Units that are way too cheap/expensive

[PlasmaKrab]

About the loss of one helo as a critical aset, you have to remember how easily they flee from the field at the first damage. Or even if they happen to be really suppressed, they walk much faster than anyone else and can get off-map before you can catch them!

It is just as good that things go this way, considering they get back to the rear area repair shops to get fixed before crashing down, and can't come back in time.

Considering that anyone can have a pot shot at them, and even one guy with an Enfield rifle can deal one critical damage point on a helo (not often, I grant you) and erase it from the field anyhow, in most cases attack helos don't last that long unless you base your whole strategy on them. If you go more daredevil and use them as recon, you have more chances to lose one.

Now about vulnerability, remember that all modern attack helos (both Cobra and Tiger, even more Apache and Hind) are meant to withstand 23mm AP shells. Apart from that they have a durability value which stands for the damage they can deal with.
And maybe that is one reason why air units look so cheap, if the cost calculation is the same as for the AFVs: these two factors (armor and durability) stand for the whole airframe, and these units have no other armor rating.
Since the armor deals a great part of the unit cost, and these have only two non-zero value out of 24, this may explain that.

Als consider that helos have far less ammo than tanks. Even if you equate one (guided) ATGM for two or three sabot rounds in a modern MBT, helos are still on the poor side.

Both helos and tanks are among the ruling classes in this game, and can reach pretty delirious costs. When trying an extended-cold-war oob for West Germany, I was quite surprised to seee that my TRIGAT-armed BO-105 were actually more expensive than the basis Tiger UHT! And by adding 140mm HV gun, .50 overhead mount, VIRSS, addon armor etc, I managed to raise my Leopard2A8 over 600 points!

Anyway, as I told you, you can correct that by shrinking the dividing factor for the "attack helo" class in CostCalculator.

[Suurajatollah]

As PlasmaKrab put it: it all relates on what you consider as the most important.

Lets do a little comparison with country training on:

INF AT
-------
China:
* PF-98 LAW Team, cost 20p, accuracy 50, range 16
Germany:
* Pzfaust 3, cost 19p, accuracy 5, range 10
Finland:
* Apilas Team, cost 28p, accuracy 5, range 7

Penetration is almost the same with these three units but the other 3 most important properties differ. Clearly the accuracy of the Chinese law is false. I suppose that the zero is there by a mistake -accuracy of PF-98 LAW should be 5, not 50.

China:
*PF-97 FAE Team, 17p, range 17
Russia:
*RPO Team, 35p, range 17

Double the price and you get the same unit in the Russian army.
???


ON-MAP BOMBLET ARTILLERY
-------------------------
For example

*on-map BM-22 Uragan battery(6 tubes) , 324p, 6 Ammo Carriers, 210p, total 524 points
*on-map BM-22 Uragan (one piece)54p , Ammo Carrier 35p = 89p
*off-map BM-22 Uragan Pl(8 tubes) , 690p

Basically with lower cost you get more devastating weapons as the on-map artillery is much better than off-map. One is able to fire several times more bomblet ammo (size 2??? What for? Israeli LARs ammo size is 8 thus they are slower to refill) in a game when he spends the money on 524p Uragan batteries with Ammo Carriers -all this with lower costs.

And when you compare
*on-map BM-22 Uragan (one piece)54p , Ammo Carrier 35p = 89p
to one
* Msta-S , 142p you only get more confused. Msta-S is nothing to that Uragan.

Not to mention the cumulative effect of the on-map bomblet artillery batteries, which can be horrible!

Conclusion is that on-map bomblet artillery should cost much more than 54p or so.

ATTACK HELICOPTERS
------------------
AH-64 Apache with 2 TOW-2B, vision 60 EW 8, Aero costs 747.
One of the best tanks, M1A2 SEP Abrams without VIRSS costs 465. That Apache is capable to destroy many Abrams without even to be seen! Look at the price of those units and see the fault.

And when one of the best SPAA sections, Tunguska (2pcs), costs 562p the blunder is clear. Apache can take, what would I say, 5 to 10 Tunguskas easily in a 25 turn game. It's game over before it ever started.

I really think that CostCalculator parameters should be reconsidered and be fixed in a future upgrade of winspmbt.

[shilka]

A Tunguska battery would probably shoot down a Apache before he reached fire distance on a western battlefield. They are excellent short to medium range SPAA units IRL. Probably one of this worlds most effective ones today besides the american 20mm Phalanx gun system.

Today the Russians have probably made them even more deadly then when I first saw them on a documentary called Dual In The Desert from 2003 with the export version of the 2S6 Tunguska system on the screen. Have anyone seen one of these systems engaging a flying object? I know this much, if you are having a ride with an Apache helicopter and your machinery is locked by a 9M311 SAM missile you are pretty much toast.

The Tunguska system is far from that old Shilka ZSU-23-4 system even if it still is a pretty good one depending on where you are posted in the world. In open desert it can be hard to keep your head cold in one of those coffins. But in a dense jungel as in Korea you can still get burned.

Just talk to someone that have been flying A-10 Warthog over Iraq and then moved to the Korean mainland. It is a great differance between open desert and European or South East Asian djungel areas with these babys on the ground.

Now I know the game has it´s limitations but I can really understand why those choppers are as expensive as they are. They are the games most effective flying artillery units. *lol*

[KevinRanger95]

Like the shilka, have they attempted to make the Tunguska a CS or ground support convoy gun

[shilka]

It works just fine when it comes to engage ground targets. *Nods* They can easy engage ground targets with both the main guns and the SAM missile. But the two systems Shilka vs Tunguska is like comparing a scooter with a racing bicycle

[JaM]

AA guns are not so effective in SPMBT. They are not capable fire AP targets at helos! Many times i hit Mi-24 with 35mm from Gepard without effect! in real Mi-24 would be anihilated from 35mm fire

[Suurajatollah]

Many seem to think that in real life Gepard and Tunguska would be able to shoot down an Apache or at least engage it in a more even fight. As we see. But in winspmbt it's not like that.

In my experience One Apache is worth propably thousands of points SPAA. So the costs of these two unit types do not match. Also, it doesn't match if we compare an Apache or any other modern attack helicopter to a modern battle tank. Again, the costs of these two unit types do not match. One solution is that Helicopters should cost much more in relation to tanks and anti aircraft. Another solution is that anti aircraft should be more effective.

I'd like to play with helicopters but with these flaws it would only spoil the gaming experience!

What do you think of the costs of those units mentioned up in this thread?

What are the units that are way too cheap/expensive?

And what should be done to correct the situation?

[SCAJolly]

South East Asian jungel in Korea? Korea's in the NE of Asia.

[Listy]

Personally I think it works fine.

The modern MBT's cost as much as they do because they're Very deadly, and very survivable.
The Attack helicopters cost as much as they do because they have maneuverability on their side and a good punch, if you can get the blasted things to hit...

If you're really convinced that something's wrong (Which I'm not, And I've been playing for just a few years ), then look under preferences. There's a side bar there with lots of fields that you can alter to make something's more or less effective.

[JaM]

But you cant make that 35mm AA gun will fire against armored helicopter armor piercing rounds instead of high explosive.By the way ZSU-23-4 Shilka fires in reality two HE and one AP round in one burst.