More thoughts about Dynamic Points for Team Yankee

Battlefront has decided to bring dynamic points to Team Yankee. It’s an exciting prospect to adjust the points of various units which will certainly adjust how people build lists. The first set of changes have landed in https:forces.team-yankee.com allowing everyone to more easier build test lists.

Thus far the modifications include making anti-aircraft units more expensive and tanks less expensive. Battlefront has been clear, their initial changes are a start not a final word, as the game is a living game. They next time they’ll revisit is approximately in the November 2024 timeframe.

Getting back to basics, what is the goal?

Team Yankee is a point costed system where you can show up at the table to play against someone where your units and all their capabilities will have some areas where you are strong, others where you might be weak due to the choices you’ve made putting together a list. Dynamic points allow the designers to revisit those point costs after the fact tuning to in hopes to adjust the balance.

Math is hard, be it via forces or pencil and paper.

Long time players know and see that there are certain combos and list elements that over or under perform.  Adjusting points can help the things that under perform, enticing players to make use of them, get them off that dusty shelf, and those units that over perform, make them a little more expensive so while you might still take the unit, you’ll have to make sacrifices elsewhere.

What’s changed?

The dynamic points changes that have landed make main battle tanks (MBTs) cheaper. This should entice players to field a few more than what they have done in the past. Leo2’s, T-80s, M1A1s etc. will probably be on the table more often. Well, maybe.

Anti-aircraft is more expensive. You’ll feel the pain to mitigate those higher point games where you just know people will be bringing air assets. Anti-aircraft units often had another purpose though and that is to go over low armor APCs and such. The West German Gepards, British Chieftain Marksmen, Russian Tunguska, and so on all work well in that capacity. While more expensive I doubt raising the points a bit with change these often auto-include units.

Current challenges in the game

Let’s spend a few moments and think about problem areas in the game that dynamic points didn’t touch. What detracts from the game or causes frustration with players. This is my list.

  • Missiles are everywhere. From APCs, man packed, helicopters, tank fired and more it’s a wide range of AT with one focus, knocking out other vehicles. Anti tank assets are everywhere.
  • APCs are more prevalent and as the game stands they are allowed to function far and away from the unit to which they are attached. This causes them to be used in ways uncharacteristic of APCs, whose purpose is to support and carry the unit they are assigned.
  • Strike Aircraft/Anti-aircraft struggles, on the one hand harriers are the terror of the table with their 3+ arrival and very effective munitions load out with high AT. The remaining strike aircraft somewhat suffer with a 4+ arrival and some nations aircraft are easier to hit with worse saves.

Points won’t fix these kinds of challenges. Should we consider what could help the game? These are thoughts offered up for consideration with the goal of improving the game.

Missiles

Team Yankee, depending on your list can be one large missile fest. For some units that makes perfect sense, take the Soviet Storms, they should have plenty of missiles on hand as that is why they exist.  The Soviet BMP-1 also carries missiles, but it’s not a tank hunter, it’s an APC. Its standard load out is only 4 AT-3 Sagger missiles. Yet in Team Yankee, BMP swarm lists are a “thing” because salvo after salvo of BMP missiles can handle many a tank or APC.

BMPs are not alone in limited missile load outs. Consider man-packed Milan missiles. There would only be so many carried and if infantry is out on the march, without their APCs nearby, the infantry teams could only carry so many.

I think the solution isn’t in a points adjustment, but rather the adjustment of game mechanics. Some might be quick to suggest ammo load outs. Certainly other rule systems like PSC’s Battlegroup NorthAG/CentAG do just this, but it’s also a pain to track ammo for a game you want to get done in a few hours.

How about an ammo check instead?  After missile shooting by a Tank attachment or missile team with a heavy weapon designation, that a 3+ be rolled or the unit is “out of ammo” when it comes to missiles.

APCs

A substantial difference between Team Yankee and Flames of War is support units are able to act independently of the team they support. Consider the French 120mm man packed mortar unit, which comes wither either 3 or 6 VAB transports. These armored transports can go running around the table doing anything they like. I personally like to use them to try and hunt down infantry on the move.

Transports have an offensive responsibility, consider the Bradley or BMP-1, BMP-2, Marder 2 which all carry infantry forward.  Roaming out far and wide alone on the table top?  It’s a common tactic with NATO and WARPAC players. It casts them into being used as battlefield chaff (when empty), annoying to deal with it and it leads to spam lists.

What if transport attachments went back to having to stay with in a certain distance of teams they support? Perhaps 6″, 8″ even 12″ could still be representational of their role in modern times. This wouldn’t tie them down, rather if they are carrying even a subset of the infantry they support, that would be more in keeping with how they are used.

