4-Armor Shermans in Ardennes 1944!!!

[patman]

Today's Daily Content on the AP website put a big smile on my face! 

Amongst the sample counters in the Ardennes 1944 preview article is a 4-Armor-factor Sherman unit!! I've always thought that the 3 Armor factor on stock Shermans was too low relative to its peers and opponents. This has been argued here and on CSW before, and Mike even issued a Golden Journal with upgraded Shermans, but this campaign has finally reached the design level, and Ardennes 1944 will apparently have the upgraded Shermans!!!

Granted, that upgrade won't help much in dealing with the Tiger II a bit up the page (that's what Assault is for!), but it will definitely help against PzIVs and the "foot AT weapons".

[triangular_cube]

If it does end up being the case that the system is going to feature AV4 Shermans going forward, is PGHQ going to interpret this as errata for the legacy game listings and use the "Heavy" Sherman unit types or will these continue to be the "base" M4 units?

Two examples of similar units that come to mind were the nerfed Marine INF units, which did replace the old ones in the listings, or the PZIIIH AV3 > AV4 alteration which never even warranted a separate unit card. 

I guess I just don't know what to expect.

[patman]

Good question, because the page for the Black Panthers Golden Edition (posted a few days before the Ardennes 1944 page) still has AV-3 Shermans. Perhaps they are allowing designers flexibility in choosing a value for a particular setting/game?

Or, alternatively, chaos reigns?

[plloyd1010]

Calm down guys. This was an image pulled from a library containing 3-4 M4/75 images, by someone who normally doesn't show a lot of in the details of the graphics. Don't believe me? Check out the NZ service troops in Parachutes Over Crete as an example.

In days of auld lang syne, other units have had their values changed. I asked Dr. Mike about this when I noticed the difference in the Sov 76.2mm field guns of 2 games. He said to use the units from a given game, for that game. Thus far there has only one unit (there were 2 which were replaced) errata'd to a new version. So if there are AV-4 Shermans in Ardennes '44, I think they will exist in their own space.

AV-4 Shermans already exist in the library. So if they are in Ardennes '44, it isn't a big deal, but there may need to be a little relabeling.

[patman]

I'm talking about the Avalanche Press website. The company that makes the games. I'm not sure how the PZ-HQ image library is relevant here. 

And why shouldn't those of us who have lobbied for 4-armor Shermans be excited about this development? Yes, we know that there was that Golden Journal with 4-armor Shermans in it already, but this is different: an apparent designer decision to adopt the (better, IMO) value in a full boxed game. And yes, values of other counters have changed before. So what? I am excited about THIS change. I think that's allowed. 

As we have both noted, it would appear that the new approach allows designers to choose values. I say "yay!" YMMV.

[plloyd1010]

Exactly who said I was talking about the PH-HQ library in regard to the Shermans?

[patman]

You linked to the PG-HQ image library in your post. 

But perhaps you just meant to suggest that the AP webmaster idly picked a Sherman image (that happened to be a rare variant), without deeper meaning, for the Ardennes 1944 article. Since Mike fills pretty much all posts at AP, I am guessing that the image was meaningful with respect to what's in the box...

[plloyd1010]

I link a PG-HQ image (which was of the New Zealand service troops) as an example as to how APL tends to be rather sloppy about counter data. APL has been posting M4 Shermans on their website ever since Battle of the Bulge (which is a 2nd edition game). They (before the Shermans gold club) had 3 or 4 images of Shermans used at various times. If you really need an example from APL look at this one:

Yes, I am saying APL is a sometimes a little sloppy with their counters and what they post. You will come to notice that after a while.

[patman]

I hadn't really noticed that (above and beyond the usual level of miscues anywhere on the web), and I've been around PG literally for decades. Just not observant enough, I guess.

But I will be disappointed if it turns out the AP-4 Sherman was a sloppy mirage. We will all see when the game comes out.

[triangular_cube]

If it does end up being the case

I certainly am approaching this with tempered expectations. 

I was just curious how the book keeping would be done. Didn't mean to fan the flames.