Oob issues
 

Here im going to post some issues i found on the oob's:

Syria (at least '87) hizbollah entry 3 has inferior lmg (lower acc but otherwise same stats) and one less ap round for their rpg-7 than entry 4. Both have the same cost.

Iran (at least in '87) augusta bell 205 and 212 have same point cost even 212 seems clearly superior (one more mg, 3 more sped and 2 better durability).

Algerian (noticed at '87) mech infantry with strela sam costs same than inf-sam team with said weapon and ammo loadout .

Finland 2018 has amos sp-mortar that is identical to a swedish one in the same year but is a lot cheaper than the swedish one.

Finland 1987 sissi sections has two entries with the same cost and equipment and other one has 2 more ammo in 66 kes orak.

Finland 1987 reserve section has two statistically identical entries with 1 pts cost difference. (Rk 54 and 56 main weapons have same stats but apparently different cost.)

Russian 77 there is in 5th page of infantry brm-1 and 3 hmg teams. Carr cap 9 and carry cost 12 total.

Iraq (At least in '82) is able to take on map artillery and AT guns as Direct and General support. I believe this should not be possible. Have not encountered this with other rosters.

Bosnia-Hertzegobina (At least '92) has an RCL jeep in ARMOR section that is typed as Wheeled SP ATGM even it is not.

Pretty sure North (and / or South) Korea has Special Forces.

Russian 79 SEAD CAIRA seems to destroy Air Defences quite easily against Air Defences with similar EW values.

Seems unlikely that Swedish Gripen would not have vision 40 equipment in 2018.

Reporting more when i happen to find some.

Re: Oob issues
 

Please give the unit number in the OOB at least. "Hizbollah unit 3" means scrolling about trying to find it, and the spelling in the oob differs (Hezbollah)so the search function won't work. These reporting procedures are outlined in the sticky thread at the top of the forum. Unit number is key - since end users will not necessarily agree in spelling of unit names, and we have no idea where the 9say) Hezbollah section is in these OOBS, since there are 93 or so, and WW2 besides.

I will assume you mean Unit No. 460 vs No. 461?
The weapons cost of small weapons like LMGS are tiny, and only vast differences (Range, Accuracy Kill etc) will result in anything other than the default 3-4 points being applied for an LMG. Same goes for rifles - they tend to be much of a muchness. Same goes for small arms ammo - 80 or 90 issued rounds won't make much difference. Ammo points cost for small arms is tiny. An extra ATGM will usually be noticed, of course!.

Now if we made infantry cost 5 times more, maybe a few points difference might be noted in the base cost in rifle elements - but then perhaps any cost reduction for low experience and/or morale may round those away - points are integer, not fractions. And also, your tanks and arty etc would now cost 5 times more (and there is a maximum number for integers, and the large integers which hold the total force value).

Iranian units nos. 270 and 272
You need to look at all the data
- Speed differs 80 vs 83 - Speed costs points
- Hull value differs - one is 4, the other 6. Hit points cost
- Stabiliser differs, stabiliser points are charged for, no. 270 has 5 expensive stabiliser points, and no. 272 only has 2

Again - an MG with 20 rounds is a trifling cost. If you made 2 exactly similar helos but one with 1 MG and one with 2 and run it through the cost calculator utility it may result in 2(?) points difference between them. Speed, electronics (stabiliser) and carry capacity etc will be by far the determinants between vaguely similar helos (like No. 273 for example - a tad more speed, carry, and 1 stab point more)

Re: Oob issues
 

The two Hezbollah Teams ( units 460 and 461 ) do seem on the surface to be an error as the LMG for 461 is slightly better, the rpg has one more round and they have marginally better radio communication but everything is run through the cost calculator before the patch is released and it uses the same criteria for every unit in that unitclass and in this case it costs them equally and I would have expected a slight variation.... maybe not enough to change the unit cost but enough to show in the calc but it doesn't.........on the list to investigate