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.
2017/06/08 10:36:09
Subject: Re:40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Just at work and it's slow so I jotted up a 2k list
1996 Points - 104 Power rating.
A Song of Ice and Fire - House Greyjoy.
AoS - Maggotkin of Nurgle, Ossiarch Bonereapers & Seraphon.
Bloodbowl - Lizardmen.
Horus Heresy - World Eaters.
Marvel Crisis Protocol - Avengers, Brotherhood of Mutants & Cabal.
Middle Earth Strategy Battle game - Rivendell & The Easterlings.
The Ninth Age - Beast Herds & Highborn Elves.
Warhammer 40k - Tyranids.
2017/06/08 11:04:01
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
There is a VAST meaningfull difference, but for some reason it keeps being totally ignored by point advocates (and if you read everything I wrote in this thread you should be aware, that what you cited was an additional argument, not a basis for defending Power Levels) - by design Power Level and Points ARE NOT designed for the same purpose. They CAN be used for the same purpose to some degree, but they have two different uses with two different sets of missions to use in. And for Narrative section using points doesn't make much sense, because missions themselves accomodate power level discrepancies (al of them work better that way, and some of them work ONLY when power levels are different enough), so the very process of "adding up the points" is very different, because you don't have to fit as closely as possisble within an arbitrary margin, which is a clue with competetive (ballanced) point list building. Of course, you can use points for this, but even if they were on the same page such process is simply unnecessary longer (not more complex, just longer by the unnecessary multiplications and addictions you have to make for wargear and single model cost) and has unnecessary granularity.
When reaching for new audience GW assumes (correctly), that not everyone will end up using points - you missed the part "then you may move to points if you want better granularity" - not everyone want's that and you have proof for this in this very thread. And you also missed the point of "making an informed decission" - points for wargear aren't just math behind points to add up, they are meaningfull in game decissions to be made and you simply have to know how the game plays before you understand that, there is no "theoretical workaround" for experience, mathhammer in the void is pretty much useless.
And realy, what there is to not understand after reading Narrative section and looking at this discussion? Some people want to use Power Levels and WILL use Power Levels because for them THERE IS meaningfull difference. This is not a subject of "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude and lawyering. Are there any people here that advocate dropping points altogether? Then why there are people who want to advocate, that Power Levels should not be used by anyone/are dumb/are unnecessary or try to argue with any personal or rulebook reasons behind using Power Levels presented to them? This thread can only give answers to people who wonder why other people chose Power Levels, not to people who think that there is a necessary choice between points and Power Levels to be made, because there simply is none.
Yes. This.
There are a lot of wargamers familiar with other systems where points seem tedious. GW is opening the door to them with power levels.
What most points advocates fail to admit is points are not really a good approximation of balance. In some ways, they create overpowered factions and make some armies unplayable. GW has written the rules for quite some time where points favor new models they are trying to sell, or to create interest in overlooked factions. The cost of a Scatterbike units is clearly not on the same scale as a unit of Berzerkers, when you compare shot output, movement and special rules. Yet there's nothing in a CSM list to compensate for the difference, you just get blown away.
Given this, it doesn't feel like it's worth it to sweat over every weapons upgrade. Points doesn't mean I am building a balanced force, it means I am doing a lot of math to put some arbitrary restrictions in place. Playing CSM, if I want to win, I have to have many lists designed to exploit weaknesses against different armies, and even different players. It means I never have a single, coherent army I can bring to any match up.
I will be playing power levels in 8th edition. Going to break out the Noise Marines with their sonic blasters and see how massed havocs fare. From what I can tell, I would be able to fit more of them into a power level 100 army than I could into a 2000 point army. And that's alright, because my opponent is going to be doing the same.
This might not clean up the imbalances that are going to exist, but it will take a lot less time to sort out the differences.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 11:04:20
hobojebus wrote: Except even people who play aos will openly say ghb is not balanced.
