T-34-85 handicapped by it's cost

[Johann]

What is the cost of T-34-85 (120 points) based on? The G version of Panther costs 125! As far as I know, construction of a Panther was *much* more complicated.

Shouldn't the price tags reflect the actual numbers of units? For example if I play a 1944 Germany-Russia battle against a friend there is now 1:1 Panther to T-34-85 ratio, which obviously makes the game far from balanced or enjoyable.

Are You gonna correct this (I have ver 2.3)or is there any way I can alter the unit stats myself?

[Belaja smert]

Originally posted by Johann:
What is the cost of T-34-85 (120 points) based on? The G version of Panther costs 125! As far as I know, construction of a Panther was *much* more complicated.

Shouldn't the price tags reflect the actual numbers of units? For example if I play a 1944 Germany-Russia battle against a friend there is now 1:1 Panther to T-34-85 ratio, which obviously makes the game far from balanced or enjoyable.

Are You gonna correct this (I have ver 2.3)or is there any way I can alter the unit stats myself?

There is an earlier topic where the pricing is discussed, but to cut it short pricing is based on the "combat effectiveness" of the unit. Rarity or complexity of constructing aren't taken into account in the price.

OOBs will be updated to version 3.0, so I guess the prices will change too.

Belaja smert

[Nikademus]

it really surprised me on how controversial the subject of unit cost was and how differing various opinion was!

personally, i think 'economic' considerations are just as important (if not more so) than tactical ones. Both the Panther and T-34/85 were very formidable mediums for their times. A key difference though was that the Russians were able to mass produce a hell ofva lot more of the latter than the Germans were the former.

Reducing the cost of the T34 and/or increasing the Panther cost would , at the very least i feel, cause the AI to purchase the units in a more historical ratio. Increasing the T-43 cost to portray its rarity would probably disuade the AI from purchasing them over the T-34 (given that there were what, two or so T-43's built...maybe its cost should be trebled! )

[renwor]

Damn, so much fuss because of T-43. I hope it's left out completely from v. 3. If no, first think I'll do would be to delete it from my OOB, or at least make it avail. 49-49. I can afford it, as I am not on-line at home, so PBEM or iven TCP-IP games are not an option for me.

Renwor, erasing the oddities.

[JR]

Remember that this is a game, not a historical simulation. Ideally, if you allow the players to choose ther own force, giving the players the same amount of points should give a balanced meeting engagement regardless of contries played. If the terrain and missions favours one of the players, give him less points. If you want to balance out the fact that one of the players are more experienced than the other, adjust the points.

If you want to make your own forcs more realistic, impose restrictions on what you are permitted to buy.

I see the point on restricting the computers buying, but I do not think this should be done by price.

Just to add a few words to a case that is probably closed already.

JR

[Nikademus]

agreed that player's choices should not be limited by the program (they can do that themselves before setup) but in terms of the AI, how else can one limit its choice of 'exotic' or rare vehicles if not by price?

Not one of the code busters but that would seem good material for a major headache for the Matrix gang trying to code that one in.

[BA Evans]

Originally posted by Nikademus:
agreed that player's choices should not be limited by the program (they can do that themselves before setup) but in terms of the AI, how else can one limit its choice of 'exotic' or rare vehicles if not by price?

There is already a 'flag' in the units statistics that tells the AI not to buy certain units. All you have to do is update the T-43 to include this flag if you don't want the AI to use it.

The 'flag' classifies units as: common, rare, don't use, etc.

See discussions concerning the second digit of the radio characteristic.

BA Evans

[Nikademus]

ah! thanks for the info, then it would seem a simple fix after all then.

[Windo von Paene]

Heh, just got done with a PBEM game against Warhorse, where I had picked up two of those bad boy T-43's not realizing, (not a hardcore grodnard here), all of the rarity fuss made over them. And ooohhhweee they were killer. I think he finally killed off one of them by the end, after shooting at it at a range of about 3 for two or three turns.

Since they appear to be such awesome tanks, why weren't more of them made, what's the story behind that tank?

[orc4hire]

Windo,
See here: http://www.history.enjoy.ru/t43.html

Basically, range was much shorter than the '34, and it couldn't be upgraded to the 85mm gun.

[Drake666]

The story behind the T-43
http://www.history.enjoy.ru/t43.html

[BA Evans]

Does the T-43 look like it has a huge shot trap? If a round bounces off of the front armor, about the only place it can go is up under the turret. The turret seems to hang over the angled front hull. It would be interesting if this would have hurt the tank if it saw large scale combat.

BA Evans

[Paul Vebber]

The T-43 is gone - and I had confused its armor with the T-44 so it was a bit more "bad-ass" than it should have been! This has been fixed!

[Seth]

Well, I'm sorry to see the T-43 go. I love the what-if stuff, but I guess before we start including them left and right we need some sort of real world/sci-fi preference switch. What does this mean for other what-if units? I noticed that the new ANZAC OOB had all sorts of oddities.