Team Yankee Battle Report! USA vs. USSR!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ม.ค. 2021
- Jon and Jake play some Team Yankee, this time playing with the starter forces found in the latest Beginner box. Can you have fun with just the contents of the starter box? Watch and find out!
Check out our Flames of War Patreon at for a exclusive Flames of War Battle Report every month! / allminiaturesgreatands...
Take a Chance Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
I would love to see more Team Yankee, especially with varied forces!
Lots of those videos out there now
The TY community needs people who made battle reports! Thanks!
More battle reports are coming!
I'm an old M1 tanker and I've hear both Improved Production and Improved Performance. Go figure what it actually is. I don't know John... 105mm v. T80? This should be interesting. Also about the camouflage.. if Jake gets a hot run on the dice you can always blame headquarters for deploying you in the wrong place. Like, how can you confuse Germany for Iraqi???? Not my fault!
Thanks for another nice report, gentlemen. They always look like you're enjoying yourselves as you play them. Helpfully informative too.
Thanks! We do have a good time and really that's the point.
Nice report, looking forward to seeing more!
I appreciate this is paced as a walk-thru for beginners.
Ohhhhh... all those sixes on cross checks and ones for firepower! Some wicked luck there. And yes, more Team Yankee please.
Great battle!! Love the tanks! Keep it up. J
Love the kwik-e-mart
Thanks!
awesome.....was hoping for some tank battles....good start to 2021
Great battle report.
Great video!! I’m very happy for watching Team Yankee at your channel and I would like watching more in the future.
I have played a lot of team Yankee games and I would like you one advertisement... move, move and move. The big difference between FOW and TY is the mobility. Tanks can move and shoot without penalties and you have to use this advantage. It is only a opinión, your battle is too similar a FOW battle and TY offer you a new game mode with more mobility than FOW, you must use it 😉
But congratulations for the report, I like it very much 👏🏼
Thanks and great advice, movement is key in TY.
What no helicopters? That's what makes Team Yankee the best miniatures game. More Team Yankee please, bring on the helos and aircraft.
For this game we were just using the contents of the "Starter Set"
Oh, there will be some helos real soon...
Gotta love miniature games. I just saw this video and I have subscribed. I'm a huge Micro armor fan and I love what you guys were doing.
Thanks Andrew and I appreciate it!
@@AllMiniaturesGreatandSmall It is not often I see or meet somebody with the same interests I have. I still have the book called Team Yankee. Early model M1's against T72's and others. Capt Bannon was the man.
Yay, a TY report! 😁
Now you can add infantry, artillery and air ;)
10:40 the Company commander opens fire first, as is appropriate Comrade !
( and wisely picking on a Bradley ... the Captain *should* come off looking like a Hero of the Soviet Union. )
A good report. Have to admit, used to play Team Yankee and stopped due to 2+ to kill on almost everything, and the mission meant the soviets really played 'game' and not advance, again mission selection but overall, the worst aspect is large battles with Soviet Parking Lots of Vehicles and Infantry ( due to 15mm scale ) and the cost of some US equipment is SO HIGH that having a full force for 100 pts is 6 tanks ( or just 5, not sure ). Won't go into how TY has a "soviet supertank syndrome' like the US had of the T62 before the Israelis encountered it and the T72 in Lebanon, which showed how bad the Soviet equipment was and how it's unknown capabilities lead to the supertank syndrome, again dispelled TOTALLY in Gulf War 1 and 2.
Worse stats/ability = even cheaper units = even more spam for WARPAC, to the point of unplayability (and only hedge fund managers being able to afford a WARPAC army).
team yankee has a soviet super tank syndrome? using the Gulf wars as proof? you are either ignorant or stupid...