Well no suprise. Points cannot be balanced. All they are designed for is quick setting of game between 2 unknowns. Balance isn\t goal. Just quick setting up of game.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/06/08 11:45:13
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Pedroig wrote: Just another moderate post on this life or death, hot topic issue that will determine the fun for the masses for eons to come...
If you work up a list by points, divide by 20 will get you "close enough" for a power level game, the inverse is also true. Course that's if you are just playing for fun. (Some folks have trouble grasping that concept)
An organized event needs to pick one or the other... And since it has been points since the beginning of time, I'd put my money on points it remaining.
A games fun when both people have a roughly equal chance, when one side overwhelmingly slaughters the other that's not fun unless you're TFG.
We really don't want the shitshow that was aos on release and the imbalance power level has built in could result in a similar clusterfekke hence our concern.
The very core of our argument is that we want everyone to have fun with a well balanced game.
Arguing otherwise is disingenuous.
If the points system in AOS is good enough to mitigate all of the balance issues there, then the exact same system in 40k (power level) will be good enough here.
The two systems work fine on their own merits, arguing otherwise is simply stating personal opinion as fact.
Except even people who play aos will openly say ghb is not balanced.
You specifically stated how broken it was when released, as though the points had rectified that situation. Strange how suddenly when I point out that the two systems are identical in structure the points in age of sigmar are now too imbalanced as well.
If you actually thought that, it would have been the entire crux of your argument when you brought up AOS.
Edit because my fingers don't work right when I am sleepy.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 11:49:21
Local tournaments in my area have already stated they're going to use points. I don't know how stores will prefer friendly local matches are run.
Psienesis wrote: I've... seen things... you people wouldn't believe. Milk cartons on fire off the shoulder of 3rd-hour English; I watched Cheez-beams glitter in the dark near the Admin Parking Gate... All those... moments... will be lost, in time, like tears... in... rain. Time... to die.
"The Emperor points, and we obey,
Through the warp and far away."
-A Guardsman's Ballad
2017/06/08 13:21:51
Subject: Re:40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
I just tossed a first draft of a 2000 point Ork army together. 4 30 boy mobs, 4 kans w/ rokkits, a morkanaut, 3 rokkit koptas, and 3 big meks. Came out to 2009 points, or 116 power level. I was at around 1800 points and 100 power level without the koptas (although I had a few more upgrades on the BMs at that point.)
I think a couple other people posted armies at around 2000 points that were 100 power level, so maybe there's about a 10% fudge in power level versus points if you aren't going out of your way to maximize upgrades. Honestly, that doesn't seem too bad to me. It'll be interesting to see some tournament lists, or even the preview lists their doing on Warhammer TV, work out in power level instead of points.
One thing I can see power level letting people do that points doesn't, is take cool but over-costed units... especially if the overcosting comes from excessive upgrades. Veteran Space Marine units seem to be the most common example... it's fun to have a bunch of guys with all sorts of awesome weapons, but after you add more than a few upgrades, you seem to be spending more points for the unit than its really worth. The power level, however, would stay the same if you kept them all in bolters or thunder hammers and storm shields. If the points system was perfect there'd probably less of a use for power level (ignoring the difficulties of a perfect point system.)
Downside, of course, is that you (probably) need to use a very fuzzy 'Don't be a dick' rule, and not everyone is going to agree on what that means. One of my friends? I could totally play games using power levels with... he likes a to make good lists, but he's not really a min-max kinda guy. Another? Nope... he power games and min-maxes everything. He'll take advantages in the points system, and power levels are just easier to abuse.
Competitive game? Points. Casual game where you want to take cool, but perhaps poorly costed units? Power level.
2017/06/08 13:23:42
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Pedroig wrote: Just another moderate post on this life or death, hot topic issue that will determine the fun for the masses for eons to come...
If you work up a list by points, divide by 20 will get you "close enough" for a power level game, the inverse is also true. Course that's if you are just playing for fun. (Some folks have trouble grasping that concept)
An organized event needs to pick one or the other... And since it has been points since the beginning of time, I'd put my money on points it remaining.
A games fun when both people have a roughly equal chance, when one side overwhelmingly slaughters the other that's not fun unless you're TFG.
We really don't want the shitshow that was aos on release and the imbalance power level has built in could result in a similar clusterfekke hence our concern.
The very core of our argument is that we want everyone to have fun with a well balanced game.
Arguing otherwise is disingenuous.
If the points system in AOS is good enough to mitigate all of the balance issues there, then the exact same system in 40k (power level) will be good enough here.
The two systems work fine on their own merits, arguing otherwise is simply stating personal opinion as fact.
Except even people who play aos will openly say ghb is not balanced.
You specifically stated how broken it was when released, as though the points had rectified that situation. Strange how suddenly when I point out that the two systems are identical in structure the points in age of sigmar are now too imbalanced as well.
If you actually thought that, it would have been the entire crux of your argument when you brought up AOS.
Edit because my fingers don't work right when I am sleepy.
Search these forums you'll never find an instance where i've said AoS is fixed or even playable these days .
It was horribly broken on release you had to stand on a fence to get a save and summoning was just outright the most OP thing ever.
This is not the gotcha moment your looking for.
2017/06/08 14:39:06
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Power levels are WAY!!!! off for some units. For example, 10 rubrics vs 5 deathwing terminators. Rubrics are 1 power point more, but can slaughter deathwing terminators.
how do they compare in points?
According to Jervis, a unit's Power Level is based on the average of the minimum and maximum points value for a unit.
In my group, there's not really any tailoring of individual units (other than adding or subtracting models from the squad), so Power Level seems like a more suitable method to use for us.
2017/06/08 17:16:34
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: If the PL is on the page with the unit, it's convenient for when you're searching for the datacard for those then guys sitting in the table in front of you, flipping to the back of the book for PL is an inconvenience.
When you're building a competitive list, it's an inconvenience to flip around all the time looking for the page that the unit is on to look for it's costs. It's really nice to have all the costs in one place.
I don't get it, you're using power levels and points for the exact same thing. Why is it convenient for one to be in one location, but inconvenient for the other to be in the same place?
Simple:
I have my models laid out by unit on a table. I'm going to be introducing my friend's friend to Warhammer 40k. I ask him: "which ones do you like?" As of now, he knows that the Sisters of Battle are Nuns with Guns, the Space Wolves are Super-Soldier Space Vikings, and the Imperial Guard are best personified by "We Have Reserves". He picks out a squad of Custodian Guards, their Land Raider, their Dreadnought, and a squad of Wolf Guard Terminators. In his words, "The Golden Knights, the Robot, and those Big Viking Guys." So I pick out a list that's appropriately balanced against what he has, and I teach him to play. I didn't tell him how many points things were, not how much upgrades cost, I let him pick models he liked and I picked an army to match how I perceived their strength [and of course, to achieve the goal of demonstrating the game]. PL would be ideal for this case, and if he goes out and gets his own army, ideal for him until he has a lot of games under his belt and know like I do what each unit and weapon is and does. The last thing a new player needs to be doing is looking at the last 50 points of their list and wondering how to spend it, and if they really need that meltagun or if they'd rather have a plasmagun or a flamer or another, different unit. Since he'll be finding out how much things cost after adding them to his force, it would be most useful for him to have PL on the page where their stats are.
I know that, when I'm building my list to play and beat my friends' Tau and Tyranids, I much prefer my 6th Ed IG codex arrangement to my 7th Ed Space Wolves or Sisters of Battle [Imperial Agents] Codex arrangement. I don't need to see the stats of the Leman Russ Tank, I need to see how much it costs and how much the Lascannon I'm mounting to it costs, and paging through the book to find what page it's on is kind of annoying.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 17:18:15
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2017/06/08 17:31:21
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: If the PL is on the page with the unit, it's convenient for when you're searching for the datacard for those then guys sitting in the table in front of you, flipping to the back of the book for PL is an inconvenience.
