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.

I'm thinking about getting out from under my gaming rock and heading to the primary tournament in the state. Come to find out though, they're running "Power Level 80, no unit greater than 30". That seems a bit goofy for competitive play, but my experience with 8th amounts to a couple of learning games (using points), so I really don't know. Free upgrades seem pretty broken, and I'm not willing to rip my figures apart to refit them with the most powerful weapon options. I suspect I might be so far outclassed I shouldn't bother - I'll be running something from the Index too, rather than a codex. Any recommendations?

If the primary tournament in your state is running PL, it's time to move.

You don't because power level is incredibly random and unbalanced.

That was kind of my impression. Odd that they've gone that way, because it used to be a solidly competitive scene back in the day.

 Kirasu wrote:
You don't because power level is incredibly random and unbalanced.

The funny thing is there are a lot of people on this forum saying the same thing about the points.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
You don't because power level is incredibly random and unbalanced.

The funny thing is there are a lot of people on this forum saying the same thing about the points.

GW adjusts points based on concerns yet they haven't done anything with out of wack power levels. That alone is enough reason not to consider power levels as anything but a casual tool, which is fine but has no place in competitive events.

 kestral wrote:
I'm thinking about getting out from under my gaming rock and heading to the primary tournament in the state. Come to find out though, they're running "Power Level 80, no unit greater than 30". That seems a bit goofy for competitive play, but my experience with 8th amounts to a couple of learning games (using points), so I really don't know. Free upgrades seem pretty broken, and I'm not willing to rip my figures apart to refit them with the most powerful weapon options. I suspect I might be so far outclassed I shouldn't bother - I'll be running something from the Index too, rather than a codex. Any recommendations?

The GW Store here ran a few PL tournaments last summer. They went OK mostly. There's still broken units, but it's a different selection of them. It certainly does reward some armies like Blood Angels and Chaos that can load up on upgrades while Primaris Marines, Necrons and similar armies start with a disadvantage.

It also makes things very bland when every Leman Russ has full sponsons and a hull Lascannon and every Knight has a Stormspear Pod, etc.

However, there's probably a decent number of other players were aren't willing to rip apart models or buy new ones just for PL play so depending how many turn up, the field might not be that unbalanced.

Pretty much every PL game I"ve played has had similar results to points games in the end.

If you're playing true WYSIWYG and not letting people just phantom on ghost turrets and ghost upgrades that don't exist on the models, doubly so.

Honestly, in a tournament setting there will be almost no difference. The only difference is that a handful of different units will be stronger than if you played points.

If anything, a tournament actually makes power level more useful than casual gaming. Power Level is calculated roughly around 20 points per power and it assumes two things:

A) You take units in blocks of infantry instead of purchasing single models.

B) You are taking "most" if not all of your upgrades.

If you understand these two things, there is almost zero difference. Assume everyone will be taking all of the upgrades available, and buy your infantry in the blocks indicated in the list. You'll be taking fewer models because the assumption of upgrades means that power level is often more expensive than points if you prefer to take less wargear in a normal game.

Example: Dire Avenger Squad for the Eldar. It's 3PL and assumes you have five models, one of which is an exarch...and you're equipping that Exarch with some wargear. Another 3PL gets you "up to" five more models. So you take five. If you take one additional Dire Avenger, it still costs 3PL. This is where people mis-understand how PL works and get angry that a 6 man squad costs the same as a 10 man squad. It does...you just...don't take a six man squad.

Same thing goes for stuff like the LeMan Russ. A basic LeMan Russ w/ no sponsons, and a heavy bolter in the chassis costs the same as a LeMan Russ with a lascannon in the chassis, two sponsons with weapons, a heavy stubber and hunter killer missile etc. Players who like to run stripped down units to get more models on the board will suffer in Power Level. It's not bad, you just have to build an army in a different way than using points. You have to "play" the Power Level game and acknowledge it's not the points system. It's also why you can't do stupid stuff like convert your points-costed army over to Power Level and just run it like that. It's a different army construction method.

I prefer points myself, but power level works just fine if you understand how to build a power level list. It's a different method and has different rules. If you're going to play in a tournament, expect every single model you see to have all the wargear it can carry --- and you should probably do the same.

 Kirasu wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
You don't because power level is incredibly random and unbalanced.

The funny thing is there are a lot of people on this forum saying the same thing about the points.

GW adjusts points based on concerns yet they haven't done anything with out of wack power levels. That alone is enough reason not to consider power levels as anything but a casual tool, which is fine but has no place in competitive events.

You must have missed the raging in the Chapter Approved threads.

Taking models in certain size groups is fine - the problem is the weapon choices. For example termigaunts look like they can get devourers essentially for free - assault 3, 18", vs an assault 1, 12" for the fleshborerer. I have 10 with devourers, 60 with fleshborers. No matter what size I buy them, they are going to be much worse than those with the "free" upgrade. I might be able to put together an army with all maxed out models, but it would be a stretch.

I do like the idea of somewhat fewer figures - should make it faster to play, right?

Luciferian wrote:If the primary tournament in your state is running PL, it's time to move.

Kirasu wrote:You don't because power level is incredibly random and unbalanced.

Have you actually tried it? It's fantastic.

As a tourney organizer, everything is WYSIWYG and lists are a breeze to check.
As a player, you can bring all your fun stuff and not worry about that ONE plasma pistol putting you over in points.
As a game, everyone is on a level playing field because everyone can bring it all per unit.

This nonsense that points are somehow "better" needs to go away, it's a different play style and it's boring imo.

Our FLGS has gone pretty much 100% into Power Level, it's just more fun and just as competitive.

More points does not equal winning when you play power level in our experience, we have even been tracking the statistics from event to event to check that assumption lol. The players that win more are often: A. More familiar with their armies. B. Using an updated codex. C. Have list synergies not just random units.

It has nothing to do with points.

I've had zero problem with power level. In fact power level games usually operate with the same result as point level games.

Point level games offer a safety blanket soothing pretense of "balance" that is a false illusion.

They are both flawed in terms of balance. They both give you the same type of game.

The major difference is one (points) lets you tweak and min max at a granular level while the other removes tweaking at a granular lvel and you simply min/max at a general level.

If you like granular powergaming and granular WAAC style games and love deckbuilding games, you'll want points more. But the current points are not balanced one iota, so balance as an argument for using points is extremely flawed IMO.

Power level and tournament in the same sentence? Eeew! Wash out your mouth with soap!

It's the exact same game with different units being auto include.

People always claim all maxed out upgrades etc...But has that actually ever really HAPPENED? Clearly there are tournaments with PL(or this thread wouldn't exists!). How many of those has seen units with maxed out upgrades?

Having seen PL used in action here nope. Not seeing it. Yeh there's some expensive upgrades you wouldn't neccessarily see in point games because they suck for the price but that's just positive that it's not same point min-maxed stuff but has interesting options when you aren't automatically shooting your shoot with taking it.

This topic shows the problem at the core : it's mainly a question of bias.

Tournaments in PL are perfectly fine and I agree with the others on that point (haha). The results are indeed the same, it's just how you build your list that changes. It's actually a good way to change your meta by using one or the other method.

I know some people who deliberately tried to make horrible lists with PL at such tournaments just to prove that point based games were better. Those are particular cases.

Players who comes from AoS tournament scenes (yes, it exists) and play both games are already used to that, since AoS works pretty much like PL system in 40k.

Just try it with an open mind. You'll be surprised by the results. Like everything new, you may need some time to adapt, but in the end, the results are really the same. And it's really a blessing for tournament organizers (it's much simpler to check the lists in PL, doing it with points is really a chore in comparison).

Main reason tournaments use one or the other method is, IMHO, the acceptance in their community for the said method. Some places in my country are so strongly against PL that the players boycott litterally all attempts to bring it on local levels. Others are more open. It's not a question of one being superior to the other, from my point of view, but rather players' habits.

"Hey, man- you wanna just play by power level?" - Guy who wants to put 2000 points up against your 1500 points

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
"Hey, man- you wanna just play by power level?" - Guy who wants to put 2000 points up against your 1500 points

Typical "argument" of point based games fan.

Here, in reality, the answer will be "sure, let me make my list with PL - how about we play at 70 instead of 80 ? I don't have enough for 80"

And it won't be 2000 vs 1500 anymore.

 Sarouan wrote:
Typical "argument" of point based games fan.

Here, in reality, the answer will be "sure, let me make my list with PL - how about we play at 70 instead of 80 ? I don't have enough for 80"

And it won't be 2000 vs 1500 anymore.

Here in actual reality it's more like, "No, I'd rather make sure it's more balanced. Let's just do points instead."

If someone wants to play PL games, it's usually the newbies with the boxed set games.

 Kirasu wrote:
You don't because power level is incredibly random and unbalanced.

You can put together a 2500 point 100 Power Level Army or a 1600 point 100 Power Level Army its pretty imbalanced

Sure you can...because Points don't translate into Power...hence the people who seem to not understand this complaining about it.

Power Level is perfectly fine, but you have to play Power Level, and build Power Level...it's not translatable. People who are too lazy to understand that aren't going to have useful armies.

Elbows has the jist of it. You have to build your army differently, but its not much difference balance level.

Yes units that don't have upgrades loose some value in PL verses units with a lot of upgrades, but i'll give you an example of how that's not as much an issue as people make it.


Necron warriors vs Termagaunts is a good example.

10 warriors is the base unit size at 6pl, and 1-10 more warriors adds 6 more PL. The unit doesn't have any purchasable upgrades but is definitely stronger than a base unit of gaunts. Full squad of warriors is Double the strength for double the Power level. Makes sense.

10 termagaunts is 3 PL, +3 PL for every 10 more you add. You can more than double the cost of termagaunts with upgrades, which is one of the biggest upgrades to a unit in the game. Unit goes from 40 points to 300 fully upgraded. It however only triples in PL.

Doesn't seem fair at first, but if you put 20 warriors on the table vs 30 fully upgraded gaunts the warriors would actually probably win the fight. 5" greater range on their guns (considering the adrenaline glands) and no save for the gaunts from their shooting + WBB rolls gives them a huge advantage, which is fine since they have a higher PL.

I'd say they are decently balanced againgst each other unit to unit.

Power Level heavily rewards certain armies over others, as has been mentioned several times. My community gave Power Level an earnest try, but with Necrons and other armies with few upgrades, it just seemed unfair.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Sarouan wrote:
Typical "argument" of point based games fan.

Here, in reality, the answer will be "sure, let me make my list with PL - how about we play at 70 instead of 80 ? I don't have enough for 80"

And it won't be 2000 vs 1500 anymore.

Here in actual reality it's more like, "No, I'd rather make sure it's more balanced. Let's just do points instead."

If someone wants to play PL games, it's usually the newbies with the boxed set games.

And here's typical point system fan fallacy in action believing points are somehow balanced when they aren't. And making hyperbole like 2000 vs 1500 when in practice 100 PL won't be as big difference in practice and impact on game is actually even less...

People keep spreading myth about maxed out upgrades etc BUT HOW MUCH THAT HAPPENS IN REALITY?

I have yet to see any actual hard evidence of tournament that has those maxed out upgrades when used in PL. So the idea that people will max out is actually just flat out lie so all these 2000 vs your 1500 are flat out incorrect deliberate lies.

If your that worried about max upgrades just make a rule stating the upgrades a unit purchases are limited in some way.

Something like:

Unit-wide upgrades are limited to one per unit (i.e. gaunts can take either adrenal glands or toxin sacs but not both).Weapon upgrades are limited to 50 points per 4 PL.

tneva82 wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Sarouan wrote:
Typical "argument" of point based games fan.

Here, in reality, the answer will be "sure, let me make my list with PL - how about we play at 70 instead of 80 ? I don't have enough for 80"

And it won't be 2000 vs 1500 anymore.

Here in actual reality it's more like, "No, I'd rather make sure it's more balanced. Let's just do points instead."

If someone wants to play PL games, it's usually the newbies with the boxed set games.

And here's typical point system fan fallacy in action believing points are somehow balanced when they aren't. And making hyperbole like 2000 vs 1500 when in practice 100 PL won't be as big difference in practice and impact on game is actually even less...

People keep spreading myth about maxed out upgrades etc BUT HOW MUCH THAT HAPPENS IN REALITY?

I have yet to see any actual hard evidence of tournament that has those maxed out upgrades when used in PL. So the idea that people will max out is actually just flat out lie so all these 2000 vs your 1500 are flat out incorrect deliberate lies.

The Tau are a pretty good example of how the power system can be broken in half. Especially since most of us have our suits magnetized so its not that hard to swap in and out. We can easily hit 2300+ at 100 PL and that's with 2 battalions and a supreme command detachment which is a pretty straight forward basic list. Each Commander with 4 Fusion Blasters/Missile Pods and 2 shield drones is a whopping 7 power, 6 if you don't take the drones. Its also not that difficult to purchase since you can run xv8s as Commanders since that is what the old model used to be before they released the enforcer suit. It gets more ridiculous when people own expensive upgrades like pathfinder rail rifles or multiple DS8 Support Turrets.

tneva82 wrote:
I have yet to see any actual hard evidence of tournament that has those maxed out upgrades when used in PL. So the idea that people will max out is actually just flat out lie so all these 2000 vs your 1500 are flat out incorrect deliberate lies.

Lies because you and your circle of pals haven't seen it, right?

In my area I've seen it, so it makes you a liar.

I guess anecdotal evidence isn't indicative of all reality, now is it?

Watch who you call a liar, you're wearing egg on your face now.

Keep this polite, people.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
If your that worried about max upgrades just make a rule stating the upgrades a unit purchases are limited in some way.

Something like:

Unit-wide upgrades are limited to one per unit (i.e. gaunts can take either adrenal glands or toxin sacs but not both).Weapon upgrades are limited to 50 points per 4 PL.

If you're going to start introducing stuff like this, why not just play points? I get that PL has an advantage over points because it's easier and quicker to use but if you're going to start complicating things, why bother?