Preview: Unit Details and Abilities

I’m thinking the Allied sub may be British. Possibly a Trident class. Big bow. Not looking like the pics I saw of a Gato class.

tanks at 6 is an utter disaster! i think if i’d buy the game i’d remove the 6 an replace with 5, atleast. or even 3, while making inf 2. the game is to draw players in; not bore them to death with a) no units on the board and b) only inf, because tanks are too expensive…

So it’s certain that the Allied Carrier is the Ark Royal? I thought for sure it was a US model. Still interesting to get a new type of carrier.

The Japanese Transport. You said it is the Hakusan Maru. That’s the same class as the earlier Japanese Transports yet they look pretty different. Is this one just better detailed than the previous ones?

@knp7765:

So it’s certain that the Allied Carrier is the Ark Royal? I thought for sure it was a US model. Still interesting to get a new type of carrier.

I too thought it was a Yorktown or Enterprise at first but the stack seems too small. It may well be an Ark Royal

@knp7765:

The Japanese Transport. You said it is the Hakusan Maru. That’s the same class as the earlier Japanese Transports yet they look pretty different. Is this one just better detailed than the previous ones?

I think this is the case. I also think the Axis sub is the same Japanese one as the previous sets.

I think it is an Essex class carrier

definatly not HBG or FMG standards…

I too would agree that they improved the quality of the naval and air sculpts. The tanks though, in my opinion are terrible. They don’t compare to the rest at all. And the same old infantry sculpts are getting very tired.

If you count the sculpts it can’t be the Hakusan Maru or the Type VII. 8 Allied and 6 Axis is 14 new sculpts. I think it’s a Type XXI and I’m unsure of the transport.

wow…. Carriers cost 12 and BBs cost 16???

that is 2 cheaper for Carriers, and 4 cheaper for BBs

and no artillery???

I am also very surprised to see tanks at 6. 
Tanks at 6 only makes sense on a “large” map.
On a small map, Tanks make more sense at 5, since you can’t run around a stack of infantry anyway.

I have a small feeling that with Tanks at 6, and no Artillery, that this is going to turn into “mega-inf stacks” game.

I agree it seems like it’s back to infantry push

@Veqryn:

wow…. Carriers cost 12 and BBs cost 16???

that is 2 cheaper for Carriers, and 4 cheaper for BBs

and no artillery???

I am also very surprised to see tanks at 6. 
Tanks at 6 only makes sense on a “large” map.
On a small map, Tanks make more sense at 5, since you can’t run around a stack of infantry anyway.

I have a small feeling that with Tanks at 6, and no Artillery, that this is going to turn into “mega-inf stacks” game.

house rules… i suggest adding artillery at 4 (but no support for infantry). cause tanks are expensive, but on a small map they’re supermobile…

Isn’t there a spot in the rulebook telling you what each sculpts are what?

Or just pay 5 for tanks and tell our friends, or children, that it was a printing error! We all love tanks and  if purchasing is hard we will want some.

5 ipc tanks just seem to cheap. There’s not enough distance between Berlin and Moscow. Before making changes to the game play it OOB a few times. Changing unit cost has an unbalancing effect slanting it to the Axis.

I know it sounds wrong but look at it like this. If there was a unit that cost 7 everyone would be able to buy it to afford it. If that same unit cost 14 it’s out of how many countries price range? And if you raise the price enough it gets to a point the Axis can’t afford it at all and really only America can afford it. Thus raising cost of units is doing the Allies a favor. Lowering helps the Axis.

I love the Axis and I am sure most new players will too. I  need to see the map and make my decision then. Am in England, so will be a while yet.

it looks like there’s 1 or 2 territories between berlin and moscow and Japan can land tanks in china and have them attacking southern russia the next turn. China is shallow on territories. Siberia is also shallow. Axis hold one territory in africa. The best way I can discribe it is the Classic map. China is 2 territories north and south not east and west like in classic. The IC in Leningrad from classic has been moved to Stalingrad. There are servely islands in the pacific that are in the same sea zone