Recommend
8 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

World at War: Blood and Bridges» Forums » News

Subject: New Blood and Bridges Screens Up rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mark Walker
United States
Henry
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
'65 Squad Level Combat in Vietnam. On Kickstarter!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We just wanted to tell everyone that we have put up some new pictures of Blood and Bridges. Keep in mind that this will be the last week for pre-order. More info at:http://www.locknloadgame.com.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Knight
New Zealand
Titirangi
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Looks pretty good, Mark. I'm hoping to get some time to play World at War some more over the holidays!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Caires
United States
Unspecified
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmb
New unit stats...
From the screenshots, it looks like we can see some of the final unit stats.

BMP-2: In close assault, they've got 3 @ 5, compared to the BMP-1's 1 @ 4. Looks like the autocannon and the missile are what pack more of a punch in close combat. I'm guessing they'll be able to do a better job of fighting alongside the infantry than the BMP-1's in EG, which were usually better of hiding and launching saggers than mixing it up directly.

(http://www.locknloadgame.com/UserImages/BnB120408.jpg vs. http://www.locknloadgame.com/userimages/WAW_02.jpg)

T-80: Armor of 3 @ 5, which is the same as the M1's in the original Eisenbach Gap. Makes me want the uparmored M1's or M1A1's to go up against them. I assume the reactive armor is what makes the difference here. Sounds like the T-80's will have an easier time closing with the enemy than the T-72's of Eisenbach Gap, and I think a unit of American tanks would have a harder time taking on a whole battalion of T-80's this time around.

(http://www.locknloadgame.com/UserImages/BnB120408.jpg vs. http://www.locknloadgame.com/userimages/WAW_01.jpg)

Apache: Range of 28 with a 4 @ 3 attack will probably smite just about anything, and a range of 6 on the HE isn't half bad either. I'm looking forward to using these. I think the rumor is that they're going to only get one activation chit, so they seem less maneuverable than the hinds or cobras.

(http://www.locknloadgame.com/UserImages/BnB120408B.jpg)

Overall it looks like the russians are getting some seriously beefed up units. I'm looking forward to mixing these units with the ones from EG and Death of the First panzer and seeing if the upgraded Soviets can properly steamroll the Americans. The upgraded armor on the T-80's and upgraded close assault of the BMP-2 are the things that interest me the most. (I have a not-so-hidden Russian bias...)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Price
New Zealand
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
thecaptain wrote:
From the screenshots, it looks like we can see some of the final unit stats.

BMP-2: In close assault, they've got 3 @ 5, compared to the BMP-1's 1 @ 4. Looks like the autocannon and the missile are what pack more of a punch in close combat.


Yes, I looked at these numbers with interest as well.

The 30mm autocannon is a superior weapon for the MICV role than the 73mm recoiless the BMP1 used (subsequently I believe all modern MICVs use an autocannon up to 40mm). The missile, a spandral in this case, has a significant minimum range (approx 100m) making it difficult to use in close combat. So I think the designers are primarily taking into account the autocannon and co-axial MG. I believe 3-5 is appropriate for close combat, but others may disagree.

Quote:
T-80: Armor of 3 @ 5, which is the same as the M1's in the original Eisenbach Gap. Makes me want the uparmored M1's or M1A1's to go up against them. I assume the reactive armor is what makes the difference here.


I assume it is the T-80BV that is being modelled in this game, which includes explosive reactive armour (ER)? The T-80 armour value of 3-5 initially struck me as possibly a little too high, particularly given the Chechen experience. However, following digging around this value seems appropriate (although possibly a tad high as discussed below).

Since the mid 1990's we now know quite a bit more about Soviet armour (and also Western armour). Here are some best guess RHAe numbers for turret frontal armour (KE=Kinetic Energy; CE=Chemical Energy):

M1 Abrams KE=400mm; CE=800mm
T-80BV KE=300-500mm; CE=700-1000mm



One thing that counts against the T-80 is that the reactive armour blocks do not cover the entire aspect of the tank, including the front. The exact figure escapes me, but I believe the reactive armour only covers 60%-70% of the frontal aspect. Thus you could strike the front of a T-80BV with a HEAT round and not engage the explosive blocks.

From practical experience the T-80BVs were proved vunerable in Chechnya 1995. This was primarily attributable to poor tactics, absence of ER or lack of explosive filling, and ex-Soviet servicemen who knew the weak points of the tank (interestingly, in the recent Georgian conflict T-80 and T-72 tanks were reported with ER lacking explosive infill).

Thus, I believe on balance the M1 is better protected than the T-80, but not by a huge amount.


Quote:
Overall it looks like the russians are getting some seriously beefed up units. I'm looking forward to mixing these units with the ones from EG and Death of the First panzer and seeing if the upgraded Soviets can properly steamroll the Americans. The upgraded armor on the T-80's and upgraded close assault of the BMP-2 are the things that interest me the most. (I have a not-so-hidden Russian bias...)


Being from the United States I would hope that you had a NATO bias. We would have to keep an eye on you in the front lines!

Steven
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Schulte
United States
Washington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wrgplayer wrote:

Being from the United States I would hope that you had a NATO bias. We would have to keep an eye on you in the front lines!

Steven


But isn't it always more fun to play the bad guys?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Price
New Zealand
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Jeff Schulte wrote:
wrgplayer wrote:

Being from the United States I would hope that you had a NATO bias. We would have to keep an eye on you in the front lines!

Steven


But isn't it always more fun to play the bad guys? ;)


I agree, it is!

Bring on the T-80's.

Steven
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Snyder
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The T-80 is the T-80BV and we also have the T-64BV in the game too. Reactive armour does play a small part in the tanks defensive numbers, but we did have an optional rule cut dealing with advanced armours vs ATGMs. The M1 is a good tank, but I think the T-80 is a decent match and basically hits harder with the 125mm over the M1's 105mm gun.

As for the single activation of the AH-64's, the first AH-64 units were in training at the outbreak of the war and they are just not up to full speed. Hence the 1 activation chit. The platform itself is a tank eater and second only to the A-10 in single shot firepower.

As for tanks being easy kills in recent conflicts, it's never a good idea to have your tanks in restrictive terrain where infantry can hit them from the sides or top. The WAW rules do a good job of showing that with a very simple game mechanic.

Big battles are around the corner. I hope you enjoy them. cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Price
New Zealand
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Capn Darwin wrote:
The M1 is a good tank, but I think the T-80 is a decent match and basically hits harder with the 125mm over the M1's 105mm gun.



Well if it hits harder, why is the T-80 a 3-4 whilst the M1 is a 4-4 on anti-armour firepower?

It looks like you are classing the M1 105mm M68A1 gun above the 2A46 125mm T-80 gun on punching power.

In terms of aiming, the M1 is superior, particulary on the move due to more numerous input sensors, imaging, better stabilisation and fire control computer. With respect to penetrating power in 1985 I believe (although I'm pleased to be corrected here) they had similar armour penetration. Common sources indicate the BM-26 APFSDS round could penetrate 410mm at 2000m range (0º, c.f. M1 frontal armour of 400mm against KE rounds) and the NATO 105mm equivalent round had similar or slightly less performance.

So whilst I believe your statement above maybe somewhat simplistic for anti-tank warfare based ob calibres, I believe the values given on the counters appear roughly consistent with our current knowledge.

Regarding vunerability of T-80 tanks, I noted poor tactics in my post as the first contributing factor to the T-80's apparent poor performance in Chechnya. Even the mighty King Tiger performed poorly in many situations!

You can see I'm a fan of the WaW series when I start throwing around numbers most people probably don't care about.

Steven

P.S. I've written this post without any reference material with me. Any mistakes are entirely my fault.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Snyder
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve,

We love the numbers. A lot of what you are using and saying is what we used. The T-80 was scored 3-4 vs the M1's 4-4 on the basis of range finding, fire control, rate of fire and stability. Basically what you point out above. With such a narrow window of values using a 6 sided die, units may fall in and out of a "type" and it looks funny.

Keep the comments rolling in. cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Schulte
United States
Washington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Another thing to remember is that the Soviets had only a 3 tank platoon compared to 4 tanks usually for a NATO platoon. This should affect firepower for the units in the game. Even taking into consideration the smaller platoons of the Soviets, I think the firepower numbers are about right (IMHO).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Snyder
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb


More, once I can get my camera to play nice.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Price
New Zealand
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
It lives!!!

I hope that's not my copy you have seductively posed their?

Definitely a candidate for America's Next Top Model.

Steven
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Snyder
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve,

no.. no.. I would never...(scribles name off of box)...use your copy...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.