StuGs and the price of them in QB

[Vanir Ausf B]

2 hours ago, Larsen said:

Correction. I am lookign at purchases for QB in the game now. When buying as single vehicles JPz IV costs 319 (StuG III late costs 296). they have the same gun. JPz has a much better armor, more HE and a working MG. JPz IV/70 (V) costs 362, Same armor as JPz IV and the gun is a Panther gun. This is Hetzer, a very good TD.

I don't understand why you are calling the JPz IV/70(V) a "Hetzer". The Hetzer is a JPz 38.

2 hours ago, Larsen said:

It is 65 points more than StuG and it is a much better TD - better gun, better armor.

And for 65 more points you can buy a King Tiger. Even better gun, even better armor

2 hours ago, Larsen said:

When buying formations Hetzer costs 347 and JPz IV (late) costs 312. StuGs when buying in formation cost 284. Essentially JPz IV is 28 points more and is very hard to kill. One needs either a Firefly or a side shot. Even the US 76mm gun on M10 won't get you a kill from the front.

76mm APCR will kill it from the front. So will 90mm when it shows up. So again, whether the JPz IV armor is effectively a lot better than StuG armor or just a little better than StuG armor depends on what is shooting at it.

[Vanir Ausf B]

7 hours ago, Redwolf said:

It's 20%, so it is buying 5 StuGs or 4 Panzer IV/70. The front armor and the better gun (especially against the Sherman's upper front hull) make the Pz IV/70 much more valuable than that.

And 4 King Tigers are (arguably) much more valuable than 5 JPz IV/70s. And 4 Sherman 76s are more valuable than 5 Sherman 75s. And 4 IS-2s are more valuable than 5 T-34/85s. And so on and so forth. Because the price difference between one model and the next tier up model is typically a fraction of the cost of a single unit moving up or down a tier will not dramatically change the number of units you can purchase. There may be a good argument for increasing the intervals between unit prices, particularly in the upper half of the scale.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Vanir Ausf B

[Larsen]

I was wrong and you were correct JPz IV is not Hetzer. 

The US forces in Sep 44 don't have any gun that can kill it from the front and British need Firefly to  penetrate from the front.

Not sure what 90mm has to do with the discussion. This is CMBN forum. Let's confine our conversation to the equipment covered by the game.

This is a thread about StuG pricing in QB. Not about anything else.

I believe that the way they are priced now makes them a weird choice for the Axis player to even consider for QBs. They are essentially are priced out of the game.

[Vanir Ausf B]

59 minutes ago, Larsen said:

The US forces in Sep 44 don't have any gun that can kill it from the front

Not true. As noted, 76mm APCR will kill it frontally. APCR becomes available in July 44.

59 minutes ago, Larsen said:

Not sure what 90mm has to do with the discussion. This is CMBN forum. Let's confine our conversation to the equipment covered by the game.

QB price changes made to CMBN will also be made to the other WW2 games and vice versa. You may not care about the other games but some people do.

[Flock]

Two things is clear from this thread, that StuGIII's are too expensive and that no one seems to no by what mechanism AFV points values are arrived at.  We could really do with someone 'in the know' telling us. Until such time I speculate that as well as armour, firepower, mobility etc' that the ability of the country's economy to manufacture/supply the equipment also may be factored in the the points value. I hear you say no,no, that is the rarity value and indeed that has a bearing, but hear me out.

It cost Germany far more to produce a PzIV than it did the USA to make an M4 and in consequence they made considerably more, I believe something like 40,000 compared with less than 9,000. So if this is factored into the purchase points it is no wonder that all allied equipment is generally cheaper. Why is an American 6X6 truck cheaper (only 3 pts I grant you but nonetheless) than an Opel Blitz with 2 wheel drive? This may also go some way to explain why a firefly is still relatively cheap at 240 pts  despite the increase in firepower and why straffing planes are only 30pts. after all allied pilots were encouraged to shot up anything on their way home from bomber escort . I do feel that if this is the case, then the points system is biased in favour of the Germans for the sake of balance/playability. If this were not so then all German players would be subject considerably more Artillery bombardment, plane activity (given clear weather), to name but two things off the top of my head. No one would enjoy playing the Germans under these conditions.

Back to rarity values, these will, of course , reflect the production figures but, also availability at the front due to, breakdowns, interdiction, fuel, etc'etc'.

However, all this still does not answer the question why is a StuGIII so expensive when they were the most common German big gun AFV type. Also think I the term 'mediocre' could be replaced with ad hoc, as StuGIII's killed more enemy tanks than any other German AFV so they were obviously efficient tank killers.

One more point, StuGIII, PzIV and PzV were the only standard German 'Tanks' in this period of the war, everything else can only really be classed as limited production runs.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Flock

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, Flock said:

It cost Germany far more to produce a PzIV than it did the USA to make an M4 and in consequence they made considerably more, I believe something like 40,000 compared with less than 9,000. So if this is factored into the purchase points it is no wonder that all allied equipment is generally cheaper. Why is an American 6X6 truck cheaper (only 3 pts I grant you but nonetheless) than an Opel Blitz with 2 wheel drive? This may also go some way to explain why a firefly is still relatively cheap at 240 pts  despite the increase in firepower and why straffing planes are only 30pts. after all allied pilots were encouraged to shot up anything on their way home from bomber escort . I do feel that if this is the case, then the points system is biased in favour of the Germans for the sake of balance/playability. If this were not so then all German players would be subject considerably more Artillery bombardment, plane activity (given clear weather), to name but two things off the top of my head. No one would enjoy playing the Germans under these conditions.

 

I think a more likely explanation for the weird pricing is simply that different units were added at different times as different games and modules were released, and the people who decided the unit price points might not be the same people between games, so you end up with a hodgepodge of different pricing decisions that maybe made sense at the time but not in the big picture later.

Could it have been the same person who decided a Firefly should cost 240 points, but an M36 Jackson should cost... I think it's 360 points? Not at my computer right now.

 

[Flock]

Is the M36 in CMBN? I cannot find it in the QB charts nor in the Big Bundle manuals. i don't doubt the 360pts just wanted to have a look see. What is it's rarity value?

 

[Larsen]

It isn't. I don't understand why people keep bringing up units that are not in the game.

How StuGs priced in other CM games should be confined to those subforums. CMBN, CMFI, CMFB - are all independent stand alone games that are purchased independently. 

Let's focus on StuG pricing for CMBN that covers western front from July 1944 to September 1944.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Larsen

[Flock]

I doubt wether it's a matter of different people, different games or different times as I would imagine that the formula was a constant.

 

[Sgt Joch]

The one who could answer this the best would be Steve. He has posted on QB pricing various times over the years. As I recall, pricing is not just a function of the inherent qualities of the AFV, but it’s availability as well. Allied units pretty much always had AFVs available and at full strength while German units had limited availability and even armour formations were rarely at full strength.

All U.S. infantry divisions in NWE 44-45 had a Tank battalion attached and usually had more tanks than a German Panzer divisions. German infantry divisions often had zero AFVs in support or at much a Stug unit. For example, the German 7th Army total armour strength in the initial phase of the Battle of the Bulge was 15 stugs.

[Larsen]

That would be great if Steve or someone else from BFC would provide some rationale behind StuG pricing.

I was under the impression that it was rarity that took care of availability of different units. Maybe some of that trickled in the pricing. In that case Axis players will always be at a disadvantage in QBs vs Allies as QBs don't have any historical meaning behind them.

 

 

[Flock]

I agree with Larsen that it would be great to hear from Steve. I disagree with Larsen that there is no historical context to QB's because, 1) the environment, the map will be based around the terrain of the campaign from June -September, 2) more importantly the fact that the availability is factored in  to the pricing gives us something of the feel of the campaign. I'am personally quite happy about this as it reflects true cost of  things and it's impact at the front. As I say this must be biased in favour of the Germans.

And, just maybe we might indeed get a clearer view of why the StuGIII is so  expensive!

[KGBoy]

1 hour ago, Larsen said:

In that case Axis players will always be at a disadvantage in QBs vs Allies as QBs don't have any historical meaning behind them.

 

 

Yes. War aims were different between Axis and Allies. If pricing is to reflect RL then war aims should also. Otherwise just make things even and be damned to RL. In QB ME particularly.

 

And thanks to everyone. Learning a lot about the purchase versus value with Axis.

 

Edited July 1, 2021 by KGBoy

[Bulletpoint]

Correction to my earlier post: The M36 Jackson is not 360 points, but 277 points when purchased as a single vehicle.

The point of comparing with a vehicle that's not in CMBN was mostly just to see if it could yield some clues to whether there's some formula for how points costs are calculated, and if so, how it works.

In comparison, a Firefly is 248 or 249 points depending on model.

As noted before in the thread, the StuG is 299 points.

 

Another fun comparison:

The light tank Lynx with its little 2cm gun is 155 points. A US Greyhound with a 37mm gun and a .50 cal is... 84 points.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Bulletpoint

[Flock]

I don't quite understand the desire to make things even. Have we been so discontented with QB's so far, I know I haven't.

I have recently played the Germans in 14 or 15 PBEM QB's against a friend of mine, it is hard but, thats the fun/challenge and so far the games have gone mostly my way. When I played as the Americans I also found it a challenge/fun to play. In consequence of this I think the  game is balanced ( apart from the Stug enigma).  It could of course mean that my friend and I are balanced!

Edited July 1, 2021 by Flock

[Redwolf]

At the end of the day we would all enjoy Quickbattles more if they more or less historical unit mixes. And having a pricing scheme can facilitate that.

