tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post1101547982253474798..comments2024-03-05T06:15:15.057+00:00Comments on Breakthrough Assault: Team Yankee - Unit Cards - ExtraBenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07727751389191052408noreply@blogger.comBlogger92125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-69120287494140482532015-10-06T05:53:41.660+01:002015-10-06T05:53:41.660+01:00Charles. If I remember correctly it was the BMP-1 ...Charles. If I remember correctly it was the BMP-1 that loaded the gunner's arm. The T-72 occasionally loaded the gunner's leg.Tankguy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/12429782968606368158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-87304644184026355862015-10-06T05:53:33.621+01:002015-10-06T05:53:33.621+01:00Charles. If I remember correctly it was the BMP-1 ...Charles. If I remember correctly it was the BMP-1 that loaded the gunner's arm. The T-72 occasionally loaded the gunner's leg.Tankguy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/12429782968606368158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-16827725328759348212015-10-05T22:38:03.559+01:002015-10-05T22:38:03.559+01:00Having served in the US 3rd Inf Division at the ti...Having served in the US 3rd Inf Division at the time of the book. You all have missed a dew simple facts Soviet turrets also are more cramp than NATO turrets which effect movement especially the WG LEO 2 which the loader can fully stand up and load.Soviet auto loaders at the time were prone to occasional catching the loaders arm in them much to the loader chagrin. ATGMS flight times at longer ranges far exceeded target acquisition and main gun projectile flight times which if a AFV in overwatch detected the ATGM vehicle or crew might be able to engage and destroy it not to mention cause the gunner to flinch which would cause the atgm to crash.Since atgm in this time period are wire guided a ATGM using vehicle would have to remain stationary while guiding the ATGM to target increasing the chance of being engaged after firing.Most antitank ambushes are initiated from the flank because of these facts. The T 74 was the new toy the Soviets had and was only assigned to Guard units the closest ones were in Poland.This led to a amusing story, NATO wanted to know what size the gun was as this was a closely guarded secret so the British sent in a SAS team the measure the barrel in the motor pool, the US used satalite imagery to determine the caliber and the French ambassador got the Soviet military attache drunk at a party and gave afull description o f the new wonder tankchuckazuluhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10576576404182302095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-29272810620992932032015-10-05T19:19:49.179+01:002015-10-05T19:19:49.179+01:00Is it just me or is there a typo on the Soviet car...Is it just me or is there a typo on the Soviet cards; '"Machine guns cannot Shoot Team cannot assault". Should there be an 'and' between 'Shoot' and 'Team'? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05588998522836947175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-31105581613635943952015-10-01T00:22:38.592+01:002015-10-01T00:22:38.592+01:001991, Persian Gulf, Battle of 73 Eastings. Yep. ...1991, Persian Gulf, Battle of 73 Eastings. Yep. Of course to be fair that was an upgraded 120mm smoothbore cannon on the Abrams and the export version of the T-72. Still...<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09744239430264252847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-77915233103340916622015-09-29T02:49:35.262+01:002015-09-29T02:49:35.262+01:00The autoloader in T-72 was and still is crap. Some...The autoloader in T-72 was and still is crap. Some comments from a user, translated with Google translate:<br /><br />"I talked with a guy, who rode the T -72 . The carousel was able to stutter. "Treatment" followed using 5 - pound hammer, a proprietary obligatory equipment in the fighting compartment.<br />In addition, other interesting observation - if it happened a bullet that was needed was on the other end of the carousel, before loading, you had to wait for the carousel until the bullet arrived. In addition, he claimed that manually loading a bullet in T-55 (Merida ) was faster ( although smaller caliber, but cartridge combined )..."APJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07838842070403355924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-65818353598673649292015-09-28T16:35:29.485+01:002015-09-28T16:35:29.485+01:00If those stats are meant to represent abrams and T...If those stats are meant to represent abrams and T-72As then it is a very poor representation. The abrams better ability to fire while moving, longer range and thermal imager is accurate IMHO, as is the better penetration of the T-72s main gun. The poorly represented part however is that IRL a T-72A has pretty much equivalent (slightly better according to many sources) front armour versus KE (APFSDS projectiles). Another issue is that a stationary T-72A has almost the same rate of fire as a stationary abrams, not half. Accurancy up to 1.5 kilometres would also be pretty much the same so the better to hit scores against T-72s could represent both better skill when it comes to using terrain and slightly higher ROF.<br /><br />I sincerely hope that the designers have made a good effort at making both sides of this conflict fun to play and collect. IMHO that means absolutely no downgrading of any kind. I may be mistaken but I firmly belive that the popularity of this game is all about making both sides fun to play what I have seen so far does not really inspire confidence.