proposal for determining tank cost

[IronHat]

TL; DR: 130 pt for pz4, 185 pt for m4a3 76(w), 405 for KT(h)

take a theoretical tank with 10 AV, 10 AP, 5 HE, 20km/h off road, 63km on road, 3 x .30 cal mg, 4 acc on main gun, and NO stabilizer. We will use this as our "base" tank and adjust price of other tanks according to the following rule:

• 10 pt for 1 av/ap
• 2.5 pt for ~5km/h off road, and 2.5 for ~10km/h on road
• 2.5 pt for a .30cal mg, with 5pt for a .50cal. ( +2.5 if you swap out a .30 cal for a .50cal)
• 5pt for 1 acc.
• 1.25(?) for 1 HE. (unfortunately true HE value is complicated)
  
• -5pt for having a hand cranked turret (pz4j)
• 2.5(?) for stabilizer ("normal" aim time for a tank gun is 4 sec, 3 with stablizier)
  
• +20% final value for 1200 m range
• round to the nearest 10s and 5s

using those rules, the pz4 would cost ~130 pt.

• +40 pt for +4 ap,
• -20 pt for -2 AP
• no adjustment for speed or mg
• +10 pt for +2 acc
• -1.25 for -1 HE

A m4a3 76(w) would cost 185

• 30 pt for 3 ap
• 10 pt for 1 av
• 2.5 pt for 25 km/h off road
• 10 pt for 2 acc
• 2.5 pt for swapping out a .30cal for a .50cal
• 2.5 pt for stabilizer.
  
• subtotal + 55 pt
• 155 * 1.20 = 186

King tiger (h) would cost 405, the m4a3 would cost 135 pt and the m4a2 would cost 125 pt.

This actually fit within the existing price pretty well, and in general buff the weaker tank while nerfing the stronger tank. However, the formula sort of break when you scale down.

 

[Sarin]

Nice job putting in work for an idea and doing the calculations.

Don't agree though, there is more to pricing than just the stats on the card.
Also goes towards balancing out divisions, availability and other considerations.

 

[Rojan]

Symmetrical balance isn't the way the developers want to approach the game balance thankfully. Like Sarin said there are multiple factors that go into what something will cost. This includes the division itself, the phase, the availability, the type of deck, and other things.

 

[Think Tanker]

Symmetrical balance isn't the way the developers want to approach the game balance thankfully. Like Sarin said there are multiple factors that go into what something will cost. This includes the division itself, the phase, the availability, the type of deck, and other things.

All the more reason for the M4A3 and Panzer IVJ/H to be cheaper, as these appear in armored decks. The fact that it is more likely to see a King Tiger H than it is to see a M4A3 75mm is a little bit of a crime IMHO.

 

[Rojan]

All the more reason for the M4A3 and Panzer IVJ/H to be cheaper, as these appear in armored decks. The fact that it is more likely to see a King Tiger H than it is to see a M4A3 75mm is a little bit of a crime IMHO.

Yeah I don't disagree with that. I think Shermans for the most part are overpriced.

 

[Nebelwerfer 42]

Symmetrical balance isn't the way the developers want to approach the game balance thankfully. Like Sarin said there are multiple factors that go into what something will cost. This includes the division itself, the phase, the availability, the type of deck, and other things.

This. While I appreciate your well formulated system for determining the price of tanks OP, this game thrives on asymmetrical balance which is what makes it so good.

 

[IronHat]

This. While I appreciate your well formulated system for determining the price of tanks OP, this game thrives on asymmetrical balance which is what makes it so good.

since when does asymmetrical balance mean overcharging for units?

one side having statistically better unit is one thing, but the price need to fair, or else you will just have nonexistent balance.

chess are example of symmetrical balance since it's a functional mirror match.

 

[Rojan]

since when does asymmetrical balance mean overcharging for units?

one side having statistically better unit is one thing, but the price need to fair, or else you will just have nonexistent balance.

I don't think anyone disagrees with thinking that some tanks are overpriced. I think what people are hesitant to do is lay out some blanket remedy that streamlines balancing.

 

[IronHat]

I don't think anyone disagrees with thinking that some tanks are overpriced. I think what people are hesitant to do is lay out some blanket remedy that streamlines balancing.

you have to start somewhere. When you have so many unit as in this game, a formula is a decent starting point.

 

[Arctander]

I definitely think that the med and lower level tanks need to be MUCH more cost efficient compared to the uber tanks. It certainly would get them more represented on the field of battle, which certainly would be much more realistic.

 

[Sleight of Hand]

Panzer IVs, Cromwells and lower-tier Shermans all feel too expensive right now.

 

[kvnrthr]

Not a formula to be blindly applied but gives good starting points for discussion. Too many Panthers, 76 mm and Fireflies when these should really be situational tanks.

 

[Arctander]

Unfortunately, the over valuing of super tanks has always been one of the least realistic points of the Wargame series. I'm not sure what the easiest fix is for it, but I do hope they tweak it a little to try and encourage players to put more of the mainstay tanks onto the battle field.