GDW Team Yankee with Steve's hacks...

I've known Steve over at the excellent 'Sound Officers' Call' for many years, and in addition to the fact that we have played games online with Jon over at the equally excellent 'Palouse Wargaming',  we have a few gaming 'likes' in common, including a love for Frank Chadwick's 'Volley and Bayonet' and of course his 'First Battle' series from GDW.

Now amongst the First Battle series was the superb Team Yankee, based upon Harold Coyle's book and released in 1987. (Not the similarly named Flames of War variant with 'tank parks').

We have tinkered with converting this game to tabletop since 2014, and I know Steve has been hacking these rules for several more years, so when he sent me his latest iteration, I was of course all over it.

The original 1987 Team Yankee box. Now, the original was designed to have the box look worn after 24 hours. ALL boxes look like this, no matter what they tell you about quality on BoardgameGeek...if your box is pristine, or undamaged, you clearly have a cheap chinese copy of the game...

The design is mostly seamless, and has been upgraded and upscaled for other conflicts  (Sands of War, Blood & Thunder, Test of Battle et al); but, it is the tactical nuance of Team Yankee that gives it the edge, with units as single tanks and squads.

This is why it works:

• The Turn Phases are '1st attacks' , 'move and reaction' and 'last attacks'. This is beautifully subtle, with some variation for missile technology, and unlike similar systems (like Rapid Fire for instance), where you can 'move fire' or 'fire move' - yet players rarely use this variation, the discipline of the sequence encourages you to manipulate it to your advantage - but in a tactical manner, which makes sense.
• For instance, I might use one platoon to shield the move of another - hence 'overwatch' style play is intrinsically built into the rules, and 'reaction fire' can be easily handled too.
• The stats are also beautifully done - in terms of attack / defence values, which are further manipulated to suit range modifiers. (There is a massive spreadsheet online which collates ALL the games' stats).
• Steve's changes however, were mainly to the single biggest bugbear of the original system - that of the CRT or Combat Results Table; a holdover from more traditional 1970s hex'n'chit style games (we all know them). This in essence compared the attack/defence values - the issue being that an M1's attack value vs a T72's defence, invariably ended up at 1:1, or at the very least, was less than satisfying with the variability of a single d6 roll on a CRT.
• Simply put, Steve's variant challenges this by using a number of dice based off the attack/defence differential (1, 2, 3 or more) - said dice achieving hits on a 6, 5-6, or 4-6 dependent on range and target. Hence the whole system is baked into a neater and dare I say, more modern appreciation of probabilities, which 'slays' said bugbear with 2d6 damage to the face!
• 'Yes!' you will say, 'but doesn't a 2:1 attack end up with the same probability of a hit/kill?". Of course, but if the math still works, but with a system that is more satisfying and actually faster without the 'wayback machine' CRT, then that is what we want.
• Now, the rolls to hit and kill/damage/pin (infantry), are subsumed into the number of dice rolled, and the results on said dice. (As Steve pointed out, there is a throwback to FFT, which developed its systems from TY, so clearly the world works in perfect balance...).
• The game that made tactical WW3 work, is now a lot more elegant in terms of design, in my view.
• We used 'inches' to match range stats in the game in this one, on a 6x4. As a slight upgrade, would probably double this for future games, and use 2" or 50mm gradations on a range stick, as WWIII always needs to have long range stuff happen at 'long' range.

Added to this was the fact that my eldest daughter always offers to play a wargame with Dad on his birthday (which somehow, she always wins), and my young nephew also joined us for the first half too - and now wants to ditch D&D for wargaming (yay). See how the stars aligned? Hence the short action below, which despite the depredations of a little red wine on my part, was hard fought...

The only slight issue with my daughter playing in the games room, is that any 20mm stuff from other games, sitting near the table, thereby seems to become 'doused with bling' ...

A badly mauled Soviet battalion, is ordered to over-run scattered US defensive positions in the small twin villages of 'HauenStadtBahnHoff' and 'BahnHoffHauenStadt'.

We have T80s and T72s, with BTR borne infantry, vs two platoons of M1s reinforced with 3x platoons of infantry. Artillery is unavailable on this, day 6, of the third world war in 1985...(yes, even for the Soviets)...

(Forces below are 1/200 Skytrex, the poor efforts are my painting - the more photogenic vehicles are by 'DiceDemon Steven'):

US units for a hasty defence of the twin villages. They must stop Soviet units exiting the highway...

Soviet infantry on their right, will spend the day moving cautiously 

US units are outnumbered, but well dug in. Canny Soviets however would spring a trap...

M1s use the high ground where possible

Here they come. T80s have missile capability (Songsters down the gun tube) while the T72 does not. Firing said tac missile prohibits movement however. 

US also has ITVs which do a lot of damage early on at range

An M1 on a wooded hill does damage on the T80s, which rather than strike hard and fast, waste time deliberating about their missile technology

A stunning position, for M1 fire discipline...you would think ;)

...until it got swamped with Soviet infantry

On the Soviet left, armour uses cover to advance, using BRDMs to scout, and acquiring targets...

'BRDM2 800m...engage"

A little hot on the way in, on the Soviet left

...but...poor fire discipline in the centre, allows Soviet armour to make gains. A few kills and damaged vehicles littered the battlefield, but neither side was close to break point

Having overwhelmed the US left with infantry, the remnants of the Soviet BTRs launched themselves into town, dismounting into buildings, without US firepower being able to overwhelm them due to numbers

jazz hands...

The US centre held for a time, and armour started to pull back to form a second line ...this was my main mistake; I had not planned adequate second lines of defence and really should have pulled back after first shots. As usual, I kept ITVs in place for too long, and did not pull back at opportune moment...I should really know better. Soviet units were able to overwhelm with simple numbers...

The rules allow for US doctrine and Soviet doctrine to work seamlessly - simply put, the fire-move-fire - notation of the turn sequence builds in continuous advance under fire AND an element of fire and retreat to second line

The centre turned into a massive firefight. Interestingly, both sides left several units out on the flanks and forced the fight into the town, where Soviet numbers became rapid equalisers to US firepower

Soviet troops drink Heiniken in the beer garden  :(

All in all, Team Yankee never fails to deliver - made all the easier with Steve's CRT hacks. Certainly a more valid ruleset now - and it easily competes for attention with more complex sets. My sense was, that 'seven days to the river rhine' hangs off its activation system - without that unique 'token' placement in 7dttrr, it is a d10 based hit system, while Team Yankee is designed for ww3 action from the ground up - the nature of its turn sequence, its hit/armour values, and its variations in doctrine.   More to come, and can not wait to get my British on the table...even my Territorial Army elements ;)

...and in other news, future games, as discussed with Steve, will be using both modern and ww2 variants of Peter's excellent ww2 rules - now although these are company element based, we can also go with platoon variations on hexes. This enables larger scale 3 battle campaigns, Falklands, Fulda Gap, Desert war...watch this space...

3am at Walcourt & the Goldilox Hex Principle

Ages ago, I joined 'Steam', and discovered all of the old PC games that I wasted time on 20 years ago on the PC.

I also found 'Pike & Shot Campaigns' which I had first seen on Doug's excellent 'Cry Havoc' blog, and it included a lot of late C17th battles, so what's not to like?

So when I say this is a screenshot, Duc de 'Luddite' couldn't work out how to do a 'Prt Scrn' from here...these are actual screenshots...like with a camera.

 I chose Walcourt 1689, which is great, as the scope of the battlefield encompasses all of the movement of incoming reinforcements from both sides, seizing built up areas and hanging onto them, and massive cavalry actions on the flank. It's a nice system, which is obviously built upon the mechanisms of wargaming rules, so all makes sense.

Great action, great dynamic gameplay ...I lost!

 Say what you like about video games 'addiction': I was up until 3am ....uhhhh....and I lost!  Great game, and lots of scenario detail. 

Point the second: More thoughts after the last GDW Team Yankee / First Battle game. I'll be graduating to 'Battlefield Europe' next - the follow on variation, which used D10 instead of D6, and added some more developmental rules for modern warfare.

I have a few sizes of hexagon, though the 4.5" variants are the ones that I have most of, and that are finished/flocked.  I had contemplated using the 1/200 and 1/300 stuff on hexes and so had a few tests.

1) I can mimic the rules exactly in terms of smaller hexes- though I can't fit enough vehicles on board to mimic the stacking limits (3 or 4)

Too Small

 2) I can use the ultra large hex, but it allows too many vehicles, and I don't really have enough of them - plus increases the footprint of the map - even if this represents two map hexes.

Too Big

 3) I can use the 4.5" hexes - and model each of them on the  basis of 'two' actual hexes on the GDW gameboards...AHA! Stacking to this extent is rare, but does allow Soviet platoon doctrine.

Just Riiiight!

So this represents 2 hexes on the actual game map.

Now, this also has the handy bonus of mimicking Soviet doctrine - in that, I can place a platoon in the hex and have it restricted to staying in 3 vehicle groupings.

As it's two hexes, I can have a platoon of tanks and BMPs in the same hex, if required.

I can further have a single platoon fire at a single target as per Soviet doctrine, and rule it perfectly with this system.

So, if two hexes in the boardgame, becomes one hex on my table, I re-do the counter information slightly, along these lines:

 Now that I see these rules in action again, I'm wondering even if mimicking NATO training is simply done by virtue of granting them initiative each turn.

Also, I can use the scenarios from here:

 

to test the system

The more I see of this simple (but not simplistic) GDW/Chadwick system, the more I like its elegance. The advent of the D10 over the D6 actually fixes the obvious issue that the system had with decent armour, whereby if you fired enough shots at an M1, you could destroy it through disablement. That's harder on the D10 CRT.

More to come...

More GDW Team Yankee

 Managed to squeeze a game in, and it seems we keep coming back to the old GDW Team Yankee boardgame for WW3. 

I used the stats for British forces at the back of the rulebook, plus there are more of these in the other 'First Battle' supplements.

1:200 vehicles in play today

 The turn sequence seems like nothing new, as does the combat table, but this game is so elegant. 

 Elegant systems include:

• The Turn sequence, where if you have initiative, forces you to choose between going 1st or 2nd in turn - but be careful with reaction fire.
• The CRT seems very old school, but range and cover make such a difference. The game design advice is correct; if you can fire, you 'might as well try it' unless staying hidden and closing range is worth doing. Two Chieftains got taken out in the game below, simply by virtue of the weight of Soviet numbers.
• For me, the great thing here is one set of rules suiting all levels and modern periods / scenarios.

GDW's Team Yankee - all the boxes are like this; it's part of GDW's 'patented battered box' design.

 I've managed to collect all of the 1st Battle series now, including 'Stand or Die 1941' which appears to take 2 jumps up from Team Yankee (where 'Sands of War' jumps to units being platoons, 'Stand or Die' makes them companies - but without making it obvious ;)   ).

 

 So, I'm hoping to explore the entire set using miniatures. Aims include:

• Also expanding 'Last Battle' for Man to Man on tabletop.
• Playing some of the modern battles included in 'Sands of War'.
• Using some bits for 'Hyboria Now'.
• I'm still keen to develop the 'turn clock' and 'traits' systems in conjunction with these rules. 

 

  (oooh Blogger sucks so much now with pics...Now I get it!)

Soviet armour on their left makes a dash for the town.

 

 The British Chieftains are poorly spread out.

BMPs on the left start to take MILAN hits.

T72s exploit an apparent flank opportunity on the right.

While on the right, Soviet infantry mass against the British units in cover, pinning them early.

 

 

Soviet units make it into the BUA.

The weight of Sov armour is just too much, and a couple of lucky hits put paid the British right flank.

There are unexplored nuances in these rules, and the rest of 'First Battle' just waiting to be explored.

'When I said, 'stay on my tail', this is NOT what I meant!'