Wow.
That excel spreadsheet is pretty much what we would be hoping to get out of this.
If the formula are still valid, then we just need to update for some of the other abilities.
Unless someone beats me to it, will pull out the formula and post it on here later in a format that is readable.
If the guy who created this is still about, would love to find out how he worked things out.

@ Scream Re Vet Costs.
No problem.

Matt

yes, the formula is still valid I used it to compute the value for many "new" units in the past and it works well.

It needs small work on the extra cost tab to complete the ability cost list but it's very efficient.

Guys, i have neither the time or mind to help you with this but i just wanted to say that this is an awesome initiative and i'm very thankfull that you guys are set about doing it. I salute you all with a standing ovation!!

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

Cheers Mord.
If it helps bring about a more balanced system then it will be worth doing.

Matt

I hate to bring the voice of dissent, but I'm afraid that I'm going to have to.

I can't see that there is a massive problem with the original points costs. How GW designed them, and whether they used a decent formula don't overly concern me, because, based on my experience of playing second edition Epic for the best part of fifteen years, I never felt that costs were an issue, except with a small number of units, such as Titan Battlegroups, and NetEpic has already taken steps to solve these issues.

What is the problem with leaving the costs as they are? I can't see a huge mountain of evidence, from my own experience, to suggest that the costs are flawed.

I also caution against comparisons with 40K. I still play 40K, and it's a very different animal to NetEpic, so comparisons across the two systems really don't work at all well in my opinion. The rules are just too different, as there are a lot more levels of sometimes unnecessary complexity at 40K level, and, combined with a whole host of other variables, mean that comparing the two systems causes more problems than it solves, in my opinion.

In view of the fact that NetEpic Gold looks like such a successful project, and also that I've just chewed through a whole pile of ink cartridges printing whole section of it off, could we just leave the fundamentals alone?

_________________

Hi!

As I mentioned before Irisado, were not replacing the points cost as they stand now. They will remain and the army cards that will be made will reflects those values. Nothing will change in the current books as written. So if your happy with that, as are many others will, you can choose to stick with the original values.

This project will serve as an alternate for those whom want a more uniform points system. It will be presented in a follow up book which will contain errata and a lot of optional stuff. So you can consider this alternate points scheme optional.

As always we like to provide options. Its up to you which you like the best.

The current books will stand unchanged. They are the foundation to which people can print and keep. Anything extra will appear in forthcoming books for people to use or discard as desired.

I currently inclined to call these book Net Epic Gold Appendix (Volume 1 and so forth). That way people will know its just extra options, separate from the core books.

Primarch

My thoughts as well. I'm leery about using the current points for 40k to determine what points or ratios should be for NetEpic,

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Like an update to Vets?



Using 40k gives us an idea of how good units should be in comparison to each other and I would trust the newer values more than those from back in the 90s.
Parts of the "modern" era of 40k have already been adopted by introducing Necrons, Tau, Valkyries and all those other new vehicles and units. It doesn't feel right that we should only use some of the information available to us and not use others.

Matt

Hi!

I remember seeing that excel sheet back in the day. I don't remember whom did it, but I still don't like it much, which was my original feeling to it as well.

Well, its up to everyone to decide. I can easily slip into that next book an alternate rule that for space marine armies, the terminator and veteran companies are limited to battles over 5000. Simple enough. Or we can attempt a full blown costs rewrite.

As to what to compare to, I'd prefer comparison be made by actual game play value. Base units cost on how valuable/good you have seen them in actual play. Far better than eyeballing it to related 40k fluff.

So which way is the way to go?

Primarch

Primarch: That's fair enough on the optional rules issue. The only concern I have with that it that it does potentially make it more difficult to get more players interested in the game if people are using different sets of rules, as I've argued with the NetEA team in the past when there were too many versions of the rules floating around this site, and the internet in general.



You're better off looking at all the different Epic systems if you want an idea of how well units perform relative to one another at this scale in my opinion.

You also have to be very careful when assessing relative performance in 40K, because, unlike in Epic, there is a lot of variance between certain codices, depending on when they were written, and who wrote them. Epic tends to have far better external balance than 40K does, which is why I urge caution when making comparisons.

Points values also tend to be misleading in 40K, since these tend to be governed by the particular ethos underpinning the design of a codex at a particular time. As a result, I would avoid getting too hooked up on this too.

_________________

Hi!

Irisado, the main reason to putting all this stuff in a separate book and leave the core untouched is to avoid what you mention. That doesn't mean they are written in stone, but they do have the virtue of being tested (16 years of testing too!).

That means at this juncture all I would do is compile peoples ideas in such in a separate book. I will make it clear in the preface of that book that is what its purpose is and in no way changes the core.

As I have mentioned before, what we are seeing here now is a small taste of the dynamics of what it was like to participate in netepic's glory days of the "great revision".

Lots of stuff gets mentioned, generates enthusiasm and is later discarded when you realize it may have not been that great, or the work outweighs the payoff. This is normal. I've seen it hundreds of times throughout the years.

What I wanted with the this particular book is give a home to all these ideas. There have been many through the years. its a shame they sometimes get lost. Of course, that's all they are ideas, untested ones. So they don't alter core (which was a big deal in revision days). Core can only be altered by play test data. Lots of it. So view the current endeavors as just some loud brainstorming.

Well, I'll leave what happens from here on out to you guys. If just a minor patch is wanted, I'll stick it in that book as an options. If someone wants to retool all the points, I'll make sure that gets in too.

As always its your game!

Primarch

Best of luck with the project chaps - I don't envy you the task ahead! I'm still working on my campaign project, the easy bit, the basic rules are near done, but the (optional) advanced rules are going to take a long time to write up. But next to what you're planning here, it's just peanuts!

If you could get the cost of Tactical Troops down I might start using them again!

_________________
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

When can we get a sneak peak of the campaign rules Bissler?

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

Hi Mordoten,
Don't want to hijack this thread, so have updated my other one! PM'd you the link...

_________________
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

Thanks for clearing that up.

I think that this is the best way to proceed, and I'm sure that there will be some interest in developing these optional projects.

I'm going to stay out of it, and just stick with the core stuff though, so apologies in advance for not getting involved .

_________________