Plastic Playing Pieces

@ TG Moses VI - Yes, this indeed what FMG is planning to do; replace the entire existing nation sets with new ones.  It remains to be seen how many of these new molds will be unique, and how many will have to be shared; FMG is obtaining a price quote first before relaying this information back to us.

@FieldMarshallGames:

…My Goal so far is the following:  (I am still working with factory on cost)

1. To make a FULL set for each Nation in AA50.  Better quality and greater quantity than provided in the stock game.  These can fully replace the stock units OR complement them.

2. To add two additional colors for expansions ie; BLUE for France and one other color with general sculpts to be used as Neutrals or other nation as required by expansion.

3. To add some new SPECIAL Expansion units to the game.  “Why would some one buy this?” Something new will give the set greater appeal to the general public and and help pay of the cost of the production investment.

…

@FieldMarshallGames:

…Once I get a decent quote on cost of this project I will finalize the unit types and numbers.

we’ll just have to see if the goal is actually practical and affordable for FMG then. fingers crossed

All I can say is that I hope FMG can afford quite a few new molds; I am trying to draft up a list with only 48 new molds, but I can’t get it down past 75 so far (and that is with such corner-cutting measures as cutting out unique molds for the entire Soviet navy, a Japanese halftrack and transport aircraft, and a lot of the Italian Navy). My list also assumes six new unit types; mechanized infantry/half track, rockets, commander, self-propelled artillery, transport aircraft, and bunker, shared molds for IC, AA, rockets, and bunker, and doesn’t include France and a neutral set. I just can’t cut it down much more without any sense of satisfaction. :-(

@TG:

If every country kept their colors EXCEPT for Italy, I would be more than happy.  Italy and Russia still look too much alike.

I’d be fairly happy with that colour arrangement too.  The brown used for Italy in AA50 isn’t easy to distinguish from the AA50 maroon/purple Russian pieces, and it causes even greater confusion once you start mixing in the dark brown Russian pieces from the original A&A edition and the brownish/olive-green US pieces from the same game.  My own preference for Italy would be light grey.  The colours used for the five main combatants in AA50 would be fine to keep as they are, but it might be a good idea to find another colour for the lime green AA50 Chinese infantry pieces.  Anything greenish will tend to be associated the US pieces.  This was the same problem that the lime green British pieces had in AA Revised: the sculpts were clearly British, but the colour was closer to the American medium green than the usual British tan.

CWO Marc

Actually, I would go with a full spread of country specific parts for a power like France before coming up with things like leaders or fortifications, but that is just my opinion.

I could go for this except id like neutrals as well and a redesigned scenario for 1939 start date.
but you still need the technology units like rockets, jets, Heavies, and super subs.

For the Italians I would light to see a green gray but light gray is okay.

Green-Grayhttp://www.diggerhistory.info/images/uniforms4/italy-Paracadutista.jpg
Light-Gray

http://www.diggerhistory.info/images/uniforms4/italian-Sirte.jpg

IL, I miss Klink :-(

If I was FMG, I’d just start making any pieces in any colors, because its going to be sold out pretty fast anyway for sure. But if we must wait 20 years for a perfect set, that everybody agrees on, nothing will happen. I for once will not be aliwe in 2025 to buy this set.

Klink is just for Harris site

Quote from: FieldMarshallGames
…My Goal so far is the following:  (I am still working with factory on cost)

1. To make a FULL set for each Nation in AA50.  Better quality and greater quantity than provided in the stock game.  These can fully replace the stock units OR complement them.

2. To add two additional colors for expansions ie; BLUE for France and one other color with general sculpts to be used as Neutrals or other nation as required by expansion.

3. To add some new SPECIAL Expansion units to the game.  “Why would some one buy this?” Something new will give the set greater appeal to the general public and and help pay of the cost of the production investment.

First, FMG thanks,
this would be a great additions to the game;

I would agree with Craig and Moses, build the Italians first,
you would already be sold out.- immediate action-money-LOL!!

Then, special units, such as tech units or optional units,
I would buy today-these would also sell well.

Now, with a feel for market, you could add the other nations as well.
Again, agree with IL, Blue-France would be the second Nation.
so, this follows your ideas, only suggesting a different priority for the development.

