[Rules] Unit scale - tanks

[leonard]

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!

Hmmm. Tricky questions.

PzGren is a kind of "poetic" historical wargame : it doesn't work too well if you just start counting numbers and trying to get an historical result from these. The part for luck, imagination and symbolic representation is too high here and it is most probably what we also like in the game.

From another point of view, I like counting too and I spend a lot of my time to design HISTORICAL scenarios.
I've also designed some ASL modules and there, man, you can go into details: every vehicle, every gun, every foot of terrain (well : 40m per hex ; see Kampfgruppe Peiper module, I know the names of the owners of almost every house on the maps) can be pictured BUT is the overall representation working better ?

Regarding the number of vehicles per platoon in PzGren, you have to be imaginative ... or tolerant or both.
French tank platoons in 1940 have only 3 X B1-bis and so are R35s used in DCRs but tank platoons in cavalry divisions (DLMs, DLCs) have 5 tanks. Panhard armored cars will have 3 OR 5 vehicles per platoon depending on the division.
Germans light tank platoons in 1940 actually contained a mix of PzI and PzII. However you can not represent it by two (reduced) tank platoons because of the stacking rules...
British tank platoons in Normandy had one firefly tank per platoon. There were no specific firefly platoons.
Look at the PzGren counter for the German SK7/1 : isn't the direct fire firepower a bit low ? Mike Perryman already has explained it was his choice to represent a kind of half-platoon otherwise the counter would have been too strong in the game.

When an historical description tells a platoon of 4 X AT guns were available and they were positioned 1km apart in two sections of 2 X AT guns, what do you do ? One or two AT gun counters in the scenario ? If you choose only one, you probably lose the historical feeling.

[JayTownsend]

G. K. Zhukov, don't make this too difficult, remember PG isn't about individual tanks/vehicles but platoons or reduced platoons that can be reduced all the way down to one tank and so on. Remember there is some fudge factors to make it all work under one umbrella but it works. ASL has way too many rules for me to make the game series enjoyable and I sold all off years ago.

Like I mentioned and others as well, figure your totals as we posted earlier. PG historically is pretty accurate, prefect no, but for gaming close enough. Anyway, that is my take on what you have posted.

[G. K. Zhukov]

Thanks, Philippe and Jay.

I simply needed to get some feedback, and after your comments it becomes crystal clear that fudging TOE's might be the way to go.

[plloyd1010]

Like I said before, focus more on companies when it comes to small AFV platoons. For example a DCR tank company fits nicely into 2 counters. So does a Soviet tank company.

[vince hughes]

Like I said before, focus more on companies when it comes to small AFV platoons.  For example a DCR tank company fits nicely into 2 counters. So does a Soviet tank company.

A useful phrase here:  "Design for Effect"

[larry marak]

Which means the scenario is composed so that it usually will result in a historically probable outcome.

[vince hughes]

Which means the scenario is composed so that it usually will result in a historically probable outcome.

Or should have a good chance to do so ..... Fate & Play style notwithstanding.