Leopard Preview – Infantry and Artillery Unit Cards

Hello All

Welcome to part two of our preview of the Leopard unit cards. Today we are looking at the Tanks and Recce units of Leopard. Like the last post I’m not going to focus too much on the stats and how they will play in the game.

First up we have the Leopard 2 Panzer Kompanie commander, like the Infantry the Morale is 2+. The tank compares well to the M1 and T-72’s with the armour of a M1 and the gun of the T-72.
Leopard 2 HQ

Leopard 2

Next up something that will make anyone who wants to collect Aussies and Canadians happy, we have the Leopard 1! This is the HQ option for the Recce company.

 

Panzeraufklrungs HQ

You also get the platoon option too. This is an interesting unit for Team Yankee as it’s the first “Medium” tank we have had, it’ll be nice to see how it plays out in the game.

 

 

Leopard 1   The Recce have their own infantry option which looks similar to the normal infantry.

Panzeraufklrungs Zug

Except they have their own transport option. Sort of a wheel version of the Mardar without the extra MG and worse crossing skill.

 

Fuchs

Finally we have the Luchs a recce armoured car. Which looks like a BMP killer.

Luchs So thats it for today, we will be back next time with Air Support and AA.

Thanks for reading and until next time

Ben

Category: Flames of WarTeam YankeeWest Germans

7 comments

  1. All of these look awesome, can’t wait to get some!! One thing….any idea why the Leopard 1 has a 19 at and the M1 has 20? Weren’t both guns the same?

  2. So… the Leopard 2 gets the armor of the M1, and the gun of the T72. Meaning that a T72 has very little chance to bounce shots this bad boy tosses out! And the West Germans get a scout too, very nice. So only the USA doesn’t have a scout unit (yet).

  3. Great review and I’m looking forward to getting some of these guys!! One thing….anyone have any idea why the Leopard 1’s 105mm gun is AT 19 while the M1’s is AT 20? I thought they were the same gun?

    1. Marginally better ammunition (DU instead of Tungsten) on the American licensed built L7 gun. it could penetrate an extra 75-150mm of armour compared to the Tungsten APFSDS rounds.

    2. They both used the British designed L7A3 105 mm the americans mixed it with their T254E2 prototype gun, that might be why they gave it a higher value. Like wise the M1A1 and M1A2 both used the same gun as the Leopard 2 the Rheinmetall 120 mm.

      What gets me is the armour, the leopard 2 far out armours a M1, its closer to M1A2 armour level. But I guess for balance reasons. The problem is now what happens if they add things like the t-80 or m1a1 the leopard 2 armour wont reflect what it is compared to them.

      1. I tend to agree. The Leo 2 was far better armoured than the baseline M1. The M1A1 was closer, though still not quite there. I think they are trying to avoid ridiculously high armour values, so as not to make the tanks utterly impenetrable for game balance purposes. If we see a T-80U down the road (which I am sincerely hoping we will), I have a feeling it will also be AV 18 frontally, although it was actually better than the Leo 2 after you factor in Kontakt 5.

Leave a Reply to Ryan Sullivan Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Article by: Mark Goddard