Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 161 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11  Next

The Great Points Formula Debate!

 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:47 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:34 pm
Posts: 3219
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
MagnusIlluminus wrote:
Just had another thought. (Yes, I know I'd slow down, but this needs to be addressed.)

Does Morale really belong at the unit/model level? Yes, the Morale score affects how well they fight, but as far as I'm aware, Morale is only ever checked at the Detachment level, not for individual models. Much like Break Point, Morale should probably influence the final cost of a formation / detachment of units / models, but probably shouldn't directly affect the cost of the models themselves.

If you have a strong reason / argument why you think it should affect a model's cost directly, please state it.


I completely agree about morale, if Break Point does not affect the unit cost, neither should it. Morale is something which I don't generally find influences the game much (although I know it can do) so I think the costs should be fairly cheap. Presumably the worst Morale Value of 4 for IG and Orks should be free with units with better morale costing slightly more...

So far as the Terminators go, I don't have a better idea, it was more just a case of pointing out that I'm a little concerned about that particular unit. I think it is better not to worry about units like this though and keep going! Like you say, play testing will be when we can see if it all works. Sadly I don't have another battle due for a month or so...

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Thu Mar 20, 2014 6:54 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:50 pm
Posts: 1543
I've just done a look through of the various excel sheets posted last October, specifically looking for and at Morale values. While there are a few formations here and there with scores of 5, I found none with a score of 6. Thus considering a 6 to be the 'baseline' just makes no sense. Since most Guard, Frateris, and Orks have a 4, that should probably be considered the baseline.

Since you (Primarch) have said that you and Mattman (I think it was he) were working out the formation structures offline, I can only guess at their structure. I'd guess it wouldn't be overly different from what we currently have, so I'll base the following recommendations on the current structure, as that's all I have to go with. Obviously if anything here just doesn't work with what you have, it can be adjusted, as all of these are suggestions.

I'm seeing two stages of point cost setting. The first stage is the unit/model level, and the second is the formation level. We seem to have the model level fairly good for the moment. At the formation level, I can see (at least) the following adjustments to cost.

A: Break Point. Most likely, 50% should be default with no cost adjustment. Thus if your formation contains eight models, your BP is four models. Off the top of my head, I'd say that if the BP is higher, than the cost of the formation should be increased by the difference. For example, if a formation of five models has a BP of three models, that is 10% above the default, and thus the cost of the formation would be increased by 10%.

B: Morale. As I mentioned above, the default (free) value should probably be 4, but it could easily be 3 if we feel that the default soldier should be more battle-trained than a Guardsman or an Ork Boy. Either way, for every point above or below whatever is chosen as the default, the cost of the formation should be adjusted by 10%. Models with the Fearless ability would probably have an extra cost here.

C: Command structure. Since the majority of the current, mainline NetEpic factions do not require their formations to be within any given distance from a Command unit (or whatever), the default should be not requiring one. Those formations of a faction that do require this should receive a discount, probably 10%. Obviously, models with the Independent ability would not receive this discount. Robotic units should possibly get an adjustment here, but I'm not sure as they are odd.

D: Formation Type. Currently, Company formations often, but not always, get a discount off of the formations that comprise them, as well as (again, generally) gaining a free Command unit or three. This should probably be standardized in some way. The only soldi-ish idea I currently have along those lines would be that models that are only available in Special formations should receive a discount.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
MagnusIlluminus wrote:
I've just done a look through of the various excel sheets posted last October, specifically looking for and at Morale values. While there are a few formations here and there with scores of 5, I found none with a score of 6. Thus considering a 6 to be the 'baseline' just makes no sense. Since most Guard, Frateris, and Orks have a 4, that should probably be considered the baseline.

Since you (Primarch) have said that you and Mattman (I think it was he) were working out the formation structures offline, I can only guess at their structure. I'd guess it wouldn't be overly different from what we currently have, so I'll base the following recommendations on the current structure, as that's all I have to go with. Obviously if anything here just doesn't work with what you have, it can be adjusted, as all of these are suggestions.

