For V0.42 I'm going to make two changes.

First, the above mentioned Special Abilities will be converted into multipliers at a rate where a +20 fixed cost converts to a +20% adjustment to the Model cost. These adjustments will be made after any remaining fixed cost Special Abilities, but before Morale and Command / Orders adjustments. These are:
20 Deep Strike
20 Infiltrate
20 Regeneration
20 Sniper
20 Stealth
30 Stealth, Improved [does not require being in Cover]
20 Teleport


Second, I'm going to reduce the impact of most Movement affecting abilities by half. Abilities I'm going to change are:
Movement Ability ____ Current _ New
_ Jump ________________ 1.5 ___ 1.25
_ Skimmer (no pop-up) _ 1.5 ___ 1.25
_ Skimmer ______________ 2 ____ 1.5
_ Support Craft _______ 2.5 ___ 1.75
_ Flyer ________________ 3 ____ 2
_ Floater ______________ 3 ____ 2

The remaining Movement abilities should not need adjusting at this time. I'm adjusting these primarily because, as The Bissler pointed out, the Movement cost values for Flyers are very, very high. This should reduce them somewhat. The others are being adjusted as just doing Flyer would not be fair or balanced.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

These look good.

I agree that changes should be uniformly done to all units and not single out some. I think that way of doing things lands us back in the old way of doing things.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

I just thought of two other things that should be Special Abilities, but never got added as such. The Self-Repair systems on most Titans and Gargants. I'm going to categorize them as multiplier systems since they function very similarly to Regeneration. Since they are less reliable that it, their values will be lower.

For models with Self-Repair that functions as per normal Titans, cost is +15%. While the rate (4+) is the same as Regeneration, only some damage results can be affected.

For models where Repairs are conducted by crew stands, cost is +5%. This is because the number of things that can be repaired is limited by the number of stands, and the rate is only 6+. As far as I know, this only affects the Mega-Gargant so far.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

This sounds reasonable.

While we are on the subject of titans, did the formula take into account that the Emperor Titan (Imperator) takes saves using 2d6 instead of the standard 1d6? They basically save like buildings. Which along with its shields account mainly for its resilience.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Yes, I have that in there. Their values for each locations save is higher due to that. For example, on a normal Titan a save of 1+ would be worth 6 points. On the Imperator it is worth 12 points.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

How were you able to account for the "novel" way the Imperator has of regenerating shields (its not a static number), as well as the weapons and the whole plasma counter mechanics?

Very interested on how you handled these types of units with special rules very outside the norm for the game.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Hi!

If I read correctly, the Mega-gargant is worth more than the Imperator, when in game the Imperator is usually somewhat more useful.

Granted you haven't accounted for the difference in shield quality and repair systems (which are significant between the two), so it will be interesting to see the costs once that is adjusted.

It would be difficult for me to gauge how much more valuable one is over the other, but the better shields and 2d6 save usually tends to play out very much in the Imperator favor.

I wonder instead of the armor location value being double in value as you mention if it shouldn't be higher (exponentially?). since a 2d6 save I think is more valuable than just a doubling of cost.

Thoughts?

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

I've already found another SA to convert to a multiplier. Living Metal. It's basically Regeneration, just at 5+.

Actually, shield quality has been in the system since day 1. Void Shields are worth 10 per Shield. Power Fields are worth 5 per. Thus that is covered.

However, the Imperator's system for repairing Shields and it's Plasma Counter generation system are not. The shields probably average out fine just dealing with the Self-Repair modifier that I'm adding. I'll have to look at that specifically sometime though just to be sure. I have no idea what to do with the Plasma system. So far, I've been costing weapons and movement as if it was fully powered. That is, as powerful as it gets. I think. I'll have to review that as well.

Exponentially? Oh gods no. For it to be that valuable, it would have to be rolling D100. Or at least D20. More specifically, I'm not just doubling, I'm adding 6 to all normal values. IE:
Armor _ Normal
Save ___ Model _ Imperator
_ 1+ ____ 6 _______ 12
_ 2+ ____ 5 _______ 11
_ 3+ ____ 4 _______ 10
etc

I think that I thought about taking the bell curve of the 2d6 into account, but at the time I just wanted to get something in place. While perhaps not as accurately as it could, this system works reasonably well.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

The assumption for weapons at maximum charge is a good enough compromise. I wonder if you shouldn't do that for shields (since on overcharge they regenerate better than the usual 5+).

Instead of adding 6 for the extra d6, why not 12? Would that make it 3 times as costly?

Given what a 2d6 save means in the game (and how rare it is), perhaps a significantly increased cost difference is warranted. Its not only the extra die, but it makes even the highest TSM manageable.

Or would taking into consideration how much harder the standard TSM's in the game would have getting through the Imperators armor be a better measure of its reslience and therefore cost?

I feel there could be a tweak somewhere, but I am not sure where.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

In looking at the Marine and Chaos lists, I'm noticing that I've been doing Drop Pods wrong for a long time now. I've had them having a *2 modifier to their Move abilities instead of having the SA cost of 20 for their Deep Strike. That is fixed now. I've adjusted their Move abilities modifier back down to *1 as it should be, and applied the *1.2 to their model cost for the Deep Strike ability.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

And I just keep finding errors. Sigh. Apparently, a while ago Wounds changed from being a fixed cost per additional Wound to a multiplier to the Armor Save value, but I never actually changed the Tyranid costs to reflect that. That is fixed in V0.42 as well.

