How do you improve PzB???

[ComradeP]

I guess at the core is the lack of element vs. element interaction for the vehicles/guns and that the system essentially treats them as men. Infantry combat works fairly well (though the relation between artillery casualties and infantry strength can still be problematic).

Within the current system, the mechanics simply don't allow a single vehicle to knock out another vehicle as part of a larger unit (as in: when you have 15 tanks, the maximum theoretical result isn't 15 enemy losses). I understand the need for low - and high fire values and they suit the mathematical system nicely, but they become problematic when dealing with vehicles or guns.

The range modifier not being related to actual penetration at a certain range reduces its value, The variety of modifiers boost combat value, but in the end the result is a percentage value that determines the low - and high fire values, so essentially they influence the die roll for a hit that knocks out one (or more) vehicle(s).

The low casualties also mean establishing overwatch positions isn't likely to work as well as they would in real life, because enemy tank units can always close in and the casualties from opportunity fire are fairly low and fairly random as well.

Even if creating a system where each vehicle or gun in a unit fires and those results are then added up to the result for the unit, instead of the unit's strength being multiplied by the unit type's hard attack value relative to the defender's defence value isn't possible, a very harsh modifier on armour penetration (=kill chance) when the modified hard attack value is below the defence value of the target would at least give the side with the longer-ranged guns the advantage they deserve and would limit tank casualties from artillery fire.

Currently, most of the formula's that limit the effectiveness of a certain unit or weapon can be countered by increasing numbers. If a certain value is halved, you will still get the original value if you use twice as many vehicles. The low hard attack value against a target with a stronger defence formula is currently quite forgiving.

Dog Soldier might be a bit fed up with my commentary by now, as he might think I'm saying that all his results come from luck, but what I'm trying to say is that there's a fairly narrow number of results that the system allows which in this case doesn't give a truly significant advantage to the side with better crews, vehicles and guns. It's similar to the way attacking bunkers works.

Dog Soldier implied that tactics can beat math, but as math decides the result, that isn't how it works. When you gather X amount of men or vehicles and fire or assault, the actual result of that is beyond your control. Variability is a good thing, but it shouldn't by itself be allowed to decide a game in situations where a lot of variable outcomes are possible. An example would be breaking through several rows of bunkers. If the defenders disrupt early, your chance of winning is much greater than if everyone fights to the death, yet there's no significant way you can influence events aside from selecting the best units for the assault.

As with Moscow '42, I might sound overly critical, but my only intention is to see if there are some good ways to deal with some of the issues with the system that hopefully won't require significant code work, as both PzC and PB are good systems, making every smaller or larger thing that unbalances it unfortunate.