That is not a moving goalpost SWC and cost are parts of the same formula, you might not like it, but it is. And you can see it in the various BS 10 troops, others pay 8 points and 1 SWC (Keisotsu) and others pay 11 points and 0,5 SWC (for example volunteers), you will also find that 8points and 1 SWC is not universal among troops with other BS values. I leave it to you to decide what is more important, points or SWC, personally I find them equally important.
You've just literally moved goalposts, exactly like Triumph said you would. Your claim was "BS 10 units do not pay the same for an HMG as BS 14 units though." and it's easily refuted. Going "bbb-but SWC!" is moving goalposts. But the intellectual dishonesty does not surprise me at all.
I respectfully request that as a representative of Corvus Belli you not tell bald-faced lies. Keisotsu with Combi Rifle: 9 points Keisotsu with HMG: 17 points 17 - 9 = 8 points to upgrade to an HMG Orc with Combi Rifle: 29 points Orc with HMG: 37 points 37 - 9 = 8 points to upgrade to an HMG Kappa? 8 points. Thorakitai? 8 points. Dakini? 8 points. Morat Vanguard? 8 points. Alguaciles? 8 points. Securitate? 8 points. Mobile Brigada? 8 points. Zhanshi? 8 points. Zuyong? 8 points. Fusiliers? 8 points. Kamau? 8 points. Knights Hospitaller? 8 points. The Druze are the only exception, as they pay only 7 points (bizarrely). The Nox also pay 7 points but they lose their Zapper in the trade. Some of these units get a discount on SWC, paying only 1 instead of 1.5, but their actual BS doesn't factor into that equation; both BS 10 Keisotsu's and BS 13 Mimetism (-3) Kamaus only pay 1 SWC for an HMG. I'll say it again: the points formula is broken and in need of a major overhaul.
I mean it makes perfect sense that the same weapon costs the same, no? The HMG has the same basic damage potential (B4, therefore 18.55% chance of a crit, Dam 15) on any of those troopers*. The thing that differs is how likely it is for a trooper to successfully apply that damage and this is 100% dependable on the Trooper's BS, Special Skills and Equipment - which is the reason why your listed troopers are priced differently. So why should a trooper with higher attributes pay extra for the same weapon? That's illogical. Like a professional craftsman had to pay more for the same hammer than a dude who couldn't even distinguish the hammer's face from it's peen. That said the so called "points formula" has some flaws and certain troopers or combos might need some fine tuning by just arbitrarily adding or substracting points / SWC. E.g. the Rifle and LSG Combo schould cost at least the same as a combi rifle and small teardrop template DTW (+1B) - as perfectly schowcased by the CSUs (the normal ones, not the SedDets): Of all profile options the one option taken the most (69%) is again the cheapest one. Imagine the Rifle, LSG CSU would cost 13 points instead of 11. Also the BSG CSU is technically overpriced since it's priced the same as the Combi and Breaker Rifle CSU who are bot additionally equipped DTWs. *) Bizarrely the HMG Druze is again different from the others.
Because better stat'd/geared troopers get more value out of equipment and rules per order they put in. Infinity already scales points costs for different items on different units, such as NCO. TAGs pay a greater cost to gain access to NCO except for the Gator which, to a common player complaint, pays the Infantry NCO cost instead of the increased TAG one.
If the profile is overall X% better, then the profile should cost roughly X% more (usually with some discount to account for enemy focus-firing or other opportunity costs, such as SWC and Availability). Now exactly what the value of "X" is can be a hotly debated topic that requires a lot of playtime and analysis to determine, but the point stands. It's important to remember: the unit isn't "paying" for the weapon; you, the player, are paying for the profile as a whole; better profiles cost more points, worse profiles cost less, and giving a profile that's bad at shooting slightly better shooting is worth considerably less than giving a profile that's great at shooting a significant upgrade. To use your real-life analogy of the craftsmen and the hammer; a crappy craftsmen who spends a lot of money upgrading his tools isn't going to be able to increase his prices very much, because the worth of his work hasn't really changed, but a great craftsmen who buys those same tools is going to be able to bump his prices up by a lot more because the extra efficiency makes his worth go up significantly more. You're not the unit paying for the hammer; you're the client trying to contract them.
