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 have been trying for almost 8 months not to crack the formula that FFG uses to calculate point cost for their ships, but what works out for one class ends up failing miserably for another. I have tried double the stats, I have tried double the PS, I have included actions (Side note, anyone else notice that EVERYONE can focus?), but nothing works out well... I am trying to figure this out for two reasons: 1) I am very curious and it bugs me... 2) I would like to eventually develop unique pilots of my own for use in private fun games.

You can't reverse engineer the points cost, because there's an X factor involved on a ship by ship basis.

I believe the story goes that the Academy Pilot should cost 10 points, but was found to be too powerful when fielded 10 to a 100 point list so the cost was adjusted up to prevent this.

Consequently there's 2 points in the cost of the basic TIE just because, which you can't calculate.

Yep, what azrael states. For example, the X Wing (the original mind) is deliberately overcosted because was worried 5 generics would be op facing off against TIEs. You have stuff like the TIE Defender where its white k turn alone was posted as being worth several points because nobody else had one.

I'm fairly certain they asign a random number, playtest, adjust based on results, and then playtest again. It isn't perfect, but formulas based solely off stats will never work because actions help ships differently (for example, boost on a large ship is worth far more than on a small one) and stats don't scale in a consistent manner (for example, 1 attack die isn't worth 1/3 of what a 3 attack die ship is, as the odds are far worse)

There is a squad point formula, and it's this:

‘Squad Points’ = 2 + ‘Pilot Skill’ + (Weapon – 2) x 8 + (Agility – 2) x 8 + (Hull – 3) x 4.25 + Shields x 4.5



It's not perfect because we know that FFG will add points here and there if they think that something is overcosted to keep it from being abused (like the did to prevent five Rookie Pilots or ten Academy Pilots).

It also takes no account of actions, special rules or allowed upgrades. At best, that can only be a starting point for playtesting.

I compiled based off of the current list of available expansions, and it seems that the formula I had works out to be more or less consistently off base by the same amount of points in each ship type. Example: all of the YV-666 are Seven points more expensive than how mine works out.

My formula is a straight addition of Pilot skill + fire power + Agility+ Hull + Shields +1 for an ability + 1 for each action on the action bar + 1 for each of the actions except focus. Works out perfect for every A-Wing except for Tycho, but is spotty at best afer that.

I just ran the Formula that ScootyPuff gave me, and it works out significantly more often.

Any one have any ideas on what the actions should be valued at? I am thinking maybe the actions have some kind of value.

I'm sure they do, but I'd also be surprised if, like Andrew said, it's anything more than a starting point.

Formulas can never take in to account the broader picture of how it actually adds up.

My main focus is to establish how the different pilots are within a single hull type. For example, say I want a new X-Wing pilot. Three questions need to be answered:
-How do I determine what the base value of an X-wing?
-What are basic point costs associated with the Pilot skill granted?
-How many points is the ability worth?

If I can answer those three fundamental questions, I can be satisfied.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
It also takes no account of actions, special rules or allowed upgrades. At best, that can only be a starting point for playtesting.

It also takes no account for maneuver dials, which is arguably the single most important element of any ship in the game.

 Corpsman913 wrote:
I compiled based off of the current list of available expansions, and it seems that the formula I had works out to be more or less consistently off base by the same amount of points in each ship type. Example: all of the YV-666 are Seven points more expensive than how mine works out.

My formula is a straight addition of Pilot skill + fire power + Agility+ Hull + Shields +1 for an ability + 1 for each action on the action bar + 1 for each of the actions except focus. Works out perfect for every A-Wing except for Tycho, but is spotty at best afer that.

I just ran the Formula that ScootyPuff gave me, and it works out significantly more often.

Any one have any ideas on what the actions should be valued at? I am thinking maybe the actions have some kind of value.

Problem with this method is that it doesn't take into account 'synergy' between stats on a ship. No one stat is isolated from the others given that game mechanics are based on the interaction of these stats, right? A good example is Agility, its essentially a multiplier on the ships survivability when you factor in shields and hull. A ship with 1 point of agility and 3 hull/shield is SIGNIFICANTLY less survivable than the same ship with 3 points of agility. This isn't the kind of thing that you can price out using simple addition, if you were truly being scientific about how you were pricing out the ships cost you would probably assign a points cost to each point of shield, as well as a points cost to each point of hull (and the two shouldnt be the same, due to the implied disadvantage of hull points being inferior to shield points due to critical effects), you would then add these two values together, and then multiply it by some numeric multiplier determined based on the probability chance of evading damage (and adjusted for based on range bonus considerations), in turn multiplied by the number of defense dice (keeping in mind that defence dice are independent variables), probably multiplied again by some other numeric multiplier determined from probability to account for the presence of a focus action, and then probably adding some numeric value to it to account for evade action, etc. etc. etc.

And again, you have to somehow factor in a cost for the maneuver dials, right? Also taking into consideration that certain maneuvers on a ship with the boost action or barrel roll action, for example, are much more valuable than that same maneuver on a ship without those actions.

In short, its a lot more complex a formula than you realize, and if there *is* a formula, and you're consistently coming in 7 points over the printed value, then chances are you have a good *basis* for the formula, but you need to find the right multipliers/what needs to be multiplied in order to get the right result.

 Corpsman913 wrote:
My main focus is to establish how the different pilots are within a single hull type. For example, say I want a new X-Wing pilot. Three questions need to be answered:
-How do I determine what the base value of an X-wing?
-What are basic point costs associated with the Pilot skill granted?
-How many points is the ability worth?

If I can answer those three fundamental questions, I can be satisfied.

This is a lot easier. The base value for a ship is given to you, always go with the lowest pilot skill version of that ship available to you. You don't need to know what the stripped down non-PS points related points value of the hull is, because that doesn't exist and is therefore an extraneous and irrelevant piece of information, and all other (PS) variants of that ship will always use that ship as a starting place, as they will always have the same exact rules PLUS some added options.

This is something that I've been working on for a while now and I try to make revisions whenever new ships come out. My intention is basically the same as yours, which is to use some custom ships for play at home (I've not gotten into the tournaments for this game... unlike 40K). Anyways, I started out using the formula listed above and I applied it to every ship without a special ability... then kept making adjustments. Ship point values go up by 1 for every point of PS in almost every case and my numbers have worked out even better when applied to EVERY ship. This isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn close. I average less than 2% off for all ships prior to the Force Awakens (this excludes the Outer Rim Smuggler, which is an extreme outlier in every attempt that I've done). Including the tFA ships, it is around 2.3% (I attribute to minor power creep). My group basically uses this formula and adds +1 for small ships and +2 for large ships. This exceeds the average margin of error and works out just fine for us.

Formula/charts are basically as follows:

2 + Pilot Skill + (Hull - 3) x 2.9 + Shields x 3.6 + Attack (chart) + Defense (chart) + Actions + Upgrades + Maneuverability + Other

Attack Chart:
Att 1 = 0 pts
Att 2 = 0 pts
Att 3 = 6 pts
Att 4 = 10 pts

Defense Chart:
Def 0 = -12 pts (see notes)
Def 1 = -6 pts
Def 2 = 0 pts
Def 3 = 6 pts

Actions:
Barrel Roll = 0.55 pts
Boost = 0.45 pts
Target lock = 1.1 pts
Cloak = 2.1 pts (see notes)
Evade = 0.55 pts
Focus = 0.9 pts (see notes)

Upgrade Bar:
Elite = 0 pts (see notes)
Illicit = 1 pt
Cannon = 0.5 pts
System = 0.35 pts
Missile = 0.2 pts
Bomb and Torpedo = 0 pts
Astromech = 1.25 pts
Crew = 1.25 pts (each)
Turret = 2.25 pts

Maneuverability:
This is the big wild card. I don't know how FFG calculates this, but based on all of my iterations, I think it is pretty darn obvious that it is taken into account in some way. I've tried (in every combination I can think of):
# of maneuvers
total speed
# of greens
# of red
# of K-turns

The best metric that I've been able to come up with is # of Green Maneuvers - # of Red Maneuvers and then the following:
-2 and -3 = -3.5 pts
0, 1, and 2 = 0 pts
3 and higher = 0.5 points

Other:
For large ships, use (Hull - 6) x 2.9 instead of (Hull -3) x 2.9 in the base equation
Primary Turret: + Attack value x 1.3 pts
Aux Firing Arc: + Attack value x 1.0 pts
White K-Turn: + 1 pt (TIE Defender only, so not too many data points)

Notes, observations, and assumptions:
There is only 1 ship with attack 4 (phantom) and only 1 with cloak (also phantom). There is no way to really know the distribution of points, but I work out that Att 4 + cloak = 12.1 points.

Every ship has focus. Based on that, it doesn't really make sense to assign a point value to focus. From the beginning of my formula, there is a "2+", this could just as easily be 2.9. I use focus as an adjustment stat in my iterations and any time it went over 1, I'd just add 1 to the "base" number and drop focus back down to 0.

Elite talents don't seem to have a point value associated, but generally are only added to ships with PS 5 or higher... no real rule here that I can figure out.
I note that the accuracy is slightly different for tFA ships. These are calculated on the assumption that the new dials are the same as or very similar to the current X-wing and TIE ftr dials.

The attack chart seems a bit odd and I feel like it should be -6, 0, 6, 12, but this is where the iterations led. At the same time, there is only 1 ship with Att 1 (HWK) and 1 ship with Att 4 (Phantom), so data points are a bit slim... as new ships come out, I'll have to see. There is no reason that the attack chart couldn't be "12" for Att 4, but that would mean that cloak is worth 0.1 points. I just made a judgment call.

The defense chart would actually work out slightly "better" if it was -13, -6, 0, 6. I stuck with -12 for Def 0 to make a more evenly distributed chart. Once again, there is only one ship currently with Def 0, so it is a harder number to pin down.

I think that there is a fair chance that the action bar points could be on an odd scale. Something like full points for the 1st action and then 50% points for each other action. I've not tried it yet, but this is (and is likely to always be) a work in progress. Within 2% is close enough for our friendly games, at this point I'm more trying to improve accuracy out of curiosity.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
It also takes no account of actions, special rules or allowed upgrades. At best, that can only be a starting point for playtesting.

It also takes no account for maneuver dials, which is arguably the single most important element of any ship in the game.

Dear Deity, Griff... you have really don the homework!

Good point DanielBeaver... I actually hadn't even noticed that. It would appear that if that is the case, maybe I should start with dials?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another end goal would be to eventually add in ships from the EU that aren't currently realeased, like the Ebon Hawke, or Droid Starfighters, or even design some of my own.

If there is a formula, I suspect that it's step 1. step 2 is "playtest." If you want to invent your own ships, that's what you need to do. It doesn't matter if you use some formula to get an initial points cost of if you think "well, this is sort of like an X-Wing, but it's got more options on its dial, and different upgrade options; add a couple of points and go from there". You need to playtest it. repeatedly, and if you're serious, you need to test it until you're sick of the thought of playtesting it again. The thing is, this pretty much guarantees you'll be playing unbalanced games, but then you're not playing these games for fun or to win; you're playing them to fix this ship.

Find the cheesiest, most game-breaking rules lawyer in your group and give it to them to try out (as an aside, that's how Ad Astra Games came up with the canonical ship designs and weapons layouts for their Attack Vector game).

I have just they guy... lol. I appreciate it.