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.

Now, let me begin with a simple fact. (maybe slight opinion) All points systems have unbalance... even the most balanced gaming systems have "strong" units and "meta" game. Hearthstone, X-Wing miniatures, Magic the gathering, 40k... All of them!

So lets look at these home-brewed point systems. I do not want to downplay anybody's work.. these systems work and have a great amount of dedication and love behind them. So thank you!

I looked at Skaven using the SDK point system and found that on average (give or take, I did this at work) you are about 11-15 points per wound. Some models, such as skeletons are 8 points a wound (but can be summoned by a wizard ~17 points per wound). So while some units are stronger (AKA more points per wound) the game can find its own balance simply by using wounds as points. And naturally using synergy of units (skeletons and a wizard) balance can be achieved (respectively).

Again, this isn't perfect.. some units just suck! This is part of our table top gaming life!!! Am I ever going to run clan rats over stormvermin.. NO! Partially cause stormvermin just look amazing and are frankly better in every aspect. Some ghetto units (lets say zombies) become insanely terrifying as there vast numbers will boost their stats to hit/to wound. Now lets say you divine shield them with a wizard... HUGE force mulitplier effect!

As far as named heroes go.. Well, those were about 1.5 to 2 times more points per wound. Makes sense! So... set a limit on named characters... 1 name character max... or simply have an agreement that no named characters will be used.

Warmachines/monsters/wizard all tend to be slightly higher than infanty/calvary which makes sense... Set a limit on these as well??

So keep it simple and game with wounds as points and maybe apply some limitations... its your game have fun with it!

What do you guys think!

Fert wrote:
What do you guys think!

I think you aren't serious; the argument you have here is "there is no need to attempt balance because there will always be imbalances" while ignoring the fact that there are varying degrees of balance. I try to assume the best in people, and I am assuming that you are not seriously making that argument. Heck, referring to MTG and 40k as balanced game systems throws it off the serious train right at the start.

No, this isn't a sarcastic post. And my point with MTG and 40K is that they are table top games with some form of balancing mechanism. Which have imbalance... the fact that there are strong builds and a meta in all table top games. Is that really that hard for you to bridge that simple concept???

My post is simply that while these point/comp systems are great. People, if they want, can keep it simple and just use wounds... its fast and easy. And if the point systems that people have developed are basically producing the same results.. then why use them for a quick game with friends.

Fert wrote:
People, if they want, can keep it simple and just use wounds... its fast and easy.

It is indeed an option, but people already know that.

And if the point systems that people have developed are basically producing the same results.. then why use them for a quick game with friends.

They are not producing the same results, or even close to the same results. The argument that they are is exactly why I (still) find it hard to believe you are being serious here. I'm trying to assume that I'm missing something...

So what you're saying is that any system is inherently imbalanced, leading to a metagame where some choices are good and some choices are bad. And since all systems are imbalanced, why even bother, why not just use wounds instead?

The answer is that there are different degrees of imbalance. While a game with a good point system might have a small imbalance, the game will still be decided mostly by the choices made by the generals and the dice rolls. A game using wounds for balance, on the other hand, will most likely be so imbalanced that the result is more or less determined before the game even started, making it almost meaningless (in my opinion) to even play.

Having a point system also makes it possible to adjust the costs of units, which gradually makes the system better and better balanced. You cannot adjust wounds.

Wounds as points is terrible simply because models exist with the same wounds as other models only have vastly inferior or superior stats to the other.

Swordmaster vs a goblin

Both have 1 wound.

Guess which one is a lot better?

30 sword masters and 30 goblins would be equal if you use wounds as a basis of balance, but anyone thats anyone knows that this is not a balanced matchup. Maybe 60 or 80 goblins and 30 sword masters would be a good balance, but definitely not 30 on 30.

30 goblins pack quite a punch.. plus they can shoot.. plus if you are playing that f'ing guy who has 30 sword master in a small scale game.. he is a dick. Of course this goes back to the fact that units/armies/entire codex's to not being perfectly balanced and some being "OP".. It's part our table top life.

I'm just saying using wounds is relatively simple and easy... Oh and doesn't involve 7 pages of PPC discussion.

For tournament guys and the very competitive we do need something.. (GW please save us) .. But for the casual gamer looking for some good times rolling dice... Wounds. Also, using a balanced out PPC... Random turns has screwed so many times.. so balance went out the window and it was worth it!