"Team Yankee Unit Cards" Topic

Once again the lads at Breakthrough Assault have turned up Trumps! (Pun intended!)

link

I note the M1 Abrams has the 105mm main gun :-(

That's no surprise. That is the version used in Team Yankee.

105's.

M1A1 didn't enter production until '86, so 105 is definitely right. ROF 2 versus 1 is a huge advantage though….

It looks like the same game, just with some changes and simplifications.

The cards look good, with lots of useful info on them.

A bit surprised to see D6 values, but I guess I really shouldn't be.

Man, those tanks are fast, compared to their gun ranges.

So, if I'm reading the card right (no idea if that is true), looks like the tank guns are "on target" on a 2+ on 1D6 (and get "X" number of attacks, based upon their ROF)?

Then, if the attack is "on target", the defender rolls to see if it is really hit and damaged (3+ on 1D6 for that to occur for the T-72, if that's what the "IS Hit on 3+" listed on the card means)?

Presumably, if that occurs, and the penetration value of the gun exceeds the armor of the target, the tank is damaged, or killed?

It's been forever since I've played FOW, so thought I'd ask.

Not quite – the 2+ Firepower is to convert a penetration into a knockout. (In FOW WW2 its normally about 4+ for a tank gun, so these modern guns are lethal!)

I think you add a d6 to your armour value, and compare that to the gun's penetration.

Morale / Training looks to have been tweaked this time around as well. None of the values seem to translate well to FoW WW2 terms. Still not sold on the cards, nice looking and some nice stats – but I hate dealing with cards in Dust and I can't see myself all of sudden liking it here :(

I do wish they'd switch to a D10, provide a lot more granularity….

PS. Please post the rest of the pics here (I can't access the blog from work!) ;-)

Cards beat the hell out of constantly flipping around in rulebooks trying to read 8pt type on a colored background!

TheT-72 is "Brutal"? WAFU?

Fatman

So shooting at an Abrams frontal Arc with a T-72M1
50% of your shots miss
Of the remainder:
50% of them fail to penetrate
16% of them cause a bail test
33% of them cause a FP/Destroy check (at 5 out of chance of a kill)

Company of 12 tanks shooting
6 Hits
3 Fail to penetrate
1 Bail
2 chances of a kill at 80%

Turn the other way around
6 Abrams firing
4 hits
1 chance in 6 for a bail otherwise the rest are kills at 80%

Extra Crispy, I was thinking the same thing. I would rather have a nice card than have to flip through the rule booking looking for stats.

Depending on their size a folder would be useful to hold them similar to those for collectors of card games such as Magic.

For our games using a mash up of Battlegroup we use linear print outs in folders for quick access to stats,

Tally Ho!

Brutal is probably the Team Yankee equivalent of Breakthrough Gun.

The numbers as they stand make it look like it could be tough facing the Soviet horde with M1s and should the M1s have to attack it will be very unpleasant for them.

The only upside for the M1 jockeys is that if the M1 is 50% likely to be penetrated the M60 is probably going to have zero chance of standing up to a round from a T-72.

So it appears (not surprisingly) that this will be yet another case of "quantity vs quality". I would not expect to see much NATO attacking here, unless NATO have reduced the Soviet hordes down to a manageable level.

Well there is a counter attack in the book – since TGunner appears to think there is not to be any thought or wish outside of the book – but that admittedly soon converts into a 'consolidate on the objective' type mission!

Why Oh Why do they always punish the Russians with a ROF of 1 ?

Is that autoloader really only half the speed of a human loader in a NATO tank?

To be fair it's not far wrong. A big chunk of the problem is that the gun has to be at 3 degrees elevation to load, so you have to elevate or depress the gun, fire, elevate or depress the gun, load….

Not sure what the latest is, but my friend who was in the Army always said NATO fired three times faster. Course, that was back around '84, '85.

By the way, here is what one of my "BattleCards" looks like for the WW2 game:

Well there is a counter attack in the book – since TGunner appears to think there is not to be any thought or wish outside of the book – but that admittedly soon converts into a 'consolidate on the objective' type mission!

I'm not saying that at all, Navy. It appears to me that they're using the novel as their starting point. After all, it's what they've shown us so far and it's what they did with their Vietnam range.