When you're building a competitive list, it's an inconvenience to flip around all the time looking for the page that the unit is on to look for it's costs. It's really nice to have all the costs in one place.
I don't get it, you're using power levels and points for the exact same thing. Why is it convenient for one to be in one location, but inconvenient for the other to be in the same place?
Simple:
I have my models laid out by unit on a table. I'm going to be introducing my friend's friend to Warhammer 40k. I ask him: "which ones do you like?" As of now, he knows that the Sisters of Battle are Nuns with Guns, the Space Wolves are Super-Soldier Space Vikings, and the Imperial Guard are best personified by "We Have Reserves". He picks out a squad of Custodian Guards, their Land Raider, their Dreadnought, and a squad of Wolf Guard Terminators. In his words, "The Golden Knights, the Robot, and those Big Viking Guys." So I pick out a list that's appropriately balanced against what he has, and I teach him to play. I didn't tell him how many points things were, not how much upgrades cost, I let him pick models he liked and I picked an army to match how I perceived their strength [and of course, to achieve the goal of demonstrating the game]. PL would be ideal for this case, and if he goes out and gets his own army, ideal for him until he has a lot of games under his belt and know like I do what each unit and weapon is and does. The last thing a new player needs to be doing is looking at the last 50 points of their list and wondering how to spend it, and if they really need that meltagun or if they'd rather have a plasmagun or a flamer or another, different unit. Since he'll be finding out how much things cost after adding them to his force, it would be most useful for him to have PL on the page where their stats are.
I know that, when I'm building my list to play and beat my friends' Tau and Tyranids, I much prefer my 6th Ed IG codex arrangement to my 7th Ed Space Wolves or Sisters of Battle [Imperial Agents] Codex arrangement. I don't need to see the stats of the Leman Russ Tank, I need to see how much it costs and how much the Lascannon I'm mounting to it costs, and paging through the book to find what page it's on is kind of annoying.
^^ This right here. Sure, the list building aspect of the game is important, but the GAME ITSELF is why any of us are really playing it. Especially in the case of teaching new players the game, using Power Levels as a "rough estimate" of unit strength is good enough for the newbies to get a feel for how the game works, from moving the models, seeing them on the table, rolling the dice, etc. It is just a simplified army building tool designed to make things simpler for players, and I can see how it would be very useful in teaching new players or throwing together pickup games or planning large Apocalypse events.
2017/06/08 18:00:54
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
I've realized another disconnect some of us have with others is some want listbuilding to be as important as playing the game itself, where as others want playing the game to be the ultimate decider.
2017/06/08 18:07:32
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Martel732 wrote:You can't disconnect list building from victory. Just like you can't disconnect build order from victory in starcraft.
This is correct. In fact, building the list is more important because it dictates what plays you can make at any given time. I can fairly frequently predict an outcome just from seeing what's in the opposing lists. That's why we have dice, so the game isn't an immediate forgone conclusion as soon as you compare what you brought.
But that's the competitive side.
If you're trying to introduce a new player to the game and make sure you both have fun, you don't want to be playing competitively. Simplify the process as much as possible, and let's get going so we can roll some dice.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 18:18:58
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2017/06/08 18:22:06
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
For new players, just play with the starter box or whatever. Or I'll take one of as many units as I can see they can see what they do. Although being marines, they are all at least kinda similar.
2017/06/08 18:31:33
Subject: Re:40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
How I can see the use of power levels?
All those models you never used before that were useless or cost an insane amount of points due to going upgrade happy.
Models that were awesome for 3rd edition but sucked since...
A good-old I want to play a horde of stuff for say an apocalypse game.
Models I happened to get together and painted, I really can see this being a good thing for pickup games.
Competitive I would go points all the way, because, I know and you know the scheming turkeys we can be and every point is vital.
I foresee stuffing those massive charts in Excel and getting some pulldown menus made for units and then copy-paste units as I get their basic cost together.
Either choice, I can see the army list guys losing their minds getting all this together.
Actually, this release certainly gets everything on the table in a hurry.
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte
2017/06/08 18:52:47
Subject: Re:40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Talizvar wrote: I really can see this being a good thing for pickup games.
I'll beg to differ here. Having two different systems in place with a more-or-less equal weighting in terms of legitimacy is surely a recipe for gakheads to argue over it! I fear that many games will begin now with a 'debate' over the merits of Points vs. Power...
Although now that I think of it, I guess those in the know about both systems being based on the same Points values will have an advantage here - if anyone gets upset either way, you just run the numbers through the median/20 formula, and get the correct amount of decimal places in your 'army value number' to satisfy your opponent!
2017/06/08 19:16:36
Subject: Re:40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Talizvar wrote: I really can see this being a good thing for pickup games.
I'll beg to differ here. Having two different systems in place with a more-or-less equal weighting in terms of legitimacy is surely a recipe for gakheads to argue over it! I fear that many games will begin now with a 'debate' over the merits of Points vs. Power...
Although now that I think of it, I guess those in the know about both systems being based on the same Points values will have an advantage here - if anyone gets upset either way, you just run the numbers through the median/20 formula, and get the correct amount of decimal places in your 'army value number' to satisfy your opponent!
I don't see much of a problem. Your local Meta is going to set the standard anyways most likely. If they like Power Levels that is going to be the norm for Pick Up Games. If they don't be ready to figure out points.
Martel732 wrote:For new players, just play with the starter box or whatever. Or I'll take one of as many units as I can see they can see what they do. Although being marines, they are all at least kinda similar.
The force in the starter box is both tiny and uninspiring. Plopping the Custodians' shiny gold Land Raider down and pushing it around on the tabletop made for a much better starting experience, I think.
Both points and power levels have entirely different applications, and using one for the other's job is bound to end in a mire.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 19:17:34
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2017/06/08 19:59:10
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Using power to build lists isn't simpler or faster then using points unless you're like, bad at addition or something, and even then there are plenty of programs (including an official GW sanctioned one soon) that will do it for you.
So the notion that power has a good niche in helping new players falls rather flat.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 19:59:37
2017/06/08 19:59:51
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
SeraphimXIX wrote: Using power to build lists isn't simpler or faster then using points unless you're like, bad at addition or something, and even then there are plenty of programs (including an official GW sanctioned one soon) that will do it for you.
So the notion that power has a good niche in helping new players falls rather flat.
You're missing the point that a new player doesn't know what a meltagun does, or if a meltagun is worth 19 points for a guardsman to have, or the the guardsman would rather have a flamer because a flamer is only 9 points, or if a guardsman would rather keep his lasgun so you can buy two more guardsmen.
A new player doesn't know if a Leman Russ needs sponsons, or if it should have a Heavy Bolter or a Lascannon, or if the Annihilator, Vanquisher, or Demolisher is worth the points as a tank killer.
The whole point of PL, that I think you're missing, is that it reduces the number of options to consider.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 20:25:23
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2017/06/08 20:30:46
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
SeraphimXIX wrote: Using power to build lists isn't simpler or faster then using points unless you're like, bad at addition or something, and even then there are plenty of programs (including an official GW sanctioned one soon) that will do it for you.
So the notion that power has a good niche in helping new players falls rather flat.
You're missing the point that a new player doesn't know what a meltagun does, or if a meltagun is worth 19 points for a guardsman to have, or the the guardsman would rather have a flamer because a flamer is only 9 points, or if a guardsman would rather keep his lasgun so you can buy two more guardsmen.
A new player doesn't know if a Leman Russ needs sponsons, or if it should have a Heavy Bolter or a Lascannon, or if the Annihilator, Vanquisher, or Demolisher is worth the points as a tank killer.
Just pointing out - what you're saying here isn't impossible using points. If the bonus to Power that you're proposing is that you don't have to bother with specifics, that's hardly impossible to do with the other system. If you're playing loose, you're playing loose, it doesn't have to be built in to work.
Not to mention that you're still actually building a list using Power Level - you do still have to list out the equipment and stuff that your units are bringing, so the choices still have to be made. The number of options hasn't changed, unless you're talking specifically about unit size.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 20:32:42
2017/06/08 20:40:30
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
BunkhouseBuster wrote: This right here. Sure, the list building aspect of the game is important, but the GAME ITSELF is why any of us are really playing it. Especially in the case of teaching new players the game, using Power Levels as a "rough estimate" of unit strength is good enough for the newbies to get a feel for how the game works, from moving the models, seeing them on the table, rolling the dice, etc. It is just a simplified army building tool designed to make things simpler for players, and I can see how it would be very useful in teaching new players or throwing together pickup games or planning large Apocalypse events.
Except, again, GW is presenting power levels as a primary (if not the primary) way to play the game, not just a stripped-down learning system for newbies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: I have my models laid out by unit on a table. I'm going to be introducing my friend's friend to Warhammer 40k. I ask him: "which ones do you like?" As of now, he knows that the Sisters of Battle are Nuns with Guns, the Space Wolves are Super-Soldier Space Vikings, and the Imperial Guard are best personified by "We Have Reserves". He picks out a squad of Custodian Guards, their Land Raider, their Dreadnought, and a squad of Wolf Guard Terminators. In his words, "The Golden Knights, the Robot, and those Big Viking Guys." So I pick out a list that's appropriately balanced against what he has, and I teach him to play. I didn't tell him how many points things were, not how much upgrades cost, I let him pick models he liked and I picked an army to match how I perceived their strength [and of course, to achieve the goal of demonstrating the game]. PL would be ideal for this case, and if he goes out and gets his own army, ideal for him until he has a lot of games under his belt and know like I do what each unit and weapon is and does. The last thing a new player needs to be doing is looking at the last 50 points of their list and wondering how to spend it, and if they really need that meltagun or if they'd rather have a plasmagun or a flamer or another, different unit. Since he'll be finding out how much things cost after adding them to his force, it would be most useful for him to have PL on the page where their stats are.
All of this can be done just as well with points. In fact, you're doing it with points! You're just doing it with points that are less accurate than the other point system. You, as the experienced player, are building their list for them (though dear god I hope you'd avoid fluff abominations like that in a real situation) using a point system to evaluate their list, and then a point system to build your own list to match their total. Replacing conventional points with power levels adds nothing here.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nou wrote: There is a VAST meaningfull difference, but for some reason it keeps being totally ignored by point advocates (and if you read everything I wrote in this thread you should be aware, that what you cited was an additional argument, not a basis for defending Power Levels) - by design Power Level and Points ARE NOT designed for the same purpose. They CAN be used for the same purpose to some degree, but they have two different uses with two different sets of missions to use in. And for Narrative section using points doesn't make much sense, because missions themselves accomodate power level discrepancies (al of them work better that way, and some of them work ONLY when power levels are different enough), so the very process of "adding up the points" is very different, because you don't have to fit as closely as possisble within an arbitrary margin, which is a clue with competetive (ballanced) point list building. Of course, you can use points for this, but even if they were on the same page such process is simply unnecessary longer (not more complex, just longer by the unnecessary multiplications and addictions you have to make for wargear and single model cost) and has unnecessary granularity.
As you said, you can use points for all of those things. Nothing is being gained by replacing the conventional point system with a point system that is a less-accurate evaluation of a unit's value.
