Hello Dear Warhammer Fans!
I have read latley some strange statements on this forum, why u should always take expensive high tier units over low cost units in campagne. So lets do the math behind it and see if that claim is true or not !!
Cost Effectivness = Value / Cost
Value = Powerlevel of the Unit*
Cost = Units Price
* I will not discuss the units "Value" here as we focus on "Cost" .
Lets assume, we have two units
unit 1: Cost 50
unit 2: Cost 600
Next we have to understand, how to interpret the army upkeep increase by lets say 7% each time we get a new
So in math terms 7% is a relative cost and its a compound interest effect.
So we can use a simply formula to get the cost increase after X new armies created.
SingleUnitCostAfterXArmiesCreated = BaseUnitCost * (1+ InterestRate)^NumberOfArmiesCreated
Lets now assume, we have created 20 armies!
Whats the cost increase effect between Unit 1 and Unit 2 ?
We can use the formula, we just learned ,to solve this...
Unit 1: 50 * (1.07)^20 = 193.5
Unit 2: 600*(1.07)^20 = 2321.8
which is a cost increase per unit in absolut and relative terms:
Unit 1: +143.5 or 287%
Unit 2: +1721.8 or 287%
...and this is only 1 Unit...u can use a multiplier like 19 to calc the full army cost effect...
There is absolutly no incentive, what so ever, to take any high tier units over low tier units based
on cost effect considerations. Anyone who thinks its better to take hammers over dwarven warrios is
falling into the value trap. The reason behind this is the relative cost effect and the compound interest effect,
which always favors a lower base value.
If you like this analysis i could this for "Value" as well which can solved by either Maschine Learning Tools
or some simple thoughts about absolut vs relative value increases
Important note: Dark Elves can give their Lords special names,
if u choose "army", there is a change to lower the cost of i.e. witch elves significantly
so they can become your baseline unit.