Tobruk '41 Gold Questions

[Green]

I find this an interesting topic. In his notes for the Bulge '44 campaign mod, Brian Jennings made these comments;

"No Zones of Control: This might not be to everyone’s taste but I am convinced it is a more accurate representation of combat at this scale and is particularly important in Bulge44 where infiltration and breakthroughs were such a key part of the campaign. Units can only hold the ground on which they are deployed; the area around them they can observe and, depending on their type, dominate by fire. It is particularly ahistoric for a small, possibly non-infantry or armour, unit to be able to stop movement over a frontage of two or three kilometres (hexes). There are many reported cases of armoured formations driving past defenders. This can now happen, but as opportunity fire still occurs cannot be done with impunity. I have tested this thoroughly and it works, and gives the player a need for much more realistic deployments to produce a sustainable defence."

I guess he changed his views slightly as his scenario does have ZOC's but the movement cost from one to another is doubled (as in Panzer Battles). I like the concept for PzC but the problem is that any unit will be able to move from one ZOC to another using all its MP. For example, the Alt scenarios in Tobruk '41 set the ZOC Movement Multiplier to 90 which means that virtually all units will require all their MP to move from one ZOC to another. But this still allows for units on foot to infiltrate relatively easily over a series of turns. This may make sense in the Bulge campaign but I would be interested in the rationale for using it in the desert scenarios. The Design Notes for Tobruk '41 say that using soft ZOC's  "was seen to improve the free wheeling nature and desert feel of the game", but I am not quite sure that really explains it. Anyone have any thoughts?