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, this is more to get a wider opinion from others about a conversation a friend and I had and ended up playing out the other night. We theorized that an easy way to "balance" the playing field between some of the codex might be to take a little something from AoS. (now dont hang me before I get this all out! I know AoS is a dirty word to most!)

So we played out a game, where we both agreed to be allowed to take any "upgrades" for free, this included Dedicated transports. (which might have been to much since i quickly found out i didn't have enough land raiders for what i wanted to take! lol) We both agreed that f you wanted to add models to a unit you had to pay the points for them but your upgrades to the unit where at no cost. And surprisingly this wasn't horrible. I actually did better then expected against a Gladius who BASICALLY get that anyway. Now I am aware that with Angles of death, Gladius might not be the new hot list anymore. BUT that being said its still a solid list. i did loose, but my 1 point, and was playing CSM's. (I took this as a moral victory! lol)

I was more looking for the communities thoughts on the idea of this. I actually felt like the game was on a much more even playing field, We are kinda just messing with games to see what can actually bring a little balance to the force if you will, for the next rule set. Our own little wishlisting sort of. We agreed to try out something else next time and do away with Initiative, and just chose which order to do combats, the same way AoS does. We both think is a much more organic CC system. Overall AoS is messed up in several ways but there are some brilliant things that we love and thought would really improve 40K. But I would love thoughts, please beyond"that is stupid" or " Keep AoS out of my 40k!" We have all heard that before, which is fine if you feel that way, but i would rather be able to have a conversation then a troll fest.

I was just thinking that for some armies this is going to be horribly imbalanced, like ones without vehicles to buy. Daemons and Tyranids were first to mind. Then I thought about how many points I spend on upgrading my greater daemons.... probably still not nearly as much as a few free stormwolfs and landraiders would be though.

With a codex like Daemons, it really helps out with the MCs, I could field an Infernal tetrad for 645pt, where it usually costs about 1300pt. Its an amazing formation, but horribly expensive. However outside the HQ slot, daemons don't really have many upgrades. So for daemons, you would just see MC spam. I wonder how that would balance out.

I am sure you can imagine what SW would bring... Oh dear, look at all the special weapon/Storm shield TWC backed up by min troops in flyers and wulfen formations in flyers!
I think its an interesting idea to crank up the insanity of the game in a more "balanced" way across the codex that don't have the formations that the marine armies do. Like you said, SM pretty much get free transports, and SW can get free drop pods, or free upgrades on vehicles through iron wolves.

Renegades and heretics would be hilarious with these rules! As everything in their army is dirty broken cheap because it costs points to make it worthwhile. If all unit upgrades are free, it would make for a very interesting game. Effectively making every single infantry model 3pt. Unending host would be unstoppable!

Why yes, please, I would like to field 2000 points of terminators all with chain fists, and each with a heavy weapon for free.

For 2000 points I would be able to get 50 terminators and 10 land raiders :3

But no I honestly think the idea of free upgrades is a good one. More so for the "common" upgrades like tac squads can take 1 special and 1 heavy for free.

Or with terminators you get 1 free heavy weapon and 1 free chain fist. Anything like relics and banners would cost you.

Depends what you consider an upgrade. I'd at least experiment with free upgrades if you didn't count dedicated transports as upgrades because at the end of the day every Eldar squad getting a free Wave Serpent is insane.

I would say you need to define what would be a free upgrade and what should still be paid for. If all dedicated transports were free then for the Inquisition there's no point in buying the Chimera or Rhino anymore, as a Land Raider Crusader is always better.

I think a good way to make it is that upgrades which is squad-wide would be free (basically every member of the squad can take it without numerical limits), while anything from the armory or only upgrades one model in the squad will still cost points. In the case of CSM and icons, the icons would still be free since it's effectively upgrading the entire squad. Similarly, maybe pay for transports, but get all the upgrades for free. This would mean that armies with a choice of transports won't automatically select the most expensive and powerful one (i.e: the land raider again, but also valkyries and other such shenanigans).

I'm a fan of Age Of Sigmar myself. It's not perfect but it's an improvement over the previous system.

I really like this idea too. I wouldn't have it as a complete free for all but certainly most stuff. To use the IG as an example:

Special and heavy weapons, vox casters, medi packs, standards, sponson upgrades for tanks and maybe dedicated transports could all be free, but upgrade equipment for characters, combat doctrines for vet squads and extra models for units could all have a price.

Now I could actually consider taking an emperors shield infantry platoon formation or even a company! I could take a company of 1 CCS, 3 shield platoons (PCS, 5 infantry squads and 1 scout/armoured sentinel, no dedicated tranports allowed) with all the suitable upgrades for around 1020pts. 200 odd models in a 1500pt game.

