Help support TMP


"Team Yankee: Too Gamey?" Topic


39 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Cold War (1946-1989) Message Board


Action Log

20 Feb 2018 3:15 p.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Removed from TMP Poll Suggestions board


Areas of Interest

Modern

2,289 hits since 9 May 2017
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian10 May 2017 4:27 p.m. PST

Writing on TMP, freerangeegg once said – TMP link – that Team Yankee encourages…

…players to make very gamey and non historic tactical decisions

Do you agree?

d88mm1940 Supporting Member of TMP10 May 2017 4:41 p.m. PST

I once had my Soviet T-72 company behind walls and buildings, except for one tank near a gate. My buddy's nasty W. Germans could trace 1 or 2 lines of site thru the gap and Bam, no cover for the whole company! I did get even later, but I would have to agree: Gamey.

Mako11 Inactive Member10 May 2017 4:44 p.m. PST

Of course.

Where would you get 6 x Mi-24s to support just a handful of tanks on the tabletop too?

People seem to like it, as a "game", but it really bears very little resemblance to what a real, Cold War, armored battle would look like, I suspect.

Still, who doesn't love great-looking, modern vehicles and troops on the tabletop, battling it out for supremacy of the battlefield?

ScottS10 May 2017 4:56 p.m. PST

What would you recommend as an alternate system for models already based for the game?

Personal logo Extra Crispy Sponsoring Member of TMP10 May 2017 4:57 p.m. PST

Fistful of TOWs III is a great system.

28mm Fanatik10 May 2017 6:00 p.m. PST

Gamey? Who you calling gamey?

picture

Generalstoner49 Supporting Member of TMP10 May 2017 6:09 p.m. PST

I prefer Saber Squadron as my go to small unit action rules.

darthfozzywig Supporting Member of TMP10 May 2017 6:19 p.m. PST

For an historically accurate Cold War tabletop game, the units should mostly be in barracks. Decent chance of rolling your vehicle off the road when returning drunk from a bar, though.

Wackmole9 Supporting Member of TMP10 May 2017 6:31 p.m. PST

it plays/looks much better in micro armor scale.

Weasel10 May 2017 7:31 p.m. PST

It's just television gaming.
Nothing wrong with that.

11th ACR10 May 2017 9:29 p.m. PST

And don't forget the "Panzer Parking Lot!"

Guthroth10 May 2017 10:14 p.m. PST

Yes. Definately. If you like dice games with pretty models, fine. Personally I don't see it as any more 'realistic' than AK-47 …..

Achtung Minen11 May 2017 12:54 a.m. PST

I use the TY models for IABSM/TW&T. One of these days, I'll compile all these notes into a PDF if people are interested in Cold War wargaming with Too Fat Lardies rules.

Kiwi Red One Inactive Member11 May 2017 2:05 a.m. PST

I'd be keen to see your notes on cold war gaming using TFL's IABSM/TW&T rules please Achtung Minen.

Doesn't look like Rich and co are looking at getting IABNM out the door anytime soon so anything you have is appreciated.

Cheers
KRO

boggler11 May 2017 2:09 a.m. PST

It's an off shoot of FoW which is an offshoot of the 40K model of gaming, so no surprise that it's gamey / competitive in focus. That's probably why it's popular.

Attalus I11 May 2017 3:04 a.m. PST

Cold War Commander & Modern Spearhead are good game systems, better than FOW/TY IMHO.

Jozis Tin Man11 May 2017 3:14 a.m. PST

For the record I am not a TY player and I have not played FOW since 1st edition. I cannot stand tank parking lots, although they are even closer together than in a motor pool!

But, I remember playing FOW 1st edition and thinking the fundamentals were there, at least for infantry combat. Suppress your opponent with mortars and machine guns and then attack, preferable from a flank so you don't mask your support weapon fire worked pretty well. Some parts felt wrong to me, like a company commander getting direct close air support in WW2. But the rules themselves seemed pretty good.

I think the "Gamey" ness is more a function of competition play than the rules themselves. Horses for courses, people playing in tournaments look like they are having a good time. I prefer much more low key.

