urogard wrote:Wonderful argument. Now all that's still missing are the actual numbers.
How much markup is the extra ammo?
Why should this markup be a flat 30 pts for Malka (2 extra rounds, 40% of the price) and Pion (6 extra rounds, 33% of the price)?
Where are your numbers? You're the one challenging the status quo. I won't accept anything more primitive than a support vector machine.
Already posted them on the previous page.
Malka/Pion have identical stats (accuracy, HE, aim time) to M109/A2 and should therefore be priced identically (70/90 pts) with the same availability 4/3.
The current price difference is a discrepancy that requires correction.
That by definition means that my claim includes the part about RoF and Ammo having no effect whatsoever on the price in the current setup, because there's no data to support that fact, at least I couldn't find any relevant data (caesar vs nora-b, anything else requires cross-comparison over multiple units and regression analyses which you're refusing to do for some reason).
If you want to make the counter claim that RoF and Ammo does have an effect on price, then you better be able to clearly show that that's true.
And your single comparison between 2 arties where there's half a dozen stat differences (speed, range, ammo, rof, accuracy, price) is insufficient to be able draw all the conclusions you're inferring from that comparison.
Also don't get confused about making claims along the lines of "Arties SHOULD pay more for more ammo carried". Whether or not they should isn't up for debate, I believe they should as well. However the way EUG designed howitzers ignores this stat and that's a very simple fact.