Did anyone notice AVF's in assault?

[plloyd1010]

I totally agree that the rules should be clearer, and that new players (especially) should be able to find all their answers in the rules. The permanent solution would be to update the PG rules.  For now, perhaps we should add an annotation to section 12.41 of the Annotated Fourth Edition Rules. 

That is probably the best solution for the time. There are other points which should be added, like terrain modification mechanics. Wadis have been brought up, but there are other potential instances.

Adding the "Display Relevant AFV rules" tab to PGHQ was my attempt to help clarify things for players because I didn't think it was clear enough in the rules.

The "Relevant AFV Rules" pages were put together before the Fourth Edition Rules came out and the passage you quoted:

Not dissing the intent, or even the notion. Just think we need the improve the likelihood that it gets in front of the necessary eyeballs.
 

I'll talk to Shad about making changes to the AFV rules tabs, since I can't edit them directly.  If you have any wording suggestions, please feel free to message me (or Shad) here.

Since we are both staff, he'll listen to us. Drew has been pretty busy though, don't know when he is likely to get to it.

For this specific issue, I would lift GSR 4 from Elsenborn Ridge as it seems to be direct and complete.

APCs, self-propelled artillery (5.64), armored cars, open-top AFVs and tank destroyers do not provide the + 1 AFV with infantry column shift bonus in assault combat.

I would put it in at 12.41 or 12.54.
 

I believe that the lack of clarity in the PG rules can be attributed to the incremental addition of more and more vehicles to the game as more boxed games and supplements were added. The rules started pretty basic and didn't take into account all the different AFVs used in the war.  As new types were added to the games, new distinctions and rules (and rules exceptions) were required, and sometimes the authors missed putting them in.

A reasonable assessment, which I agree with. There are 6 distinctions regarding AFVs in Panzergrenadier (I add another and an optional in my rewrite). When there is a distinction, it requires rules definition. I think we all hoped the 4th edition would have provided more in that catagory.