Heavily armoured versus armoured : overpowered ?

[CONSTANTINIX]

Hello

Maybe it has be considered before but I didn't find the answer

has the cost/value of armoured vs heavily armoured been considered because I think Heavily armoured is a (very very) very cost effective improvement
Example
(no heavy weapon taken into account)
(cost 69 points) -Armoured- Dismounted knight&Sergeant vs protected unit : + 25 POA bonus armour on melee
(Cost 78 points) -Heavily armoured- Dismounted knight&Sergeant vs protected unit : + 100 POA bonus armour on melee

For a 9 point value, I got a 75 POA return on investment ?
Have I missed something ?

[SnuggleBunnies]

Current armor values by POA:

0 Unprotected
12 Lightly Protected
25 Protected
37 Some Armored
50 Armored
75 Well Armored
125 Heavily Armored
150 Fully Armored

With a max of 100 advantage vs foot and 50 vs horse.

Note that since steady off Spears cancel mounted swordsmen,

Early Dismounts Spear vs Late Knights = 25 in favor of Dismounts

Early Dismounts HW vs Late Knights = 15 in favor of Knights

Late Dismounts vs Late Knights = (I think) 10 in favor of Dismounts

Of course Combat Strength means all these melees actually favor the infantry. But vs say, Average Protected Spearmen, the later Dismounts do indeed get 75POA more. Not sure if it's unbalanced though, given the presence of hw, xbow, lbow, and the sheer difference that numbers can make - 9×7 = 63, enough to get a solid unit or two.

[SimonLancaster]

I think you also have to factor in costs in general and the type of units on the battlefield. 78 pts spent on one unit is quite a lot. I could get three Raw Spear units and still have 6 pts left to spend.

[Cunningcairn]

I think the later knights at 74 points is a better example of "value for money" than earlier knights at 72 points.