And this is one of the reasons you don't see basic line troopers with active turn weapons. They get low value out of them compared to more expensive troops that pay the same cost differential. It's why Mimetic troops are such efficient gun carriers. They pay slightly more for much better odds of winning Face to Face rolls and don't cost any more than getting the same gun elsewhere on a worse shooter. It's also why you don't see already expensive troops carrying rifles unless they are a specialist and have no other option. If the HMG on your 2W 4ARM HI cost 12pts+ instead of 8, you might have a think about it.
Yup; this is also why the Sophotect is much maligned in OSS; They pay full points for a Combi rifle while other units shave off 4-5 points by switching to an SMG (see: Kappa Hacker with SMG costing the same points as a standard Kappa with a Combi).
Original poster here, I didn't say "entitled" anywhere. Stop equivocating when you've made an incorrect statement. It makes people cease to listen to your otherwise frequently decent arguments. BTW I specifically don't use "entitled" in my posts or personal language because that word tends to turn my fellow Americans' brains off immediately, spinning them out into stupid political farces and identity stuff... when we're actually talking about what constitutes reasonable demands for product and communication. I prefer something like "making publishing-pace and communication task demands based on a lack of understanding or even basic reflection on what it takes to produce and support a sprawling game product line; demands based on consumer hunger-impulses rather than rational desire for a sustainable creative product." The guy suggesting that CB's game developers be rotated out like widgets so that they can all work at 100% production pace all the time (with no cost of switching to pace, quality, or consistency of course) is a good example of what I mean. That suggestion is ridiculous. That's not "entitlement" though, it's fundamental misunderstanding of business, exacerbated by a lack of compassion for workers.
Perhaps cop to what you're saying and then you'll seem more honest. Saying that a company like CB is allowed to act in its own self-interest but the customers are above their station to do so, like you, PS, and Mao have been doing, is boldfacedly unfair and is not going to fly with anyone who understands what you're saying. Where's your compassion for customers? Looks like you have a parasocial relationship with CB itself.
Why are you calling me a liar? aren't most HMG carrying BS 10 units 11 points more and half SWC? or we must ignore all other BS 10 units and assume only Keisotsu exist? regardless, as you listed usually LI pay 1 SWC, MI and HI usually pay 1,5 SWC, I am glad you found that not all units pay 8 points, there are more if you take a look. From all the hypotheses I have read, nobody has come close to figuring out the formula, I am not sure calling it broken is justified, if it needs an overhaul time will tell, I think it still serves the game well.[/QUOTE]
It's also worth noting that, regardless of whether or not their acknowledging their gaps in knowledge or not, customers can make any observations/requests/demands they like, doing what they think is best for themselves. However, if they drown out their good/valid/reasonable points in noise, they've drastically reduced the probabilities of their argument being taken seriously. Yes, it is incumbent on the receiver to be emotionally intelligent and separate the message from the messenger, but when the sheer weight of noise makes that prohibitive, it's not going to happen.
Units you are talking about upgrade to HMG from cheaper weapons (its 8 points for HMG compared to combi). The volunteer you are giving as example pays 11 points more to upgrade from normal rifle not combi.
Those BS 10 units with HMGs pay 11 points more THAN A REGULAR RIFLE, which costs 3 points less than a Combi Rifle (other weapon profiles on those profiles stay consistent with other units, allowing for easy comparison). 3 + 8 = 11; the price formula stays the same. Ghulams also still fit, as they pay 9 points to upgrade to an HMG, but they start from a Rifle+Light Shotgun, which costs 1 point less than a Combi. 1 + 8 = 9. And... I'm not sure you really thought your point through, because if your argument is that BS 10 units pay more than BS 14 units for HMGs then that's just more evidence for the system being broken. Also for the record if you haven't seen anyone come close to figuring out the formula you haven't been looking in the right places.
Not in my case, I think it's actually a good tool to make cheaper, less skilled platforms more desirable. I just wish that the discount extended to the likes of MULTI Snipers and Missile Launchers instead of only "machine gun"-style weapons. Honestly the flat-cost formula design makes a lot of sense to me, allows a little inequality to be baked in and give factions flavour based on what is and is not optimised in that army, it just needs (like most things in Infinity) CB to be responsible when working with it to create an environment of excellent external balance.
Sure, PM me a place that has "figure it out" to check, I doubt they have, but would be interesting to read.
