United States Set from Historical Board Gaming!


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    more

    US Ship-2.JPG


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    more

    Us Ship-3.JPG


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Wow Coach, these look absolutely amazing. Stuff we’ve all been missing for far too long. Looks like I will have to get the credit card back out before too long!


  • '14

    I love these!!!  Wow, look awesome! Keep up the good work.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    What class is the U.S. battleship supposed to represent?  It seems to have a total of ten main guns: a two-gun turret superimposed over a three-gun turret forward, and the same thing aft.  This was the main gun layout for the British KGV class and for the U.S. Nevada class, but the Nevada class only had one bridge/director tower after its 1927 refit (unlike the two on the sculpt).  It had two cage masts before its refit, but at the time the funnel structure was close to the forward mast not attached to the rear one as in the sculpt.


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    @CWO:

    What class is the U.S. battleship supposed to represent?  It seems to have a total of ten main guns: a two-gun turret superimposed over a three-gun turret forward, and the same thing aft.  This was the main gun layout for the British KGV class and for the U.S. Nevada class, but the Nevada class only had one bridge/director tower after its 1927 refit (unlike the two on the sculpt).  It had two cage masts before its refit, but at the time the funnel structure was close to the forward mast not attached to the rear one as in the sculpt.

    It is the Nevada Class.

    sch_nevada.jpg


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    King George Class Battleship had only 3 turrets with a 10 gun configuration, where the Nevada had a 4 turret design.

    hms_king_george_v_battleship_1940-07390.jpg


  • Customizer

    @CWO:

    What class is the U.S. battleship supposed to represent?  It seems to have a total of ten main guns: a two-gun turret superimposed over a three-gun turret forward, and the same thing aft.  This was the main gun layout for the British KGV class and for the U.S. Nevada class, but the Nevada class only had one bridge/director tower after its 1927 refit (unlike the two on the sculpt).  It had two cage masts before its refit, but at the time the funnel structure was close to the forward mast not attached to the rear one as in the sculpt.

    Take a close look at the photos.  The battleship piece is actually backwards with the aft closer to the camera and the bow pointing away from the camera.  So the funnel is close to the forward mast, not the rear.  I don’t know about the bridge/director tower.

    Thanks for the closeups Coach.  Isn’t FMG doing the Pennsylvania class (which also includes the Arizona)?  It iwll be cool having two classes of older US battleships.

    Now if we could get someone to do the South Dakota and North Carolina classes, we will have representatives of all US battleship classes used in the war.


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    @knp7765:

    @CWO:

    What class is the U.S. battleship supposed to represent?  It seems to have a total of ten main guns: a two-gun turret superimposed over a three-gun turret forward, and the same thing aft.  This was the main gun layout for the British KGV class and for the U.S. Nevada class, but the Nevada class only had one bridge/director tower after its 1927 refit (unlike the two on the sculpt).  It had two cage masts before its refit, but at the time the funnel structure was close to the forward mast not attached to the rear one as in the sculpt.

    Take a close look at the photos.  The battleship piece is actually backwards with the aft closer to the camera and the bow pointing away from the camera.  So the funnel is close to the forward mast, not the rear.  I don’t know about the bridge/director tower.

    Thanks for the closeups Coach.  Isn’t FMG doing the Pennsylvania class (which also includes the Arizona)?  It iwll be cool having two classes of older US battleships.

    Now if we could get someone to do the South Dakota and North Carolina classes, we will have representatives of all US battleship classes used in the war.

    I will do the South Dakota Class on my next US mold!



  • Hey Coach, received notice my Marines are on the way to Enid, thank you.  IDEA: 😄 😄 😄  Question have you considered for additional USN ships in the future doing the Washington Class 9 x 16 inch guns 2 ships, The Colorado Class 8 x 16 inch guns 3 ships, Idaho Class 12 x 14 inch guns 3 ships and last but not least the New York Class 12 x 14 inch ie USS Texas only WWI Dreadnought still intact berthed at Laporte, Texas 2 ships, or the BB Arkansas 12 x 12 inch guns 2 ships.  Then we would have every USN class of battleship that was engaged in WWII.
    ?


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    I do not plan on doing that many Battleships.
    Early war
    OOB
    Late war….“Montana Class”

    Depending on sales…who knows!!!


  • Customizer

    @coachofmany:

    I do not plan on doing that many Battleships.
    Early war
    OOB
    Late war….“Montana Class”

    Depending on sales…who knows!!!

