PG-HQ Forums
A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - Printable Version

+- PG-HQ Forums (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms)
+-- Forum: Panzer Grenadier (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier (/showthread.php?tid=780)

Pages: 1 2

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - Poor Yorek - 04-10-2014

(04-10-2014, 05:00 AM)plloyd1010 Wrote: As much as I am into house rules for realism, I think I'll pass this one. Too much bookkeeping and PG stacks get too tall as it is.

I hope it was understood that I was jesting, though one could have some fun with the artwork for such a project just as a gag.

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - otto - 04-10-2014

Yes you you got it right
but don't panic, nothing like thag in fourth edition rules!

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - richvalle - 04-10-2014

For larger formation moral maybe something like a -1 to mc's when X number of steps were lost. Like init is done now.

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - zaarin7 - 04-10-2014

I still think there should be some kind of a check before infantry can attack AFV's in open country bu that may be memories of SL/ASL trying to creep in.

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - plloyd1010 - 04-11-2014

(04-10-2014, 12:17 PM)zaarin7 Wrote: I still think there should be some kind of a check before infantry can attack AFV's in open country bu that may be memories of SL/ASL trying to creep in.

I know the rule you are referring to, it first appeared in Crescendo of Doom. A friend (not the one I usually play with) and I discussed the problem of getting early war infantry to attack armor some time ago. No house rule came from it. Here are the working questions we decided upon:
  1. Should this morale check be collective or individual?
  2. Should the morale check be made in assault hex for the attack or prior to entering?
  3. Should there be modifiers for numbers of attacking units and/or for attacking from multipule hexes?
  4. Until what date should such morale checks be required?
My current and not well considered opinion is that it should be a collective check within each attacking hex. Morale modifiers from leaders (who don't need to check) would only apply to units stacked with that leader. The morale check would be made prior to entering the assault hex. Having 3 units attack would gain a -1 to the morale check. 1941 infantry would have a -1 modifier, 1942 a -2 modifier, no check required after 1942. Assaulting with infantry anti-tank weapons would have an additional -1 modifier.

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - zaarin7 - 04-12-2014

As an add to that I'd say infantry don't need to check when attacking tanks with out friendly infantry in there hex when the target tank is in a hex giving the attacking infantry cover or how ever 4th ed defines it.

RE: A lack of realism in Panzer Grenadier - armyduck95 - 04-13-2014

I believe at the platoon level conveyed in PzG, the activation rules and other leadership rules are sufficient to account for "seeing the elephant"; remember to initiate an assault, a unit has to have a leader activate it and order it/lead it into an assault hex. So the rule is realistic/constraining enough to force the presence of leadership prior to advancing toward an enemy that can kill you. I think that is fine for platoon level gaming.

The TEC and morale/recovery rules and assault rules all sufficiently cover the difficulties/details associated with conducting such attacks.

Also, the rules with regard to decapitation and senior leader casualties (forcing morale checks with negative modifiers depending on how good the leader was) are sufficient depictions of how a formation can crumble in the face of some bad luck/leader casualties.

The cascading effect of the cohesion/morale loss due to step losses also conveys a very realistic effect of how combat effectiveness breaks down and the formations break and run more easily. I am good with the rules.