Fix Tank Destroyers AT Penalty

Anti-tank guns and tank destroyers (ATGs/TDs) were made to attack tanks but PG/AG penalizes them for doing what they were intended, by making them shoot second when attacking tanks (the AG manual says "always" but Rudankort says "almost" always).

PG/AG gets TDs backwards:
  • Makes TDs too little like a TD by giving the AT penalty in the one place it should not (attacking tanks, 'panzerjager' means 'tank hunter,' not 'tank prey').
  • Makes TDs too much like a tank by not giving an AT penalty where it should (thin-skinned, open-topped Marders were not made to overrun infantry and charge 105mm batteries).
  • Makes "tank destroyers" into tank-like "infantry/artillery destroyers."
  • Makes TDs avoid tanks rather than the other way around.

The historical innacuracy is especially glaring for the US tank destroyers which succeeded despite thin armor (thinner than the Sherman) by using aggressiveness, speed, open-top turrets (visibility), and reconnaissance to gain initiative and shoot first (documented in many WWII battles). PG/AG reverses history and pretends that the Germans shoot first, which makes the M18 Hellcat unrealistically ineffective against the panzers.

Changes can affect costs.

AT Penalty Possibilities:

  • Give ATGs/TDs a penalty for attacking everything except tanks (not possible to change class characteristics with current editors, perhaps reduce the HE).
  • Give tanks the penalty for attacking ATGs/TDs, i.e. reverse the AT penalty onto tanks (reclassify tanks as ATs and ATs as tanks, perhaps reduce ATG/TD HE).
  • Keep the penalty for ATGs because towed guns are more likely to dig-in and wait for tanks but remove the penalty for TDs to reflect the SP TD's greater mobility (reclassify TDs as tanks, perhaps reduce TD HE).
  • Keep the penalty for ATGs and non-US TDs but remove the penalty for US TDs to reflect their special doctrine, training, and organization (reclassify US TDs as tanks, perhaps reduce US TD HE).
  • Reclassify ATGs from AT-class to Infantry-class.
Spotting/Initiative/Close Defense Possibilities (could apply to other units too):
  • Spotting= Keep 1-hex spotting range for closed-top TDs but give open-topped TDs 2-hex spotting range (like most ATGs, which are very open-topped). So, an SU-85 or StuG would be 1-hex and a Marder or M10 would be 2-hex.
  • Initiative= Give turretless vehicles an initiative penalty. Give open-top vehicles an initiative bonus. So, an SU-85 or StuG would have a penalty (turretless), a Marder would even out (turretless but open-topped), and an SdKfz 222 or M10 would have a bonus (turreted and open-topped).
  • Close Defense= Give turretless vehicles a penalty. Give open-topped vehicles a penalty. So, a T-34 or PzIV would be neutral, an SU-85 or StuG would have a penalty (turretless), an SdKfz 222 or M10 would have a penalty (open-topped), and a Marder would have a double penalty (turretless and open-topped). Perhaps also adjust for MG type (any, coaxial, hull, remote-control) or close-defense mortar.
US ATG/TD Possibilities:
  • Add M20 75mm recoilless rifle (RCL), available after 3/45, perhaps infantry-class, engineer bonus, 2MP or 3MP leg, and high initiative for several-thousand-yard range (also see German fallschirmjager (paratrooper) Leichtgeschutz LG 40 75mm recoilless rifle, although the LG 40 was a heavier, wheeled gun).
  • Add 75mm GMC M3 half-track as a TD with Sherman firepower to the US Order of Battle (OB) , available before Pearl Harbor.
  • Correct M36 Jackson speed to 6MP (M36 was lighter than M4A3 or M10 but had an engine more powerful than M10 did).
  • Increase Hard Attack (HA) factor of M10 and M18 after 8/44 and of M36 after 2/45 to reflect special HVAP ammunition (in short supply and reserved for use against heavier tanks, so ideally there would be a separate ammunition count for HVAP depleted only in combat against Panthers/Tigers/etc., or a random "die roll" to determine HVAP or standard AP against the heavies, but PG/AG will apply any increase against all armor including half-tracks so a compromise is an increase of 2 points). Perhaps list 2 different units just as you would do for a gun, armor, or speed improvement, "M10" and "M10 HVAP."*

* Offer new units with special HVAP/APCR/APDS ammunition for any country's units (British 6pdr).

