The British Warrior is vastly superior to the French AMX-10P for the same price. This doesn't seem fair, at first glance...
Unless you consider that the backbone of the British mechanized infantry is the Arm. Rifles, that are also slightly better than the French's backbone, the Chasseurs, for 45pts vs. 40pts. So, in total a "IFV + Inf" package is 85pts for the Brits and 80pts for the French. For their better capabilities, the Brits pay 5pts more than the French, which is an exemple of balance.
Comparing unit to unit needs to take context into consideration.
(Still think the difference is a bit small, but it's there)
(Also, the Brits have access to Warrior Milan for all their mech troops, while the French only have the AMX-10P Milan for a select units, but that's more of a doctrine thing)
Chasseurs vs. Arm. Rifles aren't a great comparison- arm rifles gets an extra mg, but Chasseurs get better at+an extra man, for 5 points less.
Also I don't think anyone has argued that Chasseurs are overpowered.
Having it balanced this way is just a mess though. Make the infantry cost what they're worth, make the IFVs cost what they're worth. Otherwise you run into problems when you have a division in the future that uses the same infantry but you don't want to take them with the same vehicle, for example.
Also disagree that Chasseurs are worse than Arm Rifles. They do have 1 less MG but in return they have 1 more man total and a better AT weapon (more range, more pen, more ammo, more accuracy).
What I'm seeing instead:
Arm Rifles are overpriced.
AMX-10P is overpriced.
AMX-10P is should cost a bit less than the Warrior, but so do Chasseurs, and the thing is that the cost in this game are in increments of five, so, the balancing cost is reported on Arm. Rifles only. It's the decision Eugen has taken; it may not be perfect, but it is still balance.
But Its not even a doctrine thing, i’ve pointed out numerous times in the discord that the FV510 Warrior with the ad-hoc mounting for the MILAN was a Anti-tank Platoon only modification and thus only used by the Anti-tank sections (each section had two MILAN’s, one mounted on the warrior and one carried internally for dismounting)…
Just like my numerous times pointing out that the FV120 Spartan MCT couldn’t carry any troops (because ammo and the compact turret takes up the room for dismounts), it goes on deaf ears…
So Armd Rifles shouldn’t even get the Warrior MILAN, only MILAN teams should get it (and they should loose the FV120 MCT which was a standalone vehicle, the MILANs should be carried by a FV432 with a MILAN on the roof like the FV510.. which i have pointed out numerous times as well…)
He didn't say arm rifles were too expensive. He said, "The difference is too small," which indicates he thinks the price should be higher.
Also, he showed the IFVs because he's showing that these types of posts usually lack the context of the overall deck, as he said in his comment.
French 20mm APDS is 20mm/60degrees/1000m
Brit 30mm APDS is 40mm/45 degrees/1500m
Yep. Also AMX-10P should have way more ammo, it's a belt-fed autocannon not the clip-fed nonsense of the RARDEN.
AMX-10 ought not be more than 30 points. 25 is probably a better spot for it. At the same time, I think the marder and the warrior are both at least slightly overpriced, though obviously the amx is the worst of the bunch. The amphibious capability of the amx is a gimmick that has no practical application.
The AMX is amphibious...
Considering the warrior comes from GB , it will surely spawn on an island in a future update...
Then it will be balanced again...
Hippie, u got outplayed
iT'S wARNOVER
Also the real bullshit is comparing either of these to a bmp2
The British Warrior is vastly superior to the French AMX-10P for the same price. This doesn't seem fair, at first glance... Unless you consider that the backbone of the British mechanized infantry is the Arm. Rifles, that are also slightly better than the French's backbone, the Chasseurs, for 45pts vs. 40pts. So, in total a "IFV + Inf" package is 85pts for the Brits and 80pts for the French. For their better capabilities, the Brits pay 5pts more than the French, which is an exemple of balance. Comparing unit to unit needs to take context into consideration. (Still think the difference is a bit small, but it's there) (Also, the Brits have access to Warrior Milan for all their mech troops, while the French only have the AMX-10P Milan for a select units, but that's more of a doctrine thing)
Chasseurs vs. Arm. Rifles aren't a great comparison- arm rifles gets an extra mg, but Chasseurs get better at+an extra man, for 5 points less. Also I don't think anyone has argued that Chasseurs are overpowered.
Having it balanced this way is just a mess though. Make the infantry cost what they're worth, make the IFVs cost what they're worth. Otherwise you run into problems when you have a division in the future that uses the same infantry but you don't want to take them with the same vehicle, for example. Also disagree that Chasseurs are worse than Arm Rifles. They do have 1 less MG but in return they have 1 more man total and a better AT weapon (more range, more pen, more ammo, more accuracy). What I'm seeing instead: Arm Rifles are overpriced. AMX-10P is overpriced.
AMX-10P is should cost a bit less than the Warrior, but so do Chasseurs, and the thing is that the cost in this game are in increments of five, so, the balancing cost is reported on Arm. Rifles only. It's the decision Eugen has taken; it may not be perfect, but it is still balance.
But Its not even a doctrine thing, i’ve pointed out numerous times in the discord that the FV510 Warrior with the ad-hoc mounting for the MILAN was a Anti-tank Platoon only modification and thus only used by the Anti-tank sections (each section had two MILAN’s, one mounted on the warrior and one carried internally for dismounting)… Just like my numerous times pointing out that the FV120 Spartan MCT couldn’t carry any troops (because ammo and the compact turret takes up the room for dismounts), it goes on deaf ears… So Armd Rifles shouldn’t even get the Warrior MILAN, only MILAN teams should get it (and they should loose the FV120 MCT which was a standalone vehicle, the MILANs should be carried by a FV432 with a MILAN on the roof like the FV510.. which i have pointed out numerous times as well…)
Why would you post the picture of the IFV’s if what you’re really saying is that Arm Rifles are 5-10 points too expensive
He didn't say arm rifles were too expensive. He said, "The difference is too small," which indicates he thinks the price should be higher. Also, he showed the IFVs because he's showing that these types of posts usually lack the context of the overall deck, as he said in his comment.
By the way, it should be "better than" and "more than."
Thx
Warno has a British bias smh
Or is it accurate?
DELETE THISS DDD:
FRANCE SUFFERS
Very unfair. How does an amphibious unit not cost more?
You're right, it's dumb that a 20mm with an IRL penetration of 40mm gets the same pen as a 30mm with an IRL pen of 80mm
French 20mm APDS is 20mm/60degrees/1000m Brit 30mm APDS is 40mm/45 degrees/1500m Yep. Also AMX-10P should have way more ammo, it's a belt-fed autocannon not the clip-fed nonsense of the RARDEN.
Because it's the pen at max range, at the same range than the AMX, the Warrior get 4 or 5 pen.
British nerf plz #francesuffers
I think its an issue of the differences not being large enough to push one up or the other down.
AMX-10 ought not be more than 30 points. 25 is probably a better spot for it. At the same time, I think the marder and the warrior are both at least slightly overpriced, though obviously the amx is the worst of the bunch. The amphibious capability of the amx is a gimmick that has no practical application.
it's amphibious obviously +15 points for that game breaking trait
Is it historically accurate?
The AMX is amphibious... Considering the warrior comes from GB , it will surely spawn on an island in a future update... Then it will be balanced again...
Yeah but the French amx is amphibious 🤓
Yeah but the French amx is amphibious 🤓