1stly the gulf war was fought by T-72m tanks which had downgraded armour compaired to contemporary soviet models. with ammunition from the late 60s and mid 70s, aditionally they were fighting 1990s era american tanks (M1A1s). so you have downgraded soviet tanks from the 70s (rather than the latest 1980s varients like in team yankee) going up against tanks designed to fight the latest tanks in the 90s+. ofcaurse they are not going to do well. as for Lebanon? they did well in the first Lebanon war in the 1980s (where the game team yankee is set), according to Herzog, Chaim; Gazit, Shlomo (2005). The Arab-Israeli Wars: War and Peace in the Middle East.( Vintage Books. p. 560) not a single T-72 was lost in the 1982 war in Lebanon, according to both US, Syrian and soviet sources, despite killing over 33 M60s. only the Isrealies claim to have killed T-72ss in 1982, but they claim to have killed only 11, to the loss of atleast 33 M60s, and this is the export T-72m let alone top of the line for the time T-72As the soviets would be fielding.
if you had bothered to actually look up stuff, you would find the CIA studied soviet armour after the cold war, and found the T-72A (let alone better armoured soviet tanks) to be practically invulnerable to 105mm guns at ~500m and further frontally (standard tank engagement range was considered to be 1-2km) and only a 22% of penatrateing below 500m, yet in game the T-72 has only front armour 16 and american 105mm guns have a AT of 20. this means at close range the 105mm has a chance to kill it of 50% (and a chance to kill/bail it of 66%), it would thus be more realisitic to give the T-72 a front armour of 17 or 18 (17 giveing the US 105mm a 33% chance to kill, and 18 giveing it a 16.7% chance to kill at close range. i would say 18 is more accurate as if we include bailing a penatrating hit, that is 33% chance to penetrate, which is higher than CIA figures. it would also make the T-72 practically invulnerable at long range [it goes up to FA19, meaning the american 105 can only bail to tank] just like the CIA statistics say) if the US 105mm stays AT20.
so soviet armour values are sub-par in team yankee compaired to real life.
what about fire controls? well the soviets need a 4+ to hit a US tank at point blank range in the open when stationary! realisitically such a target should be impossible to miss, for either side. so hardly soviet super tank syndrome.
aditionally the game is set in 1985+, yet there is no T-64BV or T-80BV and T-72B tanks ( kontact-1, and 1984/85) only the 1987 T-80U tank (kontact-5) and basic T-72 and T-64 (which are said to be T-72A and T-64B). so artificially nerfed soviet tanks there, and thus no soviet super tank syndrome.
as for soviet armour penatration? AT22. the M1 Abrams has a front armour of 18 (and thus 19 at long range), according the CIA documents the M1 had 400mm of RHAe frontal protection, soviet ammunition introduced in 1976 had 470mm* of penatration at 2km (and thus all ranges in game), according to soviet testing(source after notes), later ammunition introduced in the early-mid 80s had as mutch as 560mm** at 2km. what i am saying is the soviet T-72 should easily penetrate the regular M1 abrams at any range, and thus have atleast 5, prefurably 6, points high At value than the M1 has armour.
if the game was realisitic then if the standard M1 abrams has an FA18 and AT20, then the T-72A should have FA18 and atleast AT25 (for 3BM22, a 1976 ammo) if not higher (especally for say 3BM26 or 3BM32, from 1982 and 84 respectfully, which do fit in the 1987+ timeline of the game, but also potenially for 3BM22).
the T-72M (used by say east germany), might be useing even old ammunition, specifically 3B15 (1968), which had a 80% chance of penatrating 400mm of armour at 2km. if we make it AT22 it gives the T-72M a 66% chance to pen (50% to kill), and thus is much too low. AT23 would give it a 84% chance to pen (66% chance to kill), which is slightly to high for pens, but is closer than AT22. on the flip side US 105mm ammunition would have ~50% chance to penatrate its armour at 500m (and thus T-72M should have a front armour of 17),
thus if the M1 abrams stays FA18 and AT20, the east german T-72 should have FA17 and AT23 (3BM15) and an upgrade to AT25+ (3BM22) [rather than FA15 and AT21]
as we can see from declassified sources, the T-72 is nerfed in team yankee, team yankee does not have a soviet super tank syndrome but quite the opposite.