Let 1000 flowers bloom!

fantasque11 May 2017 3:37 a.m. PST

Wall'o'Tanks

me no like

'tis a silly game

martin goddard Sponsoring Member of TMP11 May 2017 7:06 a.m. PST

Not too gamey at all in my opinion. It is what players want. Many new games have giving the players what they want as the major criterion . To quote Abe "people who like this sort of thing , will find this the sort of think they like".

freerangeegg11 May 2017 8:06 a.m. PST

The reason for my comment was that because of the way casualties are taken from any unit of a platoon there is no incentive to use tactics within the platoon, you just take off whichever part is least critical, not the stands which have actually been hit.
I have also seen far too many games with what should be fragile and valuable anti aircraft units leading tanks chasing helicopters around tables, instead of staying hidden, and players parking units on objectives in unsustainable positions as they know the game will end next turn. I have played the rules several times but they are not for me.
We have also tried Sabre Squadron, which played a lot better but is more aimed at 6mm models, but have currently settled on an updated version of IABSM

Achtung Minen11 May 2017 8:52 a.m. PST

IABSM/TW&T is definitely the way to go!

Weasel11 May 2017 11:05 a.m. PST

People complain about the wall of tanks but most games have nothing penalizing it.

badger22 Inactive Member11 May 2017 6:42 p.m. PST

Weasel it is because most folks dont want to model certain things. Specifically we all want artillery in our games but most people dont want it to be as damaging as it really can be. If more games let indirect take tanks out of the game they would not make such big wonderful targets out of them.

Also, as you know fromm the suppresion thread, formations are important for 360 situation awareness. This is even more important for vehicles than grunts.

And gamers know they are in an even point game, so not to many surprises. RW tanks have no such knowledge, so you stay dspersed so at least some of you can respond to most anythng. random explosive crap falling out of the sky on you will make real people spread out. plastic model dont care as much.

And FOW is not the only culprit, but I seem to see it more often with FOW

Owen

Rick Don Burnette Inactive Member11 May 2017 8:07 p.m. PST

Yes, it is all gamey because that is what our hobby/activity is and has been all about. I can recall playing a Napoleonic wargame with firesticks and a gamer who used flats to cut down on casualties from the touching of the firesticks to the figures. This in 1974.
The whole idea of the hobby/activity as having some or any simulation value is defeated by many game features, one of these being the gamey rules and game play

nickinsomerset11 May 2017 10:07 p.m. PST

But it is a game not a simulation and certainly not going to be used at Bovington or Warminster as a training system!

In addition to many of the points, using div level arty in direct support of a small battlegroup, is a little odd for the period. We never saw BM-21 or 2S3 being used or training in that aspect!

However it does provide a simple system for quick games that provide a great deal of fun and entertainment, just reading through some of the blogs, Facebook pages proves that folks who play it enjoy it, nothing wrong there,

Tally Ho!

Achtung Minen12 May 2017 4:25 a.m. PST

I'm not sure tank parks necessarily have to do with artillery…

In TW&T, for instance, the main punishment for wall to wall tanks is that 1) it is much easier to range in on them all in one go and 2) there is no advantage to wall to wall tanks. Activation is card based and so you don't get to fire all your tanks off all at once like a great Napoleonic volley of musket-fire. Lining up all your tanks together is just making what one might call a "target rich environment," nothing more.

lincolnlog12 May 2017 4:47 a.m. PST

It's kind of sad, but people don't want to play simulations anymore. I remember in the 70's and 80's it was Combat Commander, Empire, Mustangs and Messerschmitts. People no longer have the attention span or patience.

Having said that, there are some really good fast play games that aren't that gamey. The problem is, the more modern era you play, the dumber the game looks when you insert heavy doses of gamey.

UshCha12 May 2017 5:14 a.m. PST

Linconlog has it. There are better simulation around but folk may not want them because:-

You get less models on the table.

Real helicopters get slaughtered in the heat of battle and even if they made it their time on the battlefield would not be worth having a model for. Re-enforceing (1)

Credible battle plans like chess take thought, time as and effort. None of which seem in vogue at the moment.

ScottS12 May 2017 8:31 a.m. PST

I did enough credible battle plans and simulations when I was a Marine, I'm perfectly content with a game these days.

Murvihill12 May 2017 9:31 a.m. PST

I played TY twice, and the Russian player charged me from out of sight, firing as he went (some special Russian rule), slaughtering the squad before they could even shoot at him. I suspect we didn't play the rule right, it seems to me you would have to have the enemy in line of sight before you can charge them, but if that's legal I'm not sure you even need an enemy.

nickinsomerset13 May 2017 12:42 a.m. PST

"I played TY twice, and the Russian player charged me from out of sight, firing as he went (some special Russian rule), slaughtering the squad before they could even shoot at him"

I played a chap who tried a similar tactic, speeding his tanks over a hill to attack the chaps on the other side. (Now if we paused in such a situation the sprog would be sent to to top of the hill to stag on and watch for any enemy). The rules I was introducing him to allowed for overwatch/interdiction fire which simulates this. Needless to say none of his tanks survived breaching the skyline.

