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.

How do?

So 8th Ed of course brought us what some might call an innovation, others and abomination. And that of course is the concept of power points. I trust there's no need for me to elaborate further on what those actually are.

Here, I'm just looking to see which people are preferring for their games. But you'll have noticed that this is multiple choice, and has more than two options. And that's because I figure a give person might have differing preferences depending on the occasion. The last option is to reflect you've got more to say on a given choice, and I can't possibly cover all the possible permutations.

Most of all, I want to hear a dialogue about this. Ain't nobody wrong, ain't nobody right. I just want to pick your brains!

After dabbling with power and being hopeful about its possibilities, actual experience has caused me to take a very hard about turn back to using points almost exclusively.

I'm a big fan of power level for more casual games. I'm sick and tired of getting penalized with gakky rules for using the cool models I wanted to paint, and I like that in PL games, I can bring all my Guard sergeants with powerfists, grenade launchers, heavy bolter teams, standard bearers, etc that I can't justify in a points game.

I know the system doesn't dictate how competitive you are, but I've liked them because most of the time, it attracts more of a chill crowd, and we can actually kick back and enjoy a game of 40k that isn't over by tabling one way or the other top of turn 3, with silly unit choices, mixed weapons in squads, and other less optimized stuff.

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, or not even that great. But it's good to have something there for the more casual crowd as well as the more competitive crowd.

Points all the way. It's not very hard, in my experience, to make a list with points, and it's MORE balanced. Not WELL balanced, but better than Power.

For pick up games I chose points. The reason being that it allows me to gage my opponent as a player. This is important when playing an opposing warlord for the first time. Seeing as to how they are as a player. This leads into the casual and organized play types.

For casual play, powers levels does just fine. It simply allows you to pick your models and not worry about specific war gear options. This is a great thing amongst friends.

For organized play, points are where it is at. A lot of organized events are highly competitive. Hense, you need to account for all of the subtle nuances. That is what truly makes any tournament balanced and fair between all participants. Especially so when entry fees and prizes are awarded for placing well in said tournaments.

In an ideal world: point every time. Points for casual games, points for competitive games. The power level system is stupid as hell, it's a point system in all but name and all of the criticism of conventional points also applies to power points. And there is nothing gained by saying "all upgrades cost zero points" and encouraging people to throw in every possible upgrade just because it's free. You just make the point cost of a unit a less-accurate evaluation of its strength on the table, and make balance worse. It's inexcusably bad game design, and whoever approved it should be fired for incompetence.

In the real world: I'm starting to like the idea of power level. 8th edition is such an RNG-obsessed dumpster fire that I honestly can't find the motivation to study the point costs and figure out what works best from a point-efficiency perspective. Melta or plasma? Who knows, it's all such a mindless RNG mess that no option stands out. So if the game is already going to be a hopeless dumpster fire of "roll to see how many dice you roll, on a 4+ you roll to see if you get a 4+ to see if you get a 4+ to see if you get a 4+ to see if you get a 4+ to do 1D3-2 (minimum 1) wounds" why bother? Power levels are the least of the problems with 8th edition, and let you throw some models on the table and RNG for a couple hours with less time invested in preparing for the "game".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
and we can actually kick back and enjoy a game of 40k that isn't over by tabling one way or the other top of turn 3, with silly unit choices, mixed weapons in squads, and other less optimized stuff.

No you can't. None of this is true at all. Silly unit choices, mixed weapons, etc, are still bad in a point system where the point cost is assigned to the unit and upgrades cost zero points. In fact, balance issues like this get worse in a less-accurate point system. You no longer have things like grenade launchers being weaker than plasma, but costing fewer points to compensate. When they cost the same points (zero) taking the grenade launcher is always a poor decision. The only reason you're seeing any benefit here is the social pressure to believe that using power points makes it a "casual" game where everyone should ignore optimization, the point system itself is not helping you at all.