*or rather it an 80% chance of penatrating 470mm of armour at 2km
**3BM32 had an 80% chance of penatrating 560mm of armour at 2km
(source for soviet penatration “Боеприпасы: учебник для вузов : в 2 т. / Бабкин А. В., Велданов В. А., Грязнов Е. Ф. [и др.] ; общ. ред. Селиванов В. В. - М. : Изд-во МГТУ им. Н. Э.Баумана, 2016.”
if you want NATO source)
(source for CIA annalysis of T-72A armour www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498195.pdf)
( Lanz-Odermatt equation was used for US M774 vs soviet T-72M seeing as that has RHA on its turret)
@@matthiuskoenig3378 our club stopped playing team Yankee since the Soviet player was playing parking lots of tanks and BMPs that cover a large section of the table. if no parking lot, the the units literally covers the table due to command distance. as they were some ex military; they just thought it didn't capture the feel properly due to scale and number of unit's deployed. as for the stats, I used to play Challenger so it seemed more accurate but agree that system has lots of problems too. As for all the knowledge you cite, I applaud you. Not all gamers have access to this and I only game in my spare time rising a child and working full time leaving minimal time. Also note that Gulf War 1 and 2 showed how good US equipment is, since we have no real Soviet data that is, in my opinion, reliable. ( how long did they deny shooting down Korean airlines 007). I don't 100% believe US claims either some it's somewhere in the middle. Team Yankee is the game Challenger should have been..( Firefly = Flames of war ) and to me, it's just a game struggle g to find balance between realism and playability. I wish I had more time to read about this but family calls and Bri g a good dad is more important than knowing the penetration of Soviet 115mm guns on Cobham armor. but I thank you for the detailed info, I will have to look up your cited sources.
Seems impossible to buy TY infantry in Spain...same issues in your countries? We have got starters, tanks, AA, air support...but no soldiers (well, a lucky friend has british infantry 😆)
I'm not sure why all the vehicles seem to be clustered together. Besides being a very tempting artillery target, when your vehicles are spread out a little bit, you increase the chance of getting a flank shot from at least some of your tanks.
More team Yankee!!
also can we see a full battle report of Team Yankee in the future
Yes, Probably February or March will have a full blown TY battle!
I've always wanted to play this with someone.
I like a lot about TY. You know what I can’t stand? All the tanks just smushed together. I know there has to be a lot of abstracted concepts...but I wish there was a 1” rule or something!
Otherwise, thanks for sharing! Love the look of the board and the well-painted minis. And your banter throughout the game was enjoyable.
Thanks for the comments Justin. I agree on the Tank parking lot. It's hard to get around but list building and agreement with your opponent. Players might consider dropping scale to 6mm (GHQ scale models) and keeping all the ranges, or playing on a larger table.
@@AllMiniaturesGreatandSmall Would aircraft or artillery make it better to space out the vehicles?
Can you use team Yankee rules with micro armor scale?
@@jeffthompson2264 indeed you can, same for Flame of War.
May be a bit late, but I’m new to TY, are huey/infantry platoons any good? I love the air cavalry aesthetic but I’d like to know if they are any good, thanks
Not really, hard to use, easily countered. Actually quite realistic that if the DZ is hot (you fly anywhere near the enemy) you are going to lose basically everything.
@@tando6266 fair enough, I’ve been hearing it’s good to grab and hold objectives quick though, is that true
@@ethanmeiring7128 thats if the opponent left it completely undefended. In TY you always know everything your opponent has, so it may work one time in dozens as its counting on your opponent forgetting you can do it.
@@tando6266 very true
Is Team Yankee vehicles only? Or is it just vehicles in the starter box?
