Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?
Register

How about a Petition

SlySniper said:
I think you are going about this the wrong way, trying to get BF to the adjust the pricing is somewhat fine if it happens, but its always a matter of opinion on how the values should be based.

I think what is needed is that BF adds a feature to allow the user to adjust the pricing in his game as he wishes.

Thus, you could tweek to your hearts content and you and only those you play against need to come to a agreement of what is wanted.

BF could keep what they feel is correct and is a default option.

But those hosting tournament s and such could use their own systems if so desired.
Click to expand...
The price list should be loadable as a XML file or whatever.

But I think there is zero chance that BFC goes for it.
 
Well, BF is getting in a mindset to allow for the game system to be more flexible as to settings so as to appeal to more type of players from the casual gamer down to the hardcore player that wants as much realism as possible.

Likely would not see this unless it shows up in cmx3 engine but hey there is a chance

So requestiong for a player flexible purchasing system, might not be as far fetched as you might think
 
In all honesty Sherman 76mm is a better tank than Pz IV. Much better armor, more HE, comparable gun, better ground pressure, better spotting... not sure about being 50 points more thought. The way it is now Sherman 76mm tank is much, much cheaper than StuG. Doesn't that bother you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Would you, please, elaborate?
StuG cost about 300 points and has no turret, has low HE, almost no MG and has very mediocre armor.
If you look at, say, Marder it is essentially a mobile ATG. I think that given the price of 75mm PAK Marder is priced about right. Other open top assult guns, i think, are also about right. If you go to something like JPz IV then it has an absolutely formidable front armor. It should be cheaper than Panthern for Germans since it has very limited infanry support capacity but as an armor fighting vehicle it is really good and I think is priced about right.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Larsen said:
Would you, please, elaborate?
StuG cost about 300 points and has no turret, has low HE, almost no MG and has very mediocre armor.
If you look at, say, Marder it is essentially a mobile ATG. I think that given the price of 75mm PAK Marder is priced about right. Other open top assult guns, i think, are also about right. If you go to something like JPz IV then it has an absolutely formidable front armor. It should be cheaper than Panthern for Germans since it has very limited infanry support capacity but as an armor fighting vehicle it is really good and I think is priced about right.
Click to expand...
For the Jpz4/70V vs Panther and stug vs pz4 its quite aparent. While the germans dont have anything comparable to the marders the american m18 is a good comparison point and there the marders come off worse.
The question is what stats do the CM devs consider to be more important than any player to cause the price of those vehicles to be so out of sync. Im noticing the trend that turretless vehicles seem more expensive than they should compared to comparable turreted vehicles. It might also be that ammo capacity is undervalued.
Whatever the actual reason unless we can get down to what the actual misvaluing is any petition has little chance of achieving anything. If we cant do that wed be better served making a list of vehicles and what we as a community think they are worth compared to what they are now and let BF figure out what is wrong. But considering BF rate of development if we do that i doubt anything will ever happen.
 
i beg your pardon. M18 is a much better anti armor vehicle than Marder. For starters it has a fast turret and it is very fast.
Here is I am looking at CMBN Aug 44 price list. Individual vehicles (not a part of the formation).
US
M4 (Sherman Mid) - 190
M18 - 156
M4 (late) - 199
M4A1 (Mid) - 190
M4A1 (76mm early) - 256
M4A3 - 193
M4A3 (75mm early) - 232
M4A3 (75mm mid) - 232
M4A3 (76mm early) - 258
M10 - 207
M10 (late) - 215

Germans
Pz IVH (ealy) - 248
Pz IVH (late) - 248
Pz IVJ (early) - 241
Pz IVG (late) - 245
Panther (VD Late) - 357
Panther (VDA early) - 360
Tiger (mid) - 366
Tiger (mid) - 375
JPz IV (early) - 319
JPz IV (mid) - 319
JPz IV (late) - 337
Jagdpanther - 390
StuG III (mid) - 299
Marder I - 108
Marder II - 137

I don't have a problem with the pricings of Marders, M18 or Panthers/Tigers ( well, they might by a bit cheap. I would be OK with getting them a a bit more expensive - different discussion).
I have a problem with pricing of Pz IVs compared to M4 (very comparable tank) and M4A1 (76mm) - a much better tank overall and I have a problem with the pricing of StuGs. StugS are priced basically at the lower levels of JPz IVs while being completely inferior to them in all regards.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Current wording. I plan to post on the weekend.