Points most of the time but for pickup games Power level can really be useful.

the other week at my GW I was in after work painting some models, wasn't planning on a game that night. A newbie came into the store but games were already underway, GW manager asked me if I wanted a game, since I hadn't planned a game I didn't have my list and was able to knock up an 50 PL list in 3 minutes - it has it's uses, but for those wanting more balance out of the game should probably steer clear and stick to points.

Points all the way. In theory I would like power-levels a lot, if the actual power-levels were not sprinkled all over the Ork index by a very drunken intern. Power-levels in the Ork index are hilariously broken. Building 8th edition lists with points is pretty annoying though.

 Peregrine wrote:
Melta or plasma?

Plasma.
Also, plasma.

But the rest of the post is spot-on.

Kaiyanwang 740719 9622475 6b818fbd57bb51968f0956479e510c11.jpgPlasma. wrote:
Also, plasma.

But the rest of the post is spot-on.

Curious why you've ruled out melta? The D6 damage bonus (albeit at a short range) has helped me many times. I guess plasma does give you more reliable damage output

 NurglesR0T wrote:

Kaiyanwang 740719 9622475 6b818fbd57bb51968f0956479e510c11.jpgPlasma. wrote:
Also, plasma.

But the rest of the post is spot-on.

Curious why you've ruled out melta? The D6 damage bonus (albeit at a short range) has helped me many times. I guess plasma does give you more reliable damage output

You are absolutely right.
Just ironizing on the usual strategy discussion/suggestion "get something that make you reroll and overcharge".

More on topic, albeit I think Peregrine is spot on, It came in my mind I want to defend the points in 8th in favor of points: I think GW is paying a bit more of attention as a general rule.
I say this because the started again to price differently some equipment in base to the model wielding it. Is far from being perfect (see plasma on scion) and this does not mean that even very recent models can be over/underpriced, but I want to believe this means there is a bit more of attention.

Power Level, incidentally, is also very prone to being done incorrectly compared to points. (ESPECIALLY when considering Forge World units.)
Heck, when the Indices dropped, Imperial and Chaos Vindicators had the exact same points cost but radically different Power Level.

One of the problems as always been as well that points/power rarely take into account the rest of the synergy it has with the army when the 'same' unit appears in different indexes/codex. Often the combos that can be pulled off with certain rules etc can greatly make a unit worth much more than what the point cost is "deemed" to have.

PL is literally unbalanced AF, but for a teaching game they are great due to you wont take those unbalanced units/wargear and you will just say "take 25/50/etc.. PL" this makes starting an army/learning an army extremely simple.

Once that player(s) has played a few games and understands the difference in why you take weapons for point values and purpose vs the average cost of bad and good weapons, then they should swap to Points as fast as they can.

If you literally dont care about winning or doing 2min of math... i guess PL is good otherwise outside of a learning tool?

Here's a good reference point for Power Level, taking two variations on a unit that should both *Theoretically be effective:
Take five Dominions, a Sisters of Battle choice. They have two pertinent weapon options - Storm Bolters and Meltaguns. Everyone in the squad can take one of these. (The Sister Superior can technically only take a Combi-Melta, but it's effectively the same.)
The Meltagun is one of Adepta Ministorum's best options against tanks, especially on Dominions - You can get in close with their scout ability, and since they lack much in the way of S9 shooting and Melta has really high damage, it's a great tank hunting choice.
The Storm Bolter, meanwhile, is a mildly effective anti-infantry option. It gives lots of extra shots, but doesn't particularly take advantage of the bonus movement and comes in an army chock-full of anti-infantry choices.
If you're using points, then it becomes a question of what role needs filled, how you're delivering them, and whether you're willing to trade number of units for volume of fire - See, because a Dominion with a Meltagun costs more than twice as much as a Dominon with a Storm Bolter. So while the Storm Bolter is a middling choice, it's really cheap, and the Meltagun is a very potent but expensive choice.

Unless you're using Power Level, in which case a 60pt unit and a 137pt unit suddenly both cost exactly the same - 5 PL. If you want to add five more sisters to the unit (Five sisters that cannot take extra Special Weapons) it's going to cost... 5 more PL.