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04324359363868910971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-50579063141427680212015-09-28T16:23:26.951+01:002015-09-28T16:23:26.951+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04324359363868910971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-11092568978020055952015-09-28T08:11:29.902+01:002015-09-28T08:11:29.902+01:00AmenAmenTankermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05440361113908965814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-5356985962566926992015-09-27T23:32:59.656+01:002015-09-27T23:32:59.656+01:00to point out one thing. this is based a novel of ...to point out one thing. this is based a novel of alternate history, the units present in the initial release are all from that book. with more to come in later months. the Abrams tech represented in its is mostly 1st generation tech. as to ROF. the t-72 had a much more limited fire control system, with the gunner having to manually enter data, where as NATO equipment was much more automated. The Rambling Czechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04000844964809521210noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-17427633863793221142015-09-26T18:30:33.772+01:002015-09-26T18:30:33.772+01:00Yeah, I'm really interested to see follow-on r...Yeah, I'm really interested to see follow-on releases, because I think we'll see better ratings & vehicles for the WarPac forces (and also worse ratings and vehicles maybe!), to compliment the Brits and Germans in other areas of Germany. <br /><br />It would be kind of fun to play true Category C units (i.e. Polish T-55's, which would be a true horde army!). I am definitely going to buy into this in 15mm from BF as the models looks great, but our local Calgary group has several groups already heavily invested in MicroArmour just waiting for these rules (we tried the GHQ rules a few years back but they were terrible). <br /><br />Using MicroArmour will allow for super affordable armies that can be very large as well, allowing for those crazy T-55 hordes trying to smash their way through, or for more modern armies of T-80's. GHQ figs are lovely with crazy detail for 6mm. I think the ranges actually work far better in 6mm, especially with artillery on the board. <br /><br />But as I said, I'm a BF fan too, so they will still be getting my dollars. :) <br />ExGGFG (Howard)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13023511252809491300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-24219896507320030832015-09-26T18:16:01.542+01:002015-09-26T18:16:01.542+01:00Yes it does mention that if you choose to move Tac...Yes it does mention that if you choose to move Tactical at 14", you suffer a +1 with the T-72, implying that going Tactical 10" has no penalty for shooting. So it sounds like maybe they've done away with the +1 to hit for moving, which will be good news to T-72 players. Only if you choose to move 14" will you have +1. That would be a nice mechanic I think.<br />ExGGFG (Howard)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13023511252809491300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-24690030102979732802015-09-26T01:04:34.419+01:002015-09-26T01:04:34.419+01:00Excellent! - And yes - just plain common-sense rea...Excellent! - And yes - just plain common-sense really!Sparkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07008013944950635778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-86906485659377568932015-09-25T09:01:19.104+01:002015-09-25T09:01:19.104+01:00Don't worry I haven't given up on you guys...Don't worry I haven't given up on you guys. :-)<br /><br />Really looking forward to team Yankee, just think people need to stop making a snap decision on one tank vs one tank when it's a combine arms game. Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07727751389191052408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-34503270057967826192015-09-25T05:14:36.991+01:002015-09-25T05:14:36.991+01:001978. Abrams MBT and Bradley R&D contracts si...1978. Abrams MBT and Bradley R&D contracts signed in 1976 with proto-types delivered 1978-80 for the Abrams. All of these LRIP vehicles went to Ft Hood for troop testing. 1981 first production vehicles delivered plus major rebuild of LRIP vehicles . First Abrams delivery in Europe in 1981 to Cavalry Regiments on border. 24th Inf and NG units received Abrams at same time as Regular Army, if I recall right, due to upgrade of US reserve units.Tankguy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/12429782968606368158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-33586602176280868612015-09-25T05:14:32.509+01:002015-09-25T05:14:32.509+01:001978. Abrams MBT and Bradley R&D contracts si...1978. Abrams MBT and Bradley R&D contracts signed in 1976 with proto-types delivered 1978-80 for the Abrams. All of these LRIP vehicles went to Ft Hood for troop testing. 1981 first production vehicles delivered plus major rebuild of LRIP vehicles . First Abrams delivery in Europe in 1981 to Cavalry Regiments on border. 24th Inf and NG units received Abrams at same time as Regular Army, if I recall right, due to upgrade of US reserve units.Tankguy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/12429782968606368158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-40871398907307388262015-09-25T05:05:11.499+01:002015-09-25T05:05:11.499+01:00The gun goes to full elevation on the T62 to eject...The gun goes to full elevation on the T62 to eject the casing and be reloaded. I am assuming the same for the 125mm, which is 2 piece round, shell and case. Gun actually has less distance to travel in elevation at long range. T62 round was hand loaded but gun had to elevate for the 115mm round to be loaded, and cases ejected through auto opening hatch in rear oF turret to keep ca sings from jam ming up turret.. T64 and T72, T80, T90 all with 125mm have two piece ammunition, which the auto-loader must select and move to tray for rammer to put into breach. US M68 105mm uses single piece round loader pulls out of turret ammo rack, pivots 90 degrees and pushes into open breech. Same for US/German 120mm which is also one piece. British 120mm is round plus two propellant bags. Tankguy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/12429782968606368158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-67823016772356178632015-09-25T03:09:22.198+01:002015-09-25T03:09:22.198+01:00How about ROF 2 at ranges up to 16"? At clos...How about ROF 2 at ranges up to 16"? At close range the gun isn't making a big elevation change to reach the single point where the autoloader can operate. Because of that it's much faster to get back on target. Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00681374331839852877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-23155149938121573022015-09-24T23:21:03.753+01:002015-09-24T23:21:03.753+01:00If you feel that the rules are not realistic enoug...If you feel that the rules are not realistic enough to suit you when published, they can certainly be "house-ruled" on your gaming table as you see fit. I wonder how much the performance of the Soviet tanks in the TY book has influenced the design of the rules? <br />This module has me once again interested in an era that I haven't given a second thought to since the Berlin Wall came down, and I'm really looking forward to the finished product. I have been painting & basing 6mm Cold War era AFVs every night for the last 3 weeks. November seems like an eternity away. coopman827@gmail.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11816255942435931695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-30187600081323946622015-09-24T22:32:04.795+01:002015-09-24T22:32:04.795+01:00Hey Ben, please don't give up on us. You'l...Hey Ben, please don't give up on us. You'll always get a few who are determined to dis TY before even having read the rules, let alone played a game, but the majority of us are really very grateful for the effort you mob are putting into these tasty previews!<br /><br />As a general point, TY the Novel, as Harold Coyle makes very clear, is set within the context of General Sir John Hackett's 'The Third World War', a proto history written in 1978 but set in 1985. Therefore TY is set in 1985.<br /><br />I'd also like to point out the by the end of WW2, Soviet Guards formations differed only from other Category 1 GSFG formations by title - they had no additional training, manpower or equipment, and were largely composed of 2 year conscripts same as all others - including Senior NCOs.Sparkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07008013944950635778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-29619104960216752742015-09-24T21:25:20.968+01:002015-09-24T21:25:20.968+01:00Amen brother.Amen brother.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09479380708818782288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-4827047759104656382015-09-24T17:46:45.093+01:002015-09-24T17:46:45.093+01:00This is the phrase that I am repeating over and ov...This is the phrase that I am repeating over and over when I read all the posts above...<br /><br />"This is a game, based on a book, based on a war that did not happen."WEBGriffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15413295331744196122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-42106664976462562502015-09-24T16:00:03.660+01:002015-09-24T16:00:03.660+01:00I am thinking the same way. Its too early to judge...I am thinking the same way. Its too early to judge whether somebody likes the game or not, unless the whole rule book and arsenals appear. My main thought is that it is just a game and not a simulation. Definately and whether BF and TY is reading this thread, by giving a players' choise of morale, skill and strength formation (as in FoW multiple choise in each army formation) my belief is that the game will be much more interesting. Based on what we have seen up to now, a player is aware of the oposing army list. However we have seen only two sample cards and only BF and TY know whats next. Thus waiting....it is hypothetical therefore with a very very long future..... Tankermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05440361113908965814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-41295120157741788072015-09-24T14:50:41.635+01:002015-09-24T14:50:41.635+01:00Just my 2c worth - I don't think you should ju...Just my 2c worth - I don't think you should judge this game just on the 105mm Abrams vs T72 duel that it comes out with. Those are obviously just two of many lists that this system will expand to later. BF have already said that they see expansions with the BAOR and Bundeswehr kit and I'm sure they won't neglect the alternate Soviet equipment like T80, T64 and the older kit like T62, T55 that served in some of the Category 3 divisions and Warpact allies. Also remember that the Sov infantry we have seen is the BMP mounted variety but much of the mech infantry in their Motor Rifle Divisions would be mounted in BTRs. Hopefully we will also eventually get things like Naval infantry and VDV/Spetsnaz airborne stuff Mike Bersikshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04984119146936908948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-504019008093553470.post-7279285142998574652015-09-24T12:02:23.468+01:002015-09-24T12:02:23.468+01:00I guess I can give the benefit of the doubt too, b...I guess I can give the benefit of the doubt too, but all I have to compare to is past experience, and so far what I've seen only confirmed that past experience. But if you say it will be a "whole different game" I'll take your word for it.<br /><br />I'll buy the manual (and was going to anyway) to test the game regardless, because it's a period that interests me, I'm not going into one of those "I'm not giving you my money" rage fits, I'm not like that. So I will definitely see if my fears are confirmed or disproved, hopefully the latter.<br /><br />And the models are sweet all around just the same, so even if I don't end up liking the rules (let's emphasize that IF so no one says I'm being negative), I'm still very looking forward to the models.<br /><br />So there, I'll reserve final judgement until I played a couple of games.Marcelo Hernan Gonzalezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16991531374443195957noreply@blogger.com