GOD I HATE EXCEL!!!!!!

anyway.
I've started making up some card sheets for myself for just friendly gaming.
you may notice quite a few differences. such as all the panzer IV's now being hull 5 instead of some hull 4 and all panzer III being hull 4 including the Stug III (made no sense to me)
also added some extra options as well.
these may not be balanced. as like I say they are just for fun



still got plenty to do but if I stay on excel too long I may end up killing myself
enjoy

Great builds - and on a spreadsheet, love it. I would love to try most of them!!!

But a couple of questions/feedback that sprung to mind:

a general thing: I would make all german heavies except for E-100/maus NOT-heavy. I know they were incredibly heavy weightwise, but their frontal armour was WAY superior to their sides or back. The heavy rule in this game is to show that a tank is equally armored on all sides (like tiger 1), not to represent their weight/role in the real world. (I see you did that with the jagdtiger, but this, imo, should be continued with most other large german tanks). W/o heavy you would simulate the much superior frontal armor without making it a armor 3 when shot from behind.

Why does Loewe have attack 7, I don't think it was that much superior to the KingTiger/Jagdpanther?

Why is Maus initiative 2 and not 0/1, also why is it faster than the E-100?

Also the Sturmtiger, ini 4 is way high for a SPA that had a multi-minute reload, beyond slow aiming and terrible handling. I understand that you want to make that a 100% oneshot, but in this game it would be way OP (I feel), if this tank would have a oneshot-mechanic AND could shoot every round. I feel shooting every other round would be fair for that tank, or if you don't want to write new rules, which I understand, leave the Sturmtiger out for now?!

Just as a general feel I would make many of the armour 3 tanks you propose more expensive. Right now your KingTiger is 37 points. whereas it has +1 attack, +1 crew and +1 armour (with heavy) from the Tiger 1 at 33 points. that's 4 points to go from good to godlike. Another way to compare would be your kingtiger to Superpershing: 37/46 points. 5/4 initiative. 6/6 attack. 3(+heavy)/3 def. 8/8 HP. 4/4 Crew. That means your proposed king tiger costs 9 points less, but has +1 initiative and his 3armour all around. Doesn't sound very fair to me.

As said, generally a great reference list though. gonna play your hetzer card today to try it :P (even though not sure if recon is fair to a tank that had terrible visual oversight)

I totally agree! Its more for fun scenarios and food for thought and I appreciate your effort and input creating those cards. I'm by no means trying to say they are wrong or anything (entirely impossible unless real cards come out), in all my arguments and feedback rather aim to make the tanks more playable/relatable to their real-life counter part/balancing and/or game mechanics. I love the energy you've put in for these and hope HQ at some point picks up on the obvious demands of the crowd of fans!

I didn't know the loewe could've had a 150mm? didn't know the germans ever had such guns anywhere anytime (aside from captured ISU & KV-2 tanks). All I saw was the 105. But since I don't know that much about guns from that time I see that it could be played as 7att!

Your points on initiative make sense, however if you compare the mouse to the ISU 122 at ini 1 it seems a little odd that a maus would outmaneuver and shoot faster than established, given: slow, but still much smaller and versatile/agile machines that actually existed. // this too goes for the Sturmtiger, in your proposal it is faster than pretty much all Russian TDs, even though they were known to actually be really fast and dangerous, whereas the Sturmtiger was so slow, even sluggish and bad to maneouvre and aim, that he was only used to attack static fortification, for hitting moving, small targets was pretty much impossible.

I don't quite understand your explanation of the Kingtiger vs Super Pershing to be honest. You don't ever want to touch the Superpershing/ it feels to much of/like what? or what do you mean? You think the Superpershing is overpriced? I'm not sure what your point is on making the Kingtiger better yet much cheaper (I probably just misunderstood something, English is my second language).
To the point of +1 attack and +1 armour (compared to the Tiger1), I think this is a huge deal once you pass a certain threshold. For one, as example a bloodthirsty gunner alone is three points and gives you that +1 attack, but only at close range. +1 attack at all ranges is way better. Same goes for +1 armor to make something a 3armor heavy its way way better than making a T34 go up to armour 2 from 1.
armour 3 is extremely tough and way heavier than the difference between 0-1 and 1-2, as now you can pretty much stay stationary and not risk the tank (look at all those Super-Duper-Pershing lists out there), specially if its also Heavy. This too plays into the German Blitzkrieg, the superpershing generally wants to keep moving for Gung Ho, but a German HEAVY 3armor tank with turret at Carius may just use his blitzkrieg move to get around and count as stationary ALL the time...
+1 attack doesn't matter much when going from 3-4, but going from 5-6 or higher is a huge deal (the jagdpanther loses 1 initiative and counts as an assault gun, yet still costs 2 points MORE than the panther for his +1 attack).
I play a two jagdpanther list with 8 attacks each and oneshot pretty much one tank per round. This is since I try to stay stationary all the time and most tanks have armour 1-2 and unless they race around they thus only get 3-4 defence die. adding extra attacks to heavy-hitters makes them exproportionally better, as normal defense cant compensate for numbers over 6.
--> about the heavy rule: I find the rule absolutely OP. I love my tigers, and the heavy rule enables you to be way more free on your movement initiative, because it doesn't matter to get flanked (or reared). you can park these big tanks sideways to block movement or LOS on vulnerable allie-tanks etc. Giving a armour 3 tank heavy, makes it SO much better (imo).

Lastly I totally agree on your hetzer assessment, I was thinking of recon in synergy with Scout Upgrades, which are written towards literal artillery-observer vehicles etc. The way the developers put recon game is really bad - agreed. The idea with hidden is much better!

Brill...now where's my Panzer III?