So for 10 PL, you could get ten Dominions with five Storm Bolters between them, a 110 point unit, or you could get two five-sister Dominion squads each with maxed out Melta, 276pts of models.

In points-based games, both of these options are effective. In Power Level? Aw heck no. You might as well shelve your Storm Bolters, because their one advantage (Extreme cheapness) is completely nullified in a game that doesn't take into account 'nuance'. ('Nuance' here meaning 'Weapons that cost more than the models wielding them but are available alongside weapons that barely cost anything at all.')

Power was implemented poorly. I loved the idea.

 Marmatag wrote:
Power was implemented poorly. I loved the idea.

8th edition is implemented poorly.

If used properly, power is fine with me (i.e. both sides know how to build a list to power level). If power level doesn't fit with the way you build your army, or you're silly enough to convert your points-based army to power it won't work well.

Playing Eldar sans codex has been a kick in the teeth recently - particularly with other codices coming out and power level dropping on a lot of units. It's widened the gap quite a bit. When all the codices are out, either will be fine with me.

Power is basically points with free upgrades. You still have to do the addition and math that points requires, just less. My biggest complaints is that it punishes armies and units with little in the way of choices for upgrades.

Power Level works guys, play it often and you'll see that.

It's less nonsense, you take what you want/have, the other guy does the same.

Big things balance out masses of small things getting free stuff. Like it's cute you think taking plasma in every squad will help against my Lord of Skulls. (Had this happen, the LoS was very happy all game.)

Points are silly min/max nonsense. OOOOHHH look you can fit in a whole extra squad if you cut out the hunter killers on all your tanks. PFFT forget that nonsense. Maybe hunter killers on every tank would be more entertaining and balanced?

Points are just as arbitrary as Power Level.

If you haven't really tried it, quit knocking it.

For those of you who don't like 8th ed, WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?

 sfshilo wrote:
Power Level works guys, play it often and you'll see that.

It's less nonsense, you take what you want/have, the other guy does the same.

Big things balance out masses of small things getting free stuff. Like it's cute you think taking plasma in every squad will help against my Lord of Skulls. (Had this happen, the LoS was very happy all game.)

Points are silly min/max nonsense. OOOOHHH look you can fit in a whole extra squad if you cut out the hunter killers on all your tanks. PFFT forget that nonsense. Maybe hunter killers on every tank would be more entertaining and balanced?

Points are just as arbitrary as Power Level.

If you haven't really tried it, quit knocking it.

For those of you who don't like 8th ed, WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?

In my experience, points work better. And they're more nuanced-that's objective.

And just because I'm not a huge fan of 8th, doesn't mean my opinion isn't relevant. It's equally important to listen to people who have negative things to say as those who have positive, as long as both are grounded in facts.

 sfshilo wrote:
For those of you who don't like 8th ed, WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?

We were here first.


Getting back on topic, points points and more points. Power levels are too juvenile, too basic, like a 'paint by the numbers' version of army building. For those of us who spent the last half dozen editions enjoying the depth all those 'min/max nonsense' choices, the shallow kiddy pool we now find ourselves is not conductive to reaching the level of enjoyment we've come to love in our hobby.

Power-level unless a tournament.

Points or power-level are both unbalanced AF.

 sfshilo wrote:
Power Level works guys, play it often and you'll see that.

I have. They don't.

It's less nonsense, you take what you want/have, the other guy does the same.

You're half right. (About the 'Taking what you want' bit, not the nonsense.)

Big things balance out masses of small things getting free stuff. Like it's cute you think taking plasma in every squad will help against my Lord of Skulls. (Had this happen, the LoS was very happy all game.)

Nope! It breaks on big things, too. Take Knights: A Knight Gallant is stripped down for Combat, and comes in at a very reasonable 21 PL. A Knight Crusader is a massive gun platform, and costs a very reasonable 27 PL.
A Renegade Knight ALWAYS costs 23 PL, whether you take even more expensive guns than the Crusader or you take as basic of close combat weapons as the Gallant. So if you play Imperials, you have a spectrum of possible options. If you play Chaos, you always get the most expensive option for super-duper cheap, but are punished for taking anything else.

Ooor you can run points and everyone gets charged the same.

Points are silly min/max nonsense. OOOOHHH look you can fit in a whole extra squad if you cut out the hunter killers on all your tanks. PFFT forget that nonsense. Maybe hunter killers on every tank would be more entertaining and balanced?

Firstly: How many tanks are you bringing that you have 50-60pts worth of Hunter Killer missiles? Because you'd need 9-10.
Secondly, lacking nuance in list building is not 'Balanced'. All it does is punish armies who don't have those options, and punish players who like to run a variety of different builds.
(Take Battlewagons, which have several varieties: Close combat builds, gunwagons, or sturdier, armored transports.
Only if you play with Power Level, your options are limited to one thing: Close combat gunwagons that are also transports. It's a build that doesn't make fluffy sense most of the time, isn't going to use half its wargear most of the time, but since it's free and might come in handy you're punished for taking sensible builds.

Points are just as arbitrary as Power Level.

No they're not.

If you haven't really tried it, quit knocking it.

I have tried it. It sucks in everything except friendly introduction games.

For those of you who don't like 8th ed, WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?

Last time I checked, Games Workshop provided more than one way to play.
In fact, I'm fairly sure that they've mostly only advocated Power Level for use in 'Narrative' games, which is their code for 'We didn't bother balancing play mode this at all'.

Points.

Points have issues with execution, but not the fundamental concept.

Power level has issues with the concept. It's too vague to function as any sort of balance mechanism. The fact that you can have two identical units but ine loaded to the gills with extras making it dramatically more powerful, and the loaded one costs 0% more, is a major issue. You end up with many of the problems of 7E formations and having what ostensibly is a 1500pt army on one side facing a 2250pt army on the other.

If you dont want to use points, or want to use stuff you normally wouldnt take, dont bother trying to make a crappier points system, just talk bring the stuff you wanna play with and arrange something with an opponent you think would be fun. Power Level doesnt add anything but confusion and extra stuff to the mix.

Same issue with using Points vs Kill Points for victory tabulation. It was stupid when introduced in 5E, and has remained stupid ever since.

I really want to like power. however, I think too many people immediately start to think "I'll just take every upgrade because it's free" which is the wrong mindset to have with power level. I enjoy both, however. Power I find to be easier when doing more casual/fun type games, without simply using matched play missions, or *god forbid!* having asymmetrical forces. Points are more fine-grained, but power has that cool simplicity about it for just playing a squad as-is or even *god forbid!* building it with mixed options like the kit provides versus buying bits/several kits to build out the "most optimal" squad and never deviating from that.

Basically, PL is an anathema to the powergaming/min-maxing/competitive type, because they will look at it and immediately think "There's no drawback for taking the best options, I'll do that every single time just because I can", which IMHO is not the intent of power level; points are made for those people. PL is made for the people who aren't going to min/max and mathhammer out the "optimal" choices, but will build a squad with a variety of options because that's what the base kit comes with, or not just think "This weapon is better, I'll take as many as I can" but build a model for variety or looks.

That's where PL shines. It will fall flat on its face if you approach it with a min/max or "most optimal loadout" type of mindset because it assumes you aren't doing that. If your immediate thought is "woot free upgrades!" then PL is not for you

Power-level is definitely not for people that are playing in a powergaming environment, which is what I would assume most of the people posting here play in.

Unsurprisingly in my experience the majority of those that enjoy power level or are at least ok with it also aren't powergaming or playing in a powergaming environment.

I find PL works best if you just keep everything WYSIWYG, obviously not accounting for proxies or whatever.

But if you have a Tac squad with a Missile Launcher and a Flamer, but no goodies on the sarge, you shouldn't have goodies on the sarge in PL, since you're not paying for them and they're not modeled.

Still prefer points, though.