So the thought is, unlike Flames of War, don’t require that transport attachments need to be within command distance of the infantry platoon/company commander, rather require that they have to be within 6″-8″ of infantry teams that they support.

undefined

Strike Aircraft

Aircraft present an interesting challenge in Team Yankee. Soviet SU-17 Fitter strike aircraft with their 5+ skill, 3+ to hit and 5+ save, 8 points for 6 planes are generally not worth the points and thus don’t see the table top often.  Where as British Harriers with a 3+ skill, 4+ to hit, and 5+ save that appear on a 3+ instead of the usual 4+ are very often worth the points due to their BL-755 Cluster Bombs that use a Salvo template with a crazy good 8 Anti-Tank and 3+ fire power, 4 planes for 10 points.

There is a wide range of capability yet the point difference is only 2.  Yet if we look at the Finns who have access to 4 Viggens for 16 points, skill 3+, hit on 4+, 5+ save with a one shot salvo with a 5 anti-tank and 3+ fire power, quite a point increase for lesser capabilities.

Comparisons of points across nationalities is perhaps also the wrong way of looking at it, as point values can represent access to hardware, tactical doctrines and more.

In the case of strike aircraft I think there is a case to be made for a point cost for availability. The flames of war v3 system of purchasing 3 dice, 5 dice, or 7 dice, to determine aircraft availability immediately comes to mind. If there was any 5s in the mix, your aircraft were available. If you wanted to have a fighter intercept you’d roll your dice  and look for a 6 in the results and if so, the enemy planes were intercepted and not available after all. However after every roll you made no matter the reason, you’d lose one dice from the pool, but you’d always at a minimum roll at least 1 die for availability or intercept.

What if you pay in points for a number of dice for aircraft intercept and strike aircraft support?  Consider 10 points for 7 dice availability of  6 Soviet SU-17 fitters, 5 dice availability for 6 points, and 3 dice for 4 points. What could be reasonable point values for other nations strike aircraft?

I would assert this was a better system for determining aircraft availability. Paying points for more reliability and capability is a better approach.

Wrap up

Dynamic points for Team Yankee has potential to stir up list building by giving players lower cost tank options. The months ahead as tournaments and casual gaming occur, should see some interesting after action reports. I’m not expecting much, especially due to the “missile fest” challenge I brought up within this article. With all the AT out there, cheaper tanks are still easy targets.

In the Minneapolis / St Paul area where I game, our next tournament is tank themes so while we’re using dynamic points, list building rules won’t be normal. Fall in, Autumn Wars and other events will probably be a better guide presuming they use dynamic points.

Time will tell if Battlefront will consider adjusting other elements of the game to address problems instead of just via points adjustments.

 

 

Report from ETC 2024, the most prestigious Flames of War team tournament of the year!

By Paolo Paglianti

It’s the most anticipated Flames of War tournament of the year: the top 120 players from around the world (not just the Old World, but also New Zealand and the USA) competing in a weekend of FOW matches, but more importantly, many friends reuniting under one roof for the same passion for wargaming.

I was fortunate enough to participate in my first ETC (European Team Challenge) in 2022 when my friend Søren Petersen invited me as a ‘mercenary’ for the Iceland team. I had a great time and it went very well! The following year, we returned as Team Italy led by the new Captain Livio Tonazzo, and things went very well indeed again. This year, the same team—consisting of Livio Tonazzo, Flaviano Maggioni, Giacomo Velini, Antonio Soncini, and Tiberio Vinante—is heading to Kraków, Poland. This time, the tournament is in the Late War format.

Historicon 2024 & Flames of War US Nationals report

By Paolo Paglianti

Based in Lancaster, near Philadelphia, Historicon is one of the most important events for enthusiasts of modeling, painting, wargaming, miniatures, and, as the show’s name suggests, military history. It might be a bit smaller than Adepticon, since it involves visitors, players, and professionals focused on historical games rather than fantasy or sci-fi, but it is a concentration of everything our hobby represents.

At Historicon, you can try dozens of games, from chariot racing scenarios to a 10-meter table recreating the D-Day landings in 28mm, or simply participate in one of the demos – this year we tried the excellent “Achtung Panzer” by Warlords presented in person by the author Roger Gerrish, but there was also “Wings of Glory,” demos of “Triumph” (Ancient in 15mm a-la DBA), and a splendid scenario of a clash in Indochina between French colonial and Chinese troops recreated with FOW V3.

I also managed to spend some time with my friend Mitch Reed, for the second time in 2024 and in a true American Sport Bar with baseball games on TV and huge hamburgers!

