Flames of War: WE LOVE PHIL YATES edition

The question is, what do you want T-72s for?

Yeah, they're not auto-bounce if they assault, but assaulting is an awful place for T-72s anyway, so why you would want to is a mystery, and you get infantry for that.

You can move and shoot with them, but generally you only need ATGMs for tanks, so you can still be closing on infantry anyway.

I just don't see a niche for the T-72, and it's an enormous points-sink.

So how does Naval Gunfire Support work with V4 reserves? Do you only deploy the naval observer if the NGS is part of your on-board points, or is it always placed and you can fire the guns even while they're part of your offboard points? I'd assume the former, but I'm not 100% there.

Also, the Market Garden Naval Gunfire Support lets you spot for them with any of the NGS observers (as it's possible for the Commando list to take two NGS choices), since the force can have two observers. The V4 rules for NGS say the NGS observer is in addition to the normal allocation of one, but don't bother addressing if you have multiple NGS sections because they just refer to the overlord rules for MG's NGS. Would you get one or both observers? Do you then get to spot for the battery that's in reserve with the one that has the observer on the field, since the NGS doesn't have any teams?

I'd think the T-55 or T-34 was more iconic. Even NATO intelligence had trouble telling the T-72 from the T-64/T-80.

T-55/T-34 was also much more widely used.

When people say BMP do they mean 1 or 2 ?

Can someone post those Salute images again.

Bit disappointed to be honest, I was hoping for the T-80. Then we could have a reasonable 1:1ish game without the ridiculous hordes.

Well here's hoping we still get the automatic mortars, the tunguska, the t-80,. new fighters, maybe a new artillery piece.

Oh but that's right the t-80 and ERA weren't in service till 87 and 89.

CHEERS.

I loved t64 and btr in wargame ALB. Next project for me !

Cheers, and I mean that unironically in this context.

Now that they've shown off the T-64 I bet they'll be saving the T-80 for the next book a few years down the road.

>saving the T-80 for the next book a few years down the road

Honestly at this point I don't feel that game's lifespan will be that long.

I'm prepared to agree with that now. Unless Red Thunder brings something good to the table, playing as the Warsaw Pact is a joke and how Battlefront treats us is the punchline.

On a whim I wanted to see how hard it would be to do research for TY.

Less than 30 minutes and I have actual NATO field manuals on soviet tactics and organization. This leads me to conclude that Phil and his ilk probably aren't doing any in depth research for their game.

So I present to you:
FM100-2-1: The Soviet Army: Operations and Tactics
a.uguu.se/ri4Aqg4Q6P3i.pdf

And

FM100-2-3: the Soviet Army: Troops, Equipment, and Organization
a.uguu.se/63LMjgfkrjLg.pdf

Links are good for the next 24 hours.

It really is what's keeping me away from team yankee. I like the soviets and want to play them. Playing NATO forces sounds boring to me personally and knowing the faction I want to play boils down to "Spam" in the eyes of game designers irks me.

I might just send these on to Battlefront.

They probably do the research and then disregard it or massage it.

They basically want a horde vs. elite dichotomy and nothing is going to get in the way of that.

>Modified T-64Bs with reactive armor were first observed in October 1984.

ERA WHEN PHIL?

The game is set in August of 1984.

Cheers.

In the words of GTA, 'the T-72 was the tank your dad thought he'd be running away from in WWIII'.

So has phil still got his anti-soviet bias?

Does anyone remember when he said the Soviets in Berlin were as well trained as the Americans in Tunisia?

I want the BM-27 Uragan, the 2S3 Akatsiya, the 2S9 Nona, and the BTR-D with VDV units.

I expect we will get none of those however.

I'd settle for the battalion AT platoons and maybe the regimental AT companies for motor rifle troops.

If the brits are going to gallivant about with a bajillion milans then fair is fair.

The whole last general was bitching about Phil's retarded bias.

Much of this one seems to be the same T B H.

Kinda justifed since he appears to be actively trying to ruin his own game by gimping half the factions and turning the other half into Matt Wardian levels of bullshit

well after reading a bunch of team yankee nonsense in fow thread I'm quite sure V4 is a bust and will die soon.

As long as they can keep momentum and hype going for their new releases they can keep sales up, rules be damned. It's once the pace slows that the game will start to die. Both FoaN and ToD did good business 'till the hype train derailed and then just faded away. I figure that this will be the same, with the added provision that we'll see attrition amongst Warpac players as time goes on an NATO gets more toys. I know our local scene is slowly bleeding them.

Nah, V4 just needs more releases and a comprehensive FAQ/Errata and it will be perfectly serviceable until they convert EW and LW to the new point standard and begin the cycle again.