For now I would imagine that they'll give you the troops and equipment from the novel and a set of missions to play that take root from the forces and situations in the novel, much like their Vietnam release and the "We Were Soldiers Once" book/movie.

If they follow to form like Vietnam then they'll take that narrow starting point and expand their offerings out. In Vietnam they started with just forces from '65 with the 1st Cav and their NVA opponents from Ia Drang. Then over the years since that they've expanded that narrow range greatly to include US Army armor forces, the Anzacs, ARVN, and very recently the Brown Water forces. So I'm sure that in a year or so you'll see the M1A1 and probably other NATO forces.

Like I said, this is their starting point.

Is that autoloader really only half the speed of a human loader in a NATO tank?

Yes, it is. A well trained loader can/should be able to load a round in five seconds (or less) and can do it for a while (my personal best was about 3 seconds, but that was with the 105mm). It's what we were trained to do, like the old Army being drilled to put out 3 aimed shots a minute with the old smoothbore muskets.

I don't know about the other NATO forces, but we (the US Army) would regularly conduct dry runs with the crew going through the motions of aiming, firing, loading. We did it in the motor pool, at SIMNET, and on the gunnery ranges. Loaders drilled at it until it was pure muscle memory. Some crews were lightning fast! It would scare you to see how quickly a well drilled crew could plow through a target rich engagement… you would think the things had autocannons! In PBK drills (platoon kills battalion) we would drill through a whole Soviet battalion, servicing a whole 30+ vehicle battalion in just a few minutes. That's four tanks tossing out a round roughly every five to ten seconds each. The only interruptions were targets resetting to simulate the battalion advancing with each of its waves.

Granted that was rapid fire from a static position against a foe who wasn't really firing back. Call it a mad minute from tanks. A big part of that is the drill of the crew and really breaking a gunner/loader/TC team in.

Drivers got their kicks during the gunnery tables when you moved from position to position shooting from both the move and from preset positions.

Maybe one day they'll build a mechanical loader that can match the real thing, but until then it's a human loader in 1st line western tanks.

So, which value is used for determining if a target is hit by the main cannon, on the cards?

The Skill Value, perhaps, e.g. 5+ on a D6 for the T-72, and 4+ for the M-1?

Given the speeds vs. short gunnery ranges, I suspect that there will be a lot of Soviet armor blowing past the defenders, unless they defend in depth, or are lucky with their die rolls, especially when outnumbered by the communists.

The cards have the "to hit" number printed on them
4+ for a hit on a M1
3+ for a hit on the T-72

Hi TGunner, OK, I follow you!

Yes I think NATO crews should have a distinctly great ROF than the Soviet autoloader. Much is made of the British Chieftain's 3 part ammo, but of course one part, the firing chamber, was loaded in clips of 10. The advantage of two part ammo was that the projectile could be 'lap loaded' by the loader whilst the current round was still in the breech. I've been told 6 rounds a minute was the minimum standard acceptable for Class 1 trade tests, and was considered a pretty mundane base line….

"The cards have the "to hit" number printed on them
4+ for a hit on a M1
3+ for a hit on the T-72".

Okay, call me confused.

How can we know the "To Hit" number vs. the Target, when we don't know who is firing, and what they are armed with?

If I am reading this correctly, and literally, the T-72 tank "IS Hit on a 3+" presumably on 1D6.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the weapon firing to have to roll "To-Hit", or is this perhaps some sort of "save" die roll to permit some shots that the attacker thinks are on target to be negated, before we even check for armor penetration by the round being fired at it?

Someone above did mention the FOW rules using a 4+ for gunnery "To-Hit" die rolls, and I seem to recall some 5+, and 6 die rolls being needed as well, in the WWII rules variant. Perhaps those just aren't listed on the cards. I would think they'd list all that info there, to make it easier, especially when you start firing from long range, or using different weapons like RPGs, ATGMs, Recoilless Rifles, etc., etc..

FOW's always used to-hit numbers based on the target's skill at not leaving themselves exposed rather than the firer's marksmanship.

Thanks for the clarification, Dom.

The primary reasons the Russians used autoloaders was to reduce the turret profile (smaller target) and to reduce crew size (more tanks with less people to be drafted and trained). I'm not sure the Russian autoloaders would be 2 or 3 times slower though.

