@Midnight_Reaper said in 25 extra unit 3D models, scaled and tweaked for A&A, including Gliders, Light Tanks, Escort Carriers and Landing Craft:
First of all, let me say that it’s great that you’ve made these wonderful sculpts and it’s also wonderful that you’ve decided to share them with us.
I do have some thoughts to share about some of your design decisions. They are your decisions and I respect that. But I think you might be able to take them to the next level with a little help. Says the guy with the ideas, to the guy who would have to do the work if it’s to be done. I’m not going to comment on all of them, just some. If I don’t say anything, then I like it and have nothing constructive to add.
@vodot said in 25 extra unit 3D models, scaled and tweaked for A&A, including Gliders, Light Tanks, Escort Carriers and Landing Craft:
- USS Independence (Allied Escort Carrier)
From what I can see of the sculpt, it looks nice. I would point out, though, that the Independence class carriers were not escort carriers (CVEs) but were known as light fleet carriers (CVLs). The difference being that light fleet carriers worked with the main fleet and the escort carriers worked with amphibious groups and escorting convoys. A typical allied escort carrier class would be the Casablanca class. That said, I like having a source for Independence class ships, as HBG has the US fleet carrier (Essex) and US escort carrier (Casablanca) sculpts covered already.
@vodot * IJN Royujo (Axis Escort Carrier)
I assume you mean the Ryujo class here. Again, this class was made up of light carriers, not escort carriers. They were very, very light carriers, but the mis-designation bugs my inner order-of-battle analyst all the same…
@vodot * Me-262 (Axis Jet Fighter)
More Me-262s is always something I can get behind
@vodot * IS-2 (Allied Heavy Tank)
I like your IS-2s better than the IS-2 in A&A 1941, at least from the angle I’m looking at.
@vodot * HMS Atherstone (Escort)
I’m sure she’s a fine escort ship, and the allies do have need of such a vessel in expanded games. It’s just that as the real-life HMS Atherstone was known as a Hunt class destroyer, why did you call it the HMS Atherstone instead of the HMS Hunt?
@vodot * USS Midway (Super Carrier)
I dig the Midways as a class of ships. It’s just that yours has an angled deck, and they didn’t have those when they were built, they were put in place later in refits in the 1950s. It looks out of place in a game of WW2. Would you consider making an axial deck (a non-angled deck) Midway?
@vodot * D9 (Engineers)
It’s nice to give the engineers some love and using a bulldozer to do so works for me.
@vodot * Wirbelwind (Axis Mobile AAA)
I like having options for SPAAGs (Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Guns) and you’ve picked a good one here.
@vodot * Me-410 (Heavy Fighter)
Other than by size, how will someone tell the Me-410s from the Ju-88s, He-111s, and the Mosquitos?
@vodot * Flaktrack (Allied Mobile AAA)
Again, I like having options for SPAAGs and you’ve picked another good one here.
@vodot * USS Des Moines (Battlecruiser)
While I dig have sculpts for the Des Moines class available, the Des Moines weren’t battlecruisers, they were just heavy cruisers. The US only designed two classes of battlecruisers, the Lexingtons and the Alaskas, and in the end only ever built one class - the Alaskas. Mind you, if you want to offer Des Moines class cruisers and not Alaskas, that’s your deal. I just might get someone to make them for me, but calling them battlecruisers is a historical inaccuracy in my opinion.
Just my 2 IPCs,
Hey MR, thanks so much for the feedback! Let me reiterate that I didn’t create the raw models for most of these, just reworked them for compatibility and printability for A&A. I’m proud of the work (in some cases, significant) it has taken to get them to a printable and playable state, but mad props to the original designers, not all of which I remember off the top of my head.
I knew going in that I was committing some historical faux pas both intentionally and via ignorance, but I’m a “easily-distinguishable-on-the-board” and WYSIWYG-first sort of person with historical fidelity coming in third; nonetheless historicity should be paramount once the first two are assured. I want my group, none of which are WW2 enthusiasts/super nerds, to just immediately “get it”.
RE: Midway’s anachronistic 50’s deck retrofit, that was a rare intentional historical solecism- which isn’t to say it was in good taste- intended to reflect a “Super Carrier” tech that was not achieved in the actual WW2 timeline. Perhaps I could achieve the same end using a rectangular (Axial? I’ll take your word for it) 40’s Midway sculpt by merely enlarging it over the essex/etc? I was worried it would look like just a huge rectange, but I confess I didn’t try printing one. Needs investigation.
Regarding the Ryujo (pardon my spelling!) and Independence as Light (not escort) carriers, you’re obviously correct. Serendipitously, in my half-hour of wikipedia research (keeping your expectations low ) it seems it was the Light (as opposed to escort) Carriers that were known for their speed, which was a primary mechanic I wanted these units to have- so rebranding them as CVL’s is a win-win! A caveat on the light carriers: their historical decks are so narrow (by design, of course) that it’s basically impossible to balance an A&A-scaled plane on them. So: I’ve abrogated naval design history and added a fat landing pad on the deck so a single fighter has room to live happily. Hopefully the tradeoff is worth it for most, but this will obviously make that particular model a non-starter for some.
RE: HMS Atherstone, I can see your point, given that I called the light carrier the Ryujo. It is indeed a Hunt-class sculpt.
RE: IS-2s and the awesomeness of these models in general- yes, they kick some serious ass. 100% of these props should go to m_bergman at Thingiverse, a minor deity of military history 3D modeling.
RE: Distinguishing Me-410s… you’re right. I spent some time trying to doctor up a Westland Whirlwind (damn planes and their paper-thin wings are super time-consuming to doctor for 3D printing)… and it ended up looking identical to the Me-410. I gave up. This is the reason I only have one sculpt covering heavy fighters for everyone, about which I feel bad… but not bad enough to spend another 2 hours doctoring the whirlwind.
RE: Des Moines, you’re right. When I first started working on this expansion, my “Battlecruiser” unit was called a “Heavy Cruiser” and I think that’s why I pulled the Des Moines. Later on I decided I really like the word ‘battlecruiser’. However, similar to the serendipitous mistake on the light vs. escort distinction above, this unit was also meant to be a sweet spot between the CA and the BB combining the strengths of both, but locked behind tech and advancement. Aaaaand after another half-hour of wikipedia research, it turns out that the Des Moines did not sail until 1946; so I don’t see why I can’t call this unit an advanced “Heavy Cruiser” after all.