang…
-
-
Sarcasm’s dead.
oh wait, let me try that again, didn’t come out right…
Sarcasm’s dead!
dang…
lols, your being sarcastic!
-
When is Field Marshall Games going to put some information about these game pieces on their website?
-
as soon as they have completed them to the point where they can take a picture.
-
When can we expect that to take place?
Suggested Topics
