Need Help to Finalize HBG Japan Set!


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Since we felt it was too limiting to pick and choose what made the cut on this, we have decided to do more or less all the Japanese pieces we want to do at once. The first two sets will be done at the same time, with the 3rd “Basic” set being done in 2013. Help us to finalize these plus give feedback on the ones we have chosen. Keep in mind the goal is more than simply supplement OOB or FMG. We want to give choices and provide a complete product all at the same time.

    Also, be aware the Vals and Ho-Ha mechs are included as HBG can’t keep stock of the OOB pieces! We figured we’d better make some.

    Japanese Supplement Set:

    A complete set will have 28 pieces. Sculpts and quantities are subject to change.

    (2) SNLF
    (2) Type 94 6-Wheel Trucks
    (2) Type 92 6-Wheel Armored Cars
    (2) Type 3 Ho-Ni III Tank Destroyers
    (2) Type 4 Ho-Ro SP Artillery
    (2) Ki-57 Topsy Transport Planes
    (4) Ki-43 Oscar Early War Army Fighters
    (2) Ki-100 Late War Army Fighters
    (4) B5N Kate Torpedo Bombers
    (2) G8N Rita Heavy Bombers
    (2) Fuso Early War Battleships
    (2) Shoho Light Carriers

    Japan Expansion Set

    A complete set will have 24 pieces. Sculpts and quantities are subject to change.

    (2) Type 1 Ho-Ha Mech Infantry
    (4) Type 95 Ha-Go Light Tanks
    (2) D3A Val Dive Bombers
    (4) Ki-61 Tony Army Fighters
    (4) Kagero Destroyers
    (2) Nagara Light Cruisers
    (2) Mogami Heavy Cruisers
    (2) Unryu Fleet Carriers
    (2) Nagato Battleships

    Sometime in 2013…

    Japan Basic Set

    A complete set will have 30 pieces. Sculpts and quantities are subject to change.

    (6) Infantry
    (4) Artillery
    (4) Type 97 Shinhoto Chi-Ha Med Tanks
    (4) A6M Zero Fighters
    (2) G4M Betty Medium Bombers
    (4) Transport Ships
    (2) I-400 Submarines
    (2) Yamato Heavy Battleships
    (2) Kaga Fleet Carriers


  • Sponsor 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer

    A Pill Box.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Japanese Supplement Set:

    SNLF Marine
    Type  94 6-wheel Truck
    Type 87 Armored Car
    Ho-Ha Mech Inf
    Type 97 Light Tank
    Medium Tank?
    Type 5 Ho-Ru Tank Destroyer
    Ho-Ni SP Artillery
    Ki-57 Transport Plane
    Ki-61 Tony late war Fighter
    Val Dive Bomber
    B5N Kate torpedo Bomber
    G8N Heavy bomber
    Zero is needed because you have to think when outside companies will contact you for their games and you got no zero? You tell them…  " just get the zeros out of Axis and Allies games"

    I-400 Class Sub
    Destroyer –yes
    Light Cruiser–yes
    Mogami Class Heavy cruiser
    Chuyo Class Escort Carrier—prefer Shoho CVL
    Kaga carrier
    Fuso Class Early war Battleship
    Nagato Class Battleship
    Yamato Class Hvy Battleship?
    Japanese Pill box or island fortification



  • really the tony -_- as a late war fighter? what happened to the ki 100 its an actual late war fighter and is a much better fighter. also no more ki-43 for ealrly war fighter? thats a bit of a disappointing i thought they would be able to match the us navy/airforce maybe you can use that instead of an infantry with a flag


  • Customizer

    This looks like a super great list. Looking forward to the final list. I found a couple of issues:

    The Type 97 “Chi-Ha” is a MEDIUM tank, NOT a light tank. The Japanese LIGHT tank is the Type 95 “Ha-Go”, which is the sculpt we have from OOB.

    IL is probably right, probably should include the A6M Zero fighter. As for an alternate fighter, I can’t remember the designation but there was one that was based on a German in-line engine and looked a lot like a Messershcmidt, which was a very un-Japanese look. That might be interesting to have in a Japanese set.

    Not so sure we need pill-boxes or fortifications. Not that people wouldn’t use them, I just thought pill-boxes and fortifications were going to be in a universal, or commons, set with things like factories, bases and such. If Coach is planning such a facilities set, then it seems to me like fortifications should be in that set and save the slot in the Japanese set for actual Japanese equipment.

    Would like to see HBG’s version of the Yamato, especially if other BB types were included so you could use the Yamato as a Super-Battleship.

