Posts made by HBG

@WARRIOR888:

Variable,

Any idea when it will go to Kick Starter?

WARRIOR888

2 weeks before Gencon, around August 1

Really it might be better to make another carrier, forget the Shinano, everybody has 50 of them already. Akagi was done in 1941 game, we are doing Kaga as a fleet carrier (same size as OOB), maybe we should do another fleet carrier for second set and then people can decide to use them however. Thoughts?

@CWO:

@LHoffman:

AWESOME! Yamato looks wonderful.

I don’t see its picture in the link Coach posted.  There’s a photo of a Nagato-class battleship, but I can’t find the Yamato one.

click on “Image Gallery” to see additional pictures

@Pacific:

With all due respect , I understand you guys wanting a heavy carrier but please, please, please have a really good carrier sculpt in the final Japanese set if you absolutely MUST put that clunker in this one.  One that saw action and made history instead of one that saw zero action and was sunk within a month of being commissioned.  If you look at the figures, both the Shokaku and the Zuikaku carried more aircraft and were faster than Shinano and they played a pivotal role in the war.  They truly WERE heavy carriers.  Even the  Unryu carried more aircraft than the Shinano.  Please get rid of that dinosaur and give us a real carrier or, at the very least, consider them for your final set.  These will quite possibly be the last great Japanese pieces made for A&A and ya just gotta do em’ right.  That twelve year old boy in me is begging you guys!   :-(

The U.S. carriers carried more aircraft than the Japanese carriers and really the Akagi and Shokaku carried the most for the Japanese. The two carriers Zuikaku was only 30,000 tons (hardly a heavy carrier) and Akagi and Kaga both around 42,000 tons more in line with the Essex Class for the U.S.  Technically the Japanese did no compare with the U.S. Essex or Midway carriers, even the Essex carried 120 aircraft. The Shinano was 68,000 tons, same hull as Shinano. If we base the carrier size off of aircraft storage, Lexington and Saratoga have to be Heavy’s and most of the UK carriers will be downsized. It is really hard to figure out the correct way. This will not be our last set, I assure you we are working on more Japanese carriers as well as some U.S. ones. I am not convinced but was going to use the Taiho as the heavy but also changed. The information I have shows Akagi carrying 91 aircraft, Kaga…90, and Shokaku & Zuikaku as 84, rest of them are in the 60’s and 70’s. I can be swayed to change our minds if I have good reasons. We will do more carriers at regular size and I only want to make one Japanese heavy carrier. Thanks for your input, much appreciated.

That is why we verify the colors in hand, pictures are deceiving when it comes to color on a computer screen.

@LHoffman:

AWESOME. Very impressed, especially with Kaga and the G8N… if their detail holds up in production like it is in the samples, well look out!

Will be placing my order shortly.

Moving to 3D modeling will help out a lot. After seeing the detail that can be achieved with the Tiger I from the German Expansion set, we knew we had to spend the extra money and do it. We will be able to control sizing, shape, and proportions so much better now. We only lack one model to have the second Japanese set ready for sculpting.

@xxstefanx:

@coachofmany:

All of HBG Neutral Colors plus French OOB Blue from Global 40

Why not the correct horizon blue WWI colour?
Is everything that matters fitting in existing WW2 miniatures?
What’s the point? After all it is a WW1(!) set.

Or to put it in other words: What’s the point in using a Renault FT17 WWI tank in a WW2 match anyway?
The units were not used at that time anymore! (some very odd exceptions only).

Why not thinking of creating a whole new WW1 line for those who really are interested in playing WW1 (ONE) instead?
And with this mindset of course the historically correct colour ought to be the prime colour of the set!
After that …whatever…Global 40 OOB Blue? I don’t care!
(release a French WW2 set as well because the Europe 1940 1st/2nd ed. OOB is (Russian) crap anyway!)

Â

The reason is that we cannot afford to keep expanding colors. We will expand on the set colors based on the HBG and Global 40 colors. You can then expand into WW1, Korea, Vietnam staying with the same color and intermix the pieces. The Renault Ft-17 was used by many Minor Nations at the start of WW2, it was obsolete but used as recon, etc and if people have this in the same color they can use it with their existing armies. This is our vision and we think that our customer would much better have pieces where they can build upon their armies instead of a whole new color from another game. I am sorry you do not like it but our cost in 9 colors in quite expensive and to add another with minimum production runs is too much.

@rjpeters70:

I’m sorry, what do you mean by “develop scenarios”.  Isn’t Plan Orange (and the variants therein) the scenarios themselves?  Entire books have been written on War Plan Orange (see:  http://www.amazon.com/War-Plan-Orange-Strategy-1897-1945/dp/1591145007) and even games (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/4918/great-war-at-sea-u-s-navy-plan-orange).Â

What specifically are you looking for?  The scenarios are there.  Are you looking for game design?  Story boards?  Units?

I am looking for different smaller scenarios within the “Plan Orange”

@ABWorsham:

An Plan Orange battle game would be great and very even game.

I agree, I need to find someone who is willing to help design scenarios for the Plan orange game then.

@rjpeters70:

Agree, Rainbow series of plans would be great for alt history scenarios.

Anybody have any for Axis and Allies style game playing?

@Imperious:

Leyte Gulf and Jutland would be good candidates for a game.  A number of ‘what if’ rules could be added

Yes I agree to both, both are very large battles.
I am wanting some Plan Orange or Plan Black Scenarios, those would be really neat.

Anybody have some Naval Scenarios from WW1 to WW2 that they would like to see in a HBG Naval game?
We are developing a new game for 2014 and really need some Naval guru’s to help out. Alternate History real battles, etc are welcome.
let me know if you are interested.

@knp7765:

What bayonet? I didn’t see any bayonet. Or are you saying that he SHOULD have a bayonet on his rifle?

I think it is a very good French infantry sculpt. Did you guys make that with the 3d printer?

All of HBG’s future sets will be Computer modeled, Amerika, Japanese Sets, WW1 set, etc.
We feel we needed better looking sculpts and sizing of our pieces.

All of HBG Neutral Colors plus French OOB Blue from Global 40

Does anybody play any of the Avalanche Press War at Sea Games, and if so, which ones?

There will be NO release of the PDF of our maps.

@ch0senfktard:

Is this set the only WW1 set that HBG will do?

Possibly, we will play it by ear to see how popular our first set is, we will continue our WW2 sets.

@Flashman:

Why not do both?

That is, the same sculpt but with different headgear.

I’ve thought of using the caps/steel helmets difference to mark either green and veteran troops, or the development of helmets as a tech.

……so 2 Infantry sculpts? For neutrals…why?

I have met with my webmaster for pricing on website and logisitics on what is needed and will meet Wednesday with my event organizer for place and hotel. We should have a YES or NO in a couple weeks but it looks very promising. Thsi is a huge undertaking and I will probably hire somone to run all the prep work while I just Bark orders.  :-D
I am hoping for 250 for the first one!

There will be no Armored Trains at this time.