Posts made by Black Fox

Thanks KNP

It’s actually a modified Czech OT-810.  It’s one of several that are owned by some guys in Chandler Arizona as seen in the picture below.  My avatar pic is the 3rd vehicle in the colum.  It was taken at Camp Navajo in Arizona at a WWII reenactment.  I wouldn’t mind having one in my inventory.
Here is a web site that has a butt load of pictures. http://www.sdkfz251.com/index.html

Thanks, Sanches, KNP.  Much appreciated.

Greeting gents, I’ve been out of the loop for a while.  Hope you can fill me in on the status of the FMGs Combat Units.  I went to FMGs web site to go buy some but it says “Out of Stock” for both the Germans and Italians.  Did they finally released them and sold out or are they still in Pre-Order?  I didn’t see any “Buy” icon.  Can someone give me an update as to what the status is?

Thanks

By the way IL, I miss Klink :-D

@coachofmany:

@Imperious:

American Tech set:

Tank: Pershing
Fighter : Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star
Bomber: B-29
SPA: T-92 240mm SP Howitzer  (http://www.battletanks.com/t92_sp_240mm.htm)
Submarine:Tench class
Carrier: Essex

Tech Carrier should be “midway” class,
There were 18 Essex class carriers in use during WW2.

I served on the USS Midway.  So that gets my vote :-D  Besides that, I do agree that the Midway class would be best for a US Tech carrier.  This was the last carrier class to be built and launched in WWII (But were all commissioned just after the war ended.)

Hi Chaos

Yes, I would be interested in playing with your group.  Please contact me by email.  It’s in my profile.  I also, sent you a pm.

Black Fox

Hi Drake

No not yet.  Sawtooth in Sacramento has invited me to join his group but It’s a little far for me to go there to play on a regular basis.

Where are you located?  I’m in near Pleasanton.

If I had my choice for infantry design I would do the following.

For standard infantry would use whatever the most common rifle that was uses for each country.  For commandos I would use a special weapon such as a submachine-gun, assault rifle or bazooka, panzerfaust.

For poses I would have standard infantry with weapon shouldered and at the fire ready.  With commando I would have their weapons firing from the hip position unless the are using a bazooka or panzerfaust.  Even at the shoulder ready position it will be easy to these weapons apart from the rifle.  I hope there is still time for FMG to take these into consideration.

However, if FMG has already made the molds and they are already in production then it is a moot point.  Considering all the excellent work they have done.  I’m not going to be complaining if the poses or weapons aren’t the way I would like them to be.  The quality of the pieces will be enough for me.

Then should they not be more different poses?

they are very close.

Good point IL.  Different poses would make it easier to distinguish if they are used for different funtion (such as standard infantry and commandos)

I believe FMG said they would leave the development of the rules for the new unit to the A&A community on this web site.  If you have an idea.  Start a new thread and put it out there.  If you’re not sure where to put it.  Contact Illustrious Leader for guidance.

FMG, Absolutely OUTSTANDING!  I give you a 21 gun salute from the .50 on my HMMWV (And I mean from a real one and not a toy :-D)

Sawtoothautum

Yes I did but I’m guessing you didn’t get my reply.

Sacrament is a bit far for me but still withing range.  Do you know anyone who can host between Sac and Tracy?

Bedtime

I do not have a group.  It’s just me.  Although someone who lives about 15 miles from me did contact me recently.  So there is a possibility of 2 in the near future.

Sonoma is a bit far for me but still in range.  Please contact me by email or PM and lets see if we can work something out.

Gents

Thanks for all the input.  Much appreciated.

