Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/08/18 19:24:14
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote: Why couldnt they simply come up with a formula to base points off of things such as the stats and rules of a model and then go from there?
Take into account every single stat line and give it some kind of points value, combined with a rules value (FNP and other rules attached to the model would obviously make it more costly) and work with that same formula across the entirety of the game.
I know things like combinations of certain models or units could potentially break this, but it seems like a decent starting point.
Let's take an easy example.
Say that improving your armour save by 1 is worth 10 points.
- to 6+ is 10 points = Inf% improvement, now deflecting 1/6 wounds
6+ to 5+ is 10 points = Double the damage deflection of the previous save, now deflecting 1/3
5+ to 4+ is 10 points = You have gone from 33% to 50% reduction
4+ to 3+ is 10 points = From 50% to 66%
3+ to 2+ is 10 points = From 66% to 83%
The rate of change differs significantly. Meanwhile, a model with an armour granting a 2+ save now pays 50 points for it.
In addition to that, a 1 wound model is not getting anywhere near as much benefit as a 4 wound one is. Same again for toughness differences.
Each stat can only be valued in relation to the other stats and available wargear combined.
2016/08/18 22:19:13
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote: Why couldnt they simply come up with a formula to base points off of things such as the stats and rules of a model and then go from there?
Take into account every single stat line and give it some kind of points value, combined with a rules value (FNP and other rules attached to the model would obviously make it more costly) and work with that same formula across the entirety of the game.
I know things like combinations of certain models or units could potentially break this, but it seems like a decent starting point.
Let's take an easy example.
Say that improving your armour save by 1 is worth 10 points.
- to 6+ is 10 points = Inf% improvement, now deflecting 1/6 wounds
6+ to 5+ is 10 points = Double the damage deflection of the previous save, now deflecting 1/3
5+ to 4+ is 10 points = You have gone from 33% to 50% reduction
4+ to 3+ is 10 points = From 50% to 66%
3+ to 2+ is 10 points = From 66% to 83%
The rate of change differs significantly. Meanwhile, a model with an armour granting a 2+ save now pays 50 points for it.
In addition to that, a 1 wound model is not getting anywhere near as much benefit as a 4 wound one is. Same again for toughness differences.
Each stat can only be valued in relation to the other stats and available wargear combined.
Each Stat in the profile is worth a serious look at what it's real value truly should be. Some Stats are pretty straight forward like Armor Saves and BS. These are 2 Stats that are based on a simple D6 roll. That of which, gives a very predictable percentage of its effectiveness as a Stat.
Sure other Stats will require more work than this. But our game is based off of rolling D6s. What is so hard about figuring out what percentage is when it comes to that?
Cowards will be shot! Survivors will be shot again!
2016/08/18 22:24:13
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote: Why couldnt they simply come up with a formula to base points off of things such as the stats and rules of a model and then go from there?
Take into account every single stat line and give it some kind of points value, combined with a rules value (FNP and other rules attached to the model would obviously make it more costly) and work with that same formula across the entirety of the game.
I know things like combinations of certain models or units could potentially break this, but it seems like a decent starting point.
Let's take an easy example.
Say that improving your armour save by 1 is worth 10 points.
- to 6+ is 10 points = Inf% improvement, now deflecting 1/6 wounds
6+ to 5+ is 10 points = Double the damage deflection of the previous save, now deflecting 1/3
5+ to 4+ is 10 points = You have gone from 33% to 50% reduction
4+ to 3+ is 10 points = From 50% to 66%
3+ to 2+ is 10 points = From 66% to 83%
The rate of change differs significantly. Meanwhile, a model with an armour granting a 2+ save now pays 50 points for it.
In addition to that, a 1 wound model is not getting anywhere near as much benefit as a 4 wound one is. Same again for toughness differences.
Each stat can only be valued in relation to the other stats and available wargear combined.
I'm starting to think it might be easier and more accurate to simply modify the official points costs based on what is overpowered or underpowered.
Because I don't know if anyone in the 40k community both has the math skills to work everything out accurately and also the inclination to use those math skills on 40k instead of their obviously math-heavy job.
2016/08/18 22:25:09
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Martel732 wrote: Stats don't exist in a vacuum. That's why you can't use straight math to determine points costs.
It should be possible to work out every possible stat interaction and create a (very lengthy) formula that would let you perfectly cost pretty much every unit in the game.
The problem is that if you manage to do that, almost no one is going to actually be able to follow the formula (see again, VERY lengthy) and you'd ultimately end up with most players having to take it on faith that the numbers were plugged in correctly by the person who came up with their supposedly well-balanced army, only to find out that the numbers assumed the availability of things like cover in a quantity that does not actually match your table.
2016/08/18 22:31:45
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Martel732 wrote: Stats don't exist in a vacuum. That's why you can't use straight math to determine points costs.
It should be possible to work out every possible stat interaction and create a (very lengthy) formula that would let you perfectly cost pretty much every unit in the game.
The problem is that if you manage to do that, almost no one is going to actually be able to follow the formula (see again, VERY lengthy) and you'd ultimately end up with most players having to take it on faith that the numbers were plugged in correctly by the person who came up with their supposedly well-balanced army, only to find out that the numbers assumed the availability of things like cover in a quantity that does not actually match your table.
That's a combinatorial problem that's outside the scope of the computational power available to most.
2016/08/18 22:38:57
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Martel732 wrote: Stats don't exist in a vacuum. That's why you can't use straight math to determine points costs.
It should be possible to work out every possible stat interaction and create a (very lengthy) formula that would let you perfectly cost pretty much every unit in the game.
