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.
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.
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.
The first edition of RAF August 1940: The Battle of Britain, designed by the award-winning gamer designer John Butterfield, was published by West End Games in 1986. Butterfield is best known for his solo designs. His designs are appreciated for their straightforward rules and immersive game play.
