Set III Speculation/Rumor Central

[Joisey]

Welcome to Rumor Mill HQ for Set III!

<theme music to The McClaughlin Group>
Today's topics:

Issue One:

What tank destroyers will be included in Set III?

Joisey's prediction: Hetzer, Marder, SU 155?

Issue Two: Will WOTC bow to building player demand and include the German 88?

Joisey's prediction: Yessss!

Issue Three: What kind of stats will a "Forward Observer" have?

Joisey's prediction: cost: 4; Def: 4/4; AI: 5-1-0; VI: 0-0-0 SA: Forward Observer--needed for planes to be able to make ground attacks.

Issue Four: Will there be more than one motorcycle unit?

Joisey: Other than the german motorcycle side car, I don't think any other army used motorcycles except as simple couriers, and why would you need to model that in this game anyway?????

Issue Five: What air units will be included?

Joisey: If they say "only fighters" that will translate into "only single engined aircraft. The Germans will get their stuka.

Prediction: The airplane scale will be large enough that twin engined planes and up will need to come in a bigger box!

That's all for now.

Bye-Bye

[liquidcross]

Issue Five: What air units will be included?

Joisey: If they say "only fighters" that will translate into "only single engined aircraft. The Germans will get their stuka.

Prediction: The airplane scale will be large enough that twin engined planes and up will need to come in a bigger box!
No bigger boxes; otherwise, people would focus on buying those, because they'd know a twin-engine craft was in there. Besides, we've already seen what the boxes look like, and they're the same as the previous two sets.

For fighters and/or fighter-bombers, I'm thinking (read: hoping) Stuka, Bf109, Corsair, Mustang, Spitfire, Hurricane, Polikarpov I-16, Zero.

[jiminy_fatal]

German Paratroopers! THere has to be!!!

[PatrickWR]

Issue Four: Will there be more than one motorcycle unit?

Joisey: Other than the german motorcycle side car, I don't think any other army used motorcycles except as simple couriers, and why would you need to model that in this game anyway?????


Words can't describe how much I don't want motorcycles. They have no place on a battlfield; their entire reason for existing to was to get as far from the battlefield as possible in the shortest amount of time. The 7-10 minute timeframe of AAM doesn't support couriers, so I guess we'll hafta hope that cycles will be some sort of Rambo attack vehicle. Which would be anachronistic and sad.

['panzer' Mayer]

88 thats what I'm talking bout

[Patton 68]

Planes,shmanes...give me a Pershing,a Stuart (M5) or a Greyhound.As for TDs,how about M10/36 or Halftrack with a 75.Regardless of air AAA units,any one of those will make Set III okay by me.

[Joisey]

The Germans and Russians had the most highly developed anti-air ground units. The U.S. and Brit forces did it the old fashioned way: They fought the Luftwaffe in the air with their own planes. I'm sure there's some Brit and Amer anti-air vehicles but they aren't really well known, since by the time of the Invasion of Italy and later the Luftwaffe wasn't much of a threat.

So, I'm expecting to see a tracked and or wheeled AA AFV for the Germans and the Russians. The 88 will probably be shown as an unlimbered towed heavy AA. It'll be especially interesting if they give us a mini with a gun barrel that raises vertical for AA mode but also lowers 90* to be used in ATG mode. Otherwise they'll squeeze two minis out of one unit.

Yeah, Pat, it'll be real interesting to see how they stat the German motorcycle with side car and mounted MG-42, especially since they didn't give the jeep with .30 cal mg ANY offensive stats whatsoever!! Talk about your suicide units.

Trucks would be more interesting I think.

If they refuse to alter the size of the booster box, then that means a super tiny fighter in order for a properly scaled B-29 superfortress to fit in, or the planes will have different scales between fighters and bombers----Yuck!

[Domhnall101]

Words can't describe how much I don't want motorcycles. They have no place on a battlfield; their entire reason for existing to was to get as far from the battlefield as possible in the shortest amount of time. The 7-10 minute timeframe of AAM doesn't support couriers, so I guess we'll hafta hope that cycles will be some sort of Rambo attack vehicle. Which would be anachronistic and sad.

what do think the cavalry is going to ride in on?

[Patton 68]

I'd expect US M16 quad .50cal or the M15 w/a 37mm and 2x.50 cal,possibly late war M 19,twin 40mm based on M24 hull.Not that familiar with Brit mobile AA.I know this is an air themed set,but I hold hope that the French and Italians will be at least partially fleshed out with officers,MGs and ATG.I'd definitely like trucks to tow existing ATG

[jiminy_fatal]

an american/british sniper would be nice, to make things even that is.

[Irish]

If they refuse to alter the size of the booster box, then that means a super tiny fighter in order for a properly scaled B-29 superfortress to fit in, or the planes will have different scales between fighters and bombers----Yuck!

B-29's ???? How about a Dambuster's Lancaster, that way players can spend their money on really useful "tactical" units. God knows there are all those dams on the various map's "rivers" and ponds to blow up. B-29's would also work well to firebomb or nuke those giant 300 square meter towns that are on the maps..... gimme a break, to include such units would be nothing more than WotC "money grubbing" from "collectors" (those individuals who must have one of everything.) These aircraft would just take up the rare unit slots in the boosters, so instead getting a potentially useful unit for the "gamers" one will get a who knows what scaled unit that just takes up space. I've said it before there was absolutely no "playability" reason to put aircraft into this game, this is especially true for the long range strategic types. Unfortunately, the decision to add aircraft is "water under the bridge" or perhaps its water upstream of the dam, which could be blown up by those "rare" Lancasters.......

[Stojakovic]

B-29's ???? How about a Dambuster's Lancaster, that way players can spend their money on really useful "tactical" units. God knows there are all those dams on the various map's "rivers" and ponds to blow up. B-29's would also work well to firebomb or nuke those giant 300 square meter towns that are on the maps..... gimme a break, to include such units would be nothing more than WotC "money grubbing" from "collectors" (those individuals who must have one of everything.) These aircraft would just take up the rare unit slots in the boosters, so instead getting a potentially useful unit for the "gamers" one will get a who knows what scaled unit that just takes up space. I've said it before there was absolutely no "playability" reason to put aircraft into this game, this is especially true for the long range strategic types. Unfortunately, the decision to add aircraft is "water under the bridge" or perhaps its water upstream of the dam, which could be blown up by those "rare" Lancasters.......

Whats wrong with people wanting at least one of everything :confused:

[NewtonCain]

Since there is air carft, I bet we'll get AA guns. Now the question is what AT and AA guns will be terribly out of scale (ie. 3" gun vs Pak 40)? What PZIV base hull type will we get that will be out of scale also (Brumbar vs PZIV vs Nashorn)? Will all the $$$ go into the plane(s) = so the ground unit sculpts will be junk?

And what set IV unit will actidently show up in a set III booster ? :eek:

[Lotus]

Words can't describe how much I don't want motorcycles. They have no place on a battlfield; their entire reason for existing to was to get as far from the battlefield as possible in the shortest amount of time. The 7-10 minute timeframe of AAM doesn't support couriers, so I guess we'll hafta hope that cycles will be some sort of Rambo attack vehicle. Which would be anachronistic and sad.

I was about to add my loud approval for German paratroopers when I saw this post. AMEN Patrick. If I see a motorcycle on the battlefield, I will bypass every important piece to destroy it.

[Shaposhnikov]

Nah, we don't need them, just liberal use of artillery. Read the info guys, "Forward OPbservers" means the Allies (US/UK). For every three turns of Fire Support US/UK use, the Germans should get one, with a Die Roll (fifty percent possibility) that they will get it. The Soviets can have three or four turns of pre planned (off the Map) fires, the Germans, one turn of on call fire (but it may not show up....).

[Type-A]

Nah, we don't need them, just liberal use of artillery. Read the info guys, "Forward OPbservers" means the Allies (US/UK). For every three turns of Fire Support US/UK use, the Germans should get one, with a Die Roll (fifty percent possibility) that they will get it. The Soviets can have three or four turns of pre planned (off the Map) fires, the Germans, one turn of on call fire (but it may not show up....).
Sure, why not? Let's make the game completely unplayable.

[mikeguth]

For early war junkies we need the Somua, Char B1, Panzer 38T, Panzer I (why???), Panhard AC, Bren Carrier, 25mm AT gun.

For the Western Desert the Matilda, and Australian infantry.

[fifleche]

Words can't describe how much I don't want motorcycles. They have no place on a battlfield; their entire reason for existing to was to get as far from the battlefield as possible in the shortest amount of time. The 7-10 minute timeframe of AAM doesn't support couriers, so I guess we'll hafta hope that cycles will be some sort of Rambo attack vehicle. Which would be anachronistic and sad.How about if they did the motorcycles w/sidecar as they represented the jeep for the allies? A cheap & quick transport with defense 1/1?

Wishes for set III: PzIVD, Fallshirmjaeger, Flak 88, More French/Italian pieces.

[cossackwarrior]

The Soviets used motorcyles in combat as did the Germans, and even had a FLAMETHROWER Section!!!

The M-16 is a MUST for this set!!!

The US Army did not train or outfit snipers in WWII.

[Joisey]

How about if they did the motorcycles w/sidecar as they represented the jeep for the allies? A cheap & quick transport with defense 1/1?

Wishes for set III: PzIVD, Fallshirmjaeger, Flak 88, More French/Italian pieces.
HA! Good thing I wasn't drinking when I read this one....I'd have it coming out of my nose right now! C'mon!? A motorcycle side car transporting an entire squad? GET REAL! It's already pushing it letting a jeep for 4 carry 10 men as it is.

Hey! How much of a total pisser will it be if they give us a crappy Luftwaffe Infantry unit (which we KNOW is in Set III) and NOT the Falshirmjaeger?????

Speaking of which, I don't remember seeing these boards burning up with players demanding how they HAD to get their hands on a Luftwaffe infantry unit.

But guess what? A little extra modeling clay on that sucker and we'll have the ...................drum roll please....................Ta Ta Ta Da!!!!!!!: The "Sergeant Schultz" unit! Yip Yip Yahoo! But wait, there's more! Paint a monocle on that sucker and you can have Col. Klink and Sgt. Schultz! Ooh Boy.

Cause after all, Luftwaffe infantry wuz used for what??? Guard duty at air fields and garrisoning luftwaffe stalags, that's what for! Pfffft! B.F.D.

Gee, now what would the Klink and Schultz AAM stats be? Anyone?

Well we know the Shultz unit has no attack values. Why? Say it with me now.............Because he "Seeees Nuth-Ingck!!!" :P

[Anpu42]

Actualy if you look at the Scales
The Infantry is about 15mm
The Tanks are 10mm
The aircraft should be 6mm

[Joisey]

For early war junkies we need the Somua, Char B1, Panzer 38T, Panzer I (why???), Panhard AC, Bren Carrier, 25mm AT gun.

For the Western Desert the Matilda, and Australian infantry.
I'd go for all of these except the Panzer I (I mean, c'mon, the Panzer II is already near worthless).

Instead, it's hard to see what we ARE getting in Set III that anybody wants. Nobody was really chomping at the bit for planes, and therefore for AA AFV's, and certainly not Luftwaffe Infantry, and not the motorcycle mounted MG-42 either. That's at least 9 minis right there! Just think of it, a whole freakin booster of CRAP! :(

Issue for speculation / rumor:

Out of 45 minis in Set III, how many do you suppose will be planes??????

I'm predicting about half.....ugh!

Issue Two:

Assuming there is an 88 unit for the Germans, how rare will it be?

I'm predicting King Tiger Rare. Then again, I'm in an aggravated mood thinking about this too.

[fifleche]

Joisey, my friend, you should take a deep breath & relax a bit... If this so aggravates you, you should even perhaps think of laying off this thread for the whole of 15 minutes... ;)

[Lotus]

Gee, now what would the Klink and Schultz AAM stats be? Anyone?

Let's see...Schultz...SA would be dependant on WOTC putting out an Allied chef...a strudel commando maybe. And how about he gets hulking mass? :D

[Lynx7725]

Words can't describe how much I don't want motorcycles. They have no place on a battlfield; their entire reason for existing to was to get as far from the battlefield as possible in the shortest amount of time. The 7-10 minute timeframe of AAM doesn't support couriers, so I guess we'll hafta hope that cycles will be some sort of Rambo attack vehicle. Which would be anachronistic and sad.
Er, the Germans actually used motorcycle infantry, at least early on in Poland and/ or Russian. Basically they used them like fast infantry -- scoot up to an enemy, dismount and fight like normal infantry. Nobody expects them to wheelie into the enemy spraying fire from SMGs.

I think they stop organizing infantry into such units after a while. Personally, I think it's more an issue of logistic than effectiveness -- it is more expensive to keep a bunch of motorcycles running, than a bunch of infantry marching. The theory is good, but I think the practical problems that crops up might be more than worth the result.

Heck, the Germans also had bicycle units, which can move, by some accounts, 3 times faster than normal infantry in a day. The pic I had showed them disembarking from an air transport -- odd looking, really. And the Japanese are known to use bicycles to rapidly move down Malaya to encircle and attack the Brits in '41.

[kippryon]

As Set III will have Aircraft units, will those also include some sort of 'stand' so that they are not placed directly on the map hexes as ground units... even if all the air units may be 'Ground Attack/Fighter-Bomber' type planes...???

Or will Aircraft be just a card that gets played for a particular turn and then discarded?

[spadsept@mac.com]

For sure, we need plane stands!

[Patton 68]

I don't really want motorcycles either,but a Kettenkrad as a transport or towing a light AT gun could be neat...

[spadsept@mac.com]

Motorcycle could be like humber with strike and fade(maybe 3)... faster speed and prone to breakdown if no used outside road! :)

[Homer]

No bigger boxes; otherwise, people would focus on buying those, because they'd know a twin-engine craft was in there. Besides, we've already seen what the boxes look like, and they're the same as the previous two sets.



Ignoring the boxes we've seen, they could have done it like the Star Wars Universe set and used the twin-engine stuff as the huges. It wouldn't be that only some boxes would be bigger, they'd all be the bigger size.

[Richter von Manthofen]

Prediction 5-10 planes all rare.

if 5 then one will be the Stuka and a Zero. I think we will get one plane for each major nation (US, UK, Germany Japan, Russia) If 10 Then an adittional plane for US, Japan, Germany, Australia and Italy/or France.

Tank destroyers - 1-2 (Russia, UK maybe French) maybe uncommon.

A char-1-bis for france ??

A rare German tank expensive and/or extended range

Motorcicles 1 (german)

Forward observers SA: Tanks/artillery may attack enemy units ignoring one hex of blocking terrain if this unit has LOS to the target. (UC maybe common)

Anti Aircraft: I hope the 88mm, some trucks/halftracks (a 251 version) with aa capability.

Maybe an German Paratrooper, but I fear no.

Some commanders: hopefully a French, another UK and an Italian + 2 (5 per set seems the standard)

That should fill most uncommon and rare slots, so expect a bunch of rather crappy commons (see Luftwaffe soldier), with the exclusion of an US elite whatever ;)

my2cents

[sharpie]

''anzacs Fight Till Death'' B.m.delaine

[Prioux]

Cause after all, Luftwaffe infantry wuz used for what??? Guard duty at air fields and garrisoning luftwaffe stalags, that's what for! Pfffft! B.F.D.



You may want to do a little research on the Luftwaffe's Herman Goring Panzergrenadier Division. Those were not doing guard duty and they made a name for themselves. Inquire about what happened tot he Ranger battalions near Cisterna, Italy in 1943. :eek:

[Wyldman]

Actually the HG division was a Panzer Division and not a Panzergren Division in Italy. There were several Luftwaffe field Divisions on the Eastern fronts in the Front line. So they were not all guards.

[Wyldman]

The set III release says Fighters. The Stuka Ju87 is not a fighter or fighter-bomber, just a Dive-bomber. The max speed for the Ju87 was in the 250-275mph. That is why the Brits chewed them up during the Battle of Britian and the Germans had to withdraw them from that battle. The Fw190F and Fw190G were some of the better fighter-bombers for the Germans.

[simonr1978]

No, it says "Fighters...and more". They are not specifically restricted to fighter-aircraft only. Anyway if you want to argue the toss over it the Ju87 Stuka was on desperate occasion used as a fighter (Off the top of my head, against the second Schweinfurt operation), so it counts... :D ;)

[Richter von Manthofen]

I suggest look at the box, If i am not blink it is a stuka. ;)

[simonr1978]

The max speed for the Ju87 was in the 250-275mph. That is why the Brits chewed them up during the Battle of Britian and the Germans had to withdraw them from that battle.

The Stuka suffered heavy losses in the Battle of Britain because it was unmanouevrable, especially with the bomb, poorly armed (A single rearward firing mg and two mgs in the wings), lacked armour protection and was slow.

Speed was just one factor.

[Y2UAsk]

Know what I love about these discussions? WotC_Bob and I already have most of the Set III units, and they are suh-weet!

Your musings are most amusing. :p

Steve

[Herbavida]

Know what I love about these discussions? WotC_Bob and I already have most of the Set III units, and they are suh-weet!

Your musings are most amusing. :p

Steve

That's cold...

[TheLimey]

I say we wait in a dark alley near Wizards, then kidnap both Y2UAsk and WotC_Bob until they tell us what is in the next set... ;-)

[manufan]

How about they provide us a spoiler of one of the units soon?

Cheers.

[Runelord]

As it's guess time on set 3, here goes.
SU- Maxim mg with crew, Su 76/85 or 100/122. Yak
GB- Matilda,Firefly,Typhoon,25pdr/17pdr.Commando,s
US-.5 cal mg with crew,Jumbo,Marines,P47
Jpn- Yamamato, is there anything left.Zero
Fr-Char B1,officer
Italy-semovente
All nations 80-120mm mortars,Artillery spotters.
Plus of course at least one new nation.
I believe the aircraft will come in two parts wings/fuselage in a snap together form so as to fit into existing box sizes.

Happy New Year ,from Scotland.

[liquidcross]

I believe the aircraft will come in two parts wings/fuselage in a snap together form so as to fit into existing box sizes.
You know, I didn't even think of that. Now I feel like an idiot.

[Irish]

Whats wrong with people wanting at least one of everything :confused:

That's just it, nothing is wrong with an individual wanting to collect all the items (I myself have at least one of every set I and set II unit), but IMHO I believe that people will start to leave this game if they are spending their money "collecting" more and more "useless" (as far as playing the game) units (like the Panzer II).
I have to be brutally honest here, the mini's fit and finish is just fine for playing this game, it relieves [most] individuals from having to paint them, but compared to other minitures out there the quality is a bit lacking, which will devalue these minis in relation to others that are on the market.
:)

[Geobaldi]

Well, outside of the speculative new types of units, I think a review of obvious holes in the current lineup might be worthwhile:

We still need:
A US, Russian, and maybe even Italian machine-gun team.
German bazookas(?)
Non-SS Panthers, or SS Tigers or SS King Tigers.
Sherman Fireflys, or another Sherman variant.
US or German Engineers.
British Matildas
US M-10 Tank Destroyers
US Marines
British Mortars.
More German & British armored cars, plus maybe some from USSR & Italy.
US Springfield Snipers
British Lees or US Stuarts

[Vulturedoodle]

Know what I love about these discussions? WotC_Bob and I already have most of the Set III units, and they are suh-weet!

Your musings are most amusing. :p

Steve
Yes, as Herbavida says, that's cold. Please to bite our collective behinds.

--SEF

[Runelord]

OOP's I forgot about the Germans ( pity Europe did as well until it was too late) Ouch .
Ger- Stuka,Stug,Hetzer,Nebelwarfer, nah that will be in set 4.
Oh lets guess at set 4 mmmm.

[Irish]

Just for fun I've added my couple o' pennies. My inputs are underlined below.

Well, outside of the speculative new types of units, I think a review of obvious holes in the current lineup might be worthwhile:

We still need:
A US, Russian, and maybe even Italian machine-gun team. Good!
German bazookas(?) Doubtful
Non-SS Panthers, or SS Tigers or SS King Tigers. Good
Sherman Fireflys, or another Sherman variant. Excellent!
US or German Engineers. Nope
British Matildas Excellent!
US M-10 Tank Destroyers Very Good!
US Marines Would be nice
British Mortars. probably not
More German & British armored cars, plus maybe some from USSR & Italy. Yes to a Puma, and hopefully a US Grayhound..
US Springfield Snipers Great !
British Lees or US Stuarts nope


Other Tank destroyers-- SU-122, Elephant or Ferdinand, and perhaps that little Hetzer Jagpanzer. :)

[Old Tanker]

sounds like a good idea I know where WOC is located in Renton
:O)

[protevangelium]

Know what I love about these discussions? WotC_Bob and I already have most of the Set III units, and they are suh-weet!

Your musings are most amusing. :p

Steve

For that comment, I wouldn't be surprised if you got umpteen Banzai, road movement, and terrain questions. Hehehehe.....

[Zhukov]

Know what I love about these discussions? WotC_Bob and I already have most of the Set III units, and they are suh-weet!

Your musings are most amusing. :p

Steve

With people laughing about what we think is happening Im not even going to think about it anymore... Or not that much :o lol But I have a feeling SEt 4 will be something special and different like a huge set! Just like starwars and dungeons and dragons miniatures.

[Joisey]

Know what I love about these discussions? WotC_Bob and I already have most of the Set III units, and they are suh-weet!

Your musings are most amusing. :p

Steve
Yeah, sure, go ahead and just mock us fan-boys!

Or you could do something really COOL like letting us play Twenty Questions with you...............Hmmm........Pretty Please!?

[manufan]

First Unit:

It's not animal or vegetable, but it's made up of a composite of minerals :)

Cheers.

[Joisey]

I'm serious! After that cruel mocking of the customer base, I think we're owed a spoiler or two.

C'mon! What would it hurt to oh, say, tell us how many aircraft there will be out of the 45? That's not giving away that much.

[spadsept@mac.com]

I think Bob said he had the new hellcat on his desk... Does he have a window? Is there a tall building in front of WOTC where we could spy with camera with zoom, with night shoot!!! Maybe set 3 units are all over the wotc employe's desks so they can brainstorm all day looking at the new minis ... ;)

[Joisey]

As it's guess time on set 3, here goes.
SU- Maxim mg with crew, Su 76/85 or 100/122. Yak
GB- Matilda,Firefly,Typhoon,25pdr/17pdr.Commando,s
US-.5 cal mg with crew,Jumbo,Marines,P47
Jpn- Yamamato, is there anything left.Zero
Fr-Char B1,officer
Italy-semovente
All nations 80-120mm mortars,Artillery spotters.
Plus of course at least one new nation.
I believe the aircraft will come in two parts wings/fuselage in a snap together form so as to fit into existing box sizes.

Happy New Year ,from Scotland.
There will be no new nation. Look at the Set III box pix on the website. Look at the little nationality circles at the bottom of the box. Now count 'em. There's NINE, the exact number of nations currently in the game.

I think we're going to get the U.S. M-36 Tank Destroyer. They're going to add some tank destroyers and they've had a habit lately of throwing in late war American units. Probably got a Pershing in the works, but I doubt they've got room for it in this set, what with all the planes, AA, motorcycles, and obscure Luftwaffe infantry units they have to save room for.

[Domhnall101]

Hmmmmm.. Motercycles?
anyone ever see the Great Escape?


I think 6-8 planes, with simular AA guns, german 88, 3-4 motorcycles and as for the luftwaffe they did field a few hundred thousand as regular field troops so they are not that obscure. Especially when you consider the paratroops already in play amd their historical numbers. not that I would be fielding very many luftwaffe troops mind....

[Nylore]

Do you know what is the worst thing about having a Contested Skies mini in your hand is? The insatiable thirst for more.

Brian

Why oh why did it have to be a Luftwaffe Airmen mini. Why couldn't it be a stuka?????

PS Steve or Bob if you happen to wanna share the stats, for the Luftwaffe Airmen, with me I would be fine with that. ;)

[Y2UAsk]

I'm serious! After that cruel mocking of the customer base, I think we're owed a spoiler or two.OK, how's this ... some of the guesses have been right.

Really, I'm not making fun of anybody because I've been on both sides of this fence. All I'm saying is, being on this side of the fence has its own, special charms. ;)

Steve

[Y2UAsk]

PS Steve or Bob if you happen to wanna share the stats, for the Luftwaffe Airmen, with me I would be fine with that. ;)He has Speed 1 ...

Steve

[Anpu42]

They should have the Stuka. it is on the box.
As far as its performance...They dont care, just look at the Panzer II it sucks after 39, but it is still in the box.

[manufan]

He has Speed 1 ...

Steve

That's right, mock us some more :)

Hey, I'm OK with not knowing anything right now. Release date is March 24th, right?

That's more than 2 months away.

Let's all have fun with Set II first.

Cheers.

[Lotus]

Let's all have fun with Set II first.

Yup. I second that.

[Pasalades]

I think it must be neat knowing what is around the bend and seeing the speculation that goes on in these forums. I'm not bothered by it myself. The all knowing smirks just add to the suspense. Based on the events leading up to set II, I'm sure everybody is going to do a nice job preparing us for the release and have some fun doing it too!

[Domhnall101]

OK, how's this ... some of the guesses have been right.


(the following should be read in an amazingly bad thick french accent.)

i sould have warned you, he has taunted you a second time...

[skeevo666]

As far as its performance...They dont care, just look at the Panzer II it sucks after 39, but it is still in the box.


Well you've got to have something to play in a 1939 game, right? :rolleyes:



.

[Joisey]

(the following should be read in an amazingly bad thick french accent.)

i sould have warned you, he has taunted you a second time...
Boy, you sure got that right! My only consolation is that he's so busy laughing it up he's probably peed his pants by now <evil grin>!

So, some of the guesses have been right, eh? I knew it! I'll start making my Stalag 13 diarama right now. It should have been so obvious that the "and more" meant a French LeBeau (Superior Chef SA), a British Newkirk (Pick Pocket SA), and an American Hogan (Womanizer SA) and Carter (Accident Prone SA), to go along with the Col. Klink and Sgt Schultz.

Can't wait to see the SS Major Hochstedder with the "Ruthlessly Stupid Accent" SA. I also hear the General Berchalter is a super rare "maxi".

And now that you've got the whole motorcycle field nailed down it's obvious that you've set the stage for that next class of unit we've all been clamoring for: The K-9 squads like the "German" Shepard, the "British" Bulldog, and the "American" Doberman. As an added bonus, maybe Set IV can include the "French" poodle too!

By now Bob is known around the office as "Diaper Boy" he's ****** himself so much laughing, so my work here is done! ;)

[Pasalades]

Vaudeville. We should go on the road with this act....

