Posts made by Raeder

At least the Russian Fighter would have been my choice for the French. It looks somewhat like the Dewoitine fighter, more so than the Spitfire anyway.

The Soviets do indeed have their own Mech unit, and as far as I know this has been known for quite som time. At least I know I’ve read it before.

The Germans appear to have the Sdkfz 251 Mech unit, same as Japan and Italy. I’ve been looking at the pics and it’s not the Opel Blitz.

The french battleship is not unique. It’s the same as the Soviet battleship that came with AA42. France has no unique sculpts apart from the infantry unit.

@anderb:

ship o’ hoy raeder.the way you spell from [från] means you are from sweden. how long did it take to get the game from FMG??? im from norway and would love to support them aswell. but i guess that the national sosialistishes norwegisches arbeiter partei (a norwegian branch of NSDAP) and the socialists west wing would give me a bloody bad tax on it. maybe ask a colombian drug dealer to transport it along with the merchandise im sure he will get into norway:)

Hmm… how did I manage to write “från” instead of “from”? I usually don’t mix up the languages. But I guess there’s no hiding it now, I’m a Swede.  8-)

How long did it take? Not that long, as I recall. I had it shipped with UPS International, at an extra cost of ca. 40 bucks. Total cost landed at around 900 swedish crowns, wich should be around 760 norwegian.

I just pre ordered my copy of E40 at FMG tonight, by the way.

I ordered P40 från Field Marshal Games, and I will be doing the same with E40.

@allboxcars:

@Raeder:

You fiddle with armies on the campaign map, then the armies clash and you jump straight into the action.

What do you think?

Sounds very promising. Please post whatever you come up with!

#697

Will do!

Whatever happened to Bunkers and Army HQ?

@allboxcars:

Admiral:

@Raeder:

Altough this isn’t an Axis & Allies clone, it will look and feel a lot like it, with area movement, dice rolling, and plastic units."

Well yes dice and plastic pieces I can see although IMTO that may be better at a tactical level.
But when you picture this game, do you see multiples pieces moving across the globe in different directions and being generated like A&A?

I guess a horsed piece could represent an army with a cavalry brigade while the infantry piece would represent minimal cavalry assets… a screening force only?  The grouping just seems to drag down into details that scream tactical to me.

Do I see multiple pieces moving across the globe in different directions? Well, maybe not the globe, but at least the game board ;) I basically want plastic pieces moving around on a pretty map of Europe. But the idea is to incorporate things that are good from different Napoleonic games, like for example the map from Napoleon in Europe, and the generals and strategic battle system from Age of Napoleon.

Do I see pieces being generated like A&A? Well, sort of, I guess. But I’m thinking along the lines of 4 turns to a year, where the fourth turn is the winter turn, when forces go into winter quarters (no battles), and the units purchased/recruited during the year being mobilized on the board. Something like that.

Well,the tactical versus strategic scale. Always a problem. The way I’m picturing it is that infantry pieces represent divisions, and to these divisions you can attach artillery or cavalry brigades (artillery or cavalry pieces). I want to use the battle system from Age of Napoleon, though slightly tweaked. You calculate the sum of the troops you have in your army, you add the Battle Rating of your general, if your army has one, and you roll a D6. You check a table for losses. So no rolling 1D6 per unit and hit on a low number, like in A&A.

So basically you can resolve battles on a strategic level with armies consisting of a number of infantry divisions and attached arty and cav brigades and a general, using AoN battle system variant, or you can jump right into the tactical level, where the army is divided into brigades and regiments and things are far more detailed. To this end I will probably use Napoleon’s War, or some such. Kind of like the Total War series. You fiddle with armies on the campaign map, then the armies clash and you jump straight into the action.

What do you think?

@Lozmoid:

As for German SPGs, I think either the Hummel or the Wespe. I believe the Stug III was an Assault Gun, and the Elephant (or Ferdinand) was a Tank Destroyer.

The line between Assault Guns and Tank Destroyers became increasingly blurry as the war progressed, actually. The Stug III was an Assault Gun but ended up destroying its fair share of tanks. They also had the Nashorn, wich was a Tank Destroyer, and was supposed to be replaced by the Jagdpanzer IV. But some, like Guderian, believed that the JgdPzr IV was unnecessary, since the Stug III sufficed in the role of destroying tanks. Talk about confusing. Then throw Elephant and Jagdpanther into the mix…

Try reading up on the subject of german Tank Destroyers and Assault Guns, you’ll end up with more questions than when you started.  :-D

@FieldMarshalGames:

I wanted to use this for the NEW AA Gun re: Bofors 15CM .  It is the only weapon used by all Axis and Allied Nations in the Second World War.

Thoughts?

The AA gun used by all sides during the war was the Bofors 40mm L/60 gun. The only exception was the Soviets who used a 37mm Bofors gun.

There actually was a 15cm Bofors gun (152mm), but it was a naval gun designed in 1939 to be fitted on light cruisers.

As the Swedish general Lewenhaupt said already back in the 18th century:

“One must not give the enemy any time.”

Still true today, both in war and in A&A.