Starter box only has vehicles, but infantry does exists within the game
Infantry, helos, airplanes, I'll try to include them in the next Battle report we play
I love Team Yankee. I currently have a Soviet, British and Israeli army
Blitzminis mentioned that there was a faq about being able to drive over wrecked vehicles due to ground scale. I don't know if it's true though
Wrecks are counted as Short Terrain and can be driven over but in the most recent FAQ it says "Can my models end their movement on top of other models? No. "
Soviet force is about 49 pts and American force is about 40 pts, if strictly followed the instruction. I think players can use T80s as shock company and upgrade IPM1 to M1A1. In this way it is 57 pts vs 55 pts, which is more balanced.
at 11:30, since they are recon unit, they have Scout special rule, which means they are Gone to Ground unless they fired or assaulted .
I did not notice till later that the M3a2's had the scout rule. Good spot!
Note, your saggers cannot fire if you moved your BMPs.
The BMP-3's stabber missile has a moving ROF of 1.
BMP-3s are great! I think the T-80 also has moving RoF 1 on its missile, but with the main gun it's less important
BMP 1 and 2 cannot move and shoot the missile but BMP 3 can
more team yankee !!!
Armoured warfare at this scale looks daft to me. 6mm is the best.
How come nobody ever puts the link where to get these games?
You can buy them online through the company, search Team Yankee or Flames of War. They have a U.S. warehouse. Also Noble Knight Games and Miniature Market are good online sources.
Good point, I'll try to be better about it. flames of war is www.flamesofwar.com and team yankee is www.team-yankee.com. I also order stuff from miniature market, ebay and last resort if I can't find it anyplace else, Amazon. That's after I check my LFGS.
for turn one when you blitzed the commander or rather attempted to blitz him you would be using the HQ skill level which is 3+
Thanks for the reminder!
jake be nice to your Dad. Who knows how long you will have him!
At the 15:33 mark Jake's laugh is one of the most evil laughs of all time!!! No empathy at all watching John roll two 1's!!!!!
More TY please
So why can’t we get the t72 not the t80 because there to overpowered to make it even what do I add to make this even for a battle because Russia always wins
Why is Jake always playing the 'bad' guys?
Well, in this game I let him choose. In our Soviet vs German games I own soviets so it seemed like a no brainer. Don't worry, Jake has allies/NATO as well.
I've never taken part in any combat, but I've always thought it would be much more dynamic than this. Are tank battles in real life really this static?
With the hit ratio of the M1 how do you miss? Also, crews don't jump out of their tank. Finally, the speed of these tanks on both roads and solid terrain and firing on the move the "T's" would have hard time hitting the M1. Finally, a modern armor conflict would not last very long.
aahhh yes another biased commenter that doesn't actually know anything.
you do realise the T-64 and T-80 had automatic leading on their tanks? ballistic computers that calculated the speed of enemy tanks and provided a dot for the gunner to point at so that the enemy tank no matter how fast it was going would be hit, similar to advanced AA weapons, but for fighting ground targets. additionally, the speed of APFSDS means that leading the target is incredibly easy at close range like in this game. soviet APFSDS was 1800m/s
further more even T-72s received a lead/deflection calacualtor in 1982 (where the ballistic computer would display a lead distance for a lasered target).
so no the Abrams was not too fast to be hit by soviet 'T's, perhaps Czech/polish/german/etc T-72M1s might be unable to hit the abrams at longer ranges due to lacking these balisitic computers like proper soviet tanks, but like i said these aren't soviet tanks. and thats at longer ranges.