Well, I take it back, using power levels does have one major advantage over conventional points: it allows the "casual at all costs" players to maintain their smug superiority about how little they care about balance, without forcing them to give up on balance entirely. Instead of playing a mission with, say, 1000 points vs. 1500 points and asymmetrical objectives to make up for the 500 point difference they can play at 50 points vs. 75 points and brag about how "casual" they are because they aren't using points like all those awful WAACTFG tournament players.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
auticus wrote: This is just like being in a liberals vs conservative debate.
It really is. Advocates for power level, like conservatives, have an ideological position that must be maintained no matter what the evidence shows because it fits their moral beliefs about how the world should work. So, much like conservatives will refuse to acknowledge the evidence for climate change because it might get in the way of corporate profits, advocates for power level will ignore the fact that power level is functionally equivalent to the conventional point system because of a moral belief in the virtues of "casual" play. It doesn't matter that every single thing you can do with power levels is done better by points, and every single criticism of points applies equally well to power levels, all that matters is that power levels are more "casual" because they are less accurate as a tool for competitive balance and that makes them morally superior.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 21:14:03
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2017/06/08 21:17:40
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: I have my models laid out by unit on a table. I'm going to be introducing my friend's friend to Warhammer 40k. I ask him: "which ones do you like?" As of now, he knows that the Sisters of Battle are Nuns with Guns, the Space Wolves are Super-Soldier Space Vikings, and the Imperial Guard are best personified by "We Have Reserves". He picks out a squad of Custodian Guards, their Land Raider, their Dreadnought, and a squad of Wolf Guard Terminators. In his words, "The Golden Knights, the Robot, and those Big Viking Guys." So I pick out a list that's appropriately balanced against what he has, and I teach him to play. I didn't tell him how many points things were, not how much upgrades cost, I let him pick models he liked and I picked an army to match how I perceived their strength [and of course, to achieve the goal of demonstrating the game]. PL would be ideal for this case, and if he goes out and gets his own army, ideal for him until he has a lot of games under his belt and know like I do what each unit and weapon is and does. The last thing a new player needs to be doing is looking at the last 50 points of their list and wondering how to spend it, and if they really need that meltagun or if they'd rather have a plasmagun or a flamer or another, different unit. Since he'll be finding out how much things cost after adding them to his force, it would be most useful for him to have PL on the page where their stats are.
All of this can be done just as well with points. In fact, you're doing it with points! You're just doing it with points that are less accurate than the other point system. You, as the experienced player, are building their list for them (though dear god I hope you'd avoid fluff abominations like that in a real situation) using a point system to evaluate their list, and then a point system to build your own list to match their total. Replacing conventional points with power levels adds nothing here.
I know precisely how many points his army was that day. He had 980 points. But he didn't know that. He didn't know that the assault cannon guy he put into his terminator squad cost an extra 20 points, or that the guy with the hammer and shield cost an extra 15, or that the guy with the axe cost an extra 5. He would have been lost, if he had to consider if he'd rather have a hammer or an axe, or a assault cannon or a flamer.
Seriously. I don't know if you've ever tried to play a game with a new player.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 21:19:58
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2017/06/08 21:22:19
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
I will likely be using points for pick up games, as that seems the be the way things are going at my local shop, but for apoc I will definitely just use power levels. There is really no point in costing out every special weapon or upgrade in an 8000 point list, it's just tedious, with little payoff.
2017/06/08 21:25:18
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: I know precisely how many points his army was that day. He had 980 points. But he didn't know that. He didn't know that the assault cannon guy he put into his terminator squad cost an extra 20 points, or that the guy with the hammer and shield cost an extra 15, or that the guy with the axe cost an extra 5. He would have been lost, if he had to consider if he'd rather have a hammer or an axe, or a assault cannon or a flamer.
What's your point? If you play the exact same game with power levels he isn't going to know how many power levels his units have. He isn't going to know whether he'd rather have that "robot" or another squad of the "gold guys". You're still going to do all the work of turning his "this looks cool" statements into an army list, and then building your own list to match his. The fact that you're ignoring the price of his upgrades when you write your list is something he's never going to see, so all the power level system does is save you a few seconds of adding up those numbers.
And, again, power levels are not a newbie teaching system. They are presented by GW as a primary way to play the game, for everyone, not just a stripped-down teaching system. Any benefits in teaching new players are purely coincidental.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Asmodas wrote: I will likely be using points for pick up games, as that seems the be the way things are going at my local shop, but for apoc I will definitely just use power levels. There is really no point in costing out every special weapon or upgrade in an 8000 point list, it's just tedious, with little payoff.
Of course, to be fair, there's no point in costing out units in Apocalypse either, or of playing Apocalypse at all. It isn't a game, it's just an exercise in removing models from the table. In fact, if you removed all of the rules of 40k entirely in favor of "line up all your models, then each turn roll a D6 for each pile of models and on a 4+ remove that pile from the table" and you'd have the exact same gameplay experience as a RAW Apocalypse game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 21:27:22
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2017/06/08 21:46:11
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: I know precisely how many points his army was that day. He had 980 points. But he didn't know that. He didn't know that the assault cannon guy he put into his terminator squad cost an extra 20 points, or that the guy with the hammer and shield cost an extra 15, or that the guy with the axe cost an extra 5. He would have been lost, if he had to consider if he'd rather have a hammer or an axe, or a assault cannon or a flamer.
What's your point? If you play the exact same game with power levels he isn't going to know how many power levels his units have. He isn't going to know whether he'd rather have that "robot" or another squad of the "gold guys". You're still going to do all the work of turning his "this looks cool" statements into an army list, and then building your own list to match his. The fact that you're ignoring the price of his upgrades when you write your list is something he's never going to see, so all the power level system does is save you a few seconds of adding up those numbers.
And, again, power levels are not a newbie teaching system. They are presented by GW as a primary way to play the game, for everyone, not just a stripped-down teaching system. Any benefits in teaching new players are purely coincidental.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Asmodas wrote: I will likely be using points for pick up games, as that seems the be the way things are going at my local shop, but for apoc I will definitely just use power levels. There is really no point in costing out every special weapon or upgrade in an 8000 point list, it's just tedious, with little payoff.
Of course, to be fair, there's no point in costing out units in Apocalypse either, or of playing Apocalypse at all. It isn't a game, it's just an exercise in removing models from the table. In fact, if you removed all of the rules of 40k entirely in favor of "line up all your models, then each turn roll a D6 for each pile of models and on a 4+ remove that pile from the table" and you'd have the exact same gameplay experience as a RAW Apocalypse game.
But, with power levels, if he gets his own army, we can start easy and I don't have to hold his hand all the way, until eventually he has a good idea of what everything is and does and can therefore understand and intelligently apply points costs to upgrades.
I like apocalypse. I play with all my tanks and guns and my friend plays with all his big gribblies and my other one brings out all the hammerheads and we drive around with a lot of tanks like it's the battle of Prokhorovka.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 21:47:59
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2017/06/08 21:46:16
Subject: 40K - power level vs points... which will you be using?
SeraphimXIX wrote: Using power to build lists isn't simpler or faster then using points unless you're like, bad at addition or something, and even then there are plenty of programs (including an official GW sanctioned one soon) that will do it for you.
So the notion that power has a good niche in helping new players falls rather flat.
You're missing the point that a new player doesn't know what a meltagun does, or if a meltagun is worth 19 points for a guardsman to have, or the the guardsman would rather have a flamer because a flamer is only 9 points, or if a guardsman would rather keep his lasgun so you can buy two more guardsmen.
A new player doesn't know if a Leman Russ needs sponsons, or if it should have a Heavy Bolter or a Lascannon, or if the Annihilator, Vanquisher, or Demolisher is worth the points as a tank killer.
Literally none of this is alleviated by using the power system over the points system.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 22:00:19
