American fighter has got to be the Mustang P-51
American bomber should be a B-25 Mitchell. That way the other bomber from AA50 could be a heavy bomber because it looks just like a strategic bomber, while the B-25 is your average joe medium bomber.
The AA50 fighter already looks like a classic naval tac fighter or torpedo bomber
I agree that all the new pieces need to be iconic, but their are other choices than just redoing the basic pieces.
The American tank is fine , so the new tank could be a Stuart, M24 Chaffee, M3 Lee. It makes no sence to just make a new replacement Sherman because we already got that and the current Sherman is just fine. The whole idea is:
- make a new set of pieces
- to correct the problems found in some of the AA pieces ( Italian cruiser, etc)
If your just wasting money revamping the exact same pieces but a little bit better it WONT be as successful financially as just making something original and better.
The spitfire for UK is just fine, a Swordfish would be something while all the other British fighters look alot like the spitfire. It makes no sence to make ANOTHER SPITFIRE. To me it seems like a waste of money for the trouble to FIX basically not “broken” pieces. To me the whole idea is to fix what is broken which is the whole issue that a number of the AA pieces are doubled up on more than one nation ( like Italy and Japan having the same artillery unit)
So since FMG is taking the bold step and making new pieces, it seems a waste to redo alot of the same pieces that were basically fine, but missing the opportunity to make something new, which creates utility for other games yet to come. It would give a whole new universe of pieces to create new rules for and substitute in future AA games, because frankly i expect WOTC to maintain its cheapness and avoid new pieces and keep rehashing out the old crap over and over. FMG stands to make a huge standing for all these types of games and raise the bar for quality.