Japan bomber pictures

@all-encompassing-goose

Let me try sending it again:

@all-encompassing-goose

Axis And Allies 1932 seems too unbalanced for me. This was before the Nazis rose to power, and if the game is set in 1938 or 1939, the Nazis will just be killed by the Western Allies-if a game needs to be balanced, the earliest date that can be done is the date that the 1940 game starts with, when the French Army, the biggest threat to Germany, is more or less destroyed. I guess an early 1940 game, after German troops redeployed from Poland, could work.

The political aspect of the war has always been interesting to me. Whilst players simply making deals can work, I feel like it can be better, but I don’t know how. Having shifting alliances, however it’s done, can be a lot of fun though, as it adds a lot of unpredictably to the game, and can make the situation like Diplomacy (which I never played, I’m just basing it off of what I read).

Late war research and development sounds like a good idea, especially as military technology would have advanced faster than real life, as all countries would be at war, trying to advance technology as fast as possible. Nuclear weapons seem interesting, as I explore in this topic:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/37409/nuclear-bomb-addition-for-axis-and-allies-global-1940/4

Switching sides, especially if they already are at the start of the game and can continue to change, can make the war last a really long time, and can make it crazy and fun-I wonder how will victory conditions work though?

@Yavid:

As for me, I don’t mind having 2 colors for the “major powers,” 1 for standard troops and 1 for elites.

When everything is finished I’m going to have 2 color schemes(Europe/Pacific) for “standard” troops of all countries(except China) plus another scheme for certain areas on the map. This doesn’t include the Special Forces units.

For example, the U.K. would have units in a “European” scheme, a “Far East” scheme(shown above), a “Desert” scheme, and specific schemes for their “Airborne” and “Special Forces” units.

America, Germany, France & Italy would also have “Desert” schemes.
Russia, Germany, & China would have “Winter” schemes.
Special Forces units galore.
Etc., Etc., Etc.

Those really are amazing. � Whose your painter again?

“Allworkandnoclay” is my painter and I’m very happy with his work. I love his idea of painting the national ensigns of each country on their Infantry bases. I come up with what I want and pay for them and he paints them. As long as his eyes don’t go blind,…or I go bankrupt from paying for them, we’ll eventually get ALL of the units done. We still have a ways to go as all of the HBG and FMG units haven’t been produced yet.

“Tall Paul”

The website says:
“They will be done in 2 colors, Burnt orange to match the Out of Box color and Yellow Gold for veteran pieces.”
I would like to see a third color if possible – ROSE for Siam/Thailand units.

@FieldMarshalGames:

Just wanted to mention also that I REALLY like the Corsair.  It was a fighter/Tac bomber.

If it was only up to me I would use it as the Tac bomber…  But Im sure most will wnat a more “iconic” Tac bomber for the USA.

this was a quote from FMG page 70 in the Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread
IF Fmg is going to stay with this idea can you please keep it the same size as regular fighters

For the Bomber the Mitsubishi KI-21 “Sally” is the best choice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLKQpceD1mE&feature=related

The Mitsubishi G4M1 “Betty Bomber” is a good one as well, but since it came later in the war, and carries a much heavier bomb load, it’s probably best to save this one for a Japanese Heavy Bomber in FMG’s Technology Set.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc0H8-O8Z4E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdFt0EIA-Oc&feature=related

Post some pics!

cost 7, if VS land targets:

these are 3-3 units moving 2 and each plane boosts the tank +1 at 1:1 basis

if VS Sea targets:

3-3 units moving 2 ( carrier based)…also possible modifier for attacks on surface ships ( not sure)

They cant move from land or from sea to attack the other on the same turn. So carrier planes cant attack land targets unless they fly first to land on the turn before and vice versa.

this will result is fighters staying on land where they belong with a few on carriers as escorts

Yes but if I play Russia aggressively they will end up with much of China. Additionally, as someone here pointed out the British can keep their navy in the IndianSz and thus keep the Jap navy at home. With the Americans I tend to go hard after Economic conquest, and this is because I can pick up a lot of free infantry that way. However, I will also send all of the navy into the Pacific to defend against the Japs and possibly even withdrawing from the Phillipines as well. If I combine this with a purchased carrier and give them 6 ftrs this navy can be really tough to beat, and Japan is not likely to attack it until turn 4-5 giving the Allies plenty of time to prepare for the war, or they may be forced into war by turn2. In my experience the sooner Russia and America are at war the better the Allies chances to win are.