The problem is that if you manage to do that, almost no one is going to actually be able to follow the formula (see again, VERY lengthy) and you'd ultimately end up with most players having to take it on faith that the numbers were plugged in correctly by the person who came up with their supposedly well-balanced army, only to find out that the numbers assumed the availability of things like cover in a quantity that does not actually match your table.
That's a combinatorial problem that's outside the scope of the computational power available to most.
I recognize that word from Numb3rs but really without knowing much about math I started trying to imagine how you might do the interaction between two stats mathematically, thought a tiny bit about how many factors would go into actually balancing a unit properly, and realized the formula would be longer than my post while also not accounting for things you don't actually buy in your army with points under any circumstances.
Hence why I favor just relying on human intuition. Simpler, easier, gets the job done almost as well for a fraction of the hassle and if you change your mind later it's easier to justify a change.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/18 22:40:46
2016/08/18 22:40:47
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Have a group play with said units. Then start asking how much would you pay for X? Always is too low, never is too high. Price it where most of the people starting having to think.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/18 22:40:53
2016/08/18 22:46:49
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Martel732 wrote: Have a group play with said units. Then start asking how much would you pay for X? Always is too low, never is too high. Price it where most of the people starting having to think.
Human intuition does indeed easily solve a lot of problems where it doesn't really matter if you get a completely precise answer.
Our brains are kind of awesome like that.
2016/08/19 01:02:36
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Jaxler wrote: The pirhana wing isn't that great really. People seem to forget that drones are just drones. Also a storm surge is a 420 point model with a 3+ save, if anything it's pretty balenced. Broadsides are only toughness 8. Drop pod marines with melta tend to bake them.
I hope that is a typo about the Broadsides because otherwise you need to re-read the Tau codex
It was like 9pm and I hadn't slept when I posted this, and yes I meant toughness 4. Some days ya just shouldn't type and instead head to bed.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/19 01:04:07
2016/08/19 02:52:21
Subject: Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote: Why couldnt they simply come up with a formula to base points off of things such as the stats and rules of a model and then go from there?
Take into account every single stat line and give it some kind of points value, combined with a rules value (FNP and other rules attached to the model would obviously make it more costly) and work with that same formula across the entirety of the game.
I know things like combinations of certain models or units could potentially break this, but it seems like a decent starting point.
Let's take an easy example.
Say that improving your armour save by 1 is worth 10 points.
- to 6+ is 10 points = Inf% improvement, now deflecting 1/6 wounds
6+ to 5+ is 10 points = Double the damage deflection of the previous save, now deflecting 1/3
5+ to 4+ is 10 points = You have gone from 33% to 50% reduction
4+ to 3+ is 10 points = From 50% to 66%
3+ to 2+ is 10 points = From 66% to 83%
The rate of change differs significantly. Meanwhile, a model with an armour granting a 2+ save now pays 50 points for it.
In addition to that, a 1 wound model is not getting anywhere near as much benefit as a 4 wound one is. Same again for toughness differences.
Each stat can only be valued in relation to the other stats and available wargear combined.
Each Stat in the profile is worth a serious look at what it's real value truly should be. Some Stats are pretty straight forward like Armor Saves and BS. These are 2 Stats that are based on a simple D6 roll. That of which, gives a very predictable percentage of its effectiveness as a Stat.
Sure other Stats will require more work than this. But our game is based off of rolling D6s. What is so hard about figuring out what percentage is when it comes to that?
It's like you read my explanation and thought "nah, that can't be right, the value of a stat relies only on itself".
Each stat's value relies on a complex interaction between all other stats in the statline, and the wargear and combat roles available to the model the statline is assigned to. What good is Bs10 when you only have a bolt pistol? It is much more valuable on a boltgun, but even moreso on an assault cannon. And how exactly would you quantify its usefulness on a blast or template weapon?
Strength is a cool stat, but it is much more significant on a melee unit than a sniper unit. Some units have a capacity to be either.
Toughness, Wounds and Saves rely heavily on eachother for value - a 2+ T1 W1 model is hardly making the most of ts 2+, but if your metagame sees a lot of Str 6 or higher weaponry, T4 is about as useful as T1 anyway.
Where do you find the value of an invulnerable save - something that is only activated because something else invalidated another stat you just paid for?
Take it from someone who tried to solve less complicated problems:
It's not even necessarily an issue of how to value anything in 40k, it's finding a mathematician how can do it, will do it, has a computer capable of using such a long and complex formula that will result, and is happy to change it for every new change to the game. Each new codex and rulebook has an effect on the value of everything.
This is not anywhere near as straightforward as "this stat is worth X points more than that one".
2016/08/19 20:37:18
Subject: Re:Adding a little more balance competitive 40k with just points
Hi folks.
The most accurate way to assign point values in a game is to assign point values at the level of the interaction.
Since 3rd ed 40k has been a game focused on unit interaction.
Therefore comparative costs of unit to unit is the most accurate way to assign point values.As this auto includes all the synergistic bonuses of the stats in the models stat line. the weapons and equipment the models have, and the composition of the unit including the model types in the unit composition.
So you start with a bog standard infantry unit , like the IG squad of 10, with standard weapon load out , and assign it 100 PV .
Then simply compare the in game effectiveness of this unit vs other units to get comparable point values.
(Masses of play testing here. )
Then when you have all the point values good enough , repeat the play testing with actual army composition lists, to make sure synergistic effect and this level are dealt with.'Anti-spam measure'
(Restrict number of units. (0 to 2 for example).Or scale up point values appropriately, eg 1 unit = 130 pts, 2 units 280 pts , 3 units 420 pts,4 units 680 pts.)