Cost of units need revision

[JimF]

I am somewhat mystified by the reletive cost and availability of units in CMBB.

In March 1944, for example I note that a T-34/85 costs only 2 points more than an SU-85 (a mere 1% difference in their price).

The SU-85 (a tank destroyer with the same chassis and gun as the T-34/85 but no revolving turret) was manufactured because it is considerably cheaper than its turreted cousin in both rubles and time-to-manufacture. The cost of the turret, and particulaly the precision miling required of the turret ring was avoided in the SU-85, as in all tank destroyers. The whole purpose of tank destroyers as a class of armored vehicles is to take advantage of this price diffence and field more vehicles more quickly.

Yet CMBB does not consistantly represent these price differences either with or without rarity being taken into consideration.

Perhaps BigTime could make available a tool that would allow the player(s) to modify these costs, with a default button that would return all values to those shipped with the game.

[Ben Galanti]

Point costs in CM have nothing to do with the manufacturing time and cost of the vehicle. The point costs are based soley on the characteristics of the vehicle (armor, gun, ammo load out, mobility, etc..) This is an absolute value, not relative to any other vehicle or time period.

Now, rarity might make a bit of difference in this case. If one vehicle was easy and cheap to produce, there were likely lots of them. This would lead to a low rarity modifier which might affect the comparisons of the two vehicles.

Ben

[Nabla]

Originally posted by JimF:

Perhaps BigTime could make available a tool that would allow the player(s) to modify these costs, with a default button that would return all values to those shipped with the game.

Jim,

I think that this post would fit nicely into a current thread whose name is The longest wait.

Just kidding, just kidding...

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by JimF:

[..]

The SU-85 (a tank destroyer with the same chassis and gun as the T-34/85 but no revolving turret) was manufactured because it is considerably cheaper than its turreted cousin in both rubles and time-to-manufacture. [..] The whole purpose of tank destroyers as a class of armored vehicles is to take advantage of this price diffence and field more vehicles more quickly.

Not exactly, the SU-85 (and later SU-100) were built mainly to get the gun on an AFV ASAP, not because they were cheaper to build, or could be build quicker.

Just look at the production figures: 2000 SU-85 against almost 25.000 T-34-85.

So the pricing in CMBB works out pretty realisticly, by mid 44 there really isn't much reason to buy a SU-85 when you can get the same gun in a tank. This is what happened historically, the SU-85 is a rare niche vehicle that ultimatly is mainly good for overwatch of infantry advances.

Yet CMBB does not consistantly represent these price differences either with or without rarity being taken into consideration.

Check out the StuGs (or SU-76s ) if you want to see a capable turretless vehicle that is also cheaper than it's tank equivalent

[ October 24, 2002, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

[Sunflower Farm Boy]

Originally posted by Nabla:

I think that this post would fit nicely into a current thread whose name is The longest wait.

Hehe. That's funny.