[Patton 68]

I'm personally waiting for the Kelly's Heroes expansion with Don Rickles Insult SA...

[WpgWarMachine]

I didn't see this posted, but am I the only one who knows of Harley-Davidson's contribution to the war? They basically mobilized all the American infantry.

[Mako Sharkz]

Joisey: Other than the german motorcycle side car, I don't think any other army used motorcycles except as simple couriers, and why would you need to model that in this game anyway?????


How else are we going to recreate a Steve McQueen sequence without German Motorcycles

or Indy and James Bond in a cycle chase?

[simonr1978]

I didn't see this posted, but am I the only one who knows of Harley-Davidson's contribution to the war? They basically mobilized all the American infantry.

Perhaps I have this wrong, but this reads like practically the entire US Infantry forces rode to war on Harleys. If you mean this then I believe you are incorrect, if not perhaps you could clarify your statement.

[Vulturedoodle]

Perhaps I have this wrong, but this reads like practically the entire US Infantry forces rode to war on Harleys. If you mean this then I believe you are incorrect, if not perhaps you could clarify your statement.
It's not widely known, but well established, that Arthur Walter Davidson invented the wheel. And T-shirts.

--SEF

[Joisey]

So to sum up, we can put into the "pretty sure" list the following units for Set III:

Luftwaffe infantry (this is actually in the "certainty" pile
Stuka (the "near certainty" pile)

Fighters for major powers: 1 Brit, 1 American, 1 German, 1 Russian, 1 ***. What's less certain is which ones they'll pick. The German will almost certainly be the Me-109, as it was both iconically famous AND an early years plane. With the Brits it's probably the Spitfire since it is the most famous, although the Hurricane would be more appropriate if one were to start with the earliest first (Which WOTC clearly don't care about since they threw in the Chaffee way too early). The American pick is trickier. Most famous would be the P-51, but that was late war. On the other hand, WOTC seem to like throwing in the late war stuff for Americans in, so count this as a most likely. Early years would be the P-40, but my guess is that they'll save the P-40 for the Chinese Nationalists, decked out in the famous Flying Tigers colors. The Japs will of course get the Zero, you don't need Kreskin for that one. The Russians are the hardest to predict, as they could go with either the I-16, Lagg 3 or Mig 1.

Since the Stuka is on the box, the Germans will get the Stuka too. I've got to believe they are going to give the major powers a dive bomber or fighter bomber too, otherwise there is little point/interaction with a ground game and superiority fighters. The Japanese dive bomber was the Val? The Brits had the Typhoon (late war though) and the Americans had the P-47 (also late war). I'm not expecting them to give us American carrier based planes. The Russian ground support plane, the Sturmovik, is probably too big to get into the current sized booster box. Expect the Italians to get totally dissed in Set III.

So, I'm predicting 6 fighters (I'm including the Chinese P-40) and 4 ground attack planes. Ten out of 45.

For AA, I'm expecting most powers will get a truck mounted AA unit, except for the Germans who have the more famous Wirbelwind with its hexagonal armored compartment on a Panzer chassis and the unlimbered 88. That's right, 2 AA units for the Germans, and one for the Brits, Americans, Russians, and Japanese.

That gets us up to 16.

Tank destroyers: I'm predicting the M-36 for the Americans, one of the SU series for the Soviets, and two more for the Germans. Odds on favorites: The Elephante and the Hetzer. I'm predicting the Elephante because it makes for an interesting mini and because nobody is really asking for it (I think I only saw one post). In other words, WOTC will hold back on a more likely candidate/more in demand candidate like the panzerjager IV to put into the next set. The Hetzer seems likely since it would be an easy mini to mold and will be more likely than some other candidates to get past quality control approval (assuming somebody is still doing that at WOTC, AHEM!).

So that's 4 tank destroyers and that gets the mini count to 20.

Next I'm expecting some self propelled guns, because Bob said there was going to be some really cool new units and that I interpret as units that everybody wants/has been asking for. At the top of that list is the StugIII, followed by the Italian Semovente, the Russian SU-76, the British Sexton and the American Priest. Lets be optimistic and throw in one of the following: A Lorraine Schlepper, Hummel, Marder, or Wespe. It'll only be one though, keeping in mind the marketing boys insisting on holding stuff back for Set IV.

Thats 6 more minis and gets the count to 26.

At this point we have to throw in the forward observers (figure 5 of these) plus the Luftwaffe infantry. That gets us up to 32.

What to round out Set III with? An Italian officer, a Polish rifleman and Polish officer, a Romanian rifleman and Officer, a French Officer and heavy MG units for those countries that don't have them, specifically a .50 cal for the Americans, a Maxim for the Russians, and one each for the French and Italians. That's 10 more units and gets us up to 42.

What will the last 3 be? Well, since we know no new nationalities are being added, forget about Elite Australian infantry or a Canadian Ram apc. They could, of course, issue these under the Union Jack, but I think the howls of Nationalist protest from those countries' fans not seeing their own national flag on the stat card would be a marketing blunder that would make New Coke look like a walk in the park by comparison.

Instead, every set has had a few uncommon and small AFV's, like the armored car or the Teke. So for Set III units that would fit this bill would be the Bren carrier, a Russian armored car, and another British or German armored car, take your pick between the Greyhound or one of the 6 or 8 wheeled German varieties. Unless, of course, the WOTC researchers come up with yet another 2 man Japanese tank with paper thin armor and zero tactical usefulness, but I think we've had quite enough of that. ;)

[Nylore]

What will the last 3 be? Well, since we know no new nationalities are being added, forget about Elite Australian infantry or a Canadian Ram apc. They could, of course, issue these under the Union Jack, but I think the howls of Nationalist protest from those countries' fans not seeing their own national flag on the stat card would be a marketing blunder that would make New Coke look like a walk in the park by comparison.

Joisey, Please correct me if I am wrong, however Bob told us when they first announced "Contested Skies" that the Australians would be introduced in this set. So perhaps an Elite Australian Infantry will be included. I am up on Australias elite units so not sure if it would be Air, Infantry or Tanks.

[Joisey]

Joisey, Please correct me if I am wrong, however Bob told us when they first announced "Contested Skies" that the Australians would be introduced in this set. So perhaps an Elite Australian Infantry will be included. I am up on Australias elite units so not sure if it would be Air, Infantry or Tanks.
Well, as I said, if they do then its going to be flagged under the Union Jack and not the Australian flag, because the number of nationalities on the box for Set III hasn't changed from Set II.

I think alot of people will be unhappy with that.

[Nylore]

Hey Joisey,
As Bob had mentioned in an ealier post, the 9 nationalities in the Contested Skies set (as in the logos on the set III boxes) are the following.



The nationality logos would be:

Australian
French
Soviet
U.K.
U.S.
German
Italian
Japanese
Romanian


To me that means the Australian flag would be represented.

[Nylore]

Joisey, I just realized that Australia's current flag was not adopted until after WWII. So both Canada (who's flag wasn't adopted until 1965) and Australia would use some sort of Ensign. So you are correct sir.

[Redgar]

We'd (Canada) have the Red Ensign (Union Jack top left on a red field), I suppose. Don't know about the Australians; seems to me it would make the most sense to have an ANZAC logo, perhaps with a recognizable ANZAC symbol rather than the Australian flag.

Just my 2 ep worth,

Redgar

Addition: Since these are nationality logos rather than countries' flags, I think Canadians would have the Maple Leaf symbol (which I think rocks, BTW :D) Bob used in the scenario....

[Joisey]

Hey Joisey,
As Bob had mentioned in an ealier post, the 9 nationalities in the Contested Skies set (as in the logos on the set III boxes) are the following.






To me that means the Australian flag would be represented.
Uh.....what happened to China? Looks like you bumped them off to include Australia. I'm pretty sure the Nationalist star is in that row of nine circles. It's one of the easiest to make out.

[Geobaldi]

I figure it's about time we take a balanced, rational look at what AH/WotC has in store for us in the upcoming set three as far as the verifies "aircraft" content might be.

Now, the way I understand it, WotC being a company interested in selling it's games, and almost universally taking (what some find unpopular) the LONG term view of set releases. So, we can safely assume that they think aircraft will add to the game's appeal, while not alienating too many early adopters into leaving. So, balancing making the aircraft interesting, undoubtibly of some considerable power, while not taking the main thrust of the game, obviously tank warfare, and making it obsolete.

This is going to be difficult. WW2 was the golden age of air power. If you owned the skies, you owned the battlefield. However, technical difficulties such as communication, plotting, precision and the like definately limited the total impact aircraft could have.

But how does this affect which aircraft they choose to release first?

Well, in several ways. We have ONE clue. We know they have not put something in the bow art they did not include as a piece, so we have a safe assumption of a German Stuka as one aircraft included. So we know ground attack is a certainty. They have also mention "fighters" specifically. Now, no one would call the Stuka a fighter in any capacity.

So based on all of this, these are my picks for most likely aircraft to show up in the next expansion:

We'll start with the Stuka. I'm thinking an early model. Bombs and some light machine guns, including rear guns for defence. This is an obvious choice over later, more capable, stukas. Starting at the beginning makes sence, plus, if it was the PaK 38 carrying G model, we could certainly tell from the box.

