N'44:Scenario #20: Proving them Wrong-Error?

[JonS1]

Change the values back to whatever you want.

I do, thanks. Actually, I didn't change them 'back' to anything. I've done my own research, made my own assumptions, and come up with my own values. As part of that, though, I've declined to give fantasy values to any units that I happen to think are 'cool'.

VM,
Look, I realise what you're trying to do, I just don't think the way you've gone about it is valid.

Looking at your alt scn #20 I see it uses your standard Normandy McNamara OoB. Which all of your alt scenarios use, including the longer campaigns. So, basically, what you are saying - through your work - is that because of a single engagement in mid-June you think that Wittman's platoon should be 10 times as strong as any other Tiger platoon. For the entire campaign.

Well, ok. I mean, he did do a good job on the 13th. But, using exactly the same reasoning, did you give Radley-Walters' squadron a higher HA value? Did you give Winters' company a higher assault value? Etc, etc. On what basis did you choose to throw away the fruits of the McN DB and just come up with fantasy values that fit your pre-conceived ideas of how a particular short battle should play out? Did you apply that basis consistently?

Regards
JonS