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.

Wounds appears to be the only constant across the board. So I suggest going forward games set by amount of wounds per side as the go to for determining a game points limit.

Example: Brian and Timmy want to play a game. They both agree on a 100 wound per side game. Timmy plays chaos, so brings a bloodthirster worth 14 wounds, a sorceror worth say 6 wounds, ten chaos knights with say 3 wounds each, 30 marauders worth one each, and ten warriors on foot worth two wounds each. Brian is playing orcs. He has a warboss on a boar for 6 wounds, two goblin wizards worth 3 each. Three trolls with 4 wounds each. A chariot worth 6 wounds, ten black orcs worth 2 wounds each, twenty orcs with sword and board at on each, and thirty goblins with bows at one each. Both are equivalent in wounds.

Now this system isn't perfect. And obviously there will be under and overcosted units. Belakor strikes me as undercoated at 8 wounds. And all the examples I made up top were conjecture at cost since I haven't seen them yet. But this at least makes sense to me. What do you think?

It's certainly a better estimation of value than model count itself. The rules are so beer n' pretzel crazy that trying to go for any sense of actual balance is a fools erand, but I can totally see friendly pickup games based on Wound count working pretty well. It can still be cheesed, but after reading the rules and warscrolls, AoS is very much not a competitive wargame. It just... isnt. Play with friends, play with alcohol, and don't care about who wins.

I think going off wounds as the vase can at least be a good starting point for trying to balance it somewhat. Even if this is GW's finger to the competitive community, ehim they seem to blame for their slowing sales from bad word of mouth comparing them to " inferior" games like malifeau infinity and x wing. Every time the community gets together to balance 40 k for tournaments they do things like put out a new knight book, or the retardedly powerful skyhammer formation.

Or, just come to a reasonable model count agreement w/ your opponent and follow the Sudden Death rules if necessary?

Nope. Still doesn't work.

Nagash has 16 wounds and the ability to ignore wounds or get them back, along with a page of special rules that basically say "I'm gonna cast whatever spells I want, and if you get near me, you die."

Zombies have one wound each, and on some good rolls, 1 can come back to life.

Skeletons have one wound each, and can be summoned.

Empire State Troops have 1 wound each, and no other really special rules.

The Empire Steam Tank has 12 wounds and can "fix" it's wounds along with rerolls.

I do not believe that 16 zombies, skeletons, or Empire State Troops are equal to Nagash. Nor do I think Nagash could take on a Steamtank (Steamtank has too many attacks).

And don't even look at Trolls or the Hell Pit Abomination if you are considering wounds as a "balancing point". Or for that matter, Vampires who can basically say "Ya know what, I think I'll get some wounds back this round". Bwing! d3 wounds restored...

Wounds+abilities?
So that would bring nagash up to something like 20 "points" if you total his abilities

Thoughts?

Thanks
austin

The more factors you add the more people disagree. What you price at twenty someone else will argue for 18. Simpler is probably better in this case, even if it scews in favor some underpriced units.

At this stage, the easiest way I can see to balance the game is by using the formations at the bottom of each compendium as, to me, each formation seems roughly the same power level as every other. If you and your opponent both use the same number of formations and that each unit in the formation only has the minimum about of models it's allowed and that you don't upgrade your leader to have a mount (i.e. Dreadlord on Black Dragon) then the game should be more or less equal. And then, of course, you can agree with your opponent that you'll take one unit of 20 models each, or that you'll both take a leader with a dragon. It's restrictive, but the best way I can see for people to get an even game going.

But... Wizards can summon more.... Whats to stop me in a 100 wound game to take all them and Summon 500 more wounds?

Then you have special rules on some units that make them better. Some units are completely equal in attack and to wound/to hit but one has rend where the other doesnt.

 The Shadow wrote:
At this stage, the easiest way I can see to balance the game is by using the formations at the bottom of each compendium as, to me, each formation seems roughly the same power level as every other. If you and your opponent both use the same number of formations and that each unit in the formation only has the minimum about of models it's allowed and that you don't upgrade your leader to have a mount (i.e. Dreadlord on Black Dragon) then the game should be more or less equal. And then, of course, you can agree with your opponent that you'll take one unit of 20 models each, or that you'll both take a leader with a dragon. It's restrictive, but the best way I can see for people to get an even game going.