This begs the question, does each nationality only get ONE plane? Probably. At most I would guess two. But the likelyhood that we get one per nation is rather high.

If we do get two, it's hard not to look at the 109. But even then, what model? There are big differences between the models, from the E, to the early C/D of Spanish Civil War fame, to the undergunned F and G's, to the outstanding, fast and capable late K models. My instinct says the first 109 will be an E.

Also look out for: Bf 110's, Ju 88's.

The British will probably be the easiest guess. The RAF played a defensive fight for the majority of the war, and their early attack/bombers were mediocre at best (a.k.a. the Fairey Battle & Blackburn Skua). So a fighter is most likely to be seen.

This will most likely be a Spitfire. It might very well be THE rare to own in the upcoming set. It will dominate the Stuka almost completely, and is the most likely fighter we're going to see. Given that, it was one of the best aircraft of the war. But, it's ground attack capability was limited at BEST. For that, we would look to Hurricane Mk. IV's & Typhoons.

Also look out for: Hurricanes, Beaufighters, Blenheims.

The mericans are the hardest to choose from, there are two fronts to consider, and each one used different aircraft. Do we see the SBD, which saw extensive use in the east? Or do we keep a european theme, are go with a P-47, P-38 or P-39? These three would be my guesses. The Thunderbolt is the least likely, followed by the Lightning. I think they'll suprise everyone, and the american plane will be the Airacobra.

This is ONLY a hunch.

Also look out for: Havocs, Mitchells, A-36 (Mustang A).

No, I don't believe the US will get a dedicated fighter. Why? If UK and US both get fighters, the Stuka will be nearly useless.

The Russkies are a bit easier. If you have a Stuka, you almost have to have the Stumovik. We got Panzer IV's and Tigers in set one, and we got T-34's and KV-1's to counter. If this mentality holds true, Stukas beg Sturmoviks.

Also look out for: SU-2's, Yak 1's, SB-2's, I-16's.

I am not convinced the Japanese will get an airplane. But if they do, the water gets very muddy at this point. I believe what they get will be in response to what the americans get. If the US gets a fighter, then the Japs will get a Zero. If they get an attack/bomber, then it becomes difficult to tell. The Japs have a plethora to choose from: Kates, Vals, Sonias, Jills, Nells, Zekes, Haps...

Most likely: Zero/Val.

Also look our for: Ki-51 Sonia.

[Joisey]

Joisey, I just realized that Australia's current flag was not adopted until after WWII. So both Canada (who's flag wasn't adopted until 1965) and Australia would use some sort of Ensign. So you are correct sir.
If Bob promised you an Australian unit, I'd take him at his word, I didn't see that post. But if true, then I'd say it will be British flagged based on the nationality symbols on the Set III booster box.

Just realized something today as I was waiting in Office Max to have double color photos of my maps laminated. One, I didn't need to buy a second starter set to have a second set of maps, and Two, if Set III is being issued soley in the booster pack box format, we AREN'T getting any new maps, including maps for air combat, including maps for off map air movement, including maps with large urban targets/factories for bombing, unless they are going to offer them as free downloads.

[Joisey]

WWII was not the "Golden Age" of airpower, the last 15 years have been, specifically AMERICAN air power. In the last 15 years U.S. airpower has the distinction of being the first air force on Earth to ever force a country to surrender without a ground campaign (Yugoslavia). More recently it was U.S. airpower that caused the utter military and logistical collapse of a country (Taliban occupied Afghanistan).

[spadsept@mac.com]

We'd (Canada) have the Red Ensign (Union Jack top left on a red field), I suppose. Don't know about the Australians; seems to me it would make the most sense to have an ANZAC logo, perhaps with a recognizable ANZAC symbol rather than the Australian flag.

Just my 2 ep worth,

Redgar

Addition: Since these are nationality logos rather than countries' flags, I think Canadians would have the Maple Leaf symbol (which I think rocks, BTW :D) Bob used in the scenario....

Yes i love what they did for the canadian logo! Pretty cool!

[MarcusAurelius]

Here are a few of the models I'd like to see in Set III. In all likelihood, there are enough tank destroyers, howitzers and assault guns to fill out several upcoming releases. My guess is we'll also start to see alternate sculpts/poses for some of the more common infantry units and AFVs. Several people have mentioned truck transports - what about medics?

USSR - AFV
ISU-152
SU-76
SU-85
SU-100
SU-122
SU-152

USSR - AIRCRAFT
Yakovlev Yak-9
Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3
Lavochkin La-5

UK - AFV
Bishop
Sexton

UK - AIRCRAFT
Spitfire

US - AFV
M7 Priest
M10 Wolverine
M26 Pershing
M36 Jackson

US - AIRCRAFT
F64 Hellcat
F4U Corsair
P-38 Lightning
P-40 Warhawk
P-47 Thunderbolt
P-51 Mustang

GERMANY - AFV
Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer
Jagdpanzer Tiger/Elefant
Grille
Hummel
Jagdtiger
Marder
Wespe
Maus

GERMANY - AIRCRAFT
Messerschmitt Bf 109
Messerschmitt Bf 110

JAPAN - AIRCRAFT
Mitsubishi Zero
Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa

ITALY - AIRCRAFT
Fiat G.50
Macchi C.200
Macchi C.202

[Redgar]

WWII was not the "Golden Age" of airpower, the last 15 years have been, specifically AMERICAN air power. In the last 15 years U.S. airpower has the distinction of being the first air force on Earth to ever force a country to surrender without a ground campaign (Yugoslavia). More recently it was U.S. airpower that caused the utter military and logistical collapse of a country (Taliban occupied Afghanistan).

Perhaps; however, it could be argued that planes affected the whole war on a grand scale, not really seen since. Think: Battle of Britain, Pacific Fleet actions, and Eastern Front (especially Kursk).

Speaking of Afghanistan (and Iraq): while tactical air strikes are, undoubtably, vital pieces of Nato/American forces "victory" there, they can not occupy a country; that's what grunts are for. Now, the same holds true for WWII; however, there were two main differences:

1. Paratroopers were used for the first time, especially in the opening stages of the War.

2. The ground-support effects on the large-scale war effort are greater than today. This point can be argued for and against, but the destruction of AFV, defensive installations, and industrial manufacturing facilities had a greater impact on the end result of the war than current air campaigns. In a tactical sense, aircraft play a more effective role now, but strategically....

Anyway, just my 2 ep worth,

Redgar

[Vulturedoodle]

Just wondering, with all these reasonable, logical, well thought out posts:

At what point did someone come up with the notion that there was anything the least bit logical about which units are released?

Not one, but two RARE T-34s...an uncommon Archer...an uncommon FLAMETHROWER tank, itself the second flamethrower tank released...the King Tiger released before any versions of the Stug...two sets released and no 88, no 17-pdr, no 25-pdr...the Japanese have FIVE tanks, same as the Russians.

In this vein, I predict -- with at least as much probability of success as anything else in this silly thread -- we'll see a V-2 (because we don't yet have a V-1), a Yamato-class BB (the nautical equivalent to the King Tiger, and almost as common), at least two varieties of uncrewed support weapons for each nationality (because that would account for 18-20 figures, and numbers lend credence to any argument, don't you think?).

Also, some kind of messiah figure with all sorts of strange SAs.

--SEF

[Joisey]

Just wondering, with all these reasonable, logical, well thought out posts:

At what point did someone come up with the notion that there was anything the least bit logical about which units are released?

Not one, but two RARE T-34s...an uncommon Archer...an uncommon FLAMETHROWER tank, itself the second flamethrower tank released...the King Tiger released before any versions of the Stug...two sets released and no 88, no 17-pdr, no 25-pdr...the Japanese have FIVE tanks, same as the Russians.

In this vein, I predict -- with at least as much probability of success as anything else in this silly thread -- we'll see a V-2 (because we don't yet have a V-1), a Yamato-class BB (the nautical equivalent to the King Tiger, and almost as common), at least two varieties of uncrewed support weapons for each nationality (because that would account for 18-20 figures, and numbers lend credence to any argument, don't you think?).

Also, some kind of messiah figure with all sorts of strange SAs.

--SEF
I agree that WOTC picks of units for release have been both frustrating and their "logic" impenetrable. That's why I keep hedging my bets that this set will see a bunch of late war American stuff, cause that sure seems to be their M.O.

While I assume your Yammato discussion is a bit of hyperbole, I wouldn't put it past them to continue to deny us a StugIII or 88, or something pedestrian but useful like a cheap Hetzer, but give us some behemoth like the JagdTiger (a really low production AFV) or the Elephante (a highly unsuccessful TD) with ridiculously high point costs (the JagdTiger is easily gonna cost 100 points plus).

[simonr1978]

WWII was not the "Golden Age" of airpower, the last 15 years have been, specifically AMERICAN air power. In the last 15 years U.S. airpower has the distinction of being the first air force on Earth to ever force a country to surrender without a ground campaign (Yugoslavia). More recently it was U.S. airpower that caused the utter military and logistical collapse of a country (Taliban occupied Afghanistan).

