fire value for mortars

[javier]

One possibility of putting this into practice is that the hard value attack of infantry units (direct fire) is reduced by half if each tank is supported by 10 infantry soldiers in the attacked hex.

(Or 10-6 men / tank support = 2/3 reduction infantry hard value atack,

5-1 men / tank support = 1/2 reduction.

0 men / tank support = no reduction)

This would reproduce (for infantry units)  the difficulty of being able to attack the tanks properly protected by the enemy infantry.

Could also apply to other armored vehicles

[LordDeadwood]

One possibility of putting this into practice is that the hard value attack of infantry units (direct fire) is reduced by half if each tank is supported by 10 infantry soldiers in the attacked hex.

(Or 10-6 men / tank support = 2/3 reduction infantry hard value atack,

5-1 men / tank support = 1/2 reduction.

0 men / tank support = no reduction)

This would reproduce (for infantry units)  the difficulty of being able to attack the tanks properly protected by the enemy infantry.

Could also apply to other armored vehicles

Page 56-57 of the user manual, "Combined Arms Penalty". Assaulting vehicles are penalized when assaulting into non-clear terrain without infantry support.

[javier]

I was not referring to the assault, but to the direct fire of the infantry units. In Normandy the hard attack of infantry units is high.

But to fire an infantry weapon at a tank you had to be very close. And that's difficult if those tanks have infantry protection.

On YouTube I saw a video of some German paratroopers in the Carentan area hunting a Sherman with a Panzerschreck.

Shermans advance alone without protection on a road between hedges, and are easily hunted by fallschirmjäger.

That would have been more difficult, or impossible, if the Shermans advanced accompanied by supporting infantry.

This is what I meant, not the assaults, I did not explain myself well.

[LordDeadwood]

I was not referring to the assault, but to the direct fire of the infantry units. In Normandy the hard attack of infantry units is high.

But to fire an infantry weapon at a tank you had to be very close. And that's difficult if those tanks have infantry protection.

On YouTube I saw a video of some German paratroopers in the Carentan area hunting a Sherman with a Panzerschreck.

Shermans advance alone without protection on a road between hedges, and are easily hunted by fallschirmjäger.

That would have been more difficult, or impossible, if the Shermans advanced accompanied by supporting infantry.

This is what I meant, not the assaults, I did not explain myself well.

Ah, ok. This got me thinking (probably dangerous, I realize ). Most (all?) infantry units in PzB have a 1-hex hard attack range. I always attributed this to the use of anti-tank type weapons such as panzerfaust, panzershreck, bazookas, etc. But doing a quick bit of research via Wikipedia says that all of these weapons had effective ranges in the 100-150 meter range, sometimes even less. That's considerably less than the 250 meter distance of a hex in PzB. Heck, in PzB North Africa 1941 its not uncommon to kill tanks with infantry units using direct fire. And that's long before the implementation of the weapons mentioned above. So it would seem that all of these types of weapons fall into the "assault" weapon category, at least in game terms. So what is the designer's rationale for giving infantry units the one-hex hard attack range? If it's simply for play balance I get it. I've played some PzB scenarios where that capability makes a huge difference in the game. I'm just curious now...

[javier]

The panzerfaust in Normandy had a range of 60 meters. You had to be very close to destroy a tank, although they were very effective weapons, and many casualties were claimed.

In Panzer Campaigns there were units with hard values of type 12/0. They could not make direct fire but at the time of an assault, the assault value that was taken into account, if the opposing unit was armored, was that hard value.

In Panzer Battles, for the moment, the assault takes into account its assault value, which in many cases, in Normandy for example, is lower than its hard value.

Perhaps it would be more reasonable to return to hard values of type X / 0, and apply that value in case of assault if armored units intervene in the opponents