-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Its the other way around. 3rd armored and guards armored get discounted (130p) shermans m4a3 for balance reasons. Other divisions get m4a1 for the same price (130p).
Cheaper inf. This was broken with 4AD but it is the main reason other armored decks like 3rd get cheaper shermans, their inf is costly.
GA armor isn't cheap, you don't really pick 1000m shermans but 1200m firefly's and they are 210 points units. But GA got cheap inf too.
Personaly I prefer to mix sherman V's and firefly's becasue shermans are so much better fire suport units and at 130p are a rly good deal. I find firefly's usufullness kinda narrow, they are much better than shermans as long range AT, but still lose to heavy cats...
Depends what map and kind of game you're playing, it works in 1vs1 but i was just pointing out shermans V from GA are only 1000m units (with 11 AP and 11 frontal armor) which can be tricky once you start fighting any early B tiger with 15AP and 12 frontal armor firing at you at 1200m. Not to speak about early B panthers with 14 frontal armor. Cause with lower AP you only planning on opponent mistakes to get your frontal or side shots (counting on him to reduce the distance of his panzers - what a good player will avoid to do).
3rd Armored got 1000m M4A3 but 1200m M4A3 too and the early 1200m pieces are always the best choice in teamplay on very open maps imo. With 76mm's the advantage is to be able to pick shots at nearly full range and be able to kill almost everything this way, the no-go zone you creating is everything and 300-400m can be the distance you need to prevent inf to invade a far treeline, in few words to contest.
I suppose you know that canadian and polish rifles are noticeable worse than scottish or guards, right? They cost 15 pts, because they suck at everything and their low price is justified. Inf of 4AD is a bit op, coz 12 HP though.
Actually this bullshit with different prices for same tank is allied problem, germans have same price for certain tanks across the board.
And here the most hilarious examples of tank pricing
Canadian Sherman III vs. Polish Sherman V - same price
Almost same tanks - 30 pts price difference (yeah-yeah, Sherman III has more ammo and +1 MG, but DD is amphibious)
Also weird pricing. Same transport vehicle, guard motorifles are better, but their cost is same with polish dragoni.
I suppose you know that canadian and polish rifles are noticeable worse than scottish or guards, right? They cost 15 pts, because they suck at everything and their low price is justified. Inf of 4AD is a bit op, coz 12 HP though.
Actually this bullshit with different prices for same tank is allied problem, germans have same price for certain tanks across the board.
And here the most hilarious examples of tank pricing
Canadian Sherman III vs. Polish Sherman V - same price
Almost same tanks - 30 pts price difference (yeah-yeah, Sherman III has more ammo and +1 MG, but DD is amphibious)
Also weird pricing. Same transport vehicle, guard motorifles are better, but their cost is same with polish dragoni.
Noone would use 15 points strelzcy from Pancerna if they were that bad, same for ersatztruppen or canadian rifles
It's just for holding the line and they are very useful to do so. Pancerna is considered one of the best 1vs1 deck atm, even with their 150 points shermans.Actually shermans III and shermans V cost 150 points even inside Pancerna and there is no real difference between sherman III and V except a few points of armor, it's why the cost is no different.
I don't care if same units don't have the same price looking at different decks, prices are scaled according to each deck and each deck point flow and not between all the decks together. Makes no sense to give the exact same labelled units the same price when some decks have cheaper inf, better planes when others don't.
Yeah M4DD got exact same stats as sherman III but anyone playing 101st airborne know this deck isn't really heavy in the armor department to say the least, they don't have any real at gun neither, they got their TD's but mostly coming in C and with that they rely on costly planes and a non-existent long range arty tab. Everyone will accept to say 101st airborne is the worse deck to play anti-armor wise.
Which leads us once again on the subject of 4AD. It gets more point flow than any other deck in the game and still get cheaper units in any department all the same.
Last edited:
15 points is a 25% discount over 20 points and it's a huge advantage, even if the unit itself isn't that good.
I mean, armored rifles are an even worse unit but cost more than that.
I mean, armored rifles are an even worse unit but cost more than that.
So the thought is that the poles and Canadians have to pay more for their Sherman....20 pts.....cause they have cheaper infantry....thats main purpose is to just hold the line? But then the Sherman's stats are identical.....so why should a division have to pay 20 more for a tank. Also doesn't GA get a rifle squad that's 20...
Noone would use 15 points strelzcy from Pancerna if they were that bad, same for ersatztruppen or canadian rifles
There is no question about to use or not to use, but thing is pancerna and canadians don't have infantry with artificial price reduction, the price for their inf is fair.