[PS US tanks as early as the M60A3 also had automatic lead calculators]
and 'to hit' in this game is also supposed to include spotting the enemy tanks, identifieing the enemy tanks as enemies (remember friendly fire has been committed by abrams crews, so they might have trouble identifieing if a spotted tank is a friendly or not, which might cuase delays, and thus reduce hit probability in a turn (which is a limited amout of time) aswell as actually hitting them.
this is why the 'to hit' is based on the skill of the target. as its both how mutch training they have in staying hidden and useing all available cover, aswell as their skill in useing smoke grenades and other manuvers/techniques to avoid being hit and/or spotted.
aditionally US testing found that gun tubes flex during movement, as mutch as 0.5m, this resulted in high miss probability while moveing above certain speeds (which is why the game allows some tanks to move 14" but gain a +1 to hit)
also crews do jump out of their tanks, although thats not just what bailed out is supposed to represent. the rules descibe it as anything where its unclear if the vehicle is destroyed or not, which includes the crew dismounting (which does happen, we have videos of it), but also just crew shock, and even destroyed tanks that are just not obviously nocked out.
further more, the game is not particularly realistic, the ranges are too short, the spaceing between friendlies is too short, the armor system is not realisitic (a certain amount of armour is going to stop a shell at a given range, the armour save mechanic is thus very unrealisitic), all penatrateing hits from MBT KE rounds will cause a mission kill in real life (as optics are damaged just by the shockwaves caused by the shell, preventing the tank from fighting), etc.
as for modern armour combat not lasting long? it would really depend, one should never make blanket statements. especially when the closest thing to 'modern' combat in team yankee (72 easting) lasted about 2 days, and that was just 1 combat, there were multiple battles in desert storm.
Tank don need to take moral chek evey turn if they are down to 1, they take moral check only if that last tank/bmp got baild our.
Howdy, you might want to recheck p. 64 in the little rulebook. If there are less then 2 active tanks you take a morale check. No wording about only doing so on the same turn it happened. Every turn you check each unit to make sure it's still in good spirits . Thanks!
@@AllMiniaturesGreatandSmall but it doesent say that you have to take that every turn if there is only 1 tank left, only if the tank gets baild out.
Well, look at it this way. Under "Unit Morale Test" on P.64 is says " A unit that is not in Good Spirits needs to take a morale test..." That's the only stipulation. So lets say we have a 2 team tank unit and 1 team is destroyed. That Unit is no longer in good spirits, and never again will be in good spirits. Every turn any Unit is not in good spirits it needs to test. There is no stipulation that says to ignore not being in good spirits, or flipping a Unit back to good spirits. Hope this helps!
@@AllMiniaturesGreatandSmall yes it does now. Sorry, i totalt missade that one. Becuse when why play we ignorera that rule for so long that I have forgoten that it existed. In our way of thinking, if a unit have lost its comrads and decided to stay and fight, then he will fight until the new baild out happens or if he gets destroyed. (Home rule, you either run or you fight).
Why is it a "Battalion Commander" when flames of War is a platoon level game. Even a big game would only field a Company.
Also, does bailing out of a tank even make sense in this time period? Modern tanks usually defeat the round or are defeated by it, there isn't a whole lot of in between in modern warfare. Something about Team Yankee doesn't feel right for modern combat.
equivilant sized company level forces in soviet doctrine are called battalions. Also the 2+ firepower represents the lack of in between. bailing out doesnt mean the crew have dismounted, but that there is a problem and the crew are not responding to commands
That's how I always see it as well. It doesn't have to be a literal bailing out every time, but some other factor that might keep the crew busy.
@@AllMiniaturesGreatandSmall I agree that bailing out doesn't make sense even in WWII. In WWII, after the "Gentlemen's War" in North Africa, I have read from several sources that tank crews were machined gunned down as they bailed. This happened with both Allies and Axis on the Western and Eastern Fronts. I think of "Bailed Out" as a game mechanic such as crew stunned in 40k.
The sowjet player looks uninterested sometimes….
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16 KJV, Jesus Christ is the only way
That, or an M1 Battle Tank would do in a pinch.
Does Jon keep losing to Jake because Jake blobs his tanks and hides in the corner? Pretty Lame. Find someone less cheesy than Jake to play the game with, watching that for half of the time was disappointing. Game looks fun tho, just without people like Jake and his "tactics"
Ah feeling the love 😁