TY on the other hand may or may not be gutshot.

We need a Warsaw Pact fan project asap.

I don't see the point. It's a lot of work that's just going to be automatically rejected by most of the player base either for being unofficial, or for being 'Warpact Wank'.

In my area we started losing Warpac players after Iron Maiden dropped, and its only been downhill from there. I want to love TY but right now, there is no way to attract players to Warpac, and to be fair without them, there is no game. Unless this next release evens out the NATO powercreep in a substantial way, or in the very least provides some better lists that aren't hurr durr BMPs, TY in my area isn't long for this world.

I don't know i play team yankee with a group who seem to be forever making rules for models they want in the game.

I suppose with there's a decent enough jumping off point to start from. Since we've got unit trees and composition from that all we'd really have to do is stat and cost some of the options that aren't covered yet, maybe restat a couple of things (T-55 cough cough).

I was working on a FoaN hack to cover the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia when TY launched and killed all desire to finish it.

This is as far as I got doing stats for that hack.

If i am not wrong a good number of NATO documents are desclasified, so it is posible to know a more oficial values of the M1 and Leopard 2 A0-3 armor.

I think it is the same with the russians but well they are propaganda and are in rusian

>I think it is the same with the russians but well they are propaganda and are in rusian

Hi Phil. You forgot to "cheers".

It's actually gotten harder to get documents from the Russians with the current breakdown in east west relations, at least with regards to formal requests for academic purposes.

The best bet is to go through stuff that's already been released. Unfortunately, it's in Russian - and that's probably one of the stumbling blocks that makes Phil shrug and go 'asiatic hordes'.

CHEERS

He'd just have to read some Ospreys to do a better job than he is doing now.

We need an official "cheers" image for edits and shit like that.

Can someone take a photo of all their BMP or T-72 writing CHEERS?

so ive always been an infantry man.

is volksarmee playable without going full eastern hordes mode?

10min in paint.

Is good comrade?

NVA is even spammier than the Soviets, and they're supposed to be professional.

God help us when the Poles come about.

Does anyone know if the Barbarossa digital lists are supposed to have 2 katyusha options or is that a misprint? If not you can field 2 batteries with pizza box sized bombardment with rerolls to hit and rerolled infantry saves for repeat bombardment at FP 4+. 2 sets of 8 BM-8s are 415 points with extra crew and an observer.

fuck. thats bad news. nva uniforms get me hard as diamonds. but i already play Japanese and italians so i hardly need another spam army

Forgot to attach the example image.

>play poles
>table creaks under the weight of my army
>only 50pts

That does indeed appear to give you double Katies.

If it's a misprint BF have never commented on corrected it.

Enjoy your rockets.
All of them.

What are the odds that we get T-62s?

100% with rules that will make you want to shout out cheers

So a T-55 with +1 armour and better gun?

Saved, but sorry it seems i wasn't that much specific, i was asking for someone use their T-72/BMP miniatures in a "CHEERS" formation

If we are talking about the T-62M it would be the same armor as the T-55 with the same mobility as the T-72 with a gun that could fire ATGM, it was used in Afganistan.

Or the 1985 version T-62MV with ERA.

Well, it's probably not going to be the T-62MV, because apparently to Soviets don't have ERA.

And given how BF made a franken tank rather than go with an established model for the T-72, we probably won't get the specific T-62M either.

So what we'll get is a basic, missileless, generic T-62 that only poorly represents the tank in general.

Cheers.

Huh, that can actually be done with as little as 30 models...

>Or the 1985 version T-62MV with ERA.

yeah but...

God, this is all just so grim. The Brits get stuff because it's cool, the soviets don't get stuff because it wasn't widespread among a specific kind of tank at the end of the cold war.

I feel like if BF wanted to make an NPC faction they should've at least been honest about it.

Is V4 dead ?

If a war was brewing you would think era fitting and production would increase.

Uncheers

No. We're like 2 months in. The africa stuff really doesn't seem to be selling that great here, but other places seem to be buying it up. We are picking up a few more players for LW. I still plan on playing even if I don't agree with every change.

Let's reconvene next March and we may have a better answer for that question. Seems like the reaction is entirely community dependent.

What did you expect from a company that decided to make T-72s the primary tank of Group of Soviet Forces Germany counter to history?

And then made a franken T-72 instead of a real model.

I wanted to get back into FoW with the North Africa stuff but it really wasn't inspiring. The lists and model choices were trimmed down to the bare bones of new plastic kits.

Taking the wrong lessons from GW.

>Taking the wrong lessons from GW.
Are there any RIGHT lessons to be taken from that hive of scum and villainy? (Aside from "don't do it like them")

People like high quality plastic models and high production values in their books.