I am most sure that they would generate the maximum sales if they just take what is missing from these games and makes the pieces for them:

1. make real french units ( just need infantry, tank, mech infantry, artillery, fighter)

2. make technology pieces that you swap out when you get that technology:

a) jet fighters
b) long range bomber
c) paratroopers ( one sculpt for all)
d) rockets
e) super sub

3. make a few pieces to fix the WOTC mess ups:

a) allied artillery
b) replacement German artillery
c) ANZAC infantry
d) Replacement US fighter ( mustang)
e) alternative German tank (tiger tank)
f) alternative Japanese BB ( Kongo)
g) escort carriers for Japan and USA ( the other nations can use the same sculpt)
h) make a fortification unit
I) replacement German submarine ( not toothpick)

I don’t think if they made complete sets of total replacement units of the big 5 nations that it would make as many sales as just a correction of sculpts that most people agree that are needed.

IL, I disagree.  I’ll bet that most people here ultimately want a complete package.  That means all new pieces for every country, tech pieces and the special extras such as escort carriers, medium bombers and so on.  At least that’s what I want.

No disrespect to you IL but I would not like to see a package that fills in the gaps because it would torment me.  If they made one as you suggested.  I would have this nice Kongo BB.  And because it is so nice it would make the rest of my standard BB look like crap and that would bug me.  I like everything to be of the same standard.

My preference would be for FMG to make a complete package for each country (From seeing FMG’s quote.  This appears to be the case) a package for tech units and a package for special and extra units such as commandos, paratrooper, jeep carriers, medium bombers and so on.  (Depending on the number of units to be made.  The tech and special units can be combined.  However, I think the tech and special units might be more useful to make first then the countries.

Another approach FMG could take is to make pieces by groups.  For example.  The next batch would be infantry.  I would include all infantry from each country plus any tech or special units such as airborne, commandos and so on.  The next batch would be armor for each country, halftrack, tanks and heavy tanks.  The next after that would be aircraft.  Fighters, Bombers, long range fighters and bombers for tech units and then dive and medium bombers as special or extra units.  Anyway, you get the picture.

Ultimately I plan to buy everything that FMG put out as long as they are complete packages.  I’ll even buy packages that I’m not really interested in such as French units.  Why, because the only way everyone is going to get what they want is to help FMG sell as much of these as possible.  If this means buying set I’m not really interested in, fine.  Or as I mentioned earlier.  I’ll go search for hobby store for FMG to help find new customers to sell them to.  What ever it takes.

IMHO, it is both.

For the Axis, it is through Battle.  Time is against you, therefore you must knock out one of your enemies sooner rather than later.  When you fight, you must win.  The economy, while still important, is not as necessary as marching to Moscow or sailing to London.

For the Allies, it is through Economic Advantage.  You need to build up.  You need to coordinate.  Winning all your battles is not as important as the constant flow of troops and material to the front.

I pretty much agree with way2slo.  It’s both.

The Axis start the game at an economic disadvantage but at a military advantage.  Meaning that their armies start in concentrated force and it good position.  The Axis survival depends on aggressive battles and quick expansion.  But they must make sure that the Allies losses are much greater then their own.  The Axis cannot afford to break even or lose.

The Allies are just the opposite.  They start at an economic advantage but at a military disadvantage.  Militarily they are too spread out to make any major military offensive.  They need to take whatever military forces they do have in the beginning to cause enough damage to slow or stall the Axis until they have time to build up and move their forces into major battles. Because they are at an economical advantage.  Allies can afford to take losses but only if it slows or stalls the Axis offensive.

Thanks for the info Trails

I’m not sure if this question is premature but does FMG have an idea on what they will make for the next batch?  I’ve been giving this a lot of thought.  I think perhaps technology units would be the most useful (Long range bomber, fighters, super subs, rockets and so on).  Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Thanks Variable

Much appreciated.

I haven’t received any replies yet.  Perhaps I need to be more specific.

I’ve seen the AA 50 map but have not played it yet.  I was curios as to how it compares to the 2004 Revised Edition.

Do you find the game play overall more interesting?
Is it harder or easier?
Does it take longer?
Is it an improvement over AA 2004?

Thanks

I live on the eastern edge of the Bay Area in Livermore.

I’m looking for A&A players in the Bay Area or Central Valley.  If anyone is interested, please contact me.