Tactical comparison with Squad Battles

[Koldobika]

I am a fan of SB but keen to try out PB and have got the demo running.

Could someone please explain to me whether it's still necessary to play PB with respect to fire and manoeuvre principles, ie building up a base of fire and assault elements, or whether I should treat the game as more of a downscaled Panzer Campaigns?

I ask because in the demo lots of units are company sized and in my limited military experience it would be usual for a company to attack a certain objective itself, using individual platoons for support by fire tasks, which would indicate that the support/assault elements are abstracted to a certain degree, is that fair? Also the lack of 'pinned' results would point towards this.

I love the updated UI and hotkeys, hopefully to be integrated into SB in the future!

[RickyB]

I am not sure I can completely answer the question as there may be a gap in knowing all the nuances of the series. But let me try!

Generally, for all but the Guadalcanal scenario (which has a non-standard OOB size), the companies are made up of its component platoons. PzB allows the companies to be broken down, to use as the player desires. So you can break a company down to platoons or leave combined, depending on if you are going to apply more traditional tactics - as you note a base of fire and assault - or Soviet style with some support but get that company on line and assault.

The timescale of 20 minute turns also impacts how you want to look at it.

So as I say, not sure that helps too much, but it can definitely replicate what you ask about, but doesn't force it. In PzB Normandy, the landings are made with platoons to start, and companies in the later waves, allowing the companies to be split as desired, for example. There are Crete airborne landings in PzB North Africa and those are definitely at lower level, for both sides, although a few companies may start out combined in reserve.

[LordDeadwood]

As RickyB points out, you can break down companies into platoons, but it comes at a cost: the size of the unit affects fatigue accumulation. Company size units accumulate fatigue at the rate of 0 to the fatigue factor in the PDT time the number of men lost. Assault fatigue is double the normal amount. The fatigue factor in PzB Normandy and Kursk is 2. So a company that loses 5 men as a result of fire will accumulate 0-10 points of fatigue. A company involved in an assault that experienced the same number of casualties will accumulate 0-20 points. But a platoon accumulates fatigue at three times the normal rate. So a platoon that suffers 5 casualties from fire would accumulate 0-30 points of fatigue! Because of this I avoid using platoons if at all possible; I will re-combine them into a company as soon as I can. The same mechanic applies in Panzer Campaigns when battalions are broken down into companies. The smaller units are more flexible, but they wear out much faster!

[Strela]

Koldobika,

That's a good question. As the designer who did all the Panzer Battles (PzB) titles and some Panzer Campaigns (PzC), I would say its closer to panzer Campaigns than Squad Battles. Please keep in mind my experience with Squad Battles (SqB) is (very) limited and I currently working on updating/upgrading that series and have really enjoyed the various scenarios.

The major difference to PzC is ranged fire. The lower scale means that everything is/can fire beyond the adjacent hex and that adds more of SqB feel. There is also a larger variety of units and you need to be aware of their strengths and weaknesses. PzC is much more homogenous.

A good place to start to get the feel of play and the way units are used in PzB is to read this blog post I did on one of the North Africa scenarios. You can read it here: https://wargameds.com/blogs/news/battli ... obruk-full

There is a section where I discuss the role of a battalion and how to use the sub-units within. That should probably give you a better feel. For me PzB is a bit of a sweet spot. There is probably more variety of units than in either SqB or PzC and you can really see the different solution each army took in how they structured their battalions.

Have a read and see if that helps a little.

Cheers,

David

[Koldobika]

I am not sure I can completely answer the question as there may be a gap in knowing all the nuances of the series. But let me try!

Generally, for all but the Guadalcanal scenario (which has a non-standard OOB size), the companies are made up of its component platoons. PzB allows the companies to be broken down, to use as the player desires. So you can break a company down to platoons or leave combined, depending on if you are going to apply more traditional tactics - as you note a base of fire and assault - or Soviet style with some support but get that company on line and assault.

The timescale of 20 minute turns also impacts how you want to look at it.

So as I say, not sure that helps too much, but it can definitely replicate what you ask about, but doesn't force it. In PzB Normandy, the landings are made with platoons to start, and companies in the later waves, allowing the companies to be split as desired, for example. There are Crete airborne landings in PzB North Africa and those are definitely at lower level, for both sides, although a few companies may start out combined in reserve.

Thanks Ricky. Great explanation.

Koldobika,

That's a good question. As the designer who did all the Panzer Battles (PzB) titles and some Panzer Campaigns (PzC), I would say its closer to panzer Campaigns than Squad Battles. Please keep in mind my experience with Squad Battles (SqB) is (very) limited and I currently working on updating/upgrading that series and have really enjoyed the various scenarios.

The major difference to PzC is ranged fire. The lower scale means that everything is/can fire beyond the adjacent hex and that adds more of SqB feel. There is also a larger variety of units and you need to be aware of their strengths and weaknesses. PzC is much more homogenous.

A good place to start to get the feel of play and the way units are used in PzB is to read this blog post I did on one of the North Africa scenarios. You can read it here: https://wargameds.com/blogs/news/battli ... obruk-full

There is a section where I discuss the role of a battalion and how to use the sub-units within. That should probably give you a better feel. For me PzB is a bit of a sweet spot. There is probably more variety of units than in either SqB or PzC and you can really see the different solution each army took in how they structured their battalions.

Have a read and see if that helps a little.

Cheers,

David

David that's really useful. I have read your write-up. Indeed it's definitely the level below PzC, moreso than close to SqB which is absolutely fine. It fits well with a grander type of thinking. The focus being on larger scale moves and not small scale Infantry tactics.


I can leave my down and dirty proclivities to SqB and use my big picture thinking here...