But their side armor for NATO is actually better than the Front amour for almost all medium PACT tanks, and With the Abrams and Challengers their side amour would actually be better than some high tier PACT's front amour..

Yeap.. I know that... but some don't and that's why I laugh

_________________

http://www.wargame.com.pl/ - Polska strona o WARGAME!!!
Please remember... we complain because we care!!!

base leo already costs 120 were talking base models here

Cool let's bump the T80s accuracy to 7 , frontal armour to 9 and give it a good stabiliser then.

We'll need to give the T80 A and B ( should get 9 armour too) higher accuracy and good stabilisers.

Also T72B is 120 points to match Leo 2 we'll need a accuracy bump to 7 and increased armour to 9 and a good stabiliser.

Balancing like a boss, a Kruger/Dunning boss.

+1 It doesn't need anything. It misses... a lot.

90 pts T-80 armour: 8 Front / 4 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
100 pts AMX-32 armour: 5 Front / 2 Side / 2 Top / 1 Rear

The AMX-32 may have more accurate gun, but that's offset by T-80's higher firing rate.
The AMX-32 may have an autocannon, but that's overly offset by its weak armour.

So why is the AMX-32 more expensive?

I think the price of the base T-80 is fine, but some other "medium tanks", (e.g. T72B, KPz 70, AMX-32) are too costly.

+ ATMG's to Leo's. Same units stats for all actions, just different skins. Boring mirror balancing FTW!!!


Speaking of missing a lot. Is the inaccuracy of all the T-72 models within 40 - 60 pts price range based on something from real life? I mean they're significantly less accurate than every T-55, T-62 and T-64 variant within that price range.

Or is it purely for balance purposes? I had a round using T-72's and it was frustrating watching them miss most of the time, I think no other tank misses as much. But that's OK, variety is good so long as it's balanced by other stats. Personally I find T-62's and T-64's to be more useful, though. What are your thoughts on this, anyone?

_________________

You can't balance point by point for the opposite factions; They are dissimilar. Where a T-80 has to do whith what it has, the AMX can count on tougher allies.

_________________
"Rocks are OP. Paper is fine" signed: Scissors

My Youtube Channel

AWESOME !

Now, how does it relates with what I said ?

_________________

Goddamn

T-55AMV-1 got his ATGM nerfed from 10 to 6 accuracy.
T-62M1 and T-62mv got their price increased 2 times.
T-72 series were never worth to play.
Top-tank range increase nerfed indirectly soviet ATGM tanks.
Check.

Now nerf T-80 series?

Edit: oh i overlooked TS nickname some troll

_________________

AMX 32 has a more accurate gun (by 20%) and stabiliser, normal vision (same as infantry) and is a size smaller than the T80 meaning it's less likely to be hit with the already inaccurate T80 gun.

The initial argument that the T80 should be price increased because the cheapest 2275m MBT on the NATO side has lower armour is asinine as it does not take into account or even think about the other shortfalls in a direct comparison. AMX32 is more likely to hit damage and panic (worsening the accuracy) the t80. The T80 Huge size verses the AMX32 Normal size also insure that in similar conditions the T80 will be spotted earlier compared with the AMX32 meaning it's easier to begin the process of neutralising the T80s.

The original argument was disingenuous as actual application of his misguided criteria should result in buffing of other tanks relative to their price in order to "mirror balance." Hence my allusion to the Kruger/Dunning Study to whit; The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. As Kruger and Dunning conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others" (p. 1127).[2]

Simply the original poster makes silly claims about balancing based on limited criteria: armour and gun range, ignoring all the other variables of the AMX 32 and t80.