Soviet Tank Destroyer Possibilities:
  • Add SU-76/SU-76M (very common light TD based on T-70 light tank) (also see ZSU-37 AA or AD).
  • Add SU-57 (57mm GMC T48=US half-track with US M1 57mm ATG (6pdr copy)).

ATG/Artillery Movement Possibilities:

  • 0MP = heavy guns (roughly > 5,000lbs: 88mm PaK 43, US 155mm Short Tom).
  • 1MP = medium guns (roughly 1,500-5,000lbs: 75mm PaK 40, 105mm LFH 18, UK 2pdr, US 75mm field howitzer).
  • 2MP = light guns (roughly 150-1,500lbs: 37mm PaK 36, LG 40 RCL, US 75mm pack howitzer, mountain guns, 120mm mortar).
  • 3MP = very light guns (no wheels) (roughly 0-150lbs: US M20 RCL, 80-82mm mortar).
See speed, radios, traverse/target acquisition, other initiative factors, and mortars.


PG Win Poland in 3 Turns

You can win the Panzer General Poland scenario in 3 turns (not guaranteed every time because 1 bad "die roll" can ruin the timetable).

Settings= Panzer General Windows (PG-Win), "hard" AI, normal experience/prestige.

Strategy= Minimum (original forces)= Used 2 units for Kutno (2 8MP), 3 units for Lodz (1 8MP, 1 6MP, 1 3MP), and the only job of the rest of the army is to bludgeon open the road at Kalisz. Maximum= Built 3 units (3 8MP--can build up to 4 8MP units on Turn 1--see below).

  • Sent 2 motorized infantry to Kutno as far along the north road as possible on Turn 1 despite adjacency to Polish cavalry because that it is the only way to occupy Kutno on Turn 3.
  • Sent the PzIID to Lodz because its 6MP can attack the cavalry that is in rough terrain next to Lodz on Turn 2. The rest of Lodz task force was the motorized 75mm artillery, a leg infantry, and a purchased unit in reserve (see below).
  • Optional: Built an 8MP unit northeast of Breslau because it is the only way to occupy Lodz on Turn 3 if the PzIID is unable from needing to finish clearing the area, plus built 2 more 8MP units ( built 3 SdKfz 222 armored cars--motorized anti-tank guns or motorized infantry might work too--have enough prestige points and core slots to build 4 8MP units). It might be possible to win on Turn 3 without any builds but these reinforcements/reserves add insurance against bad die rolls.
Turn 1= The armored car northwest of Breslau should have been north of Breslau. The map below shows after the Allied move (end of Turn 1), where the Polish artillery attacked the leg infantry and the Polish cavalry attacked a motorized infantry but then retreated northward. The cavalry's victim only needs 1 strength point to do its job of occupying Kutno.

Turn 2= The armored car next to Kalisz was needed this time to finish opening the road to Kutno. The Polish cavalry at Lodz retreated after being attacked by the PzIID. Lodz and Kutno now each have a single infantry unit in striking distance.

Turn 3= An armored car spotted for Kutno and the 75mm artillery helped for Lodz, then each infantry attacked its town and ejected the enemy, allowing an armored car to race into Lodz and a motorized infantry to race into Kutno on Turn 3.

See these other scenario reports:

Elite Experience/Reinforcement $

General Stats suggested that experience of more than 3 stars (399 points) is unrealistic and, although I do not see the need to ban 4-5 stars, I agree that excessive stars are unrealistically easy to maintain.

Elite Replacements cost 4x regular (non-elite, green) replacements, which is a reasonable penalty to maintain 1 star but far too cheap to maintain 5-star super soldiers.

4-5 stars should cost 6x or perhaps someone could rig the following fine-tuning of elite cost:

Cost = Experience Points of Unit (Number of Stars)
1x = 0
2x = 1-99
3x = 100-199 (*)
4x = 200-299 (**)
5x = 300-399 (***)
6x = 400-499 (****)
7x = 500-599 (*****)

Another potential modification is to pay extra to buy new units that already have experience (using prestige/influence to steal veterans from other generals) but I do not consider that ability important to the game.