It gets more interesting when Tgunner talks about tanks firing every 5-10 seconds. So that means that reloading time is not the main factor in rate of fire. In any event, 'ROF' is probably FOW shorthand for a number of things rolled together into one term.

and what are the T72 doing there with a hammer and sickle? Frontline tanks were T64 and then T80. The T72 was mainly an export version for East Germany and other Warpac countries.

"FOW's always used to-hit numbers based on the target's skill at not leaving themselves exposed rather than the firer's marksmanship"

And as we all know that a group of conscripts with a few hours training are as good in the principles of marksmanship and application of fire, both small arms and tank as well trained and experienced regular soldiers!

Tally Ho!

I think Zaloga said that under combat conditions an autoloader would probably not have made a difference. Aquiring targets in the field would take more time than on a firing range and would give a loader (or autoloader) plenty of time to reload after firing.
I think he says "maximum 3 rounds per minute" in battlefield conditions.

One thing also to keep in mind is human loaders get tired. That high rate of fire is not a sustained rate of fire. Also consider that the ready ammo rack on a M1 is less than half the ammo carried. It takes a lot of time to relocate the rest of the rounds to the ready racks. Now a Soviet autoloader has no such problem. All of its rounds are in the carousel under the turret floor.

So while the human loader is quicker for the initial burst, over time the autoloader should do just fine. But as we know, that initial burst of fire is usually the most important!

Nick, I'm explaining, not defending….

Dom, abandoning thread….

Understood Dom, back to the cards, which are always a good idea. Speed of loading and fatigue are an issue. However in an engagement of a Troop of tanks vs a Company, with supporting BMPs, with a good number of hits, say each tank would fire a maximum of 10 rounds. So probably not too much of an issue, until that Coy is followed by another and another!

Besides an autoloader does not make banjos or cups of tea,

Tally Ho!

"Aquiring targets in the field would take more time than on a firing range and would give a loader (or autoloader) plenty of time to reload after firing.
I think he says "maximum 3 rounds per minute" in battlefield conditions".

Perhaps for the Soviets/WP allies, assuming NATO tanks are hiding, or sparse in numbers.

On the other side of the coin though, when a full communist armored battalion or regiment are bearing down on your unit, I suspect it will be a very target rich environment indeed, for the gunners.

I've read for the first minute, or so, well-trained tank crews can get off 10 – 12 rounds per minute, but would obviously tire quickly at that pace. Still, enemy tanks bearing down quickly, and firing at you would probably give you that little shot of adrenalin to keep reloading rather quickly.

"Understood Dom, back to the cards, which are always a good idea. Speed of loading and fatigue are an issue. However in an engagement of a Troop of tanks vs a Company, with supporting BMPs, with a good number of hits, say each tank would fire a maximum of 10 rounds. So probably not too much of an issue, until that Coy is followed by another and another!

Besides an autoloader does not make banjos or cups of tea,"

Spped of loading, fatigue, and quantity and access of ammo certainly mattered to the Israeli crews on th Golan Heights in 1973. But then again I think the ROF of their manually loaded tanks and crew proficiency made a lot of difference servicng targets – if they'd had autoloaders, I suspect they'd have been overun on a lot of occassions.

Agree about the Tea too ; )

It gets more interesting when Tgunner talks about tanks firing every 5-10 seconds. So that means that reloading time is not the main factor in rate of fire.

Bingo, at least for western tanks. I can't say the same for Soviet/Russian tanks. Target acquisition is the time killer. You have to spot and confirm the target:

TC: Gunner- SABOT- Right tank!

Hopefully at that point the TC has used his override to put the gunner roughly on target. Then the gunner lays the target radical square on and calls out if he's on target.

(The Loader is opening the ammo rack, and tossing the round into the breech- he's got 3 to 5 seconds to do this)

Gunner: Identified!.

With luck the Gunner is on-target and the TC moves on the firing chain. If not he has to relay the gun which is a time killer.

Loader: UP! (as he arms the gun)

This should come around that time, hopefully before the gunner is even laid on and yells Identified!. Also at this point the Loader had better be hugging the turret wall! It's the slow loader who's much after that crucial Identified! Because then the next commands are:

TC: FIRE!!!
Gunner: ON THE WAY!!

That last line tells the Loader to get out of the way or he's getting really friendly with the gun's breech! You don't want to do that, trust me! It still scares the bejezus out of me to think about how close the breech comes to the turret wall and to the loader!