The Italian Flames of War Nationals in Milan!

Players in Conaredo Italy, inside an athletic facility, play wargames on a basketball court.
More than 50 players under the same “roof” in Cornaredo, my hometown, where I organize various tournaments each year

By Paolo Paglianti

Although I have been organizing tournaments in Milan for various Wargames for over twenty years, this year’s Flames of War tournament was very special. First of all, I organized it again with the support of Battlefront and the Austrian store S-Games.at, both of them generously provided us with prizes. Moreover, it is the first time I have organized the Italian Nationals, a true honor for me. And finally, we had some foreign guests – and what guests!

Dynamic Points Come to Team Yankee

Opinion Piece By Jim Naughton

DYNAMIC POINTS: IF ENOUGH CUSTOMERS WHINE, THEY’RE RIGHT

A recent FACEBOOK post called attention to a BF plan to introduce DYNAMIC POINTS into Team Yankee.  It referred the reader to the Team Yankee website.  Since then, there has been a lot discussion in the various TY Groups on social medium.  

Couple years back, dynamic points were invented for Flames of War. The ostensible ‘reason’ for this was FOW tournament players had reacted to the Army Point (AP) values of the bread-and-butter tanks of MIDWAR by choosing Lend-Lease Tanks for the Soviets and spamming armored cars. Armored cars worked because they had enough armor and lots of machine guns to tank-assault many infantry units. Lend-Lease tanks like the M3 medium had an extra shot compared to T34s.

Vehicle identification and standard markings on Danish Vehicles

By Morten

In this article I will talk about markings used on Danish Vehicles in the 80s and 90s.
Most of these have been in use since the 60/70s and are still in use to this day, although with some variations and updates.

For some markings there are Army standards that needs to be obeyed, and are generally placed on the same location on all vehicles, although slight variation in placement could occur, because they were put on the vehicle by either the crew themselves or the mechanic echelons on base.

Let’s start with the “easy” parts that are present on all vehicles: License plates, Vehicle numbers and weight classification (for heavier vehicles).

D-Day Upon Us – D-Day+10 Battle Report Part I

By Michael Rafferty

This year marks the 80th anniversary of Operation Overlord and the Battle for Normandy. To commemorate this my local group, the Nerds of War, wanted to run a D-Day themed mega battle. It’s been a few years since we’ve run a mega battle at our FLGS The Game Room and not at AdeptiCon, so we wanted to start things off with something big and flashy.

We have a logo and a banner, we’re official!

I really enjoy running large games for people and I’ve always enjoyed playing in something larger and more cinematic. It’s a good feeling to be maneuvering whole tank companies about the battlefield instead of a platoon. That’s what got me started running big games a decade or so ago.

If other people weren’t going to run the kind of games I like, I would do it myself. These games also motivate me to complete modeling projects. Setting a date means I need to have things ready by then and I work better with firm, external deadlines. Big games both keep me recharged in the hobby and progressing along my projects, a win-win!

Italian GT Nationals Flames of War – Road to ETC 2024

Flames of War Italian Nationals logo

By Paolo Paglianti

The most important event of the year for Flames of War enthusiasts is at the beginning of August when the best players from every European nation (and beyond, including New Zealand and the USA!) will converge on Krakow. This year, Krakow will host the ETC 2024, the Flames of War World Team Championship (we covered how it went last year here, and the 2022 edition here).

To prepare at their best, but the invitation is also open to players who will not participate in the ETC but want to challenge some of the best European players, we are organizing the Italian National GT, which will take place in mid-June in Milan. On June 15-16, at the impressive sports center of Cornaredo, where I organize all ‘my’ wargame tournaments, the tournament will take place over two days, which will also be the final stage of the Italian FOW Championship.

Flames of War D-Day: Forces Compendium – The Longest day has the heftier book

By Paolo Paglianti

Just as it had happened for the Mid period, Battlefront is about to release the first “compendium” of Late War books, starting with D-Day. The hefty tome, comprising more than 320 pages, includes the two German volumes (SS and D-Day German), as well as the British and American ones.

Is there anything new on the Western Front? While the Mid “Compendium” books (Desert and Eastern Front) had added the “Monsters”, the experimental units or those produced in very few numbers, in the case of D-Day the novelties are more limited. The NoDiceNoGlory team of Flames of War enthusiasts (in addition to myself, who read the book along with my favorite sparring partner Claudio Tiso, there are also Michael Rafferty and Richard Steer) combed through the tome and found some sneaky juicy additions. Are they a valid reason to buy the new compendium? Probably yes, but you need to read until the end of the article!