Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilsausage
I can agree that the price on the centurion is abit low. But Centurions should be better then Tigers and panthers.
The Centurion was a next generation tank and it was to be used many decades to come.
In a game full of late game units and protoype tanks. Tigers aren't that powerfull anymore. They came out in 42 but by the time of 44-45 they weren't as deadly.
In real life they mostly fought shermans/t-34s/cromwells etc not prototypetanks.
The Reason i can think of why centurion is so cheap is because its buildt for flanking and its hull armor isnt very good.
Centurion may have 160 mm armor on its turret. but its hull armor is actually only around 80! So truth is its not as badass as many people think it is and it can get fucked up by a panther in a duel.
Making the centurion much more expensive to use it would be no point in getting em for flanking enemy superheavy tanks.
I personaly prefere to fight king tigers with achilles instead of centurions. Just cuz they are cheaper.
And no a turtle can not easily knock out a king tiger. Both tanks has to be pretty damn close to even have a chance of penetrating eachother.
Reason why turtle cost 95 is because it lacks a turret and is mega slow.
Turetless units are always cheaper because they are so much more limited.
It may be good in face to face combat but if it gets flanked its in trouble. specially if someone disable its tracks.
I still think turtle is rather shitty. id pay 5 extra points any day to get a elefant with better gun, better speed and almost as good armor.
|
Same restriction you applied to Turtle also applies to Jagdtiger,but that isnt cheap is it,also if you look at the armour range to armour penetration of a Centurion mean's from longer distances Panthers & Tigers dont really have a chance vs one,so cost should reflect that,particularly as you yourself said they were a next generation tank,so should automaticaly cost alot more,maybe 100 compared to 120 for Kingtiger,that would be fairer i think.