Again many thanks, I hope this goes forward, we buying.

Italy 1st, then some specialized units for each nation!

@Imperious:

Actually, I would go with a full spread of country specific parts for a power like France before coming up with things like leaders or fortifications, but that is just my opinion.

I could go for this except id like neutrals as well and a redesigned scenario for 1939 start date.
but you still need the technology units like rockets, jets, Heavies, and super subs.

I am with you, Imp.

I’d love to get more individual pieces for my games, but here’s one thing to think about when considering which new pieces/capabilities will be added (fighter-bomber, mech art, transport, commander, bunker, rockets, halftracks): do they really add anything new to a grand strategy game?

Look at the Axis and Allies example:

• Starting with Europe and continuing to Revised, 2 units were added: Artillery and Destroyer.
• Europe had Bunkers but they were not kept to Revised.
• Pacific had Marines, again they were not kept into Revised.
• Bulge brought Trucks, which were not implemented into AA50.
• Guadalcanal introduced Cruisers, which where added to AA50, but as a part of a general redesign of the naval units.

What is more amazing here is to consider the different kinds of new units that have been proposed to Axis and Allies along all the years and how few have ever seen their debut in one of the games, and only half made it to the grand strategy game, Revised or AA50.

Which leads me into this conclusions regarding new pieces:

• Keep in mind the military distinction between strategic and operational theatres. Some pieces proposed seem to fit more into a operational or even tactical kind of game, like Bulge or Guadalcanal. Mech Artillery, Tank Destroyers, Paratroopers, Cavalry, Heavy Tanks, Fighter Bombers, Naval Fighters, are more fit for those kind of game.
• Make sure that there is a specific niche for those new units, other than simply changing their stats.
  There are a few units that clearly fit into this: Transport plane is one, Commander might be another (see below for more details).
• Pay attention to the KISS principle, which I truly thank Larry Harris to have done so far. It will frustrate some people that they won’t get all the pieces they want, but not adding some units will make it more easier to integrate the new pieces with the existing game without having to create new rules. One example: Cruiser. Without the rework of AA50 on naval units and stats, they would be redundant on Revised. Fighter-bombers would also need some sort of rethinking of aerial combats.
• And finally consider the overall impact on the game. A commander unit that increases the unit stats might be a good idea but it might also imply a race for commanders early on. Bunker units make attacks harder and to me the game works much better if territories are more easily taken than just building stacks of units for defense.

And here are my 2c :)

I think the extras would be nice, but isn’t the point of this to replace the craptastic pieces that we got with the game? I think that should come first IMO

I think adding the other nations and optional pieces are a good idea, but would we rather have all these extras and still be stuck with the original poor quality ones? That would annoy the crap out me to have half my set good quality and the other half a step above play-doe. Makes much more sense to me to make replacement parts for all powers first, then add extra units/powers.

@TG:

1. Italy First
2. Other country specific units + unlockable tech units
3. New Custom Units

I’d like also to see it implemented this way, but regarding point 2 I would love to have…alternatives for the current game pieces. I like to mix the pieces from different games to add some variety, for instance on AA50 I use the P-38 for fighters while they’re on land and the Hellcat for carrierborne fighters.

So, a new set could have, for instance:
USA Fighter - P-51
USA Bomber - B-24 or B-29
German Armor - PzIV or Tiger
Russian Armor - KV1
USA Battleship - Kongo

These are just examples, the idea is diversity, to add pieces that stand out from the current ones so that you could even create armies on the board that would be different from one another. For instance, all US units assigned to the Pacific are of 1 kind, to the Atlantic another.

And after deciding which units to supplement the current ones (USA Fighter, etc.) then do polls to see what specific model (P-51, P-40, F7U) what most people would like.

These are all good ideas, maybe we can use them in next episode ?

i’m pretty sure the idea is to replace the not-so-crash-hot quality of the standard pieces in AA50 with better ones. hence why FMG is gunning for a full set for each nation. so one nation at a time, most likely with a few tech-upgrade units included

after all, nobody likes pieces that don’t mix well together  :wink: