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.

Power level for fun, points for try hard

The game has always been points. I'll use Power Level against new players only, who might not be able to hit 2k or higher with the models they have. I'll match their PL and we can still have a game. But if the person has been playing for more than three months, I'm not screwing around with the new system. Play points, the way the game has always been.

 Marmatag wrote:


If you're trying to make a competitive list, power level doesn't work.

That's preposterous.

Power level certainly has competitive army building. But armies that are built competitively in Power look entirely different than those with points.

I'll stick with whatever system makes an army of brimstone horrors less viable.

I go with points 1) cause I enjoy being as nitpicky as I can with my list and 2) the amount of broke and busted stuff in pl is just dumb, example being the horror split rule.

Points for sure.

Powerlevel is super unbalanced and since I use battlescribe putting together a points list is super fast.

I haven't tried using power level yet so I chose points. It's how I've done things for the past 2 decades and I don't feel the need to change. I will probably try it at some point though.

Pink Horror wrote:
I'll stick with whatever system makes an army of brimstone horrors less viable.

1 Point Per Model, who can hate that!

I'm enjoying Power Levels, mostly because it allows me to take some models that just wouldn't see any action on the table whatsoever under the points system - Warp Talons are still expensive, but they're not totally hamstrung under the new system. List building is a lot quicker, and generally the quicker I can get to playing a game the better as far as I'm concerned. I can understand why people would use points for serious tournaments but generally I'm happy to stick with PL.

Both ways are cool. If you like to play competitively, I completely understand why you would prefer that way.

However, for the majority of times I prefer to play with power levels. I don't need to micro-manage the upgrades and just use the models I have spent ages painting. I'm used to Age of Sigmar where this approach is the norm. I don't want to spend the time tweaking a list to make it fit perfectly under the limit. I used to enjoy that - now I don't. The downside to power is that it requires a similar attitude from the players. If you like to build the strongest list - and that is a perfectly valid approach! - then it will not mesh as well with power level. That is fine.

If anything this poll illustrates how many players are competitive players and how many can go either way or are not.

 auticus wrote:
If anything this poll illustrates how many players are competitive players and how many can go either way or are not.

Not really I voted points and I've never played in a tournament and never intend to.

The biggest thing I like about PL is that it's rough. GW's battle reports have a discrepancy often of 1-4 PL between lists, and nobody cares. So I like that, I can be like hey I have 52 PL with this list I want to try, and my opponent can build somewhere around that (maybe 50 or 51 or 53 whatever) and we aren't too busy futzing around with "But you're 3 points over!" we just whip something up and sit down to play.

Don't get me wrong, that style has its uses and benefits too, but not every single fething game.

 auticus wrote:
If anything this poll illustrates how many players are competitive players and how many can go either way or are not.

Not really, in fact it proves very little.
No one in my gaminggroup can be considered competitive, and all of us loathe PL and continue using points when we make our lists.

I'm liking the power level option for the types of games I play.

 auticus wrote:
If anything this poll illustrates how many players are competitive players and how many can go either way or are not.

It's a fallacy to assume there's no such thing as competitive Power level play.

Every equation of choice people use for points applies to Power as well. That different systems end up with different unit choices doesn't mean one is inherently "more competitive".

hobojebus wrote:

 auticus wrote:
If anything this poll illustrates how many players are competitive players and how many can go either way or are not.

Not really I voted points and I've never played in a tournament and never intend to.

Ditto.

 Elbows wrote:
I have yet to find a reason not to play power level. As long as you understand how power levels are calculated and don't short change yourself, it's worked fine - haven't had a game yet where it made any kind of difference.

I really enjoy Power Level, but most of the players in may area seem to prefer points. Ultimately, I kind of prefer points because I don't have the models for all the options, and I feel like I pay a hefty premium on some units because of this. Points makes these otherwise sad units of mine much happier.

It's a fallacy to assume there's no such thing as competitive Power level play.

Technically we can play competitive open play as well. I doubt we'll be seeing much of that, just like I have yet to see any competitive power-level play being done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not really I voted points and I've never played in a tournament and never intend to.

Competitive player does not mean tournament player exclusive. One can be a competitive player and never play in a tournament. A tournament is a type of event. Competitive play is a style of play that can be done everywhere.

From reading your posts for many many years, I would definitely peg you as a hardnose competitive player, even if you don't go to tournaments.

 auticus wrote:

It's a fallacy to assume there's no such thing as competitive Power level play.

Technically we can play competitive open play as well. I doubt we'll be seeing much of that, just like I have yet to see any competitive power-level play being done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not really I voted points and I've never played in a tournament and never intend to.

Competitive player does not mean tournament player exclusive. One can be a competitive player and never play in a tournament. A tournament is a type of event. Competitive play is a style of play that can be done everywhere.

From reading your posts for many many years, I would definitely peg you as a hardnose competitive player, even if you don't go to tournaments.

One of my clubs only uses power-levels now. And that club also hosts monthly tournaments.

Boom, competitive power level play.

Neat. When an actual big-name tournament does this I'll take notice.

Prefer Points after seeing some of the upgrades possible. Like Heldrakes are default with a hades autocannon yet can upgrade to a baleflamer for free. It's a different of nearly 30 points.

 auticus wrote:
Neat. When an actual big-name tournament does this I'll take notice.

How big a name, county, state, national, international?

 daedalus wrote:
At least with guard, the vast majority of the upgrades aren't things you'd normally take. How often do people take a power axe and voxcaster in infantry? The meltagun is already too much more expensive compared to the plasmagun, but now that's getting counted against you. Powerfists on scions? I don't even take the heavy flamers on my vehicles. There's a lot of stuff I'm overpaying for that way.

I doubt guard is the only army like that.

Yeah, my guard army is the same.

The thing is though, PLs would also make me feel guilty for taking extra upgrades. Like, I don't normally bother with plasma pistols or melee weapons on my sergeants. If I take them in a PL list, am I being cheesy or does the unit's power level assume I'll take them anyway? If it assumes that I'll only take some of them, how many is reasonable?

Just seems easier to use points and not have to worry about trying to self-balance my list.

 auticus wrote:

It's a fallacy to assume there's no such thing as competitive Power level play.

Technically we can play competitive open play as well. I doubt we'll be seeing much of that, just like I have yet to see any competitive power-level play being done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not really I voted points and I've never played in a tournament and never intend to.

Competitive player does not mean tournament player exclusive. One can be a competitive player and never play in a tournament. A tournament is a type of event. Competitive play is a style of play that can be done everywhere.

From reading your posts for many many years, I would definitely peg you as a hardnose competitive player, even if you don't go to tournaments.

You'd be wrong though I do things that drive competitive people nuts like remind people of abilities they forgot, let them roll extra dice after a combats done if they missed a unit, I'll reroll dice that are just barely cocked, I'm fine with proxying.

I also never meta game I play my own way.

I'm a filthy casual and proud of it.

 vipoid wrote:
Just seems easier to use points and not have to worry about trying to self-balance my list.

It is forever strange to me that such competitive games exist where we try so hard to pretend to not be competing.

"Okay, you guys are Olympic athletes, but no running TOO fast. You wouldn't want to look like you're winning at all costs, would you?!"

 daedalus wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Just seems easier to use points and not have to worry about trying to self-balance my list.

It is forever strange to me that such competitive games exist where we try so hard to pretend to not be competing.

"Okay, you guys are Olympic athletes, but no running TOO fast. You wouldn't want to look like you're winning at all costs, would you?!"

An olympic athlete doesn't care about if the competition is having fun, they're just there for their own gain and amusement.

For my part, and those I play with, the aim of the game is that both players should have fun. I know that this seems like an alien concept to many dakka-users.
If you roflstomp and/or get shot of the table on turn one, or you did the same to your opponent, I bet only 1 player had a modicum of fun that game.

You can be a competitive player and still care about your opponent, and still want your opponent to have a good time. One easy way to do this is to not take a list that will blow your opponent of the table in two turns.

With that said I probably also belong in the filthy casuals-group:
I allow my opponents to do stuff they forgot, remind them about things they wanted to do, etc

 NenkotaMoon wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Neat. When an actual big-name tournament does this I'll take notice.

How big a name, county, state, national, international?

A regional tournament. Like LVO or Adepticon or Nova. Something along those lines.

Would also make for an interesting poll.

A) I'm competitive - and points only
B) I'm competitive - and power level only
C) I'm competitive - and I could do either




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Just seems easier to use points and not have to worry about trying to self-balance my list.

It is forever strange to me that such competitive games exist where we try so hard to pretend to not be competing.

"Okay, you guys are Olympic athletes, but no running TOO fast. You wouldn't want to look like you're winning at all costs, would you?!"

If warhammer 40,000 were a competitive sport, then this would be spot-on.

However warhammer 40,000 is a game people play for relaxation and enjoyment. At least... there is a chunk of people that do this.

 auticus wrote:

 NenkotaMoon wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Neat. When an actual big-name tournament does this I'll take notice.

How big a name, county, state, national, international?

A regional tournament. Like LVO or Adepticon or Nova. Something along those lines.

Would also make for an interesting poll.

A) I'm competitive - and points only
B) I'm competitive - and power level only
C) I'm competitive - and I could do either




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Just seems easier to use points and not have to worry about trying to self-balance my list.

It is forever strange to me that such competitive games exist where we try so hard to pretend to not be competing.

"Okay, you guys are Olympic athletes, but no running TOO fast. You wouldn't want to look like you're winning at all costs, would you?!"

If warhammer 40,000 were a competitive sport, then this would be spot-on.

However warhammer 40,000 is a game people play for relaxation and enjoyment. At least... there is a chunk of people that do this.

What would I select? I'm non-competitive and use both!