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.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The more GW try and push Power Ratings the more I realise GW know what a bad idea they are but they dug themselves too deep.

I don't follow. The power levels are a great system for Open Play and especially these new cards to help work out who is the underdog and by what margin in a matter of seconds. In Open Play you can deploy on the fly and don't want to waste time crunching numbers before or after deployment.

I'll use points for matched play but for games like his PL definitely has the advantage.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The more GW try to do something I perceive as pushing something, the more I convince mysef to look for things that confirms my bias or start inventing statements I can't prove in any way, shape or form, except for the voices inside of the echo chamber that is my head.

Translated version of what you're actually saying. You're welcome!

For 12 quid I said hell why not
Might even throw them into some match play games just for lulz.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The more GW try and push Power Ratings the more I realise GW know what a bad idea they are but they dug themselves too deep.

So the company finally decides to start supporting product and you see it as a negative. Do you wake up in the morning and go "Great, now I'm going to have to die while I'm awake."?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The more GW try and push Power Ratings the more I realise GW know what a bad idea they are but they dug themselves too deep.

Yeah, I don't get that at all. And if you prefer to only ever use points you can simply ignore them entirely. But you go ahead and feel bitter all you like. I've been playing since Rogue Trader (with a big break over the past couple of terrible editions) and it's a nice throwback in some ways to the attitude of the original game.

 Azazelx wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The more GW try and push Power Ratings the more I realise GW know what a bad idea they are but they dug themselves too deep.

Yeah, I don't get that at all. And if you prefer to only ever use points you can simply ignore them entirely. But you go ahead and feel bitter all you like. I've been playing since Rogue Trader (with a big break over the past couple of terrible editions) and it's a nice throwback in some ways to the attitude of the original game.

I don't think it's that they have dug themselves in too deep, it's that they realize the granularity of the point system is not balanced or equal. For example, a plasma pistol is 7 points for a Space Marine. It's a good, generic, pistol. It can hurt just about anything. Overcharging pushes its effectiveness up even more! It's low cost is offset by if you roll a one, the model is slain. Personally, I'd have made it a mortal wound instead, but oh well. The thing is, Space Marines have access to a relatively cheap HQ choice (Captain) that allows units within 6" to reroll ones to hit. That suddenly makes the plasma pistol x6 times more effective when it's overcharged.

How much does a plasma pistol cost in other armies? I really don't know as I don't have the other indexes. The point I'm trying to make here is that 7 points in say, a IG army is not the same as 7 points in a Space Marine army, and not the same in a Tau army, Chaos army, etc. etc. In a Tau army, plasma weapons don't overheat (only the big ones), so how much should the equivalent plasma pistol cost? In an IG army, a plasma pistol probably costs more than the Guardsman that buys it. The possible combinations of abilities within each army is borderline impossible to play test or adjust points for. How can you balance a game that's played at 2,000 points when you have items that cost 4 points (or even less... I think I saw a wargear option for 3 points?). If you use 7 points as a baseline for an army that can take a plasma pistol and another model to allow you to reroll ones, than how many points should it cost in an army that doesn't have that reroll? How about an army that still gets a save, even if a model is "slain"? How many points should it cost if you have an ability to fire it twice?

GW comes up with Power Levels to replace points. Now, they don't have to worry about that 3 point piece of wargear, or that a plasma pistol doesn't cost the same across multiple armies. Using whatever arcane formula or complicated algorithm, they calculate the Power Level of a model/unit and then say "We don't care what wargear options you take, because it's already been accounted for in the Power Level of the model..." Can it be broken? Absolutely. But so can a points system. What's the difference? I don't need a calculator, spread sheet, or some kind of Army Builder App to make a Power Level 100 army. But for a 2,000 point army, I have to account for that 3 point wargear purchase.

One more reason to support Power Levels: How many games have you played where you're opponent has said "Hey, I'm a couple points over. Is that OK?" 5 or 10 points won't make that much of a difference in a 2,000 point game, but in a Power Level 100 game? +3-4 PL could be an extra unit. As a side note, I've never understood going over the points limit. You can just as easily go under the points limit, so why do people accept going over the points limit?

TLDR; Power Levels remove the granularity of points and simplifies army construction.