No it hasn't, there still had to be ground intervention in Kosovo despite the UN airpower, not just the AMERICAN. In any case arguably political power there was as important as military power.

I think WWII was the golden age of airpower. Every major combatant started the war with biplanes as frontline fighters, yet by the end we had guided missiles and almost supersonic jet fighters (In fact I have read that the Spitfire may have been the first aircraft to reach mach I albeit in a dive, so there may have been aircraft capable of being controllable at supersonic speeds in WWII).

In WWII airpower went from a complete unknown (Douhet's proclamations that "The Bomber would always get through"), to an absolute requirement of warfare, both overland and at sea. It was arguably the first unit to eclipse the battleship. The vessel that every nation measured its military prestige in could be defeated by two men in a couple of tonnes of aluminium.

[Geobaldi]

WWII was not the "Golden Age" of airpower, the last 15 years have been, specifically AMERICAN air power. In the last 15 years U.S. airpower has the distinction of being the first air force on Earth to ever force a country to surrender without a ground campaign (Yugoslavia). More recently it was U.S. airpower that caused the utter military and logistical collapse of a country (Taliban occupied Afghanistan).

In all likelyhood I am being completely obtuse. And if so, please accept my profuse apology before I respond.

In fact, however, you are completely incorrect. World War 2 is universally known at "The Golden Age of Air Power", and has been known as that for some time.

To cut a long explanation short, the U.S. has fielded (lemme count here) 6 primary fighter aircraft, 6 attack aircraft, and 3 bombers in the last 30 years.

In contrast, in a little over 5 years, the world went from biplanes to jets. Germany, Great Britain, Japan, Italy, Russia and the U.S. all produced premiere world-class fighter aircraft.

Just in U.S. fighters alone, the names stand without explanation: Mustang, Thunderbolt, Corsair, Warhawk, Airacobra, Lightning, Wildcat, Hellcat, Buffalo, Lancer, Kingcobra and Black Widow.

More aircraft were involved in conflict during WW2 than at any other time, and more than anyone now could conceive for our future.

Maybe Boelké did write the rules 25 years before the war, but they were never more important to the world than during 1939-1945.

[simonr1978]

Neither the Kingcobra nor the P-43 Lancer saw combat against manned enemy aircraft fur the USAAF during WWII, infact the only kill for either that I've heard of was a Fu-Go Ballon for a Kingcobra, and I wouldn't be too keen on holding up the Buffallo as an example of the Golden Age of Air Power... however my obnoxious irritating moment aside, I agree with you entirely.

[Geobaldi]

Neither the Kingcobra nor the P-43 Lancer saw combat against manned enemy aircraft fur the USAAF during WWII, infact the only kill for either that I've heard of was a Fu-Go Ballon for a Kingcobra, and I wouldn't be too keen on holding up the Buffallo as an example of the Golden Age of Air Power... however my obnoxious irritating moment aside, I agree with you entirely.

Ah! But you immediately RECOGNIZED all three! Which was my entire point. (btw, the Russians did use the Kingcobra, to good effect I might add. And after having read pilot accounts of using Buffaloes verses Zeroes, it is a tribute to sheer pilot skill and bravery alone that kept those guys flying).

In contrast, if I went to London right now and mentioned "Raptor" or "JASF" to a typical pub-goer, he's not going to think of the U.S.A.F. immediately. He'll bloody well know what a Mustang is, and why the R.A.F. called those Fw 190's "Butcher Birds".

Thinking it over, I think a more appropriate title for modern air warfare would be the "Golden Age of the Microchip".

[Geobaldi]

As confirmed in a later thread, the Stuka in question is indeed the Ju-87G Stuka, immediately recognisable by the 37mm anti-tank guns under the wings!

OK, minus one point for my predictions.

[simonr1978]

In contrast, if I went to London right now and mentioned "Raptor" or "JASF" to a typical pub-goer, he's not going to think of the U.S.A.F. immediately. He'll bloody well know what a Mustang is, and why the R.A.F. called those Fw 190's "Butcher Birds".


I wouldn't like to bet on it. I live in the south east, about half an hour away from London. Spitfire or Lancaster will get you a spark of recognition, Hurricane and you're on less certain ground, only those with an interest in aviation are likely to recognise a Mustang as being anything by North American and not Ford and I'm afraid mention Focke-Wulf and you're likely to get pre-adoloescent style giggles (Hee-hee, he said Focke...). :rolleyes: :(

[Geobaldi]

Oh, um, clearly.

OK, so I don't hang out with pub-goers. But I will add that most of the Historians I do hang out with spend lots of time in pubs. Can't argue that I'm not very probably terribly out of touch with anyone outside the old teacher/historian crowds. ;)

[simonr1978]

As confirmed in a later thread, the Stuka in question is indeed the Ju-87G Stuka, immediately recognisable by the 37mm anti-tank guns under the wings!

OK, minus one point for my predictions.

What guns? The Stuka on the box shown on the website is clearly dropping a bomb, has fairings over the wheels and no cannons, it is clearly not a G. It should be a D, although some Ds were modified to carry cannon (in the first instance by Rudel at Kursk) and they fulfilled a variety of roles, but most were dedicated Dive-bombers.

[Patton 68]

I hope it works out,and airpower adds to the games playability,but right now I'm dreading this whole plane thing.I watched Decipher ruin its Trek CCG by adding card types it didn't need,then launching a second edition that wasn't fully backwards compatible with the first.At the very least,I'm hoping AA is cheap enough to include in a build just in case my buddy pulls a plane out of his rear end,and has useful enough ground stats that I didn't waste points fielding it.

[simonr1978]

What guns? The Stuka on the box shown on the website is clearly dropping a bomb, has fairings over the wheels and no cannons, it is clearly not a G. It should be a D, although some Ds were modified to carry cannon (in the first instance by Rudel at Kursk) and they fulfilled a variety of roles, but most were dedicated Dive-bombers.

OK, I've just seen the picture of the model you're referring to and it does without a doubt have the 37mm cannon and it is almost certainly a Ju87G, apologees... :o

[Canadian_Pride33]

I think people are going a little over the egde when saying they want more than 10 planes in the up coming set, this is the introduction to planes being in axis and allies miniatures.

The only problem i have is if the whole thing doesnt work and the airplanes wreck the game, hopefully not, or it could start a civil war between airplane supporters and anti-airplane supporters :p

[Stojakovic]

I think people are going a little over the egde when saying they want more than 10 planes :p

I second that!

I think that there should only be 4 1 russian, 1 german, 1 japanese, and 1 american.

I just hope they put in at least 4 French and 4 italian units. But I doubt that :(

[dracos42]

Neither the Kingcobra nor the P-43 Lancer saw combat against manned enemy aircraft fur the USAAF during WWII, infact the only kill for either that I've heard of was a Fu-Go Ballon for a Kingcobra, and I wouldn't be too keen on holding up the Buffallo as an example of the Golden Age of Air Power... however my obnoxious irritating moment aside, I agree with you entirely.

The Buffalo did great service with the Finns though. I also wonder if the P-63 Kingcobra would have seen more service with the USAAF if the Germans had been more successful in Western Europe and Africa. In other words, the USAAF might have seen a need for a gun-armed tank buster.

Michael Lyons

[dracos42]

Just wondering, with all these reasonable, logical, well thought out posts:

At what point did someone come up with the notion that there was anything the least bit logical about which units are released?

(snipped some)

Also, some kind of messiah figure with all sorts of strange SAs.

--SEF

Arthur, King of the Britons!

SA Tally-Ho (clap your coconuts together)
SA Banzai
SA remove those annoying disruption markers
anything else?

Michael

[Patton 68]

Perhaps if you built a large,wooden badger...

[Irish]

As far as the Stuka model, I agree with one post in the "picture" thread that the mini has an error. The landing gear fairings are not the late production model versions on which the anti-tank guns were mounted. This might be nit-picking but the game does claim to be historically accurate.
Also, as far as an earlier comment on Spitfires going supersonic in a dive, if by dive you mean max power, greater than 60 degrees nose low and mere moments before pounding it in to terra firma--perhaps, but if the statment is implying that any and I mean any prop driven fighter flew in controlled flight beyond Mach 1, no way! One would get localized supersonic flow on the airfoils well before the whole airframe would go mach, on a fixed horizontal tail surface with an aft edge-only moving elevator (that was tab trimmed), the shockwave would blank out the elevator rendering it ineffective in controlling the pitch of the aircraft. This elevator problem in conjunction with the shockwaves forming on the wings (which tend to cause a shift in the center of lift) causing what is called Mach tuck or a pitching down moment tends to ruin a pilot's day. Plane goes into steep dive, accelerates, shockwaves form, nose pitches down further, speed increases, shockwaves move aft and get larger, elevator is blanked, nose continues to drop, speed continues to build, pilot can't pull out, going too fast to bail out and then splat..... :(

[NEVjr]

I second that!

I think that there should only be 4 1 russian, 1 german, 1 japanese, and 1 american.

I just hope they put in at least 4 French and 4 italian units. But I doubt that :(
i would disagree on the russian plane, i think a british one should take its place

i highly doubt a spitfire ever reached mach one in a dive, or could for that matter, a mustang maybe, but a spitfire is a turnfighting plane with big wings, not a straightline speed plane, a later spitfire with a griffon engine may have experianced supersonic prop tips and some localized supersonics, but not the whole plane

[Joisey]

Well, I've had two of my predictions confirmed, the Stuka and the M-36 TD.

The Stuka is a G or an early modified D depending on how seriously you want to take the wheel farings. In any event, it is a flying tank. Since we now know that Germany is getting a dive bomber/ground support attack craft, AND we've been promised fighters too, I'd say the odds just improved for a 10 approx plane group in Set III (or more). Between the planes, the AA, and the Forward Observers, at least half this set is plane or plane related, putting it just on the cusp, IMHO, of being totally optional as a buy for me. At the very least, if I decide I don't want to do planes, I may very well cherry pick the few units in this Set I really do want with purchasing singles. I don't especially need the M-36 either, as this was a 1945 unit if I'm not mistaken, used by units like the 3rd Armored Division extensively in pocketing the Ruhr valley and pushing into the heart of Germany. I have a renewed sinking feeling that the German TD we're going to get here is the massive and awkward variety like the Jagdtiger. If we don't see any assault guns like the StugIII or the Semovente I'm seriously thinking of largely skipping this one.

[brzezie]

Also, as far as an earlier comment on Spitfires going supersonic in a dive, if by dive you mean max power, greater than 60 degrees nose low and mere moments before pounding it in to terra firma--perhaps, but if the statment is implying that any and I mean any prop driven fighter flew in controlled flight beyond Mach 1, no way! One would get localized supersonic flow on the airfoils well before the whole airframe would go mach, on a fixed horizontal tail surface with an aft edge-only moving elevator (that was tab trimmed), the shockwave would blank out the elevator rendering it ineffective in controlling the pitch of the aircraft. This elevator problem in conjunction with the shockwaves forming on the wings (which tend to cause a shift in the center of lift) causing what is called Mach tuck or a pitching down moment tends to ruin a pilot's day. Plane goes into steep dive, accelerates, shockwaves form, nose pitches down further, speed increases, shockwaves move aft and get larger, elevator is blanked, nose continues to drop, speed continues to build, pilot can't pull out, going too fast to bail out and then splat..... :(

Not to mention the shock/density wave coming off the tip of the nose, hitting the prop blades (possibily damaging/destroying them). With fairly straight wings, any shock/density wave making it to the wings, could damage/destroy the wings, which tend to be important to airplanes. That's one of the reasons for swept back wings (they also cut down on the localized shocks too)

[brzezie]

What about the poor Poles? They could use a little love'n. I'm fairly certain that they had more infantry then horsemen. How about some Polish airplanes. ;P That's what the Germans initially earned their kills on. I would like to see a few units for the minor nations (China, Romania, Poland), but the majority should be for the major ones.

[Vulturedoodle]

Perhaps if you built a large,wooden badger...
<hee hee>

--SEF

[Joisey]

What about the poor Poles? They could use a little love'n. I'm fairly certain that they had more infantry then horsemen. How about some Polish airplanes. ;P That's what the Germans initially earned their kills on. I would like to see a few units for the minor nations (China, Romania, Poland), but the majority should be for the major ones.
No indication that they are going to be including bi-planes in this set, so I don't think the Poles are getting any planes.

I've been considering the stuka mini. Someone mentioned that the prop does not turn. Also, look at the rear MG that's represented by a triangle shape of solid plastic to the rear of the cockpit. Not a pivoting gun barrel of the quality we saw on Set I minis.

This indicates to me a rather small scale, since these features don't have better detail. The release photo is careful not to include anything that would indicate actual size so I think the watchword here is:

OBJECTS IN MIRROR ARE SMALLER THAN THEY APPEAR

[Homer]

They need to go back a little further. I want minis of the Red Baron's plane and Snoopy flying his dog house.

[simonr1978]

No indication that they are going to be including bi-planes in this set, so I don't think the Poles are getting any planes.

I've been considering the stuka mini. Someone mentioned that the prop does not turn. Also, look at the rear MG that's represented by a triangle shape of solid plastic to the rear of the cockpit. Not a pivoting gun barrel of the quality we saw on Set I minis.

This indicates to me a rather small scale, since these features don't have better detail. The release photo is careful not to include anything that would indicate actual size so I think the watchword here is:

OBJECTS IN MIRROR ARE SMALLER THAN THEY APPEAR

Personally I'd rather they'd ommitted the rear gun from the model than stuck that absurd triangle in place.

On Polish aircraft, most of the Poles front line combat aircraft were monoplanes, so the comment about biplanes doesn't apply. In any case the description says that you will see "Fighter planes... and more". It doesn't specifically mention either monoplanes or biplanes.

I am pretty certain I read a comment in one of my plane books that a Spitfire may have been the first to achieve Mach 1, however when I typed that it was late and I wasn't entirely thinking sensibly, it does seem to say the least unlikely. I'll see if I can find the reference.

[dakeyrus]

OK, how's this ... some of the guesses have been right.

Really, I'm not making fun of anybody because I've been on both sides of this fence. All I'm saying is, being on this side of the fence has its own, special charms. ;)

Steve

Yes, he get to pick up the Maus mini, stroke it lovingly and say....."Precious...."

[dakeyrus]

We'd (Canada) have the Red Ensign (Union Jack top left on a red field), I suppose. Don't know about the Australians; seems to me it would make the most sense to have an ANZAC logo, perhaps with a recognizable ANZAC symbol rather than the Australian flag.

Well the Australian national flag used between 1909 and 1956 was exactly the same as it is now, except that the base colour was red rather than the blue it is now.

[Stojakovic]

i would disagree on the russian plane, i think a british one should take its place

i highly doubt a spitfire ever reached mach one in a dive, or could for that matter, a mustang maybe, but a spitfire is a turnfighting plane with big wings, not a straightline speed plane, a later spitfire with a griffon engine may have experianced supersonic prop tips and some localized supersonics, but not the whole plane

WOW I forgot about the Brits well maybe 1 more. Russians need one as well ;)

[dracos42]

Personally I'd rather they'd ommitted the rear gun from the model than stuck that absurd triangle in place.

On Polish aircraft, most of the Poles front line combat aircraft were monoplanes, so the comment about biplanes doesn't apply. In any case the description says that you will see "Fighter planes... and more". It doesn't specifically mention either monoplanes or biplanes.

I am pretty certain I read a comment in one of my plane books that a Spitfire may have been the first to achieve Mach 1, however when I typed that it was late and I wasn't entirely thinking sensibly, it does seem to say the least unlikely. I'll see if I can find the reference.

My guess about the Spitfire and Mach 1 is that a late model Spitfire reached the maximum Mach number possible for a prop plane. Or possibily it was one of the first planes to experience the problems of a prop plane hitting a high (sub)Mach number. P-38s had a similar problem.

The USAF modified a F-84 with a turboprop to research the possibility of supersonic flight with a prop plane. The F-84's prop did reach supersonic speeds, but I don't think the plane itself reached Mach 1. The plane itself was described as the loudest plane ever. (think of the prop generating several thousand small sonic booms per minute) I have also read of a racing pilot who is having a racing plane specifically built to be the first prop plane to break the sound barrier (at the Reno air races). That I read in a magazine last year.

Michael

[brzezie]

I just finished seeing an History Channel show, that actually said that a battalion of Polish Paratroopers helped the British during the Market Garden Operation. So the Poles did have some sort of sizable troops active throughout the war. POLISH POWER!!! :p (I'm just a tad Polish and never did an extensive search of Poland's involvement in WWII) Perhaps that's where Operation: Market Garden went wrong, the Poles were figthing the British, instead of the Germans. A minor oops, but perhaps that was just enough force the retreat of the British. :)

I also heard on the same show, that the Poles were also involved with the liberation of Paris. Sneaky little Poles, just when they don't have a country, they sneak around attacking with their armies.

[cossackwarrior]

I just finished seeing an History Channel show, that actually said that a battalion of Polish Paratroopers helped the British during the Market Garden Operation. So the Poles did have some sort of sizable troops active throughout the war. POLISH POWER!!! :p (I'm just a tad Polish and never did an extensive search of Poland's involvement in WWII) Perhaps that's where Operation: Market Garden went wrong, the Poles were figthing the British, instead of the Germans. A minor oops, but perhaps that was just enough force the retreat of the British. :)

I also heard on the same show, that the Poles were also involved with the liberation of Paris. Sneaky little Poles, just when they don't have a country, they sneak around attacking with their armies.

The Poles (in exile) had numerous units fighting with the Allies in 44-45. There was the Para Brigade ( and it was Monty's grandeous stupidity and loser rivalry with Patton that brought such disaster to Market Garden which was lost from the start - their intel service sucked even then!)
They also had an armored Regiment and at least one infantry division.

