Battlegroup Northag – Questions & Answers

[sikilParticipant 358xp 0]

@piers

 

Dont forget the iconic PBV 302!  ?

[bloodmoonorcParticipant 1762xp 0]

I ordered the rule book at the weekend but was intrigued to know (whilst I wait for delivery impatiently) whether stats for challenger I will be in the book. As they were delivered from 83 onwards I would assume that if they did appear they’d be restricted/unique.

[piersParticipant 25463xp 1]

@bloodmoonorc

They are in the book… and are indeed a very limited item! 🙂

• This reply was modified 3 years, 11 months ago by  piers.

[bloodmoonorcParticipant 1762xp 0]

Excellent, thank you. Can’t wait to get the book.

[phaidknott 7012xp 0]

@bloodmoonorc Debatable if the Challenger 1s would have been technically “in service” AND operational in the front lines in 1983. The 105mm Abrams would have been around in some US units (with the bulk of the REFORGER units still with M60s for the US), and the first 300 Leopards 2s entered service for the German army in 83 as well (so depending on the month, the number would vary greatly). The problem with using Challangers, Abrams, and Leopard 2 in game is this was when “modern gaming” (usually with micro tanks) basically died as a popular period (as these new tanks were leaps and bounds ahead of the previous NATO frontline tanks AND what the Pact forces had available. NATO players bought all these new toys and expected the PACT players to go out and buy armies that were 4 or 5 times as large (just look at the starter armies here just using the Chieftain tanks and the difference in price). If you start fielding these, then you’ll have a hard time finding Pact players with large enough armies to face them (and the will to play against them). There’s a reason why Team Yankee and now NORTHAG picked the mid 80’s as a period, and that’s probably from the experiences of gamers who were around at the time all this happened and saw the “Modern” game just evaporate in popularity. So sticking to Chieftains, M60s and Leopard 1s would give a nearer match up (and be more accurate to what was in the field in NUMBERS (rather than theoretical forces as “in service” usually denoted another 1 to 2 years before these vehicles are in the field in great numbers.

@piers Thermal Imaging making an appearance in NORTHAG (gawd I hope not, as this was the breaking point for modern games and when Pact gamers started to disappear). Although “technically” used, it wasn’t available in great numbers (the early M1s with the 105mm gun were equipped with image intensifiers due to the fact there weren’t enough TI units available (although the ToE stated they should all have been equipped with TI scopes)?

Does infantry have a core purpose for the game? As we have seen with Team Yankee infantry are usually not fielded and even artillery units are all SPGs (as you still don’t have to use infantry for the towed guns), so that everything is in a nice self contained vehicle that basically plays like a tank.

Smoke et al, seen a few playthoughs starting to appear, but none have used smoke missions to mask an advance. Is smoke used in game?

Any chance we might see scenarios (like in the Battlegroup rules), with a map and ORBATS (where it’s a fixed list). It’s one of my favorite parts in the Battlegroup rules (and stop silly “tourney” list shenanigans and unhistorical formations)?

[piersParticipant 25463xp 1]

@phaidknott

Challenger tanks are in the game as they are cool… 😉

But you will never get more than 3.

We dont specify the exact optics, we just have advanced gunnery and advanced sights options for some tanks.

Infantry has the purpose it does historically – to take and hold objectives.

NorthAG, like Battlegroup, factors all tactical smoke use into the spotting rolls. It also, like BG Wacht am Rhein, has some extra rules for smoke barrage deployment.

Scenarios… up to PSC really if they want to use book space to have ‘historical’ scenarios. Always my favourite part, but its PSC who commission the books, so their call.

[piersParticipant 25463xp 3]

Some pics from PSC of all the released Soviet vehicles so far…

[torros 23802xp 0]

@piers Theg look really nice

 

Have they been primed?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by  torros.

[piersParticipant 25463xp 0]

@torros

Dont think so as they come that colour.

[pacificParticipant 400xp 0]

@piers – just to say a great idea for this thread! I have just ordered the rulebook so all very useful information!

Can I ask if there is any sort of rough timescale for the NATO and Warpac forces to be expanded? (to include the US, W. Germany and E. German forces etc?)

[piersParticipant 25463xp 1]

@pacific

It’s up to PSC really when they commission it, but I think they are aiming for April 2021

[lawtacParticipant 15xp 0]

Got my copy here in the US!  Cant wait to play, but after a couple read throughs I have some questions:

1.) The Russian T-80s cost less then the T-64Bs in both the Forward Screen/ Vanguard+Main force, T-80 (+6/+60) vs T-64Bs (+18/+120) , same with the T-80K (+8) vs the T64BK (+14) However the stats on the T-80 seem to be the same or better in all categories then the T-64B. Am I missing something that makes the T-80 worth less then the T-64B?

2.) Under Russian Equipment Data (Page 98), the ZSU-23-4 has a Rate of fire of (High*) with no explanation for the *. Same for the Mi24 Hinds Gatling MG, (High*). Other equipment, such as the 2S1 on the same page, give an explanation for the * in the same data box, the 2S1 has a weapon listed as 122MM* w/ * explanation listed directly below it. What does High* denote.

Sorry for the long first post, and to be clear I am not trying to nit pick, I am very excited about the game and just want to start off right with a clear understanding. Thanks in advance for any information.

 

[piersParticipant 25463xp 0]

1 – The T64B and T80B get an ATGW missile option…

 

2 – Its gets two attempts with Suppressing Fire.  Will check the book when home and find the page.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by  piers.
• This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by  piers.
• This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by  piers.

[logisticzgsParticipant 21xp 0]

Piers, if I may ask:

In the book there is the PT-76b listed with its description, but it isn’t available in any selection of the army list compositions as well not listed in the stats sections.

Am I missing something? ?

Also do you have a recommendation for a Lynx Ah1 model in appropriate scale?

 

Cheers mate!

[piersParticipant 25463xp 1]

The PT76 is in CentAG  🙂

[Author]

Posts