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.

So, after seeing a thread where codexes were given tiers and such, it got me thinking.

So tier 4 codices being the best and tier 1 being the worst would a difference allows free points (not in an official or tourney setting).

For example, if Necrons (tier 4) play 1500 point game against Chaos (tier 1). Chaos would get an extra 750 points. (250 for each tier difference)

It doesn't change or address the issues or problems of the various codices, but perhaps it will make things a little more balanced? Is 250 per tier not enough? How should the point scale be?

That doesn't fix the weak units in those codeces, it just means you can take more of the OP units in said codeces.

I know this wouldn't encourage me to take thousand sons, but rather let me spam nurgle melta bikes.

Also what would you do in the case of allied detachments? If my primary was CSM would the 750pt bonus apply to my allied Daemons?

 mrhappyface wrote:
That doesn't fix the weak units in those codeces, it just means you can take more of the OP units in said codeces.

I know this wouldn't encourage me to take thousand sons, but rather let me spam nurgle melta bikes.

Also what would you do in the case of allied detachments? If my primary was CSM would the 750pt bonus apply to my allied Daemons?

I see what you're saying, and I would agree with you on that which is why this would be for friendly/non-competitive games only.

And it would increase your point limit, so you could throw those extra points where ever. Now I think because tier 3 and 4 are kinda close the scale would look something like this.

1 tier difference (1-2, 2-3, 3-4): 150 Points
2 tier difference (1-3, 2-4): 400 Points
3 tier difference (1-4): 700 Points

So I'm hoping that no one would abuse it but it's no guarantee.

It would be better to give a discount for crappy units.
One could use a 40k communitycomp for example and just give the other player x points to spend on non credit costing units for each credit the other player generated.

http://www.communitycomp.org/

Neither would work that well, because 40k is a mess atm.
A good way would be to do it like FW and taxing units. That would only work with a complete overhaul of all units and all codices, as well as a collaring of that damned ally-matrix and the complete messed up CAD. But this would be an amount of work.....

oldzoggy wrote:It would be better to give a discount for crappy units.
One could use a 40k communitycomp for example and just give the other player x points to spend on non credit costing units for each credit the other player generated.

http://www.communitycomp.org/

Very interesting. I like that idea.

Your heart's in the right place but the execution is off. Basically this is what point balancing SHOULD be, but GW has completely neglected it.

Arguably it would be easier to balance one Codex against another by giving the weaker one some bonus points. Certainly easier than revaluing all the units in the book.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Your heart's in the right place but the execution is off. Basically this is what point balancing SHOULD be, but GW has completely neglected it.

So how could I fix the execution?

Here is my first try
- Use the Community comp to calculate the credits used for the army. (ignore all their other rules and restrictions just use the credit score to calculate point costs)
- Calculate the difference in credits spend between the armies.
- Compensate the lower credit player with extra points to be spend on non credit units or upgrades. These points can be calculated by. Army Size x (1 + (100-(% of available*))/100)

* page 3 comp guide

Here is an example.

Lets say you play a 1500 point game.
Plyer 1 has a credit score of 13
Player 2 has a credit score of 6

The difference = 7
7 gives you 82 in the table. 100-82 = 18 1500*1,18=1770
So the 6 credit player can field up to 1770 points.
And the 13 credit player can field 1500 points.


You also might want to remove all benefits form formations and detachments or add point costs to those but that is an other discussion.

I'm going to try that in my next set of matches

What we do is instead of using formations, Your primary Detachment must be a CAD and you can have 1 additional formation below 500 points

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I'm going to try that in my next set of matches

What we do is instead of using formations, Your primary Detachment must be a CAD and you can have 1 additional formation below 500 points

So I can't play Harlequins with Dark Eldar allies?

 Happyjew wrote:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I'm going to try that in my next set of matches

What we do is instead of using formations, Your primary Detachment must be a CAD and you can have 1 additional formation below 500 points

So I can't play Harlequins with Dark Eldar allies?

This is for mono-faction. If you're using more than one faction it's a little different

I like it, it would definitely even the playing field a bit, or it might just give the OP Codexs more stuff to shoot off the table....I am looking at you Scat Bikes

How about just making a 10% point difference per tier and calculating the difference from the best codices in those armies?

Pretty straight forward.

shiwan8 wrote:
How about just making a 10% point difference per tier and calculating the difference from the best codices in those armies?

Pretty straight forward.

That's not a bad idea actually

Percentages would definitely be the way to go. Scales better between 1000 and 2000 points, for example.

And yes, you could easily create a system in which codices get a base bonus based upon their "quality." Everyone can argue for best codex, but for the giggles, best codex +0%.

Bottom of the heap, + 30%. You can then break down the codices however you like between the two. The difference between Teir 1 codices and Teir 2 is pretty significant, but between 2-3 not so much and 3-4 only slightly more. I'd probably rank it as...

Teir 1: 0%
Teir 2: +10%
Teir 3: +15%
Teir 4: +25%

And you could further sub-divide based on available Formations and the like. Space Marines with Free Transports are Teir 1, while those without are Teir 2. Necron Decurion are Teir 1, without Teir 2. Even Eldar that avoid Scatter Bikes, Wraith Knights and Warp Spiders could qualify as Teir 2. Daemons without the Rerolled 2+ Shenanigans are not top teir, from what I've heard. I've never played against them. CAD Tau

The trick would be to assign an appropriate value based on what you're using. You can't just break it down by codex. Because you aren't just looking at CAD's anymore. There's formations that give inappropriate benefits above and beyond a broken codex.

The benefit of that, is that you can show up to a "pickup" game of 1500 points with your 1650 point Teir 2 list. Or a Teir 4 list at 1875 vs that Teir 2 1650.

 greatbigtree wrote:
Percentages would definitely be the way to go. Scales better between 1000 and 2000 points, for example.

And yes, you could easily create a system in which codices get a base bonus based upon their "quality." Everyone can argue for best codex, but for the giggles, best codex +0%.

Bottom of the heap, + 30%. You can then break down the codices however you like between the two. The difference between Teir 1 codices and Teir 2 is pretty significant, but between 2-3 not so much and 3-4 only slightly more. I'd probably rank it as...

Teir 1: 0%
Teir 2: +10%
Teir 3: +15%
Teir 4: +25%

And you could further sub-divide based on available Formations and the like. Space Marines with Free Transports are Teir 1, while those without are Teir 2. Necron Decurion are Teir 1, without Teir 2. Even Eldar that avoid Scatter Bikes, Wraith Knights and Warp Spiders could qualify as Teir 2. Daemons without the Rerolled 2+ Shenanigans are not top teir, from what I've heard. I've never played against them. CAD Tau

The trick would be to assign an appropriate value based on what you're using. You can't just break it down by codex. Because you aren't just looking at CAD's anymore. There's formations that give inappropriate benefits above and beyond a broken codex.

The benefit of that, is that you can show up to a "pickup" game of 1500 points with your 1650 point Teir 2 list. Or a Teir 4 list at 1875 vs that Teir 2 1650.

This, so much this, thank you.

The main problem with tier-based comp is that some codices have one power build that places in GTs while the rest is lackluster. For example, Tyranids are bottom tier...unless you take 5 flying hive tyrants. If I take a space marine CAD I'll do alright, if I build a centurion star I'll do good and with free transports I'll do pretty darn well. GK aren't that great unless you take them as allies for a cent-star. And it's possible to build a really non-competitive daemon list. So while good in theory, those are major issues you'll need to address: are you making comp for a power list or a non-optimized one?

That's what I mentioned about formations and the like. To be blunt, any such division is going to either require tournament sanction... so presumably top-teir that you can build... or will be pickup games in which you and your opponent might have to haggle a bit.

Alternatively, we could simply re-tweak every codex so that their points are correct...

...

...

Or not. We could also make provisions for archetypes, but that gets a little messy. I'm not using a taxi service! I like Blood Angels and I took 2 units of Death Company! I just also have 5 empty drop pods...

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:

So I'm hoping that no one would abuse it but it's no guarantee.

It's extremely abusable. I take minimum CSM CAD which I make my primary detachment in order to qualify for maximum extra points and then I take the rest of my list, including the extra points) from Eldar or Necrons?

The points could be based on the percentage of your list that a given army consumes.

This would be simpler to represent with a tax on good codices and "free trade" on poor. For example, you take your CSM CAD and pay +0% points for it. You take an Eldar Scatterbike + WK CAD and pay +20% for it... or however that works out.

Instead of bonus points for poor armies, you flip the coin and have taxation on "good" armies. Hypothetically, a CSM player shows up to a 1500 point game with 1500 points, an Eldar Player shows up with 1250 x 1.2 = 1500 points. You could more easily make that work, instead of trying to figure out what percentage of your initial force is CSM [500 points means you get 1/3 of 20% of 1500 as a bonus... unwieldy.] vs another army.

That would fix the abuse issues.