I'm seeing two stages of point cost setting. The first stage is the unit/model level, and the second is the formation level. We seem to have the model level fairly good for the moment. At the formation level, I can see (at least) the following adjustments to cost.

A: Break Point. Most likely, 50% should be default with no cost adjustment. Thus if your formation contains eight models, your BP is four models. Off the top of my head, I'd say that if the BP is higher, than the cost of the formation should be increased by the difference. For example, if a formation of five models has a BP of three models, that is 10% above the default, and thus the cost of the formation would be increased by 10%.

B: Morale. As I mentioned above, the default (free) value should probably be 4, but it could easily be 3 if we feel that the default soldier should be more battle-trained than a Guardsman or an Ork Boy. Either way, for every point above or below whatever is chosen as the default, the cost of the formation should be adjusted by 10%. Models with the Fearless ability would probably have an extra cost here.

C: Command structure. Since the majority of the current, mainline NetEpic factions do not require their formations to be within any given distance from a Command unit (or whatever), the default should be not requiring one. Those formations of a faction that do require this should receive a discount, probably 10%. Obviously, models with the Independent ability would not receive this discount. Robotic units should possibly get an adjustment here, but I'm not sure as they are odd.

D: Formation Type. Currently, Company formations often, but not always, get a discount off of the formations that comprise them, as well as (again, generally) gaining a free Command unit or three. This should probably be standardized in some way. The only soldi-ish idea I currently have along those lines would be that models that are only available in Special formations should receive a discount.


Hi!

This is similar to what I tried to do with my Heresy rules, as they assign morale value at the group (detachment) level and the command structure.

I had not thought to port that over but I believe you make strong good points as to make costing a two tiered process (model, then formation).

The morale points I mentioned were done without much though towards the formation, and I agree with no "6" morale value the baseline lines elsewhere. I agree that a price should be put on the higher scores, a discount or no cost to the lower ones or whichever the baseline turns out to be.

Regarding command structure, the baseline seems to be "none", so I agree those that are forced to use one will have to get some sort of discount to fairly access the restriction.

Of course it would be another debate if ALL armies should have a command radius.... ;)

I find very attractive the idea on costing on the type of formation. Certain units available solely as special formations should indeed get some consideration.

What Mattman has come up with can replicate the old formation, there will just be a default option for "Smaller" formations with extra options to make them bigger or slightly variable as well as transport options. Of course with a points formula in place the ultimate layout is a "per model" cost and let people make forces with whatever they have with a few guidelines.

Hopefully Mattman will post an example soon, so you can see what is meant by all that.

I will try very hard to get some points for the outstanding special abilities and then see how it all looks together. I would agree that the per model cost seems about done (lacking the aforementioned special abilities cost), then we can hammer out, morale, command control and formations.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 4:36 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:50 pm
Posts: 1543
Changing all armies to requiring a Command radius would significantly change the style of most armies to the point that it would just about be a different game. Thus it's probably not a good idea as the default. However, an optional rule to that effect could be interesting.

What you have posted there (and elsewhere) about Matman's system sounds very promising and very flexible. This will be important if it is going to attract long-time players of any system and newcomers as well.

I'd think that the majority of the remaining SA should probably have fixed-value prices. I suppose the actual value chosen really doesn't matter, except as where one SA costs more than another will be saying that it is more important / powerful than the other. Then the question becomes, which ones are more powerful / useful than others? Or are they all about equal?

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 4:55 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
MagnusIlluminus wrote:
Changing all armies to requiring a Command radius would significantly change the style of most armies to the point that it would just about be a different game. Thus it's probably not a good idea as the default. However, an optional rule to that effect could be interesting.

What you have posted there (and elsewhere) about Matman's system sounds very promising and very flexible. This will be important if it is going to attract long-time players of any system and newcomers as well.

