[Rules] Unit scale - tanks

[G. K. Zhukov]

Howdy all,

I have been giving some thoughts at historical scenario creation,  but there is something that has been puzzling me for quite a long time.

Given that unit scale for tanks is 3-5 vehicles per 2-step counter, how are you supposed to portray...

• ...a Soviet-style tank company of 1 tank (Co. HQ) + 3 platoons of 3 tanks each?
  
• ...a Soviet-style heavy tank company of 1 tank (Co. HQ) + 2 platoons of 3 tanks each
  
• ...a Soviet-style heavy tank company (later TO&E) of 1 tank (Co. HQ) + 2 platoons of 2 tanks each?
  
• ...a German theoretically full-strength tank company of 2 tanks (Co. HQ) + 4 platoons of 5 tanks each?
  

My point being should I try and consider the vehicle scale fixed at 5 tanks per 2-step counter (thus giving each side a balanced force from the actual numerical strength point of view), or do counters themselves represent tank platoons with the numerical strength given in their army TO&Es? E.g. in the latter case does a T-34 full strength counter always represent 3 tanks and a Pzkpfw III 4 or 5 tanks?

Thanks!

[JayTownsend]

The rules actually state tank platoons have 5-4 tanks.

I guess at PG scale you would just have to use total tank count. Example, if you have three Soviet platoons of 3 tanks for a total of 9 tanks you would have two full step counters of 4 tanks and one half step of 3 or less tanks, in this case 1 tank. Two Soviet platoons of 3 tanks for a total of 6 tanks would still be one full step of 4 tanks and one half step of 2 tanks. So it can work in your favor or against you, depending on the number of tanks in your half step but it simplifies the process at this level of gaming.

[vince hughes]

• ...a Soviet-style tank company of 1 tank (Co. HQ) + 3 platoons of 3 tanks each?
  
• ...a Soviet-style heavy tank company of 1 tank (Co. HQ) + 2 platoons of 3 tanks each
  
• ...a Soviet-style heavy tank company (later TO&E) of 1 tank (Co. HQ) + 2 platoons of 2 tanks each?
  
• ...a German theoretically full-strength tank company of 2 tanks (Co. HQ) + 4 platoons of 5 tanks each?
  

My point being should I try and consider the vehicle scale fixed at 5 tanks per 2-step counter (thus giving each side a balanced force from the actual numerical strength point of view), or do counters themselves represent tank platoons with the numerical strength given in their army TO&Es? E.g. in the latter case does a T-34 full strength counter always represent 3 tanks and a Pzkpfw III 4 or 5 tanks?

Thanks!

In the order you show, I would go with

a)  3 x Counters
b)  2 x Counters
c)  1 x Counter
d)  4 or 5 Counters

As Jay was saying. As long as you can justify your reasons for any choice, there can not be anything wrong. This is especially so if the Orbat chosen and designed produces good or realistic effects on the table top. For the early Soviets, you also have to decide hw many tank leaders need to be assigned in the Orbat.

[Coniglius]

Keep in mind as well that you are dealing with a TO&E representing full strength. RARELY were units at or near full strength, even those that had yet to see combat! Your example of a Heavy Tank Co. with 1x HQ and 2x3 platoons, could very quickly be one large platoon of 1x HQ and 4x tanks due to mechanical breakdowns, thus easily represented by 1x full strength (2 step) counter.
This would be true for all armies engaged, regardless of theatre.

[vince hughes]

Coniglius,

You are right with regards to combat losses, attrition etc for unit strengths. That said, many of the PG stuff out there has been produced with full strength OOB's. It does not bother me too much as both sides are usually done that way, and I suppose in most cases it evens up. But you'll find as an example that in the scenarios, most battalions have a full 3 companies with 3 platoons and associated support weapons.

[G. K. Zhukov]

Thanks very much for your responses, gentlemen.

The rules actually state tank platoons have 5-4 tanks.

In fact, they state counters are platoons of 3-5 vehicles. From Panzer Grenadier 4.0 rules:



2.4 Game Scale.
Each turn represents fifteen minutes of real time. Each hex is 200 meters (200m) across. Units represent infantry platoons (15-40 men), crew-served weapon batteries and platoons (16-28 men and two to four weapons) and vehicle platoons (three to five vehicles). Leaders represent individuals, and aircraft represent 3 to 12 aircraft.



Hence my confusion - the wording of the rules state that vehicle counters are platoons, and that might imply 3 tanks for Soviets, French and British armies, 4-5 tanks for Germans. But that would mean numerical strength should affect the printed values (especially soft attack), and maybe it does, but somehow I do not feel that factor has been taken into consideration, and rather every tank counter portrays roughly the same amount of AFV's.