EDIT:

One condition I think is necessary...any new, separate unit must be paid for. That includes Dedicated Transports..

Im not a fan of Free Points. This is because, as we all know, not all upgrades are equal. Therefore this is gonna get weird. I mean Ors will now be running around with Big Shootas cuz why not, but what you just did is almost double the number od Boyz they brought because 'eavy Armor is now free. Warbosses just go stupid cheap because they come with nothing, but outside of this, it doesnt really benefit Orks as they dont have a tone of upgrades, unlike other armies.

Its an idea, and if it works for you, great, but as a general rule i dont see this working.

 Grimmor wrote:
Im not a fan of Free Points. This is because, as we all know, not all upgrades are equal. Therefore this is gonna get weird. I mean Ors will now be running around with Big Shootas cuz why not, but what you just did is almost double the number od Boyz they brought because 'eavy Armor is now free. Warbosses just go stupid cheap because they come with nothing, but outside of this, it doesnt really benefit Orks as they dont have a tone of upgrades, unlike other armies.

Its an idea, and if it works for you, great, but as a general rule i dont see this working.

This is why if they did it would be like the things are free that every one takes any way ie space marines tac get their special and heavy weapon for free

The other problem, besides abusing the rule to get tons of points in free stuff, is that it takes away the design space of "less powerful but cheaper" for upgrades. For example, an IG veteran squad might always be taking 3x special weapons, but do you take plasma guns at 45 points total or settle for grenade launchers or flamers at 15 points? If you're willing to add a heavy weapon that will usually be firing at BS 1 because the squad is moving do you take an expensive lascannon or a cheap heavy bolter? Etc. Under your rule there's now only one option: the most powerful one. You might see occasional hesitation over plasma vs. melta, but forget about ever seeing any of the cheaper options on the table.

OK so after playing a couple more games out over the weekend, I have to concede that free dedicated transports got... out of hand.. So we decided to make ourselves pay for them and it seemed a bit more manageable. Feels bad having like 6 land raiders bearing down on you that your opponent didn't have to pay for lol! However upgrading those transports at no cost seemed to still feel fine. (now none of us had any of the crazy stuff really no FW marine flyers or anything)

We also Played out a couple of things that AoS does that we do like, for example, we played with no initiative, and just alternated combats. WOW where powerfists fun to take again! lol We really liked the flow of it, combat seemed to ebb and flow back and forth as we had to make tactical decisions about what was attacking first so we could "save" important units from having to maybe make as many saves VS maybe loosing a unit that is on an objective.

The other problem, besides abusing the rule to get tons of points in free stuff, is that it takes away the design space of "less powerful but cheaper" for upgrades. For example, an IG veteran squad might always be taking 3x special weapons, but do you take plasma guns at 45 points total or settle for grenade launchers or flamers at 15 points? If you're willing to add a heavy weapon that will usually be firing at BS 1 because the squad is moving do you take an expensive lascannon or a cheap heavy bolter? Etc. Under your rule there's now only one option: the most powerful one. You might see occasional hesitation over plasma vs. melta, but forget about ever seeing any of the cheaper options on the table.

Im not sure i agree with this, I mean if you know your fighting a horde army your probably still guna take at least some flamers, it all depends on what your playing against, but it gives you the flexibility to equip your squads exactly how you want without having to points crunch beyond what units your going to take.

Im not a fan of Free Points. This is because, as we all know, not all upgrades are equal. Therefore this is gonna get weird. I mean Ors will now be running around with Big Shootas cuz why not, but what you just did is almost double the number od Boyz they brought because 'eavy Armor is now free. Warbosses just go stupid cheap because they come with nothing, but outside of this, it doesnt really benefit Orks as they dont have a tone of upgrades, unlike other armies.

I conceded the Orc warboss to you that he would be a MONSTER, that would be a amazing model for the points! But the same could be said for Chaos Lords, or Captains/ Chapter Masters. But how much more of a "hero" unit does he feel when he is kitted to the max! Cus i know my Chaos lord felt like a bad ass! and My opponents Chapter Master the same. This we loved actually, and when they finally came together on the table.. we where both like" oh man this is guna be awesome!" and it was! I don't know just a thought, and wanted to bring some positive vibes to some of the hum drum around here! Made for fun games, we will probably do more of these in friendly games. Glad others found this interesting! i would love to here more thoughts, might help our games evolve a bit to find a good balance.

Free special rules are fine. Free upgrades and units aren't.
I mean, looking at the War Conversation and Gladius, the bonuses aren't entirely insane until we get to free transports (well, not Land Raiders, but everything else) or free upgrades on everyone (Skitarii get pretty darn stupid when you're getting that many guns for nothing).

All we need is a different bonus for taking those formations instead. I don't know what I'd choose though.

I don't think free points is any different to getting free extra rules, they are both giving extra benefits that you wouldn't otherwise have.

Eldar with free decked-out Wave Serpents? Space Wolves with free Stormwolf flyers?

I don't see why this is a bad idea at all...

You missed the bit where we established transports wouldn't be included as that's too much.

Why bother with points at all if we're going to give out free stuff everywhere.

Why would anyone take a mortar over a missile launcher? A grenade launcher over a plasma gun? Why wouldn't you stack as many upgrades as possible on any given unit?

It ruins the entire notion of having to decide what to bring in a unit to perform its function. 40k already has a problem in that there's very little real decision making. Most of that decision making happens in the list building phase now, and making all upgrades free simply removes any remaining tough choices you have to make when kitting out a unit.

Better counter proposal: Fix the points costs on overperforming and underperforming wargear options. In addition, remove the ability to get free stuff from all armies.

Looking at the stuff my C:SM BT can take, I son't think this would work. T1 I can have waaaay too much firepower down...

And IG would still be laughably bad.

Eldar with free decked-out Wave Serpents? Space Wolves with free Stormwolf flyers?

I don't see why this is a bad idea at all...

We already noted that free transports where an issue, First game we played it wasn't to much of one cus neither of us brought that many really but it spiralled quickly in the second and third game. We where simply giving it a go to see how it played.

Why bother with points at all if we're going to give out free stuff everywhere.

Why would anyone take a mortar over a missile launcher? A grenade launcher over a plasma gun? Why wouldn't you stack as many upgrades as possible on any given unit?

It ruins the entire notion of having to decide what to bring in a unit to perform its function. 40k already has a problem in that there's very little real decision making. Most of that decision making happens in the list building phase now, and making all upgrades free simply removes any remaining tough choices you have to make when kitting out a unit.

Better counter proposal: Fix the points costs on overperforming and underperforming wargear options. In addition, remove the ability to get free stuff from all armies.

Well the idea being that each model is "worth" a specific amount of points, And from there they can take whatever upgrades are available to them. The idea being that you take SOME of the decision making out of the list building, not all but some. And instead put a focus on the table top again. This all came about because we found that we hated the idea of a unit of models that had older rules for the unit, running into a unit of models that had new rules, that maybe gets better weapons stock, and the upgrades they can take are either free or close to it and they just deal with a different type of target. (I.E. one deals with troops and one with vehicles). The idea behind just taking what upgrades you want is to close the gap a bit between "old" units and "new" units. As to why would you take one upgrade over another, because you are using different weapons against different threats. For example you probably aren't bringing Grav vs orcs or nids or even IG. But you would when fighting other Marines. Now can you choose to just take the same load out to every game? yeah of course, but that is a choice, in reality you could argue that making an upgrade free means you are making MORE choices then before, instead of just not choosing something because you dont want to spend the points on it. As far as "fixing" the points on units out there right now, well they have been "fixing" points for how many years now? And look how balanced it is currently. From what i have seen so far giving armies access to all their weapon options evens that playing field quite a bit. But this is a discussion so thats just my opinion.

 Dyslexican32 wrote:

Well the idea being that each model is "worth" a specific amount of points, And from there they can take whatever upgrades are available to them. The idea being that you take SOME of the decision making out of the list building, not all but some. And instead put a focus on the table top again. This all came about because we found that we hated the idea of a unit of models that had older rules for the unit, running into a unit of models that had new rules, that maybe gets better weapons stock, and the upgrades they can take are either free or close to it and they just deal with a different type of target. (I.E. one deals with troops and one with vehicles). The idea behind just taking what upgrades you want is to close the gap a bit between "old" units and "new" units. As to why would you take one upgrade over another, because you are using different weapons against different threats. For example you probably aren't bringing Grav vs orcs or nids or even IG. But you would when fighting other Marines. Now can you choose to just take the same load out to every game? yeah of course, but that is a choice, in reality you could argue that making an upgrade free means you are making MORE choices then before, instead of just not choosing something because you dont want to spend the points on it. As far as "fixing" the points on units out there right now, well they have been "fixing" points for how many years now? And look how balanced it is currently. From what i have seen so far giving armies access to all their weapon options evens that playing field quite a bit. But this is a discussion so thats just my opinion.