Tally Ho!

Khusrau Inactive Member14 May 2017 4:36 p.m. PST

I'm hoping that Pendraken put out the revised Cold War Commander set sometime soon. It was fun to play and did make you think.

Jefthing Inactive Member15 May 2017 11:12 a.m. PST

Nick – quite agree – this Warminster type won't touch FoW. But if the choice was that or Cambrai to Sinai…

I've had gameyness problems with all sorts of rules so it's not a specific FOW problem. In my experience it depends very much on the players and how much they want to exploit loopholes (or just be a d***). My rules use oil-fashioned burst circles (old CDs work nicely for 20mm): anything inside is hit. It's a simple but effective way of keeping a sensible distance between the toys without resorting to legalese.

Rick Don Burnette Inactive Member16 May 2017 1:56 p.m. PST

It is not about lack of attention. It is about what real combat is, and regarding 20th century combat, air, land sea, about the lack of miniatures on the table in a game that is closer to a simulation. Ask any cobat vet if his vision of the battlefield is as clear as what we have in say Check Your Six or General Quarters or Command Decision. The other guys stuff simply isnt there. There is no "crutch", that is, the other guys ships over the horizon or planes in the clouds or troops behind heavy concealment on the table over the horizon, in the clouds, in concealment, the crutch being there for at least three reasons. The hobby is about the miniatures, so display them for the photos. The gamers do not like umpires or ambushes, or unequal battles, they prefer chess. And it is a game as the hobbyist cannot get the uniforms right as Elting points out that theres what the regulations say they wore, what the artists draw or paint and what they actually wore, and the traditional gamer goes for the regulations, as one example.

CavScout8thCav Inactive Member07 Jun 2017 3:14 p.m. PST

25 years ago we designed our own rules. Had a guy playing Soviets mass a ITB in the open to assault dug in W.Germans. totally ignoring the US scout section. A turn later the ITB lay smashed and burning from a US 155mm btry firing DPICM. Last time we had a tank park on the board. In the Soviet commanders defense, it was his first modern game. He had only played WW2 before that. We play 6mm. Going to try TY rules in 6mm.

Part time gamer13 Aug 2017 9:52 p.m. PST

For 'the record' Ive never played either FoW or TY, I have to say for the most part IMHO it seems a combination of:
1)getting lots of cool "Toys on Table" and 2)'Lets see how many games we can get done in one night".
I can appreciate those that get only that one day a wk, or for some its maybe just one night a month to game, so they would want to play as many games as possible.

For myself.. the hobby is about gaming WITH friends.
Yes, I want the game to be fun and keep moving, not bogged down w/ tons of charts, rules & etc. but Im there to 'relax' and have fun. Not be put on a time schedule.

I agree w/ the 'tank parking lot" comments. With 1/100 15mm, it doesnt take much too fill up even a 4x8, thats 32 sqr. feet of game table.
While not my scale of choice, I think TY was 'made' for 285 scale. It just 'looks' more realistic space/area wise for the game.

After all, realistically, no matter how great the models look, and TY has some of the best Ive seen, what are the chances that a SP Art. Btty. is going to be 'on table'? (i.e. even close to the front line action).

To paraphrase the general statement made earlier, remember:
Few businesses have even gone broke "Giving people what they want".
Common sense, logic and "would this be realistic?" take a back seat, at best when it comes to sales.

nickinsomerset13 Aug 2017 10:54 p.m. PST

"SP Art. Bty. is going to be 'on table'?"

Abbot crews trained firing over open sights and 2S1 could augment the Advance Guard of the Sovs, so possible. Div Arty, 2S3, BM21 unlikely and as for the odd 3 BM21 appearing in support of a TY sized Battlegroup, only in Hollywood! I even hear that SA8 may appear on the TY battlefield!

However tis a game not a training simulation.

Tally Ho!

Vostok17 Inactive Member14 Aug 2017 12:19 a.m. PST

In general, if we talk about real life, then 2c1 and 2c3 could accurately lead a direct fire. Moreover, they have ammunition for such a case armor-piercing shells (5 pieces, as far as I remember).
Well, in the game, in principle, you can put on the table and tactical missile.

Old Wolfman14 Aug 2017 9:29 a.m. PST

And when all of your force is box canyoned in one corner of the table at the start and you're the attacker,and not much room to manuever into a better position….oy!

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.