    I personally see no need for an Infantry carrying a Flag. I wouldn’t have any use for it in my games, especially since we don’t have that piece for any other nation.



  • I think it would be cool if HBG made a set with infantry holding a flag. My idea however got kind of shot down. I think it would be cool to have the marines planting the flag as a victory marker piece. Russian planting flag at Reichstag. You get the picture.



  • @knp7765:

    This looks like a super great list. Looking forward to the final list. I found a couple of issues:

    The Type 97 “Chi-Ha” is a MEDIUM tank, NOT a light tank. The Japanese LIGHT tank is the Type 95 “Ha-Go”, which is the sculpt we have from OOB.

    IL is probably right, probably should include the A6M Zero fighter. As for an alternate fighter, I can’t remember the designation but there was one that was based on a German in-line engine and looked a lot like a Messershcmidt, which was a very un-Japanese look. That might be interesting to have in a Japanese set.

    Not so sure we need pill-boxes or fortifications. Not that people wouldn’t use them, I just thought pill-boxes and fortifications were going to be in a universal, or commons, set with things like factories, bases and such. If Coach is planning such a facilities set, then it seems to me like fortifications should be in that set and save the slot in the Japanese set for actual Japanese equipment.

    Would like to see HBG’s version of the Yamato, especially if other BB types were included so you could use the Yamato as a Super-Battleship.

    I personally see no need for an Infantry carrying a Flag. I wouldn’t have any use for it in my games, especially since we don’t have that piece for any other nation.

    completely agree with you. sept for seeing both the tony or another zero. it doesnt make sense how all the other main factions have gotten true early/mid/ and late war fighters while japan will get a tony witch is a mid war and if the zero is built another mid war fighter.



  • All here is my wish list for the Imperial Japanese.
    Naval
    Mogami Heavy crusier
    Nagara Light Crusier
    Fuso Class Battleship because its cool
    Nagato Class Battleship
    Akagi Aircraft Carrier
    Taiho Aircraft Carrier
    Shoho Light carrier
    !-400 Submarine
    Fleet Destroyer
    New version of the Yamato with original secondary battery not the AA version.  I have this in 1-700 scale waterline.

    Aircraft
    AM6 Zeke=Zero
    Val Dive Bomber
    B5N Kate Level/Torpedo Bomber
    KI-57 Transport
    KI-100 Late war Fighter
    KI-57 Early war Fighter
    G8N Heavy bomber

    Land
    Type 97 “Chi-Ha” MEDIUM tank
    SNLF Marine
    Type  94 6-wheel Truck
    Type 87 Armored Car
    Ho-Ha Half track
    Type 5 Ho-Ru Tank Destroyer
    Ho-Ni SP Artillery
    Jap costal battery
    Jap Pill box

    WARRIOR888



  • @knp7765:

    This looks like a super great list. Looking forward to the final list. I found a couple of issues:

    The Type 97 “Chi-Ha” is a MEDIUM tank, NOT a light tank. The Japanese LIGHT tank is the Type 95 “Ha-Go”, which is the sculpt we have from OOB.

    IL is probably right, probably should include the A6M Zero fighter. As for an alternate fighter, I can’t remember the designation but there was one that was based on a German in-line engine and looked a lot like a Messershcmidt, which was a very un-Japanese look. That might be interesting to have in a Japanese set.

    Not so sure we need pill-boxes or fortifications. Not that people wouldn’t use them, I just thought pill-boxes and fortifications were going to be in a universal, or commons, set with things like factories, bases and such. If Coach is planning such a facilities set, then it seems to me like fortifications should be in that set and save the slot in the Japanese set for actual Japanese equipment.

    Would like to see HBG’s version of the Yamato, especially if other BB types were included so you could use the Yamato as a Super-Battleship.

    I personally see no need for an Infantry carrying a Flag. I wouldn’t have any use for it in my games, especially since we don’t have that piece for any other nation.

    The thing is that standards of “heavy” “medium” and “light” are moving targets.  The Chi-Ha was indeed seen as a medium tank by the Japanese, but by objective standards it could also be called a “light” tank; compare, for example, its stats with the US light tanks, especially the Stuart.  Nevertheless, I’d still like to see him do it, since the oob is the Type 95.  Perhaps adding the Chi-Nu as a true medium would be a good idea… Alternatively, if HBG does the Shinhoto version of the Chi-Ha, perhaps that might be a compromise that could be used as both.