Well if every model is worth a certain number of points, it should follow that every item of wargear is also worth a certain number of points. To that end, not every item of wargear is worth the same, so they have individual costs. Making them free relegates some items to oblivion and elevates others to the stars. If you wanted to have free weapons, each weapon would have to be perfectly equal but also different enough in terms of what it excelled at killing. But we all know that a multilaser and a lascannon are not comparable, nor is a grenade launcher to a plasma gun, or a grav gun to, well, most other guns.

The problem is even worse when you consider all wargear choices. Take IG Vets for example; they have three doctrine options, which when you have to pay for them, most players either don't take them at all, or take one. With your proposal, everyone would take all three because there's no drawback or downside. Same thing with wargear on tanks. Pintle weapons and HK missiles for everyone!

Plus, would this apply to any relics and/or special issue wargear? What about grenades? I think this opens up too many problems than what it fixes. You're trying to fix a symptom instead of addressing the core issue.

The real solution is just to cost everything appropriately.

Crusader Squad w/Sword Bro, Storm Bolter, Melta Bombs, 2x Power Fist, Plasmagun, LRC [with multi-melta, any+all tank upgrades] [70 pts]

vs

IG Veterans w/3x Meltagun, Power Fist, Krak Nades, Meltabomb, Carapace Armour, Chimera [with stuff] [60 pts]

I broke it without even trying...

Well if every model is worth a certain number of points, it should follow that every item of wargear is also worth a certain number of points. To that end, not every item of wargear is worth the same, so they have individual costs. Making them free relegates some items to oblivion and elevates others to the stars. If you wanted to have free weapons, each weapon would have to be perfectly equal but also different enough in terms of what it excelled at killing. But we all know that a multilaser and a lascannon are not comparable, nor is a grenade launcher to a plasma gun, or a grav gun to, well, most other guns.

Well the problem I have with this statement is that of course those weapons don't do the same things, they aren't designed to do the same things. You wouldn't take a Laz cannon to fight a high model count army, it would be pointless, but a weapon that can throw out volume of fire or a template you would. And if you look at fluff, they have time to prep most of their weapons and gear so they would bring weapons that will have an effect not bring pointless weapons. As things currently are people will only bring 1 weapon choice all the time as it is, so they can "streamline" their list. Imagine how much better it would be if you had the flexibility to bring what works and not be shoe horned? Now marines would have to choose, "do i want to bring grav, or plas, or how about melta, or how about heavy bolters or flamers to deal with hordes? instead of basically just grav spamming cus its a utility knife and its easier to just bring grav spam because its easy.

The problem is even worse when you consider all wargear choices. Take IG Vets for example; they have three doctrine options, which when you have to pay for them, most players either don't take them at all, or take one. With your proposal, everyone would take all three because there's no drawback or downside. Same thing with wargear on tanks. Pintle weapons and HK missiles for everyone!

Plus, would this apply to any relics and/or special issue wargear? What about grenades? I think this opens up too many problems than what it fixes. You're trying to fix a symptom instead of addressing the core issue.

Wait, so my elite units would feel elete? and My HQ's would feel like bad asses like they are supposed to be instead of me taking minimum wargear on them incase they die so i don't loose the points... yeah thats feels bad, i don't want my Marque units to feel good, i would MUCH rather them feel bla... Put it this way, your elite's and HQ's are kind of like a main even fighter, and your troops are sort of like an undercard, the undercard is there and if they preform well that's great, but you dont remember the undercard unless they do something amazing! You remember the main events! So why would we NOT want our Marque names feel like they are the stars of the army? They are vets, or Chosen, or Lord or Chapter Masters or whatever! Look maybe im off base here, but i would much rather my "hero" unit actually do something in a game because he was able to kit out rather then get shot off the table my a troops squad because i didn't want to invest the points into him, and know " well if I had given him X piece of gear he would have survived that."

The real solution is just to cost everything appropriately.

Im sorry but the way that this is being done now is totally subjective, there is no true formula that they stick to. We are not going to see this any time soon, and would have to be done with a full re release of EVERY codex in the game. How long will that take? 10 years? there area TON of armies in the game now! not just a few. In a game that is constantly evolving this is an impossible task! im sorry but thats reality. I don't want this to devolve but the logistics of "balancing points" across every codex and supplement in the game is not even feasible to do at one time.

 Dyslexican32 wrote:

Im sorry but the way that this is being done now is totally subjective, there is no true formula that they stick to. We are not going to see this any time soon, and would have to be done with a full re release of EVERY codex in the game. How long will that take? 10 years? there area TON of armies in the game now! not just a few. In a game that is constantly evolving this is an impossible task! im sorry but thats reality. I don't want this to devolve but the logistics of "balancing points" across every codex and supplement in the game is not even feasible to do at one time.

Just because GW's writers are slowed does not mean that a point system cannot work. It works just fine in many other wargames.

The best solution for pointing properly would be either to rebuild the game from the ground up and playtest everything, or to:

> Take a unit, call it a baseline unit to which everything else is balanced
> Do extensive playtesting with all other units
> Do extensive playtesting with those unit against eachother, and in varying combinations
> Edit points values and unit attributes based on playtesting results
> Repeat ad infinitum

You can do this happily by using feedback from dakkanauts.

I mean if the opinion is only HQ's get free upgrades, i could understand that, It would still free up TONS of points for someone to upgrade their other units. But ill be honest, playing this out against a few armies now, Taking wargear to deal with the threat i will be facing feels alot better then running into something and going," well i actually have no way to hurt this cus i HAD to MSU spam to have any chance and took zero wargear. Guess this Gargantuan will just stomp me to death now! When i could have had a powerfist in the unit, but didn't because i didn't want to spend the points. When My opponent could have looked across the table and made the choice to not charge this unit, and instead charge the one that maybe has a lightning claw, and force them to make choices on the TABLE as opposed to games being won or lost at the list building level. i mean will you sometimes run into games where you build in a bad match up? sure! it will happen! But my guess is ALOT less often you will loose at the list level as opposed to the game level.

You can have the best of both worlds with appropriately coated wargear and units.

It's really that simple. Free stuff only creates a further gap between the have stuff and the have not stuff.

Frankly, two editions ago, the notion of free stuff, let alone army wide, would have been laughed out of existence.

Just because GW's writers are slowed does not mean that a point system cannot work. It works just fine in many other wargames.

The best solution for pointing properly would be either to rebuild the game from the ground up and playtest everything, or to:

> Take a unit, call it a baseline unit to which everything else is balanced
> Do extensive playtesting with all other units
> Do extensive playtesting with those unit against eachother, and in varying combinations
> Edit points values and unit attributes based on playtesting results
> Repeat ad infinitum

You can do this happily by using feedback from dakkanoughts.

Oh i understand HOW to doit, im talking about the logistics, not just from the actual work involved but on a financial scale. Its astronomical! You not only have to pay people to rewrite the rules from the ground up! BUT you also have to print and distribute EVERY BOOK IN THE GAME! and expect people to just fork out money for them? that isn't cheep! on either end! ours or theirs! I work in the book industry! Production on books is expensive! And how many armies do some people you know have? 2-3? some more? Ok so lts say the average player has 2 armies for the sake of argument. K? k. Now lets say a codex is $58 buck s each, that's before tax. That's $116 for two army books. And most armies have at LEASt one supplement book. so lets say one each army again for the sake of argument. $33 each, the two armies are another $66. That is $182 if you want to even play your army at relaunch. Now you tell me this community who LOVES to bitch about EVERYTHING! will handle that well? Look do i think its out of balance and needs some work? yes! but This thread isn't about another pointless argument about balance and how we need to tear the system down! We are talking about, or trying to talk about leveling the playing field a bit in friendly games and what peoples opinion on something that newer armies can basically do as it is. I want to keep this Thread positive, and open for discussion and exchange of ideas not negativity.

Instead of paying the writers to make new rule books for a year or two, they could have those guys take feedback and notes. Call it an investment in the game's longevity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or do what NetEA did, and just do community rules.

If GW abandoned the rules creation process, and just admitted they can't do it, it's likely someone will pick up the slack. I'd certainly be happy to help on such a project, if it is likely to succeed in creating an accepted ruleset.

So just spit billings, what if they outsourced the rule creation to someone like wizard of the coast?

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So just spit billings, what if they outsourced the rule creation to someone like wizard of the coast?

I can't imagine anyone bungling up the rules any more than GW has, so nowhere but up if someone takes it over. Someone like WotC has a solid track record. FFG could do it too. Hell, just about any miniatures company still in business would likely do a better job.

The fact that I've seen a few excellent fan dexes made by random people that surpassed the quality (in rules) of GW's official stuff doesn't speak highly of GW's game writing ability. Which is odd, seeing as they have the most amount of experience to draw on, and the largest resource pool to have the most and best talent in the industry.

Im not against outsourcing rules, but that will make the game VERY different then what we have, possibly even change core mechanics. Would the community be able to handle that? I mean we have a habit of hating EVERYTHING.

Well I don't think they need to change the core rules, but they need to balance all the special rules and such and realizes what works and what does not.

I think a step in the right direction is actually a step back and bring back the force org chart, make specific HQ make units troops again.

Core rules could definitely use help.

If a game is a house, the core rules are the foundation. In order to build the rooms (faction books), you have to have a solid base to build on.