There seems to be a bit of an Edition War going on.

Or at the very least some very vocal haters. Some of whom are bringing up legitimate issues with the game and some of whom are just looking for excuses to shit all over it.

It's hardly dead.

It's also roughly one month old.

The honest answer is that it needs to be given time to expand and grow.

It also needs a FAQ to answer some of the more retarded, but not technically wrong according to the rules, issues that people have pointed out.

It's T-72A, it's got BDD.

Plastic is the material of the future and you have to be able to produce high quality plastic model kits to survive in the current war games market.

This too.

>with ERA

/NVA/

>play poles
>opponent asks for a 150pt game so he can play all his leopard 2s and fancy toys
>grab the yellow pages
>book out tennis court and hire a removal van to transport my minis

...

I know., But i want to belive he is talking about only the T-64...

Right?

Yeah, NATO players who want to play at higher points values are utterly clueless about what that actually means for a Soviet or East German player.

50 extra points is something like 2 more A-10s and another 4 Abrams.

It's **a lot** more than that for the Communists.

...

It's not a T-72A, at least model wise - it's missing the telltale 'Dolly Parton' composite armor at the front of the turret. Instead it has the T-72 Ural turret. And on the stat card it has the improved gun from the T-72B.

Franken Tank it is.

The T-72A had "lumps", but not huge ones; they just make the turret non-circular rather than bulging out like the B's do.

T-72 Urals and early T-72Ms had a much gentler slope on the front turret.

T-72A bulked out the slope to more of a vertical front.

They're getting better under their new CEO, fwiw. At the moment they're better listeners than BF.

But edition launches are always difficult when you have a broad set of rules, and this is probably the best way to do it if the new edition is different enough that old stats don't work (i.e. bare bones initial release, then flesh it out over time). Hmm, "bare bones" and "flesh it out" work well together, I wonder if that's coincidence.

Is it weird that my biggest problem with V4 is that it came before they could make a 1945 compilation?

>they could make a 1945 compilation?
Last I heard they still are. Don't worry it's V3. No, they haven't explained why the fuck they're doing that.

Wat

I heard about that some many months ago too, but didn't expect they'd actually go through with it.

Oh well, if they do I'll be a happy camper.

>Don't worry it's V3.
I... wha... but...

What.

I mean, I like V3 much more than V4, but still.

What.

Alright /fowtg/ lets play a game:
>Instead of a 1980s Hot War, TY is set in the 1960s
>What key vehicle is stuck as a metal and resin kit?
>Are the Soviets actually dominant in this perioid or are they still being Cheer'd?
>Which unit is Gepard-tier OP?
>What army are you looking forward to coming out next?

I'm not going to dig through their forum again but I clearly recall posts by staff members about the Berlin book being V3, well after the announcement of V4. It was supposed to come out this Christmas but you know Battlefront Time.

Further research indicates that it was announced in a WWPD podcast and in February this year they posted on the forum that "V3 Berlin Compilation" was "Still Happening. Cheers."

This.

I feel vaguely insulted when I see a kickstarter for some new metal figures. I'm not paying more money for 2-D looking figures that will need several layers of dullcote in order for the paint to not flake off.

Zsu-57 sniping Leopards 1, T-64 being Tigers II.

>What key vehicle is stuck as a metal and resin kit?

T-55

>Are the Soviets actually dominant in this perioid or are they still being Cheer'd?

Russian tanks are complety superior in the 60s but that doesn't mean they can't be Cheer'd.

Wait, is the Plastic T-72 somehow not a proper representation of a model?

It's somehow a mismatch of the Ural and A version It has BDD Armour, but the wrong systems installed.

Also it's armour is worse than the Chieftain despite the Chieftain being categorically worse.

If the T-55 was the primary tank, it wouldn't be in resin and metal still. APCs probably.

>Wait, is the Plastic T-72 somehow not a proper representation of a model?
Ahahaha.

The plastic T-72 is a T-72A, or at least, is clearly meant to be. It is, however, a finnish T-72, because the MG mount is on the left and not the rear. The hatch is also shit, and the smoke lawn chairs are wrong. The T-72 is a pretty rubbish kit, all considered.

>Also it's armour is worse than the Chieftain despite the Chieftain being categorically worse.
For some bizarre reason the book rates the armour (in actual thickness) as 100-150mm worse than basically every source I can find does. I have absolutely no idea why.

>For some bizarre reason the book rates the armour (in actual thickness) as 100-150mm worse than basically every source I can find does. I have absolutely no idea why.

What the actual fuck are they doing with team yankee?