Even though I co-designed it with Huib, it's been a while since I looked at it so I started a game as Germans. I feel your pain from what you describe above, but I think the key is not to try to take the objectives but to keep the US from getting occupation points by keeping a few units in the occupation radii while inflicting max casualties wherever possible. That's where the Germans get the points.
This battle was the last push for the US before Ike handed over all the resources to Monty for Market Garden. There was no strategic terrain objective for VII Corps except breach the Westwall and occupy Stolberg and Eschweiler. That's why casualties hold so much weight in this scenario.
I just played defence on the German side. In game, the American advantage is overwhelming, with about 7000 men aginst 7000 men for Wehrmacht, with considerable qualitative advantage. About 3 full strength tank battalions plus 1 ARTY battalion against 12 Panthers and 6 SPGS, 12 ATs, and 4 ARTY battalions. And the American forces are better positioned in game (actually, because the German positions are not terribly good).
According to the United States Army in World War II.: European Theater of Operations (ebook free available), centering on the actions of 1st army, some force composition differs from the settings in game. On p.87, the strength of 9th Panzer Division is stated as less than 2300 men, 13 Panthers, 12 SPGs, 15 towed ATs, 1 88 plus other FLAKS, and ARTY batteries on Sept. 16, and a few hundred men was directed to another corps command shortly after. In game, the division has 1300+ men, 12 Panthers, 6 SPGs, and no ATs.
Furthermore, the position of Pathers and SPGs are a bit problematic. According to the book, Task Force LOVELADY was ambushed by a few pathers near Weissenberg, and quite some fighting took place there throughout LOVELADY's push. But in game, panthers are in the rear, and that critical location is defended by only a Landesschuetzen company.
On the American side, I think the tank strength in game is stronger than reality, with all companies at full combat strength. LOVELADY reported 14 medium tanks remaining on Sept.14 (light tanks unknown), so it is highly doubtful that they are restored to full strength on Sept. 17. That is likely the reason they turned their attack towards Weissenberg instead of Gressenich. Similar condition applies to Task Force Mills. The scenario of Sept. 17 should be that the American tank strength was gradually worn down from the hard push from the southwest beginning a few days ago, and the Germans received fresh reinforcements from the 12th VG, instead of a meeting engagement of infantry vs. tank in the corridor. Also ,the book mentions that the 12th VG was assigned an SPG brigade of less than 20 SPGs for the counterattack. Though I did not find details about them later in the book.
And after some other adjustments of force positions, I think the scenario will be much better balanced.
One other suggestions about this scenario is the objectives: The American objective, as I understand, were twofold: 1) to clear the corridor for rolling in the armour, enabling a deep penetration of the rear of Aachen 2) capture Stolberg and Verlautenheide, enabling a shallower encirclement of Aachen. And the German objectives would be to prevent them from achieving those, which is the reason a battalion is entrenched at Verlautenheide. in a somewhat exposed position. And historically the space in the north of the battlefield should not be empty. In game, it looks like a deep encirclement can be achieved by bypassing Verlautenheide from the north.
So trimming the game map can be a solution. Also, one factual error on the strategic briefing map for the scenario selection screen:
The 116th Panzer Division was defending Aachen. 