A good, solid crew on its "A" game should be servicing a new target every 5-10 seconds (with 10 being a bit leisurely). A crew who is really on fire is an awesome sight. That was my tank when we had SFC Lemon and CPL Morris as the TC and Gunner. They could really wear out our loader. He could barely keep up with those two! Being the driver at that time I usually spotted for them and called targets they overlooked, or I shifted positions when they needed me to.

Man, there are times that I really miss the life…

One thing also to keep in mind is human loaders get tired. That high rate of fire is not a sustained rate of fire. Also consider that the ready ammo rack on a M1 is less than half the ammo carried. It takes a lot of time to relocate the rest of the rounds to the ready racks. Now a Soviet autoloader has no such problem. All of its rounds are in the carousel under the turret floor.

Actually, the ready rack carries most of the ammo. If you're hitting the reserves then you're at "Black" and getting really desperate! Also, tiring isn't much of an issue. The shells are heavy but flipping the round isn't that bad of work. Now if you're at constant action for hours without rest then you might get in trouble. But really, your ammo gives out long before your loader… then it's the driver's turn!

Also there's the advantage of having four crewmen maintaining a tank. More people to share the load makes for a more rested crew too. Trust me, I really feel for the Russian crews who have to pull engine blocks or tracks with just 2 guys or maybe 3 if the sergeant is feeling nice! The LT's crew must be really SOL!

So while the human loader is quicker for the initial burst, over time the autoloader should do just fine. But as we know, that initial burst of fire is usually the most important!

Yes, it's who gets the first round off that wins a fight. That was literally burned into our brains. Being on the stick and calling out targets is the difference between a live and a dead crew. We were great spotters!

"FOW's always used to-hit numbers based on the target's skill at not leaving themselves exposed rather than the firer's marksmanship"

And as we all know that a group of conscripts with a few hours training are as good in the principles of marksmanship and application of fire, both small arms and tank as well trained and experienced regular soldiers!

You still need to incorporate target's skill at hiding into the equation, as otherwise a platoon of veterans will shoot up a platoon of veterans just as fast as they will shoot up a platoon of conscripts.

I'm willing to bet that there's a greater impact on shooter effectiveness from how good the targets are at hiding than how good the shooters are at hitting. Has anyone done a study?

They used a brownish camo earlier in the Cold War, but seem to have switched over the green during the later period.

The bug strikes again!

That's my posting Nick, for the 6mm Cold War infantry paint color question.

It posted here, and in the 6mm topic. Strange.

Actually, the ready rack carries most of the ammo.

Most? Less than 50%. The ready rack and the semi-ready rack in the turret have equal storage and then you have those few additional rounds in the hull. At least that's the way it was on the M1IP, M1A1, M1A1HC, and the M1A2s I crewed on.

BTW…Breakthrough Assault has more unit cards posted. The new ones are force organization cards.

So nothing new is shown on the unit cards that we haven't already seen in terms of models.

No BRDM-2s and no M3 Bradleys

Actually the back side of the cards are now shown which explains some special rules like how Chobbam armor works.

How odd, me post has gone!

Being in cover should give you a head start, however as we were taught, and a good quote in the Troop/Platoon tactics video, when advancing one is always thinking where would I hide if I was the enemy. Which is why at various stages a troop/section will go to ground and observe. If one comes across a dodgy area, time to deploy the gun group or half a section, (Talking early 80s now). As a section commander some of this will have been planned in by recce and map appreciation.

So when you come under fire, it is effective application of fire and fire and manoeuvre that will win. Suppress the enemy is the modern watchword.

Likewise in defence, everyone will be allocated arcs, prepared range cards etc and a well trained section will keep to their arcs both for observation and firing, unless directed otherwise by the section commander.

As one of me instructors put it years ago, you don't win by keeping your heed doon (He was Black watch)

Tally Ho!

So nothing new is shown on the unit cards that we haven't already seen in terms of models.

No BRDM-2s and no M3 Bradleys

M3 Bradleys are for the Cav Scouts, and are almost identical to M2s visually. IIRC, the difference is the plated-over gun ports on the M3.

They (M3) have rounder looking sides compared to the pretty flat sides on the M2.

M3

M2

Maybe Battlefront will show them in a later teaser? They didn't have a release date to my knowledge, so maybe it's coming.