I’ll quote myself from the other thread by Dylan the Canadian:

"I’m actually doing something similar, but only for my own amusement. I’m using the map and some tokens from Napoleon in Europe, the units from Viktory II, the chits with the generals from Age of Napoleon, and the battlefield rules from Napoleon’s War for tactical battles.

It will play as a sort of Napoleon: Total War, The Boardgame. The ship pieces included with the Viktory II set are excellent for naval engagements.

Altough this isn’t an Axis & Allies clone, it will look and feel a lot like it, with area movement, dice rolling, and plastic units."

I’m actually doing something similar, but only for my own amusement. I’m using the map and some tokens from Napoleon in Europe, the units from Viktory II, the chits with the generals from Age of Napoleon, and the battlefield rules from Napoleon’s War for tactical battles.

It will play as a sort of Napoleon: Total War, The Boardgame. The ship pieces included with the Viktory II set are excellent for naval engagements.

Altough this isn’t an Axis & Allies clone, it will look and feel a lot like it, with area movement, dice rolling, and plastic units.

@Dylan:

@WILD:

If Italy gets control of Africa, your talking the big 5, Looks like there’s a lot more ipc down there.

yeah thats another thing Italy if they do what they can, will be very powerful. Like could of they ever became that strong in the real war?

Italy should not be able to take control of Africa without German help. That’s the way I see it.

But seeing as how they made Japan way too powerful in P40, I guess maybe they did the same to Italy.

While I’m strongly in favor of Germany starting with a Battleship to represent Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst and Gneiseneu, I do not think that they should have a CV. Graf Zeppelin was never put to sea with fighters on it. If the German player wants a CV he will have to build one.

@Imperious:

Stay on topic. This is only about box art. Nothing else.

Sorry. Back on topic.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Raeder:

@UN:

@Raeder:

Hitler attacked in the West because he had to.

LOL

Good one.

What’s funny about it? Hitler took Norway straight from under the noses of the Brits. Because he had to. Hitler attacked France in order to destroy them before they themselves launched an attack on Germany. Because he had to.

Another way of saying it is that he did it because he was not an idiot. He knew what would happen if he would have done nothing. The Allies took the initiative by declaring war. Hitler took it back by going on the offensive. In any case he was not the aggressor in the west.

France and Britain had 6 months to start an offensive and they failed. They were hoping for a stalemate, and only planned for a defensive war in the west. Thus, Germany started the war in the West(and invaded some neutrals while he was at it).

As for Norway, GB was just about to take control of it when Hitler launched the invasion.

As for Denmark, BeNeLux and France, he feared that if he did nothing, then he could expect an allied attack at any time. By taking control of these areas, he believed he could force GB to accept peace, thus ending hostilities. Hitler wanted GB as allies, not enemies.

GB chose to:

1. Declare war.

2. Refuse peace offered by Hitler and carry on the fight after France fell.

Again, I’m not saying Hitler wasn’t a dirtbag, I’m saying look at the facts. Great Britain was very much involved in making it a world war.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Actually, the book supports your claim that the allies started the war

Interesting. I will have to read it.

@UN:

@Raeder:

Hitler attacked in the West because he had to.

LOL

Good one.

What’s funny about it? Hitler took Norway straight from under the noses of the Brits. Because he had to. Hitler attacked France in order to destroy them before they themselves launched an attack on Germany. Because he had to.

Another way of saying it is that he did it because he was not an idiot. He knew what would happen if he would have done nothing. The Allies took the initiative by declaring war. Hitler took it back by going on the offensive. In any case he was not the aggressor in the west.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Raeder:

@LHoffman:

Hey, what is this garbage about the Allies starting the war. The aggressor was clearly Germany in the West 1939 and Japan in the East 1931. Yeah, the Allies had to officially START the war otherwise the opposition would have simply laid down and we would not have had a war!

Germany attacked Poland. POLAND. Not France or Great Britain. Yes, France and GB honored their pledge to Poland, but in doing so, they got the world involved in something much bigger than Hitlers plans on Lebensraum in the East. You do know that Hitler wanted peace with GB after the Battle of France, but Churchill wanted to carry on the fight?

As for the box art, you are absolutely, 100% right. But what you are suggesting will never, ever happen. Using the Swastika will reduce sales for the makers of the game. We live in a market economy, and that’s that.

Britain and France did not get the USSR or the USA involved. it’s obvious the UK would’ve eventally gone to war due to Japan.

You really think Germany would’ve stopped at Poland? Appeasement was tried and failed. Germany wanted peace with Britain so that Germany and the UK could become allies and defeat the US and USSR.

Have you read Pat Buchanan’s book The Unnecessary War?

Hitler attacked in the West because he had to. He attacked the Soviets because he wanted to. The US got involved because the Japs attacked them.

I’m not saying that Hitler would not have declared war on the western nations eventually, maybe he would have. I’m just saying that AT THE TIME, France and GB started something that was a lot bigger than the war between Germany and Poland.

As for the book, I have not read it. Thanks for the tip. But a book is just a book, we still don’t know exactly what went on in Hitler’s mind, and we don’t know how it would have played out had France and GB not declared war, or if GB had accepted peace after the fall of France.