So fixing some oddities would benefit everybody. I am not talking about a committee driving endless adjustments. I am talking about a one-shot adjustment of the formula after a decade of quickbattles.

The number of clearly mispriced units is surprisingly low as it is. Basically the StuG and the Sherman (if you leave Pz IV and Panther alone). So the risk of inadvertently making is worse is small.

[Larsen]

I jsut went through the QB purchase screen. Everything is regular, Standard, 0, fit. September 44.

5 StuGs cost 1470

6 Pz IVs cost 1406

4 Panthers cost 1418

4 JPz IV cost 1338

4 JPz IV/70 (V) cost 1438

3 King Tigers cost 1259

4 Tigers cost 1454

The way StuGs are priced there is no incentive of buying them in a QB. there are just better options.

If you want quantity and HE - get Pz IV and change. If you want a tough TD  - get JPzIV/70 (V) or JPz IV and change.

If you want a tough tank depending on the map - you have options to go Panthers, Tigers or even King Tigers. All are better options than StuGs.

What am I missing?

 

Regarding the APCR rounds - I just checked. In September 44 M10(late) gets 2 APCR rounds per vehivle while M10 does not. Which makes getting regular M10 in a QB unpractical.

[Flock]

I am not sure the cost of a Sherman is  wrong, are you suggesting that they are too cheap? The StuGIII should be no more than 200pts, not because it IS available so much as for it being the most LIKELY armoured support around.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Flock

[Larsen]

Everything is relative. Shermans feel cheap compared to Pz IVJ. Those are very similar tanks each with its own strength and weakness. They should be priced about the same. Right now M4 is more than 35 points cheaper. That is a price of a 60mm mortar. 

I think StuG should be priced about the same as Pz IV J- around 220-230 points if purchased in a formation.

 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Larsen

[Vacillator]

4 hours ago, Larsen said:

3 King Tigers cost 1259

4 Tigers cost 1454

I'd probably select one of these options if the map suits.  Although In a QB I tend to select a mixture rather than 'x * type'.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Vacilllator
Poor typing -again

[Larsen]

You can mix Tigers and King Tigers, Panthers and Pz IVs, StuGs and JPz IVs and still get a discount. Once you start purchasing vehicles as stand alone you lose the formation discount.

[Vanir Ausf B]

16 minutes ago, Larsen said:

You can mix Tigers and King Tigers, Panthers and Pz IVs, StuGs and JPz IVs and still get a discount. Once you start purchasing vehicles as stand alone you lose the formation discount.

Just be aware that each formation costs 50 points.

[Vacillator]

I tend to buy odd vehicles assigned inside a formation (which you have to have).  Is that what you mean?

[Larsen]

1 hour ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Just be aware that each formation costs 50 points.

I did not know that and I didn't bother to count points. Interesting. Each formation starts with 50 points. Thank you! I am not sure how to use that yet but it looks like adding single vehicles to the existing formations might be better rather than adding a new formation with few vehicles.

[Flock]

Ok, I concede that my StuGIII value of 200pts is low and 220-230 is nearer the mark. However, I still don't see the M4 as being too cheap. Consider Sgt Joch's post on this thread

On 7/1/2021 at 3:13 PM, Sgt Joch said:

pricing is not just a function of the inherent qualities of the AFV, but it’s availability as well. Allied units pretty much always had AFVs available and at full strength while German units had limited availability and even armour formations were rarely at full strength.

All U.S. infantry divisions in NWE 44-45 had a Tank battalion attached and usually had more tanks than a German Panzer divisions. German infantry divisions often had zero AFVs in support or at much a Stug unit. For example, the German 7th Army total armour strength in the initial phase of the Battle of the Bulge was 15 stugs.

the war economies of the different countries has been worked into the pricing schemes we have no control over this just as the soldiers of 44/45 had none, but as they did we also feel the effect of it at the front. This factor is a large part of setting the historical context for a QB. I would argue that flattening the values of M4 v Mk IV would remove a large slice of historical context. Put it this way, even if for some reason Germany could have made M4's under licence, with Germany supplying all the resources, they still could have not have made them as cheaply as the USA. This would have meant that a German M4 would have cost more points than an American M4. The QB points are already biased in favour the Germans despite the  greater cost for MkIV vis a vis the M4. Read once more Sgt Jochs post and give a little thought to the 7th Armies 15 StuGs. 

The list of of potential options, kindly posted by Larsen, certainly displays the Stug III's overpricing. Having said that it makes no allowance for rarity value which would make it look like this:-

5xStuGIII                  0pts

6xMkIV                     0pts

4xPanther                0pts

4xJgdPzIV         3864pts

4xJgdPzIV70     9716pts

3xKing Tiger      8463pts

4x Tiger              4320pts

 I reckon that will exceed most QB rarity  allowances. If you don't use rarity points go for it, but forget about historical context.

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Flock