I'd think that the majority of the remaining SA should probably have fixed-value prices. I suppose the actual value chosen really doesn't matter, except as where one SA costs more than another will be saying that it is more important / powerful than the other. Then the question becomes, which ones are more powerful / useful than others? Or are they all about equal?


Hi!

Something optional for those whom like a command radius would suffice, I agree.

Mattman's system is indeed flexible, while the default will be smaller units, the optional formations will feature the traditional formations. I would add to it an optional for per model costs.

I agree given the outlines that you have laid out, that a flat cost for special abilities is appropriate.

Not all abilities are equally useful though.

I'll post a the list with suggested costs. Hopefully by the weekend end.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:24 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:50 pm
Posts: 1543
No worries. As I'm going through the other Factions I keep finding SA that directly affect a weapon system or other stat, and I'm working those in as I go. I'll have to remember to mention those as I come to them. Well, more likely in batches.

As an example, Flyers that drop bomb(s) as they move. While the value of a weapon system is normally adjusted by the Range at which it can operate, these have a Range of zero. Partly because multiplying their cost by zero would only cause an error, and partly because the model in question is going to intentionally fly over it's intended target(s), I am not adjusting cost due to this SA. In other words, it has a multiplier value of *1.

On that note, I recall there being quite the discussion over in the Army List threads some time ago about the Chaos Hell Talon and the Eldar Phoenix. As a comparison, under this (current) system, the Hell Talon has a calculated cost of 396 (from it's old value of 350) and the Phoenix has a cost of 494 (old value of 300). Quite the difference!

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:35 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:16 am
Posts: 1003
If I get some time at the weekend, I will post an example of the direction I am looking to take the formation and army building side of the platinum version of the rules (though in reality they could be used with gold if people wanted them to.

Matt


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:36 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

Here are my point values for the special abilities list.

I formulated a flat cost for each that varies from 5 points to a maximum of 25 points to be added to the models cost.

Agile - I'll leave titan related things to a separate post
AI - separate post on morale following magnus recommendation on these being formation costs.
Combat Leader - 15 points
Combat Engineer - 15 points
Daemonic- 15 points
Daemon Hunter - 15 points
Deep Strike - 25 points
Forward Observer - 15 points
Hard to Hit - 20 points
Hit & Run - 15 points
Infiltration - 25 points
Inorganic - 10 points
Inspirational - as per morale
Medic - 20 points
Mechanic - 20 points
Multiple Wounds - 25 points per wound
Open-Top Vehicle - no cost or bonus, thoughts?
Psychic Save - 25 points
Psyker - 25 points
Regeneration - 25 points
Robotic - as per morale
Sniper - 25 points
Static Artillery no cost or bonus? thoughts?
Stealth - 25 points
Teleport - 25 points
Transport - 5 points per model/capacity of transport
Tunneler - 15 points

I used 15 points a baseline for "Average abilities" and 25 for the premium ones like deep strike and teleport (which makes terminators more expensive to field).

Thoughts and comments welcome!

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

Morale.

Since morale and command radius is more an army dependent variable than the actual model, I thought once you form your formation an added cost to the total of the formation could be added to better reflect the advantages of a given army list.

As I believe Magnus' mentioned, IG and Orks will be sort of a baseline where they have NO ADDED cost to their formations since they have the most restrictive command radius and the other armies with better command (no restriction) pay for the privilege.

There are two ways to do this. One is a flat across the bard added formation cost per army. It is one value for all formations in that army regardless of the actual morale that individual formations may have since this number is more of an "average" of the armies effectiveness.

OR

Assign two added values, one for the army and one for the morale.

I would think just one value (however determined) would be more efficient.

Suggested values per formation in armies would be:

IG - no additional cost
Orks - no additional cost
Squats and Tau- 25 points per formation
Eldar, chaos and Marines - 50 points per formation
Tyranids and Necrons (or any army that has a preponderance of fearless units) - 75 points per formation

Thus a IG formation worth 250 points would remain unchanged.

A squat formation worth 250 points would be modified to 275 points

A marine formation worth 250 points is now 300.

A Tyranid formation worth 250 is now 325.

Thoughts?

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

Units with templates (such as titans).

I thought of two ways of doing them.

Calculating cost per location on template. That is calculate the armor cost of each location on a template and expressing that as a fixed cost. To this add weapons, CAF and movement and that is the cost.

OR

Simply keep the current system which is different from the standard system anyway.

Thoughts?

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:52 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:34 pm
Posts: 3219
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
primarch wrote:
Hi!

Morale.

Since morale and command radius is more an army dependent variable than the actual model, I thought once you form your formation an added cost to the total of the formation could be added to better reflect the advantages of a given army list.

As I believe Magnus' mentioned, IG and Orks will be sort of a baseline where they have NO ADDED cost to their formations since they have the most restrictive command radius and the other armies with better command (no restriction) pay for the privilege.

There are two ways to do this. One is a flat across the bard added formation cost per army. It is one value for all formations in that army regardless of the actual morale that individual formations may have since this number is more of an "average" of the armies effectiveness.

OR

Assign two added values, one for the army and one for the morale.

I would think just one value (however determined) would be more efficient.

Suggested values per formation in armies would be:

IG - no additional cost
Orks - no additional cost
Squats and Tau- 25 points per formation
Eldar, chaos and Marines - 50 points per formation
Tyranids and Necrons (or any army that has a preponderance of fearless units) - 75 points per formation

Thus a IG formation worth 250 points would remain unchanged.

A squat formation worth 250 points would be modified to 275 points

A marine formation worth 250 points is now 300.

A Tyranid formation worth 250 is now 325.

Thoughts?

Primarch


While the IG and Orks have the same crappy Morale Value, the IG Command Radius is better than that of the Orks; 25cm (35cm if you have a Leviathan or Capitol Imperialis) v 10cm. Frankly it makes little difference but thought I'd mention it in case it is something that you want to factor in.

I'm slightly concerned that the Morale Costs may be too high, but then on the other hand when the IG and Orks start breaking it can be a catastrophe, while for the Marines and Eldar Aspect Warriors it isn't a big deal... Probably only play testing will sort this out. Once you guys are ready, if you want me to fight some infantry skirmishes to test out the costings, just give me a shout. Don't have Tau or Tyranid though...

Also, Squats; should thee be some extra cost to account for that annoying (if you are fighting against them) Stubborn rule? Or does the fact that you gain extra VPs for breaking them compensate enough?

One last point about Flyers dropping bombs. While I have hardly any flyers, I do have the Squat Airships. I have played them numerous times but never ever been able to get them into a position to use the bombs, all because they are so slow. I can imagine this isn't a problem with most other flyers but thought it was worth mentioning. What I'm saying is that I wouldn't even bother altering the cost of the airships because it is pretty much a redundant ability. Not saying it would never get used, but so rare that not worth extra cost.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:22 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:50 pm
Posts: 1543
primarch wrote:
Hi!

Here are my point values for the special abilities list.

I formulated a flat cost for each that varies from 5 points to a maximum of 25 points to be added to the models cost.

Agile - I'll leave titan related things to a separate post
AI - separate post on morale following Magnus' recommendation on these being formation costs.
Combat Leader - 15 points
Combat Engineer - 15 points
Daemonic- 15 points
Daemon Hunter - 15 points
Deep Strike - 25 points
Forward Observer - 15 points
Hard to Hit - 20 points
Hit & Run - 15 points
Infiltration - 25 points
Inorganic - 10 points
Inspirational - as per morale
Medic - 20 points
Mechanic - 20 points
Multiple Wounds - 25 points per wound
Open-Top Vehicle - no cost or bonus, thoughts?
Psychic Save - 25 points
Psyker - 25 points
Regeneration - 25 points
Robotic - as per morale
Sniper - 25 points
Static Artillery no cost or bonus? thoughts?
Stealth - 25 points
Teleport - 25 points
Transport - 5 points per model/capacity of transport
Tunneler - 15 points

I used 15 points a baseline for "Average abilities" and 25 for the premium ones like deep strike and teleport (which makes terminators more expensive to field).

