Posts made by Viracocha

SOunds like a fun time for the German player… not so much for the Russian.

There are several good books of this genre (my personal favorite is Man in a High Castle).  But this link here:

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Morgen_die_ganze_Welt

is just an overview - kinda interesting, written in more of a journalistic style. Thought of a couple Axis and Allies sessions when I read it and figured I’d post it.

Top-notch!  Lov’in those stands (again).

Well… at least you’re still enjoying the game  :-D

Oh - and welcome to the site!

@allworkandnoclay:

I want to keep all the nation units true to the A&A set even though I’ve thought about outside units.

I just host my pics on my website. If you want to email me yours I could put them up there and give you the link.

chad@allworkandnoclay.com

Can I get a link to the website?

@allworkandnoclay:

Hah - I started on Japan before I even looked at the replies. About halfway through the 40 infantry.

And just so everyone knows - I’m going to get a head start on the other nations too - I have two sets of 1942 I’m going to paint (which I predict will end up being the basic setup of the combined units for nations in E&P - this holds true for Japan). The only difference is that I won’t be able to do the tactical or mech units. So voting for Europe nations next is cool. ;)

There is one thing I’d like to ask here - I’d like some more mech infantry… My new tactical bombers should arrive soon, but I’d like to have some more mechs for the set (does anyone else agree that Japan should have gotten more mechs as well with the tact bombers?).

Does anyone know where to find more mech units or does anyone want to trade theirs? I could do one of each of the five base set nation painted infantry for a set of 6 mechs. Any nation.

Table Tactics sells Half Tracks: http://www.tabletactics.com/  Not the same as A&A though.  (personally I like them a little more because they don’t appear “squished” - and they provide more mini for detailing).  And BGG has a trading area for parts on each game’s page, so you could check there…

Now answer me a question if you could - I can’t seem to upload my minis pics - keeps telling me they’re too big (even after condensing/compressing them), the limit listed is 2##(?) - a lot smaller than other sites I’ve posted on…  Do you tone yours down or what?  Looked up a thread I found here on posting pics but it was useless…

@Variable:

Are these the WOTC play testers? They only used 6 Japanese tac bombers and misspelled strategy… stratagy.

Whahaehaehaeh….  Ohhh… that made me laugh.

@Yoper:

@Viracocha:

Yoper, when you say " I just pass on the whole thing and play the game with the base rules."  So, you still use the 2d6 bombers?  How about the rockets tech.? Limited to 1 rocket launcher attack per IC or as many as can be mustered? How about fighter interceptors? (we don’t use 'em - the math doesn’t seem to make SBR’s worth it)

Personally (but I don’t believe I play enough to be certain), with the new damage system and techs., I was thinking that may of these changes aren’t even needed…

I am talking about the fact that I don’t play with tech.  So none of this makes any difference to me.  Luckily, tech is optional.

Ah, should have gotten that  :roll:. One of my groups is of the same thinking.  Good & bad I suppose.

@Boyardee:

I dont like house rules, I like to play by the Book,
But it is true that retreat could be implemented with such rules, would be nice.

By the book… so you don’t use fighter interceptors or the (now) lesser heavy bombers?

Yoper, when you say " I just pass on the whole thing and play the game with the base rules."  So, you still use the 2d6 bombers?  How about the rockets tech.? Limited to 1 rocket launcher attack per IC or as many as can be mustered? How about fighter interceptors? (we don’t use 'em - the math doesn’t seem to make SBR’s worth it)

Personally (but I don’t believe I play enough to be certain), with the new damage system and techs., I was thinking that may of these changes aren’t even needed…

@Gwlachmai:

If he gets Katusha’s mounted on pick up trucks then I respectfully request those dogs they used with mines on their back to kill tanks as the Russian mechanized infantry.

Hehehe - I’d certainly use them on the board as well, the more the merrier. And while we’re at it, let’s request little balloons with bombs on them for the Japanese!

Don’t care if they were inaccurate - I want rocket launchers on studebakers on my A&A board. eh eh eh I’d paint 'em too, a rusty car with some Soviet graffiti, and a sloppy star. Fantastic.

Good stuff irock… we have similar tastes.  :-D

No, I’m saving people some cash, time, and a useless gesture (getting a copyright on derivative work).  And I’ve also stated (“Good stuff though”) that the rules are good, I like 'em, I plan on seeing if one of my groups would like to try incorporating a few. If you’re so worried about ‘reopening wounds,’ then why would this thread still be here as it is? Lock it, or delete it (but take the enhancement rules and make them readily available elsewhere first of course).

Well I don’t think it would be an apt representation of the most commonly used Soviet artillery, but Roger, that would be the coolest mini (“rocket artillery on the back of a studebaker”)

Whew… some bad blood rolling around here. But an FYI, you cannot have sole rights to that exact name… because you do not own the material/trademark it is based on in the first place. Save yourself the $15 and don’t bother copyrighting  what is classified as a “derivative work,” unless there is profit involved (which also entails a contractual agreement with the owner/original creator).  Good stuff though.

And let’s not forget the United Kingdom… who are still using U.S. subs and destroyers, uhh… didn’t the Royal British Navy play a bigger role in the war than the U.S.S.R.?

@allboxcars:

@Viracocha:

And I believe you might be rash in your thinking, simply from the fact that you haven’t seen any of the samples said company will be producing.

Actually when he said “this sucks btw” I took it that he meant WOTC’s decision not to produce an Italian tank sucks, not the Italian tank that FMG is producing.

I could be wrong tho…

#484

(chuckle) In retrospect, that may be the case… or it could mean Italian tanks in general are distinctive, or - couple different ways to take it.  Well Ministry, my apologies if I misunderstood your post.  Check out FMG’s excellent tanks and get back to us…

Yeah, I like 'em, and they work well/keep it balanced (if played with all the others of course).  The first two are from a previous A&A (modified), but the Mountain Fortresses is my own to my knowledge.  I kept on thinking “Guns of Navarone” though that wasn’t in the Balkans territory (though it was close… technically it wouldn’t fall into any territory on the map, well, the Greek island is fiction but damn, I like the movie).

@Ministry:

@i:

yah at least FMG is here for us!! un like WotC

Whats FMG?  They make Italian pieces that are comparable for A&A?

I think this sucks btw, the Italian armor is distinctive!

Ok… I guess since no one else is fielding this one.
FMG is an acronym for Field Marshal Games - look to the right of your screen, they have some adverts posted here as they are the official sponsor of the site.  And I believe you might be rash in your thinking, simply from the fact that you haven’t seen any of the samples said company will be producing.  Their Italian armor is likewise distinctive, and far more detailed, and yes, of the appropriate scale for A&A.  My suggestion is that you browse around this site, find out about things in general… and then perhaps say what’s on your mind.