The Soviets also had the "services" of the Poles but at considerably less future for those who fought against the Germans for most of the Poles ound up with the Germans after the war, rotting in Ghulags.

[VFults]

I just finished seeing an History Channel show, that actually said that a battalion of Polish Paratroopers helped the British during the Market Garden Operation. So the Poles did have some sort of sizable troops active throughout the war. POLISH POWER!!! :p .

Do yourself a favor and watch the movie A BRIDGE TOO FAR (or better, read the book). It covers the Market Garden operation nicely. Gene Hackman plays the often frustrated Polish paratroop commander in the film.

Regards,

V

[Graycap]

There was also a Polish armoured division (organised and eqquiped as a similar british formation) that fought in Normandy, inn particular sealing the Falise Gap. There was also the Polish Corps in Italy who participated in the final battle of Monte Cassino. Also the Polish forces who fought with the Red Army on the Eastern Front. And this is not including the Polish Air Force and Navy units who fought for the allies.

[skeevo666]

One of my favorite scenes in the movie Battle of Britain is when the British commander of the Polish R.A.F. squadron can't get his pilots to maintain radio silence during a fight. Finally, frustrated beyond all measure, he yells into the radio: "Shut up! In Polish!!!" :p




.

[MicroPilot]

Hmmm...anybody else think it strange that a WOTC person starts a thread discussing Halftracks, and about the same time starts a thread in the trading forum giving away King Tigers for M5 HT's?

I predict a new ability that will make HT's worth their cost and that this SA will be for on the Allied side.

Possibly a US Marine with Mechanized Tactics and Hard Charger SA? :)

Or maybe an SA of the Forward Observer that is best used with a HT.

[XAos]

Hmmm...anybody else think it strange that a WOTC person starts a thread discussing Halftracks, and about the same time starts a thread in the trading forum giving away King Tigers for M5 HT's?

I predict a new ability that will make HT's worth their cost and that this SA will be for on the Allied side.

Possibly a US Marine with Mechanized Tactics and Hard Charger SA? :)

Or maybe an SA of the Forward Observer that is best used with a HT.
I suspect your correct that Forward Observer+Halftrack will be a natural combo. :cool:
As for starting a thread to encourage intest in halftracks at the same time as trying to trade for them. I'd think that thread would just encourage people to keep the halftracks they own. So I'd guess he was just interested in the subject himself. ;)

[FSSF]

For Australians, I predict (and hope for) a Desert Rat infantry and a LRDG truck since commonwealth armies have no transport so far.

For British, since the theme is Contested Skies, I think the Spitfire is an obvious choice and I would not be surprise to see a british paratrooper (cheaper than the US airborne, but better fighting stats then the bland SMLE). A commando would be great but I wouldn't bet on it if we get an Australian desert rat.

For French, I'm hoping for a heavier tank and a commander (I would bet a cheap one with a +1 initiative since French commanders didn't perform that well in WWII aside maybe from general Leclair and few others). Since we were foretold their eventual appearance, I will also bet on a 2 pts. partisans (with a +1 cover in forest? = maquis)

For the US, an airplane for sure but I couldn't get which one... I wouldn't be surprise if they got two airplanes (since US and Germany seem to get the most units in all sets so far). Since we are suppose to see tank destroyers in set III could this mean a pricey tank hunter airplane? And another basic cheaper fighter?
I'm betting on a MG (I would prefer heavy) and would like to see a heavy mortar, but don't have much hope to see it in set III.

For the Russians, I would bet on a fighter airplane (don't remember the name of the most common one), rockets (katsuya?), and an MG is way overdue.

For Germans, MG42 on motocycle, Fallschirmjagers, Flak 88, Stuka for sure. Maybe a M109 (as with the US, I predict that Germany will get 2 airplanes). Panzerschreck would fill the "tank destroyer" slot since they already have so many tanks... I wouldn't be surprise to see rockets for them

For Italians a scout car, a commander (again a cheap one with +1 initiative max and no positive SA). Maybe a cheap axis airplane to offer a cheaper option over a more expensive german Messerschmidt. A troop transport would be great but I don't think we will see it in this set.

For Japan, a Zero fighter. My most wanted unit for japanese would be for a transport (amphibious would be nice and make a nice change). Maybe those suicide infantry that would charge US tanks with explosives? A heavier artillery unit would also be nice.

Romanians... I have no idea and have little interest for them... Probably a basic infantryman?

Poland will not see any new units in this set and this is a sad thing. Polish paratroopers and fighter plane would have been a natural for this set. Since we will not see polish paratroopers, that's another reason why the new allied paratrooper will be a british one.

[Joisey]

The Italians actually had some technically excellent monoplane fighters, but never had the quantities that the Germans could field. A lack of oil also hampered Italian operations.

[PadreJim]

Okie doke, let's see . . .


Issue One:

What tank destroyers will be included in Set III?

Joisey's prediction: Hetzer, Marder, SU 155?



Makes sense to me.



Issue Two: Will WOTC bow to building player demand and include the German 88?

Joisey's prediction: Yessss!



Again, probably right, but if they did I'd like to see some more British Anti-Tank.


Issue Three: What kind of stats will a "Forward Observer" have?

Joisey's prediction: cost: 4; Def: 4/4; AI: 5-1-0; VI: 0-0-0 SA: Forward Observer--needed for planes to be able to make ground attacks.


Here I disagree. The FOO will, in all likelyhood, have an SA that allows it to make huge AT and AI attacks on hexes, as they're Artillery spotters, not Air Force. FOOs were used by the Canadians and British to direct 25-pdr and Naval Gun support for Infantry advances.


Issue Four: Will there be more than one motorcycle unit?

Joisey: Other than the german motorcycle side car, I don't think any other army used motorcycles except as simple couriers, and why would you need to model that in this game anyway?????


Again, disagree. The Germans used their Kettenkrad in Russia to a phenomenal effect, and the Italians used their Bersaglieri in Africa to excellent effect as well. My prediction is that they'll be used as short-ranged, highly mobile, highly vulnerable vehicles.



Issue Five: What air units will be included?

Joisey: If they say "only fighters" that will translate into "only single engined aircraft. The Germans will get their stuka.

Prediction: The airplane scale will be large enough that twin engined planes and up will need to come in a bigger box!


Either way, it doesn't matter to me. Adding Strategic-level units to a Tactical-level game is, IMHO, a bad move.

[furious angel]

See attached for photo and info on USSR motorcyle troops

http://www.cossackownersclub.co.uk/military_machines.pdf

[simonr1978]

The Buffalo did great service with the Finns though. I also wonder if the P-63 Kingcobra would have seen more service with the USAAF if the Germans had been more successful in Western Europe and Africa. In other words, the USAAF might have seen a need for a gun-armed tank buster.

Michael Lyons

The Brewster in service with the Finns was a very different aircraft in terms of performance and handling from the one that saw service with the USN/USMC/RAF in the Pacific.

If the USAAF had needed a gun armed tank buster (And considering the 37mm cannon on the Cobras had a low muzzle velocity making it a pretty poor AT gun), then you may have seen something like a Hurricane MkIV conversion for a Thunderbolt rather than King Cobras.

[dakeyrus]

For Australians, I predict (and hope for) a Desert Rat infantry and a LRDG truck since commonwealth armies have no transport so far.

Ummm....Desert Rats were the Britsh 7th Armoured Division, not an Australian Division. The Australians who fought in Africa and held Tobruk were called the 'Rats of Tobruk' (9th Division). These troops were part of the AIF which was sent to africa, and then later in New Guinea.

[Joisey]

Okie doke, let's see . . .



Makes sense to me.



Again, probably right, but if they did I'd like to see some more British Anti-Tank.



Here I disagree. The FOO will, in all likelyhood, have an SA that allows it to make huge AT and AI attacks on hexes, as they're Artillery spotters, not Air Force. FOOs were used by the Canadians and British to direct 25-pdr and Naval Gun support for Infantry advances.



Again, disagree. The Germans used their Kettenkrad in Russia to a phenomenal effect, and the Italians used their Bersaglieri in Africa to excellent effect as well. My prediction is that they'll be used as short-ranged, highly mobile, highly vulnerable vehicles.



Either way, it doesn't matter to me. Adding Strategic-level units to a Tactical-level game is, IMHO, a bad move.
Regarding Kettenrad, I don't have any reason to believe WotC are going to be including prime movers in this set.

I think motorcycle equipped troops would be cool, like the Berserglieri. But they didn't fight from their bikes, they dismounted and fought as regular infantry once they got to the battlefield.

Don't know if we discussed this, but looks like we're getting so far in air units:

Ju87G
Il-10
Bf-109E
P51-D

Figure they'll throw in a Spitfire and Zero at the very least.

[Photoner Hawkwind]

http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=8378 at this thread someone said no spitfire. Too Bad :(

[Joisey]

Yeah, hard to believe they'd diss all the U.K. fans. But the post just says what they heard about, I don't think they were saying it was an exhaustive list.

[Stojakovic]

That would be me. I got it from IQ mag. They said that is what we will being seeing but I did not read anything about an official word ;)