Riiiight, there is no big difference if your tank would be killed or not...
There is no logical price scaling according to each deck and points. Or it was done randomly. Why m10 has same price in almost all allied decks? Why Pz 4H costs 140 pts in all decks? And Stug III F-8 too.
The truth is this balancing is very complex and made in game very poorly.
Canada is pretty meh division, rarely chosen in ranked, teamplay. I watched almost all videos of paradox champ and I've only a few cases when people played Canada.
In that armor range between sherman III and V armors, nah, no real diff. You could argue for a price buff off 5-10 points but it's not really gamebreaking, especially if you aknowledge Pancerna is already very good. For canadians it's another thing but it's more related to lack of real peak units in the entire deck. Spitfires are too bad, the tank tab is a disaster to play with and it's not with a ram a few sextons and stormtroopers you make a good deck, even less now as at guns have been hidden nerfed.
If you don't really get the power of 15 points infantry, i canno't really say anything else to convince you. Pancerna got cromwell VI and plenty of assets with a very good economy in game, one of the best phase A economy to have cheap 15 points inf in A,
2DB 100/110/115/115 = 440.
1st Pancerna 90/115/125/125 = 455.
GA 80/125/130/130 = 465.
4rd Armored has 80/130/130/130 = 470.
Lehr 75/95/150/150 = 470.
3rd Armored 70/105/150/150 = 475.
The real issue now is to fix 4AD prices and improve a bit some of the german decks, If other allied decks are a bit off, some little change could come on some unit capabilities but the prices are pretty much ok.
Noone would use 15 points strelzcy from Pancerna if they were that bad, same for ersatztruppen or canadian rifles
Actually shermans III and shermans V cost 150 points even inside Pancerna and there is no real difference between sherman III and V except a few points of armor, it's why the cost is no different.
I don't care if same units don't have the same price looking at different decks, prices are scaled according to each deck and each deck point flow and not between all the decks together. Makes no sense to give the exact same labelled units the same price when some decks have cheaper inf, better planes when others don't.
Yeah M4DD got exact same stats as sherman III but anyone playing 101st airborne know this deck isn't really heavy in the armor department to say the least, they don't have any real at gun neither, they got their TD's but mostly coming in C and with that they rely on costly planes and a non-existent long range arty tab. Everyone will accept to say 101st airborne is the worse deck to play anti-armor wise.
Which leads us once again on the subject of 4AD. It gets more point flow than any other deck in the game and still get cheaper units in any department all the same.
Discounted stuarts of 4th AD is bs too. 65 points? Are you kidding me? Almost as if deliberately adjusted to get two stuarts per minute...
I just about exclusively play with the Poles they are my favorite in game and out of game. I know what the purpose of the 15 pt infantry. But still just cause they get cheap infantry why does the Sherman more points it' the exact same thing......the GA get cheap 20 pt infantry so the argument about infantry being cheaper doesn't make alot of sense, and GA gets Cromwell VI as well
Trash but spammable infantry with decent fire support wins in this game. There is practically no difference between 20 points rifles and 15 points strelcy. And even 10 points ersatz. You get 5 points of discount for every rifle squad in pancerna, compared to GA.
Still doesn't give any reason for a tank to be 20 pts more than the exact same tank in another division.
Almost every unit is too cheap in 4AD but a lot is unvetted too so it h as to be taken into account. Nerf all the hellcats from 100 points to 140-150 points and nerf price and ammo of strafe maraudeurs (maybe 150 points with the ammo reduced by half) is enough to make the deck killable imo.
At least this was my own conclusion when i analysed it here : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...ystem-is-utter-garbage.1063442/#post-23674298
Cause you have to take into account their strong phase A with 15 points cheap inf with a great 90 points flow in this phase and reduce consequently their power in B. The whole game is based around balance between the three phases and very strong phase A decks should always have harder times in B.
It does.
4 squads of strelcy offset that expensive Sherman. If sherman were to be cheaper, already borderline OP pancerna would be OP as fuck.
Yes. Poles have a strong phase A. They can pump out cheap infantry woo woo. GA has better phase B and C than poles. The Sherman is what is in question...when other divisions have the exact same vehicle the price is the same(excluding 4th armor) So why does it get treated differently phase system can't be used as a excuse Canadians get cheap 15 pt inf and 70 income phase A. Their tank even has one less frontal armor than poles and guards.