  • @WARRIOR888:

    All here is my wish list for the Imperial Japanese.
    Naval
    Mogami Heavy crusier
    Nagara Light Crusier
    Fuso Class Battleship because its cool
    Nagato Class Battleship
    Akagi Aircraft Carrier
    Taiho Aircraft Carrier
    Shoho Light carrier
    !-400 Submarine
    Fleet Destroyer
    New version of the Yamato with original secondary battery not the AA version.  I have this in 1-700 scale waterline.

    Aircraft
    AM6 Zeke=Zero
    Val Dive Bomber
    B5N Kate Level/Torpedo Bomber
    KI-57 Transport
    KI-100 Late war Fighter
    KI-57 Early war Fighter
    G8N Heavy bomber

    Land
    Type 97 “Chi-Ha” MEDIUM tank
    SNLF Marine
    Type  94 6-wheel Truck
    Type 87 Armored Car
    Ho-Ha Half track
    Type 5 Ho-Ru Tank Destroyer
    Ho-Ni SP Artillery
    ��� costal battery
    ��� Pill box

    WARRIOR888

    you were able to convince me  Drlarson. and i agree with most of warriors picks

    only differnces would be making

    Naval
    Mogami Heavy crusier
    Nagara Light Crusier
    Fuso Class Early war Battleship
    Nagato Class Battleship
    Kaga carrier
    !-400 Submarine
    New version of the Yamato with original secondary battery not the AA version.  I have this in 1-700 scale waterline.

    Aircraft
    AM6 Zeke=Zero mid war fighter
    Val Dive Bomber
    B5N Kate Level/Torpedo Bomber
    KI-57 Transport
    KI-100 Late war Fighter
    KI-43 Early war Fighter
    G8N Heavy bomber

    Land
    Type 97 “Chi-Ha” Light tank
    Type 1 Medium Tank
    SNLF Marine
    Type  94 6-wheel Truck
    Type 87 Armored Car
    Ho-Ha Half track
    Type 5 Ho-Ru Tank Destroyer
    Ho-Ni SP Artillery

    2 more points i would like to point out is  japan needs a wide variety of naval and aerial pieces  for games such as HBGs Midway. both America and Japan can have a lot of naval games. so pieces such as light and heavy cruisers are more valuable to the 2  nations also different classes of fighters and torpedo/dive bombers doing this will makes games like Midway soo much better and for me make it worth while to buy.

    second thing is japan needs an early war fighter. i still vote Oscar for that one, and they need a REAL late war fighter and the KI-100 fits perfectly it was pretty much the best fighter japan put out there at any point during the war. plus the Tony look like any generic western fighter, it would be better if we had unique Japanese looking fighters representing japan


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    New version of the Yamato with original secondary battery not the AA version.  I have this in 1-700 scale waterline.

    How bout making the Musashi? then you got both OOB and 1944 version of Musashi.



  • I’d much rather have the Model 92 Armored Car than the 87. Much cooler looking than the 87 with that dumb looking dome top. The 92 had better specs plus it’s in  the game Men of War Assault Squad, if any of you played it. I realize its not one of the ones you are unsure about. Just putting my 2 cents out there.



  • @Imperious:

    New version of the Yamato with original secondary battery not the AA version.  I have this in 1-700 scale waterline.

    How bout making the Musashi? then you got both OOB and 1944 version of Musashi.

    I agree; definitely do the Musashi (or the Yamato for that matter; there’s really not that much difference) but make sure its noticeably bigger (without getting out of scale, mind you) so that it’s a clear “super-BB.”  A Yamato-class shouldn’t look like “ho-hum just another BB” on the board like the oob pieces; it should stand out a bit next to other BB’s.  I also think you should definitely do a Kongo and one of the other 3 classes of Japanese BB’s (Ise, Fuso, Nagato, I don’t care which of these… Fuso works for me…)  But the Kongo is important to me because it allows Japan an entry into the battlecruiser category.  Yes, I know I’m asking for 3 BB’s, but this is Japan we’re talking about.  They should have a diverse ship line-up for all those Midway/ Guadalcanal-type battle games.  (And anyway, what I’m really asking for is a BB/SBB/CB range, which is easily accomodated in a d12-based system.)

    I also second the motion of having a Taiho.  I’d also like to see 3 levels of carriers: 1. Taiho or Shinano (but preferably Taiho; Shinano was a one-off like the other BB/CB conversions but they were planning to build 5 more Taihos as their standard “supercarrier”) as an “SCV” supercarrier. 2. One Hiryu/ Soryu/ Unryu as a standard CV. (This is what they were planning to build 15 more of as their “standard fleet carrier.”) and a Shoho as a CVL, though I’m not too picky on which CVL to do for Japan as they’re all pretty much unremarkable-looking towerless flat-tops.