I was looking at this too, but are all the formations Actually close to balance to each other. if this is the case I would do this.

 The Shadow wrote:
At this stage, the easiest way I can see to balance the game is by using the formations at the bottom of each compendium as, to me, each formation seems roughly the same power level as every other. If you and your opponent both use the same number of formations and that each unit in the formation only has the minimum about of models it's allowed and that you don't upgrade your leader to have a mount (i.e. Dreadlord on Black Dragon) then the game should be more or less equal. And then, of course, you can agree with your opponent that you'll take one unit of 20 models each, or that you'll both take a leader with a dragon. It's restrictive, but the best way I can see for people to get an even game going.

You cant take a game, with thousands of useable models, and boil it down to a few cookie cutter formations with no variations to seek balance. It would get extremely old extremely fast. Balance has to come to the whole game or none of it. Wounds as points cost for your army is the closest thing we have.

Why are people acting like summoning more models into the game is a new mechanic GW is using? 40k Demon factory lists start the game at 1500 points and by the end have 2k+ points on the table. I'm just saying its part of the games GW puts out.

Summon abilities could be nerves to say d6 +2. As for some units being better coated than others, how is that a remotely new thing for GW?

1 Saurus Warrior isn't worth 1 Temple Guard.

1 Skavenslave isn't worth 1 Stormvermin.

It's actually the case that 1 Temple Guard/Stormvermin is worth 2 Saurus Warriors/Skavenslave.

Wounds don't work for balancing.

Summoning looks like a double edged sword tho. They don't count for army size but do count for casualties. So if you aren't careful you could end up taking 200% casualties and losing by a mile (if you don't table your opponent within the time of the game)

Captyn_Bob wrote:
Summoning looks like a double edged sword tho. They don't count for army size but do count for casualties. So if you aren't careful you could end up taking 200% casualties and losing by a mile (if you don't table your opponent within the time of the game)

Summoning in a match where wounds determines your points cost should have a high drawback, since if you are playing 100 wounds, and you summon 20 extra skeletons, thats a pretty huge bonus. I would like to see it toned down to d6+2 or so for the purposes of being balanced in a game where wounds count is your points value for sides.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Colehkxix wrote:
1 Saurus Warrior isn't worth 1 Temple Guard.

1 Skavenslave isn't worth 1 Stormvermin.

It's actually the case that 1 Temple Guard/Stormvermin is worth 2 Saurus Warriors/Skavenslave.

Wounds don't work for balancing.

GW has always had strictly better options in the game. If this was adapted for tournaments, something as simple as making the temple guard and stormvermin 2 wounds each with no other changes could fix this. Either way, its still better by miles than what we have now, which is the laughable idea of agreeing with random pickup games what constitutes fair for both sides.

Just use 8th and End Times points

 thejughead wrote:
Just use 8th and End Times points

8th ed points cost dont take into account wargear upgrades, or the monstrous creatures being less effective at lower wounds.

Because using wounds or any other fudge method is any better?

 thejughead wrote:
Because using wounds or any other fudge method is any better?

well at least they were made for this edition. 8th edition stats and points values all take things into account like drastically reduced armor saves from multiple different ways, not just rending, but high strength as well. Or the fact that wizards were far more powerful. It is just too far removed to be viable anymore.

Wounds are also too far removed to be viable. As somebody else posted, 1 skink =/= 1 temple guard.

GW does not care about balance they just want to sell more models so they've made a "game" free of pesky limitations so he who spends the most wins.

 Orock wrote:

 The Shadow wrote:
At this stage, the easiest way I can see to balance the game is by using the formations at the bottom of each compendium as, to me, each formation seems roughly the same power level as every other. If you and your opponent both use the same number of formations and that each unit in the formation only has the minimum about of models it's allowed and that you don't upgrade your leader to have a mount (i.e. Dreadlord on Black Dragon) then the game should be more or less equal. And then, of course, you can agree with your opponent that you'll take one unit of 20 models each, or that you'll both take a leader with a dragon. It's restrictive, but the best way I can see for people to get an even game going.

You cant take a game, with thousands of useable models, and boil it down to a few cookie cutter formations with no variations to seek balance. It would get extremely old extremely fast. Balance has to come to the whole game or none of it. Wounds as points cost for your army is the closest thing we have.

This is all to true, and I completely agree. However, I want to give AoS a shot, with my opponent and I on a level playing field and these formations are how I'm going to be doing it. I, and my group, own enough armies to get several games in using the formations without repeats of matchups and these games may give us further insight into how to balance the game.

As requested here is my idea
Players agree on a wounds limit with the following modifiers. One hero and one monster or war machine for every 40 wounds. Heroes with 10 or more wounds count as two choices. Models with a 6+ save or worse and a minimum unit size of 10 or more (thanks Gaddy) half their wounds total. ( 50 clan rats counts as 25 wounds.) Models with the deamon keyword or the deathwizard ability double their wound total.
Also a couple of house rules. You can't summon models you don't have with you, so if you bring 5 locs you can attempt to summon them.
Summoned models may take no action except for fighting in combat until the following turn.
command abilities are once per game.
sudden death applies to wounds not models. It is must be agreed by both players before being applied.
measuring is base to base.
models in combat may not use ranged weapons.
thoughts?
P.s. i know some people think doing this is like polishing a **** but it is a fun thought experiment for me.
P.p.s
This is designed to make the old core choices a bit more viable. Since heroes are limited their power is only compared to one another and not other kinds of units. Summoning armies become an interesting challenge instead of massively over powered as they will start the game super small. The are still problems of course. A Saurus warrior counts the same as a temple guard using this method. Factoring saves or using the old core, special, rare balance would add another layer of granularity, but this is starting to get away from the simplicity that is the most obvious appeal of the the new system.

I actually devised a lot more rules to make the game relatively competitive. Haven't tested them, but they seem solid.

How does one balance 1wound models vs each other. A chaos knight and a dwarf warrior are both 1 wound models. But one is faster, more armored and more killy.

Would be keen to see any and all hard and fast "balance" mechanics people have for this thing.

Wounds seems to... well, not exactly work, but its certainly better than nothing.

Add in something to make trashy horde models like goblins cheaper and you've got something approaching a legit beer and pretzels game.

models in combat may not use ranged weapons.

For fethin' serious is this actually not a thing in the core rules?

What I'm thinking at the moment is some sort of wounds plus modifiers process.

Essentially, anything with the Hero, Wizard, Priest, Totem, War Machine or Monster keywords cost 50% more, rounded down. This stacks additively, so an 8-wound Monster Hero Wizard would cost +150% or 20 points.

In addition, some units are given the Horde or Elite keyword. Hordes cost 2/3rds the number of Wounds, rounded up. Elite units cost an additional 50%, rounded down. Which units get given these is up for debate, but I would suggest Goblins, Gnoblars, Skavenslaves and Clanrats would all be Hordes, and Chosen, Temple Guard, and Grail Knights would be Elite.

Also, Kroak is considered to have 10 wounds for these purposes.

I am doing something like this. I first try to base the armies around wounds and from there I balance the scale to take into account other factors. Like a dwarf quareller and a skavenslave shouldn't cost the same. So after both sides have their wounds I might add some skavenslaves. And I am doing this only using intuition. And it will probably get better the more games I play.

Makumba wrote:
How does one balance 1wound models vs each other. A chaos knight and a dwarf warrior are both 1 wound models. But one is faster, more armored and more killy.

This proves that people haven't looked at the scrolls: Chaos Knights are not single wound models anymore. Heck, Chaos Warriors have 2 wounds each. I believe Knights have 3. I'll confess, I haven't read dwarves yet. But if a dwarf is 1 wound, and a knight is 3 wounds, that means your 15 dwarf warriors are on equal footing with my 5 Knights. Sounds about right.

 McGibs wrote:
It's certainly a better estimation of value than model count itself. The rules are so beer n' pretzel crazy that trying to go for any sense of actual balance is a fools erand, but I can totally see friendly pickup games based on Wound count working pretty well. It can still be cheesed, but after reading the rules and warscrolls, AoS is very much not a competitive wargame. It just... isnt. Play with friends, play with alcohol, and don't care about who wins.

I play backgammon the same way, with beer, dried fish and friends... I still play to win and have fun doing it.. .I guess you have been playing wrong.