Thoughts and comments welcome!

Primarch


I guess I should have posted a thought I had a few days ago. Ah well. I was thinking that you should not feel that you need to stick to multiples of 5 points, and in fact should not use only multiples of 5. Partly because we are not rounding off until after the unit is entirely built (as these are part of said building), and partly to give more granularity without having really big costs. Then again, it probably doesn't matter that much.

For the most part I agree with your assessments of relative costs (if not absolute costs) above. A few thoughts:

Agile should really be a modifier to the cost of the Movement value. I'm not sure why I didn't see that before. Probably a *2 or *3 as it really improves the Titan.

AI should have a minimal cost at the unit level, as they are immune to certain rather rare attacks. Probably just 2 or 3 points. It is mostly a Morale issue though.

Command. You forgot this one, though in thinking about it, it should really be as modifiers to the Movement value (always move 2x so *2) and to the Weapon(s) (always FF, so *1.5 per weapon).

HQ. Forgot another one. Probably an average cost.

Inspirational. While it affects Morale checks, it's only within 10cm, so it should have a fixed cost. Using your scale above, probably 15 or 20.

Open-Top Vehicle. This should probably reduce the cost per squad of its Transport ability. It would probably halve the value of the Transport ability.

Static Artillery. This is partly already accounted for in Movement value, but should reduce the cost as they have worse results when a failed Morale check.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

I used multiples of 5, just for the sake of easy math, but you could easily assign other numbers not multiples of 5. :)

I would leave all titan abilities to the titan formulas. Probably just figure them into the base cost (as they are pretty much already in stadard net epic).

HQ 15 points, lower inspirational to 15 and command as a movement multiplier (x2), agreed.

That's a good idea to reduce transport costs on open top vehicles and perhaps a further movement cost reduction for units with static qualities, OR if the proposed morale cost modifier per formation is accepted, then no additional cost for formations made of static units.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:33 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:50 pm
Posts: 1543
Oh, and Tunneler I've already taken into account as a modifier to Movement value.

I'm not certain that Titans need to be a different system, as really the only thing that is different is their hit location template. I'm actually starting to get an idea for that which I'll have to flesh out a bit and toy with to see how, or if, it may work.

I've also had an idea for giving values to weapon area templates, aside from normal Barrage. The idea is to multiply the length (in cm) by the width (in cm) of the template itself to determine cost. This is because the number of 'attacks' varies by how many models are under the template, and we cannot have an undefined variable in the cost formula. The larger the template, the more models can potentially be affected. This value would replace both 'range' and 'attacks' for most weapons that use templates.

As to Morale...

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Great Points Formula Debate!
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:50 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
MagnusIlluminus wrote:
Oh, and Tunneler I've already taken into account as a modifier to Movement value.

I'm not certain that Titans need to be a different system, as really the only thing that is different is their hit location template. I'm actually starting to get an idea for that which I'll have to flesh out a bit and toy with to see how, or if, it may work.

I've also had an idea for giving values to weapon area templates, aside from normal Barrage. The idea is to multiply the length (in cm) by the width (in cm) of the template itself to determine cost. This is because the number of 'attacks' varies by how many models are under the template, and we cannot have an undefined variable in the cost formula. The larger the template, the more models can potentially be affected. This value would replace both 'range' and 'attacks' for most weapons that use templates.

As to Morale...


Hi!

Looking forward to see your ideas on units with hit location templates and barrages. :)

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 161 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net