    And I also agree with having a CL.  I assume you’re talking about the post-conversion 8x10" Mogami as a CA, because it was technically a CL before then, though perhaps in name only… aside from the Mogami, though, Japanese light cruisers really were a genuine half-step between a CA and a DD, much like the French contre-torpilleurs or Italian esploratori or, perhaps, the American “AA cruisers.”  Once again, given a d12 system, one half-step in between DD and CA is quite doable.  As to which one, I’m torn between the Agano (an absolutely gorgeous late-war design that better represents the Japanese ideal of what a light cruiser ought to be) and doing something like a Sendai (which better represents the reality of what they actually had.)


  • Customizer

    I also have the Yamato and Musashi in 1/700 waterline. I found this version of the Musashi interesting because it was an earlier version. In the middle along each side they had another 6 inch triple turret instead of the cluster of smaller AA guns (which were in the later version of the ship). The 6 inch triple turrets on the sides were later replaced by the cluster of smaller weapons.
    I have a picture of both ships. The Yamato is the upper ship with the cluster of smaller weapons as it was in the later versions of the class. The Musashi is the lower ship with the 6 inch triple turrets which was the earlier version.

    Yamato & Musashi.JPG



  • To do the Musashi, it makes more sense to do the earlier version; they later removed the wing 6.1" triple turrets in order to add more heavy AA guns… but then ran into a shortage of those very heavy AA guns (100 mm, if I recall correctly), and so ended up reducing the ships anti-surface capabilities without adding the AA guns after all.  (A sign of how chaotic things had gotten in the Japanese production qeue by 1944… and a stark contrast to their carefully-laid early-war plans when the 20x6.1" triple turrets taken off of the 4 Mogami class CL’s in order to replace them with 20 dual 8" turrets [and make them into CA’s] just so happened [serendipitously!] to be the right number of turrets for the planned secondaries of the 4 Yamato class BB’s and for the planned primary armament of the 2 planned Oyodo class CL’s…)  They thought they had it all planned down to a tee, even going so far as to predict about when the US would figure out that the Yamatos were armed with 18" guns (they were pessimistic in this prediction, for a change), at which time they would switch to 20" guns in the Yamatos’ otherwise quite similar successors…


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    The OOB Kongo from AA41 should be good enough so no need for a Kongo class BC

    But i like the hybrid Battleship?Carriers ( BBAV ISE and HYUGA).

    Prefer retrofitted Musashi  (10/44), not original.

    whatever CVL they go with it must be one of those flattops with no superstructure to get the iconic Japanese light carrier look.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    I should clarify one thing here: Since NONE of these have gone to sculpting yet, we would appreciate ANY comments you have on ANY of the units we’ve listed. Nothing is written in stone, but the list is what we compiled initially from research and previous comments, as well as our own preferences. If you see something that truly doesn’t seem right, and you can make a good argument, by all means this is the time to bring it up. Feel free to make comments, for or against, on any of the units listed. All I ask is have some info to back up your choice so we can do our research too.

    A good example is the arguments against the “Tony”. I actually picked the Tony to be in our set because of it’s unconventional look, easily distinguishing it from the carrier aircraft. Granted, entering service in '43 isn’t exactly ideal for “late war”, but '44 is when it was most utilized. I’m starting to see the merit in going with the Ki-100. It was on our list as well during initial planning but I guess it was my fault the Tony made the cut.

    My opinion on the Ki-43 is it presents two problems here. First, having two Army fighters (assuming we also go with one of the above) and one Navy fighter (oob) seems a bit odd for Japan. May be better to have it the other way around? Second, at 1/700 scale it looks way too close to a Zero. Even if you can tell the actual pieces apart, wouldn’t it be more fun to have something different looking?

    I also think the arguments of doing our own Zero make some sense. While I think the latest WOTC sculpts are much improved, the older oob Zeros could use improvement. With Japan being Naval heavy like the U.S., would it not make better sense to choose another naval fighter? Initially we were going to wait on another navy fighter until we did the Japanese naval set but, here we are doing them together now. I think including our own navy fighter makes sense and thank those that brought this to my attention!


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Would it be safe to say that the Sea Plane Tender idea is out? It does not appear on anyone’s list and could open a spot for another aircraft or ship.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    @knp7765:

    The Type 97 “Chi-Ha” is a MEDIUM tank, NOT a light tank. The Japanese LIGHT tank is the Type 95 “Ha-Go”, which is the sculpt we have from OOB.

    I fixed this on the first post. Thank you for the correction!

    @knp7765:

    As for an alternate fighter, I can’t remember the designation but there was one that was based on a German in-line engine and looked a lot like a Messershcmidt, which was a very un-Japanese look. That might be interesting to have in a Japanese set.

    I believe you are referring to the Ki-61 Tony listed currently in the set.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    With the proposed Japanese HBG set, it appears that the new goal is to make complete sets by nation.

    Keeping that in mind, they must consider replacing the OOB pieces. It is no longer “adding in a few new units” for house rules, but making the goal to replace OOB.

    The second issue is they should market these sets for other game companies who in turn will produce new games. If the iconic pieces are not in the mix ( for example not making a zero and making “tony”) the utility of these sets will not see the full potential.

    Once you got a number of complete sets, companies will contact HBG because the cost of development will no longer prevent a company from producing games with plastic pieces.

    The Soviet set is a complete set
    The German set ( “minor axis allies”) is sort of a filler piece set.
    The Neutral set is also perfect and is complete

    So the choices of units should not reflect what WOTC made, because these are superior units and will replace OOB and not be thought as used with low grade WOTC units.



  • Hey Imperious how is the Soviet a complete set? I don’t remember seeing any naval units unless that is a change I am unaware of. The last pictures I saw were land and air units. I hope HBG does start making complete sets with the same number of units as FMG. I would pay 40 per set. If this is the case Variable let us know as that would be fantastic news.


  • Customizer

    I think IL considers the HBG Soviet set to be complete because the vast majority of Soviet action was on the land or in the air. The Soviet Navy really didn’t have the chance to contribute very much to the outcome of the war. However, Go Sanchez, you are correct that to be a truly complete set, we would have to get Soviet naval vessels as well.

    With this in mind, perhaps Coach should consider expanding his sets to fully complete sets like we (should be) getting from FMG. I realize this would be more or less putting you in direct competition with FMG, but frankly HBG has had much better and more timely output with their sets. I too would be willing to pay $40 per set to HBG, perhaps a little more since from the proposed list, it appears that your sets would be somewhat larger as they would include both the basic pieces plus the sort of “in-between” units (Light tanks, medium tanks, heavy tanks) (Fleet Carriers, Light Carriers) (Early war BBs and Late war BBs) and so on. Such a set would probably be well over 156 pieces, maybe close to 200, depending on how many of each sculpt was included. With the high quality and such a large piece count, I would imagine $50 - $60 wouldn’t be wrong to ask for.

    If IL’s proposal is correct, with HBG making complete sets to replace OOB, this set really should include the Zero. That’s just too iconic to not include and the Zero was used all throughout the war. I also vote for including the Tony. THen Japan can have a navy fighter and an army fighter, plus have a fighter that looks a little different. I just don’t think you should include another fighter that looks like another Zero.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    The proposed list above for the Japanese will likely be split into two separate sets. The difference this time is we are molding them at the same time. We will likely go back and do the other fill-ins some day. The good thing about the way Coach does his sets is you can get the basics bundled for 10 or 15 bucks per set, and then fill in what you want more of for a few pennies each by-the-piece. Anyone can make their own custom set.

    Also, if we do go back and make more German, Russian, or US pieces someday, they can easily be added to our current stock and grouped into “complete sets” as IL mentions above. Since HBG pieces do not stay on the sprues like the old Table Tactics pieces, we can mix and match any number of pieces to make the set required.

    Hope this info helps. Going forward now, what do you feel is missing or not needed on the current list?


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    First post updated with new info and suggestions.


  • Customizer

    I like where these sets are going for the most part. I highly favor matching Japan’s unit classes to the American counterparts. Actually I favor this approach to offer standardized unit classes for all nations. It makes house rules more simplistic.

    Also please include a transport plane. A heavy four engine bomber would be nice too. Though I’m not sure Japan had one. Light, medium, heavy tanks (if possible) and less trucks. One or two should suffice for any nation.

    Also I’m going against the croud on this one: I’m anti zero. Yes it’s iconic but I already have many dozen zeros. Adding another zero sculpt Doesnt help us create a new unit. It actually removes a new unit from the potential set which is counter to HBG’s said objectives.
    Thanks for all your guys work at hbg.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 31
  • 13
  • 7
  • 1
  • 253
  • 2
  • 2
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

72
Online

14.8k
Users

35.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts