Enjoyed the Video, keep up the good work. I am by no means an expert in Team Yankee, but sometimes the formations seem to shallow compared to others. It's not exclusive to the french, but there i feel it's more common, having just a few formations to begin with. The Leclerc, Amx-30 and Amx-10P formations just dont have much to choose from 1 or 2 more units to have a deeper the formation would have been nice. Every formation they updated, has this depth, the old ones don't (i know the Leclerc is new, but really this only replaces some AMX-30, but otherise is the same). As i said, it's not exclusive to the french, but subjectively this is the norm for the French, while it is an exception for other nations (like the ANZAC and Belgian Recce formations). Maybe the audio can be improved a bit in the future, sounds a but muted from time to time (i assume you are not recording wearing a mask, but it sounds like you do).
Just how large are the Canadian Airborne platoons? Any stat differences versus standard Canadians? I’m trying to get a hint as to whether I need to get more infantry to enlarge my Mech Platoons.
Hi, Ive been watching your videos and have enjoyed the in depth analyses you do. Do you have any recommendations for building competitive American lists? I am a new player that is especially finding it hard to either attack or also to deal with infantry spam lists. I find the USA has a lot of static firepower with TOW HMMVWs, M901s, etc. but attacking firepower either is vunerable like M60s or very expensive like Abrams. The mediocre 4+ skill and and assault ratings mean it's hard to rely on your Americans for advanced maneuvers and attacks, as well as more difficulty ranging in with artillery as compared to most other NATO countries.
with the us lists its about being able to use things like m1s to flank, however as stated you could use a ausse lav formation in conjunction with the light attack us formation to have a majority 3+ skill force.
M109 field artillery should be good to deal with stationary infantry. You get 2 batteries of 3 vehicles for only 14 points. While it is harder to range in with them the big thing about artillery is the repeat bombardment where you will hit straight on their to hit rating and they will have to reroll successful saves.
I know you already touched this a little in the Milan spam video, but how do you think the NATO book is going to shake up the meta for both the factions in the book and the factions that get access to new gear (US, UK, WG)? Also on a scale of one to ten how silly do you feel for making a tier list like three weeks before 7 nations received updates and 1 brand new one was added?
I did this Knowing about the upcoming changes as i intend to redo this a year from now. The new NATO book will shake up things in that it can create some very unique lists using allies, as i see that people my look to take units that have access to the new ATGM to boost other nations.
@forwarnedforarmed220 Fair enough, my two cents is that no heavy tank is safe as long as the Milan 2 is like a 2.5 points per team unit. They weren't exactly Meta before but now every NATO country has AT 24 for still pretty cheap (except America). May no armor once again reign supreme as the best armor.
To be honest, the game should give the US their ADATS Bradleys (the only reason that the US wasn't deploying them is that 1) the USSR collapsed shortly after they were going into service and 2) the turret wasn't working with the Bradley quite right).
@@forwarnedforarmed220 me and my friends kind of backed off from FoW because they went on an over simplifying spree back in the day. Loosing all nuance and what not. Still, good to know that people are kiboshing rules in the FoW system.
you still have command cards for FOW which makes a lot of lists in v4. v3 days was like carrying around a backpack full of books just to find one unit.