I guess at PG scale you would just have to use total tank count. Example, if you have three Soviet platoons of 3 tanks for a total of 9 tanks you would have two full step counters of 4 tanks and one half step of 3 or less tanks, in this case 1 tank. Two Soviet platoons of 3 tanks for a total of 6 tanks would still be one full step of 4 tanks and one half step of 2 tanks. So it can work in your favor or against you, depending on the number of tanks in your half step but it simplifies the process at this level of gaming.

As I just said, I am leaning on that approach - it's the one taken by comparable miniatures rules like Command Decision, but, as you well know, CD goes for a flat 5 vehicle per miniature, that produces let's say 2 miniatures (2-step counters in PG's case) per Soviet tank company, and all fractional miniatures are consolidated at a higher level of command (battalion, brigade, etc.). Nice and almost painless.

In the order you show, I would go with

a)  3 x Counters 
b)  2 x Counters
c)  1 x Counter 
d)  4 or 5 Counters

a) ...that is the TO&E the Panzer Grenadier module "Workers & Peasants" show, and that would mean a tank scale of 3 1/3 actual tanks per vehicle. At 5 tanks per counter it would be 2 counters,

b) ...that is 3 1/2 tanks per counter. At 5 tanks per counter that would be 1 x 2-step counter + 1 x 1-step counter.

c) ...that is 5 tanks per counter (same as CD scale).

d) ...that is 5 1/2 or 4.4 tanks per counter. At 5 tanks per counter it would be 4 x 2-step counters + 1 x 1-step counter.

For the early Soviets, you also have to decide how many tank leaders need to be assigned in the Orbat.

Sure, but I am a little naughty and some day I intend to re-write the PG rules in order to dispense with leaders altogether, and instead switch to a pure activation by formation. On one hand, I find a little weird that the system separates armor leaders (with no morale and gunnery bonus) from "other arms" leaders (with full such capabilities), that cannot interact at all with each other (is that historically correct?), and on the other hand any "other arms" Captain may order any "other arms" Lieutenant without any regard to the formation they belong to... But more on that (hopefully) in future additional posts.

Keep in mind as well that you are dealing with a TO&E representing full strength. RARELY were units at or near full strength, even those that had yet to see combat! Your example of a Heavy Tank Co. with 1x HQ and 2x3 platoons, could very quickly be one large platoon of 1x HQ and 4x tanks due to mechanical breakdowns, thus easily represented by 1x full strength (2 step) counter.  
This would be true for all armies engaged, regardless of theatre.

Absolutely. Theoretical strengths would cease to exist after a couple of minutes near the front lines. And a fixed tank per counter ratio would take care of real life on the battlefield, no sweat. A Soviet tank brigade has a real life strength of 25 tanks? That is 5 x 2-step counters or any combination that produces 10 steps of tank counters.

But you'll find as an example that in the scenarios, most battalions have a full 3 companies with 3 platoons and associated support weapons.

I'd love to see historical, painstakingly researched scenarios like the ones Bob McKenzie has available at his site. In general, PG modules have tons of scenarios, but not very accurate from the TO&E point of view. I am less of a competition gamer, and more of an amateur historian who likes to game with cardboard armies, and find many of the stock scenarios would certainly benefit from a little overhaul.

[vince hughes]

It sounds then that you do not want too much helptp from the group as you already have ideas. There;s too much to respond on what you wrote above for me to go into it much. But some of what you wrote is not entirely correct ... especially on OOB's of the researchers. Mike Perryman, Ottavio Ricchi, Jay Townsend and Phillipe Leonard all use proper OOB's and they have been the main contributors.

[G. K. Zhukov]

It sounds then that you do not want too much helptp from the group as you already have ideas. There;s too much to respond on what you wrote above for me to go into it much. But some of what you wrote is not entirely correct ... especially on OOB's of the researchers. Mike Perryman, Ottavio Ricchi, Jay Townsend and Phillipe Leonard all use proper OOB's and they have been the main contributors.

I stand corrected, then.

Maybe Mike, Ottavio, Jay and Philippe would care to elaborate on this matter?

Thanks!

[plloyd1010]

Well Antonio, my copy of the 4th edition rules says 4-5 tanks per counter. 3rd edition rules stated 5 tanks. When you get to 3 tanks per counter it creates the scalability question you seem to be wrestling with. So, my first suggestion is to forget 3 vehicle counters, life will get simpler.

My second suggestion is, when composing forces which require tank leaders, look to the upper echelon to fill and forget the platoons. That is, first decide what the appropriate leader count is for the company/squadron, then using the 4-5 vehicle scale fill the unit. This works pretty well with Soviet and French DCR companies. Things get stickier with French DLM squadrons (4 troops of 5 vehicles per squadron), and 3rd edition games with the British.

[Matt W]

I should note that PG:Modern uses Leaders such as those used for all non-tank units in PG for an entire force, including vehicles.