Merry Christmas!

[Blackcloud6]

Merry Christmas.

I think the reason behind the AT Guns not getting efficiency like tanks is their relative inability to react to flanks and to fire outside of their current arc.  The guns would have to be move by hand and re-laid to fire, and this takes time when compared to a rotating turret.  This became more of problem as the guns got bigger and heavier.  Take the US M5 3-inch gun for example, it was big and heavy.  There are many accounts of these hapless crews getting machine-gunned down by tanks approaching on the flanks.  Although the Pak 40 was lower to the ground, and thus more easily concealed, it too was heavy and was not easy to man-handle.  And, considering the scale of PG, to even move effectively in a hex to counter a move off to the flank, the guns might have to be hooked up and move by the prime mover.

By not giving the ATGs efficiency the game easily portrays the major deficiency in the ATG concept, which, BTW, was the reason the US Tank destroyer command abandoned the towed TD concept by the late1940s.

The only thing you could do, but at this scale it probably unnecessary, due to what I just wrote in the preceding paragraph, allow dug-in ATGs to have efficiency along a certain arc.  This portrays the crews have emplaced, filled out range cards, cleared fields of fire and bore-sighted.  But this is what i call additional rule burden (which most detailed chromy rules are) for little gain.

Never forget, that in PG, your primary role is battalion/regiment/brigade commander.  Some details are better left to the roll of the dce which takes in account the section and platoon leaders' jobs.