Subject: Petition from FGM to equalize QB prices of some similar WW2 tanks

"This is a petition from players over at thefewgoodmen CM playing community. It regards Quickbattle pricing of common tanks that we think should be adjusted.

In our opinion a basic 75mm Sherman, a basic PzIV long and a basic StuG long should roughly be priced the same.

As for changing the pricing model we feel that:
- the turret on the tanks is worth quite a bit, so the StuG should be discounted for the lack of it. CMx2 is good enough to really make a turret count
- same for the additional MG and ammo loadout on the real tanks - right now secondary weapons seem not to influence prices much at all. Again, current CMx2's engine mechanisms provide good utility from these MGs
- although the PzIV has a better gun than the 75mm Sherman the 50mm front turret puts it right back into the same price class. And the Sherman has better HE

Currently the prices are (in CMBN):
- basic Sherman M4M1 (mid) 190 points
- Pz IVJ (early) 241 points
- StuG III (mid) 299 points

We feel that the current pricing is getting in the way of both historically accurate force mixes (not enough StuGs) and also of general fairness between the sides. Pricing these three the same would improve both and lead to more even, realistic forces. Our community makes a lot of use of QB-purchased vehicles (we are probably the experts on it) and we feel the combat capabilities are fundamentally equivalent between these three."
 
Last edited:
Bulletpoint said:
Which price should be suggested? Meet in the middle at 240?
Click to expand...
I figured that I don't suggest a price so that people don't go circles in their followups focusing on the single number. Or in other words I figure the petition is better served to be just about "equal". BFC will do whatever they want anyway with the specific price anyway, even if they consider the equalizing.

I am, however, open to suggestions that I am wrong about that and we should name a price.

240 sounds good to me as a price.
 
Added "references":

StuGs and the price of them in QB

Hi Everyone, I played quite a bit of CM1 games back in the days and recently eventually got to playing CM2. I am interested in WWII combat. I picked CMBN and CMFI with all the modules. In my opinion CM is most enjoyable when playing QBs again other players. That to me is the essence of CM. Now, I...
community.battlefront.com community.battlefront.com

StuGs

Hi everyone, I am curious how many people actually use StuGs in QB playing for Germans? And a similar question - does anyone go beyond the basic M4 when buying 75mm Shermans?
www.thefewgoodmen.com

How about a Petition

Just a thought, since many members here are CM players how would it go if all use members that wanted battlefront to revisit the cost of some of the armoured vehicles for QB. Surley if a playing group with so many players that support there products asked them to review some aspects of the cost...
www.thefewgoodmen.com

Why is the Panzer IV so expensive to buy in Quick Battles?

I've been wondering about this for a long time, so here goes: Why are Panzer IVs so expensive in QBs compared to the Allied counterpart, the Sherman? In late WW2, the Pz IV is a quite weak tank. Its armour is thin, and while it has a better gun than the Sherman, the Sherman is also better armoure...
community.battlefront.com community.battlefront.com
 
Posted over at BFC forum:
community.battlefront.com

Petition to equalize QB prices of some similar WW2 tanks

This is a petition from players over at thefewgoodmen CM playing community. It regards Quickbattle pricing of common tanks that we think should be adjusted. In our opinion a basic 75mm Sherman, a basic PzIV long and a basic StuG long should roughly be priced the same. As for changing the pricing ...
community.battlefront.com community.battlefront.com
 
I think that if they make these three vehicles 240 each, this will mean many more StuGs and Panzer IV will be fielded, because they are no longer easily outpriced by the bargain bin Sherman.

Also, I think Allied light armour will play a bigger role, since the price difference to a real tank will be more substantial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top