    Oh Wow!  The Montana class would be SOOO COOL!  That could be a US Super Battleship to match up with the Yamato.  You know, Germany and Russia also had plans for big Super Battleships which never got finished too.  For Germany, it was the “H” type battleship.  The first one was unofficially named either Friedrich der Grosse or Hindenburg.  For Russia, it was the Sovyetskiy Soyuz.
    I know this is WAY ahead of schedule, but perhaps you could do tiny sculpts of these monster battleships in future German and Russian supplement sets.  I know a lot of players like to include Yamato type Super Battleships in their games.  It would be cool to have pieces to represent them and since these types usually have limited builds, nobody would probably need too many of them.  Well, unless they are piece junkies like me.



  • Another AA piece junkie, excellent.  Coach mine was a suggestion,  Montana Class will be an excellent choice for taking on the IJN Yamato Class  Do what you plan to do and expect lots of sales of these custom sets in the future.  Question are you eventually going to sell pieces from your custom sets or are you just going to sell them in the sets?


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    My dad was a Navy man, so I love Naval pieces. I believe that the US and Japan should have many different Naval pieces.
    I need to sell pieces to continue to make the sets I am currently making but if enough people were interested, I could do a pre-order for US Naval/Air set and once there was enough interest, i could do the set along side the others.
    Examples would be:

    Montana Class Heavy Battleship
    South Dakota and or North Carolina class BB
    Essex class and or Midway class Heavy Carrier
    Tennessee Class battleship
    Colorado Class battleship
    LCM
    LST
    B-29 heavy Bomber
    Seaplane Tender
    oiler

    What do you think?


  • Customizer

    “Coach”,

    I’m in, definately!  I think a LOT of people would buy these additional naval units.

    Also, I would like to suggest that you and/or your associates look into designing an entire A&A NAVAL game.  I would really like to see a game that wasn’t restricted to a set strategy or tactical movement such as the battle of Midway.  A game that would be much more “universal” in it’s offerring of many strategies/plans to win and would be so large in sea area would make it possible(even necesary) for several smaller battles to occur all over the map.  I imagine it would help sales of these additional naval units too.  Don’t forget about seaplane tenders and PBYs (or their enemy equivilents).

    I seriously hope you’ll spend some “gray matter” on developing a NAVAL A&A game for all of us to enjoy.  It would be so differrent to have a game that the main focus was in building a navy to fight an enemy navy rather than just as an adjunct to assisting the “land campaign”.  Please consider it.

    What does everyone else think about a Naval A&A game?

    p.s.-my US Marines arrived and look GREAT!  your delivery speed is as always to be commended.

    “Tall Paul”****



  • Coach, I am in for pre-orders.  Excellent choice of a stand alone USN fleet.  May I suggest a Baltimore Class heavy Cruiser and a Birmingham Class Light or Atlanta Class.  Otherwise excellent potential line up.  My Marines arrived today, but I can’t check them out until I get back from ND.  I am sure that they are a high quality product.  Bring on a USN line up you have my support. 😄 😄 😄



  • Tall Paul and Coach, excellent idea, I would truly enjoy an AA Naval only game,  Might leave in Islands that you must capture using our new Marines for attack and defense air and naval bases.  Ships normally do not control a sea port or air base you have to have a small land force to maintain it.  This is where the Marines can come into play in a big way.  If Coach develops landing craft you need the proper forces to use them. THE USMC.


  • '14

    Here is my list:
    B-29
    PBY
    LCM
    LST
    Montana BB
    South Dakota. BB
    Alaska.  BC
    Atlanta. Light CA
    buckely. DD escort
    oiler
    sea plane tender.
    And the Essex class also!

    This would give alot of diversity in any game made or played!


  • Customizer

    Some ideas for a WW2 Naval game:
    The Marianas “Turkey Shoot”. 
    The Battle of Leyte Gulf.  I believe this is the battle that pretty much ended Japanese Naval Air power.
    The Battle of Suriago Straight.  This was the last time in history where fleets of battleships faced off and pounded each other.
    The Battle of Midway.
    The Battle of Coral Sea.

    There were also some big fleet battles in the Med between Royal Navy and the Italian Navy, but except for Taranto I can’t remember the names.  I know there was one during the invasion of Crete.



  • Cape Matapan was a big naval engagement between Regina Maria and the Royal Navy.  Coach, your line up for the USN just got better.
    I wondered why for years Avlon Hill never went for the Essex class seeing over 24 ea where built and used and several are sitting around as Naval memorials.  Keep up the excellent work.  Question, your B-29 Superfortress is it going to be a 1-700 scale model?  I have 4 of them and they look nice but are massive looking on the AA boards.  I like the idea of the Alaska Battle Cruiser and the Buckley Destroyer Escort.  Subs and Cruiser Forces will be hard pressed in the future.


  • Customizer

    @WARRIOR888:

    Tall Paul and Coach, excellent idea, I would truly enjoy an AA Naval only game,  Might leave in Islands that you must capture using our new Marines for attack and defense air and naval bases.  Ships normally do not control a sea port or air base you have to have a small land force to maintain it.  This is where the Marines can come into play in a big way.  If Coach develops landing craft you need the proper forces to use them. THE USMC.

    Warrior888,

    Yes, in describing a “universal” naval game I expected there to be several small but important land targets, whether they be resources, bases, potential new bases or whatever.  I just meant I wanted a game where the NAVAL aspect of the game is primary, not only an accessory to the land(IPC point) game.

    I’m thinking that base defense, recon, convoys, convoy escort, surface warfare, carrier warfare, bombardment, amphibious warfare, etc. would all be important facets of the NAVAL game I’m hoping for(hint hint Coach).  I also think a large open area allowing for naval battles on the map would be good.

    You know, what I’m describing sounds a bit like the Solomons Campaign.  The A&A GUADALCANAL game is already out.  I have this game but have yet to play it.  My gaming group is still too engrosed in 1940-Global, right now.  I originally bought it for the Hellcat fighters and airbase markers.  The Hellcats look so much better on my CV’s than P-38s,… and I buy the Victory marker houses(from HBG) paint them Gray and decal them(I-94) for somewhat 3D air/naval bases.  although I’ve read some discussion somewhwere that either HBG or FMG were to someday make air/naval bases as well as ICs.

    Anyway, with all the collective brain-power that is available on this forum I think A “universal” A&A NAVAL game would not only be possible, but FUN.  And if if would serve as another reason to develope all of these additional naval units,…great!

    “Tall Paul”


  • Customizer

    Also, here is my “list”, and why.

    an AO Oiler                To add a logistics capability to the game.
        an LCVP “Higgins” boat. The most iconic and necessary of the WW2 landing craft.
        an LCM                      Especially if "Coach"s new Sherman tank will fir IN it.
        an LST                      Another iconic and very useful ship for our gameplay
        an AV Seaplane Tender  To add Recon capabilities to the game
        a  PBY seaplane            "  "      "          "        "    "    "
        an Essex class CV        A necessary item to any WW2 US Navy
        an Atlanta class CLAA  For additional anti-aircraft defense
        a Montana class BB      WOW!  Need I say more?
        as many OTHER CLASSES of (BB) Battleships, NEW and OLD as can be made.
        a B-29 Superfortress.  Would add a VLR Heavy Bomber capability to the game.

    Other units such as a Alaska class BC would be welcome, and I would certainly buy it also, although it’s not on my “necessary” list.

    With these new units a very real improvement/evolution can be made to our A&A gameplay.  I feel very good that the “Coach” is the one throwing out ideas for new units as HE is the one that will get them produced!

    And if it would help get these units produced, I would right now be very happy to put money towards a pre-order.  I’m sure a lot of others would, too “Coach”, but it’s you’re call on that.

    p.s.–I also think an OIL DERRICK would be useful but the “Coach” might be able to get the ones already made from the “Wildcatter” game(BIG HINT HINT).

    What does everyone think???
                                                                                  “Tall Paul”



  • Tall Paul
    A 100 percent Naval game that would pitch ships and air squadrons against each other would be awesome.  You would most likely want D-12s.
    This could eliminate the two hit battleship, make it a 4 hit ship instead.  All ships would represent single units not an entire fleet of warships.  You would have ports to build ships based on IPCs from controlled sea zones and Islands.  If some player only wanted to build say Battleships let him, You could build a well balanced fleet that would totally defeat such a player.  Convoy routes would have to be defended by Jeep carriers, Cruisers and Destroyers.  Additional IPCs could be gained by say moving a 20 ship convoy from Pearl harbor to New Caladonia if 12 ships get thru to the seaport than you gain 12 or 24 IPCs.  It might take 4 to 6 turns to make the crossing.  This would give an aggressive IJN player if he had built the right forces several times to attack the same convoy.  If he didn’t you would gain alot of IPCs in short order. You could even add wolf packs and super subs to a Naval game like this with ease.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    I was going to take on the task of making such a game ( Midway / Coral Sea) this winter, but it sounds like I better step it up. What do you say everybody? I will start a new thread for ideas on layout, rules, etc. so everyone can air ideas.


  • Sponsor 2017 '13 '11 '10

    I’m working on a Pearl Harbor game that will have some neat twists.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 13
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 5
  • 31
  • 24
  • 3
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

78
Online

13.9k
Users

34.2k
Topics

1.3m
Posts