All Greater Daemons adjusted cost due to change in Chaos Card cost. This includes the non-standard ones as well, some of which had not had it added in the first place.

I seem to recall finding a couple other things as well, but do not recall offhand. Perhaps they will surface as I write up and post the values for V0.42.

Note that Skimmer and Flyer Transports are having their cost for Transport reduced as well, as the adjustments for the Move type within Transport should change at the same rate.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

It has been brought up that template values may be too high. Personally, I disagree, but I'll look at that sub-system to see what I can adjust. It is going to be difficult to make any serious reductions. Let me explain why.

A 6cm barrage template could conceivably hit ~11 stands if they were all adjacent in CC and will generally attack a minimum of two targets (otherwise why use a template weapon vs that target?) per shot. Mathematically and logically, this means that it's cost should be at least twice that of a normal weapon, and possibly much higher. As the current sub-system does things (X*Y/10) the cost of a 6cm barrage template is 3.6 (6cm * 6cm /10) which is a good bit less than twice the cost of a normal shot (2). Thus making any formula reductions are going to be tricky.

Similarly, while the Large Teardrop template is only 25cm long, it can potentially hit every target within that 25cm length, rather than just the one target that a non-template weapon can affect. For a non-template weapon, a Range of 25cm reduces the cost by half, but for a template the longer (and wider) it is the more it has to cost.

I'm starting to think that giving non-template weapons a base range of 50cm may be a part of the problem. It may be beneficial overall to rebuild the range part of the formula so that Range starts at zero (or more realistically, 5 or even 1 cm) and increase cost as range increases, rather than reducing for some ranges.

I'm going to have to think about these issues for a few days to see what I can figure out. I'd like to get opinions from others though as well.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

I think pricing range benefits from 5cm upwards is a good idea. Using the base range of 50cm may be giving too much of a discount to ranges as a whole. So I like the idea to tackle that particular aspect.

The problem I see with template weapons is that a barrage template is more valuable because there is a high range attached to it. In other words, those templates do not originate from the firing model in the sense that the template touches said model for its effect. In case of most artillery there is a long range then the template is placed.

In this scenario it is proper to cost in a high fashion the template size, since its ability to "travel" a long distance that makes the barrage template valuable (thus bigger is very much more useful than smaller).

However, templates that do originate directly from the model (the template touches the model and the effect starts from there) are VASTLY less useful than the typical artillery barrage because in this scenario the range IS the template.

This means the template cannot span a ranged difference like a standard barrage does and is limited by the models move and templates length to exercise its effect.

I contend that templates in this later scenario cannot be priced with the same weight as templates in the first scenario, since stat by weapon stat a template that can span a range and then apply its effect is much more valuable than a template limited by its own dimensions and model move.

Expressed in other terms, two templates of same size, same BP/attack dice, to hit and TSM, where one has a range to travel before it lands should cost much more than that very same template with identical stats that has to be placed touching the firing model and only be able to effect within the area of the template itself.

These two cannot only not cost close to each other, but the one with a range attached should be worth some multiples more than the one without.

While area covered by the template is important, its the ability to "throw" that area under the template via range that makes the template size valuable.

Those that can't do this are markedly less valuable since their worth solely resides in size and stats because the "range" is the template itself.

I'm not sure where to inject such a modifier to reflect this (or for that matter discount), but I believe that a more stark mathematical difference between the two needs to be formulated.

Maybe costing templates by their raw stats and area (like its done now) and then applying a multiplier by range (those whose range is the template could be "0.25" or some fraction like that) is one way of doing it, since the farther the template can travel the more valuable it is per size.

I hope that made sense.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Not getting into the mathematics of this but I'd agree with the gist of what Primarch is staying.

Artillery units which have long range such as Whirlwinds will be firing in turn 1. The same cannot be said for the likes of Hellhounds. Their template is very handy once they get into range but I'd say they always get one shot less per game than their counterparts in traditional artillery so could benefit with being cheaper.

I don't see this as a huge problem though and don't feel strongly about it, I just feel this is us getting into the minutiae of the project now...

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Actually, the fact that some templates can be used at range while others originate from the model is already addressed in the formula. The relevant sections are:



To simplify a bit, a model with a ranged barrage will multiply the value of the template (generally 3.6) by the Range value (generally 100cm or 150cm; thus *2 or *3), then by the values for To Hit, TSM, and any Abilities. A weapon with template that originates from the model currently has no modifier for range applied to it. Which, in a way, means that it is being valued the same as a weapon that can be fired to 50cm. This may be an easier fix.

Perhaps instead of redoing the whole Ranges sub-system, templates that originate from the model should have the appropriate Range modifier applied to them. This would mean that anything that uses the Large Teardrop template would have it's final Weapon value reduced by half as the modifier for a Range of 25cm is *0.5 (IE, half). Obviously, the Small Teardrop would be even further reduced.

However any change to how Range is factored in cannot affect the actual value of the template itself, because regardless of the range it is used at, it still covers the same area and thus threatens the same number of (potential) targets.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator