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.

Or some other, better name. Someone in one of the general discussion threads recently posted something about winning games even when it looks like your army is getting the snot kicked out of it, and it got me thinking. What if each unit were assigned an "attrition value" or a "target value" or "death points" or whatever? Some value for when it's completely destroyed. This could be as simple as assigning a value based on slot (3 for HQ, 1 for troops, 2 for everything else, as an example) or as specific as giving each unit in the game a value. You could modify it for fluff too, such as by having eldar be worth more points to represent the high importance they put on each life while things like conscripts or tau drones might not be worth any points at all.

You could also have especially large or valuable surrender points when at least half of the models it's composed of are removed or when you snipe out important portions of it. So Aun'Va himself might be worth a lot of points, but his body guards would be worth nothing. A green tide might be worth 8 points all together, but you could snipe out the warboss for a point or kill off 50 boys for 4 points.

I imagine this could easily be imbalanced (especially if you increase a unit's value due to fluff reasons), but it seems like a fun alternate rule for narrative games. It also has potential to tweak some aspects of kill points as they stand. Kill point denial lists such a s a green tide, for instance, could fork over victory points without being completely wiped out in much the same way as putting enough damage on gargantuans and colossals can produce victory points even if they're still standing. You can also use this as a somewhat blunt balancing factor. Your opponent brought a jetbike seer council? That's a potent unit, but killing off half the seers on your opponent's craftworld is going to be worth a lot of points if you drop them. Your opponent brought wyches or guardsmen? The former can be regenerated/grown in a vat, and the latter are expendable (and can be grown in a vat too).

Just a passing idea. Your thoughts?

Kill points is gak, seen variations on this rule posted up many times and its a better method in every way.

Best way IMO is "value of the unit" along with something for half killing a target. The alternative is a fifty page document detailing the points value of everything in the game... nah feth that

I'm not opposed to assigning quick values to FOC slots. Would formations be worth all the points associated with their codex entry slot then,since they don't take up slots in the army list?

gun drones and things like that could be made to be worth nothing with a rule along the line of, "models taken as upgrades to squads are never worth Attrition Points."

perhaps this could be expanded even more, with HQs worth 3 points, non- super heavy/ gargantuan LoW worth 4 and super-heavy and gargantuan creatures worth 5 points. or individual wounds and hull points could be worth points, so even if I don't kill your titan, I get the points.

I like this a lot, but it can't get too complicated. it will work as along as we keep it simple.

Just using the points value of the unit is probably fine for "kill points only" eternal war missions out of the book. If you want to make some kind of combined format (i.e. add big guns never tire) then you'll have to multiply each objective by a factor to make them equivalent.
Example: 1850 pt game, each objective marker is worth 500 points. I kill 1300 pts of my opponent's army plus hold 1 objective, I have 1800 pts. My opponent has killed 1000 pts of my army, but also holds 2 objectives for a final score of 2000 pts; winning the game.

I like the idea, and I agree with the keep it simple approach.

Named Characters and Monstruos Creatures 3 victory points, 1 vp if wounded but not destroyed.

Super heavy and Gargantuan 5 vp if destroyed, 2 vp if wounded or damaged

something like this could be useful to discourage the more unbalancing and spammed units.

In most missions, having an MSU army is a benefit, as you can quickly claim or contest ALL the objectives. Having some missions where having lots of units is a detriment is good for game balance.

That said, if you really felt like this was needed, I would try to keep it simple:


"Kill Points:
If at the end of the game you have a greater percentage of remaining units in your army than your opponent, you score 2 victory points. Otherwise, score 0 points."

 greyknight12 wrote:
Just using the points value of the unit is probably fine for "kill points only" eternal war missions out of the book. If you want to make some kind of combined format (i.e. add big guns never tire) then you'll have to multiply each objective by a factor to make them equivalent.
Example: 1850 pt game, each objective marker is worth 500 points. I kill 1300 pts of my opponent's army plus hold 1 objective, I have 1800 pts. My opponent has killed 1000 pts of my army, but also holds 2 objectives for a final score of 2000 pts; winning the game.

Definitely more fair to play it along these lines. I just "won" a game against an army that was absolutely devastating me, I had 3 models on the board to their 30-40, but since most of my squads were overpriced (terminators, ravenwing command squad, etc.) and he ran a bunch of smaller 5-10 man squads (fire warriors, pathfinders, vespids) it was essentially impossible for him to win come turn 3 unless he tabled me because I had killed more than my entire army consisted of even though he had twice as many models on the table at that point. In the end we had about 300 points on my side vs 600 points on his side, with a score of like 8-4 in my favor.

Alternately, my only complaint about running MSU is that you should have some downsides to it since it's better at objectives and you don't have to worry as much about losing large squads from one attack. Large blasts mean a lot less to squads of 5 guys, and taking 60 shots from a squad of guardsmen is a lot scarier to 10 guys than it is to 5 guys, because wounds are guaranteed to be wasted, and having a squad die to sweeping advance is a lot less painful if it's just 2 or 3 guys vs 7 or 8.

Personally I think it would be cool if you can default your mission type to an alternative kill point.

supers: 1 per 3 hp like escalation(?)
Units: 1 point
Dedicated Transports: half points.

With KtWL, LB, FB like normal.