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.

Math absolutely has a place in determining balance.It isn't, however, "the last, true answer." It can give a very strong starting point, but there's still some need for adjusting "by feel" for a lot of things.

Now, do not get me wrong. If some math shows something pretty haywire (like some of Auticus' stuff has), then it's very likely a problem and shouldn't just be handwaved away "for the feel of it." At the same time, though, math sometimes cannot take into account certain things like uniqueness or rarity (by that I mean number of X that can be taken), which can adjust the "points efficacy" math a decent bit. Sure, if a character that you can only have one of in an army is a bit stronger, by the math, for their points, you can be ok with that knowing they can't be spammed. But, again, that requires some human judgement; though if the math shows same character as outrageous, then they should probably be adjusted some.

Sadly, around here the AoS scene isn't big enough for me to confirm or deny Auticus' prophesies locally.

Wayniac wrote:
But has it? I Mean, I like auticus (now, anways; we butted heads on BOLS long ago). But I do think he puts a little too much faith in his math and his comp system. It's good, yes, and probably better than SCGT/GHB Matched was or will be, but it's not perfect. The game isn't quite as degenerate as the doom and gloom has predicted.

I never said I came up with a perfect system, but I do believe its miles tighter than the current thing we have. But my system was designed to make a lot more things viable, which cuts out listbuilding mattering as much, and a lot of people hate that.

It had flaws like any system. There is no perfect system. Especially concerning summoning.

And I know math iin a vacuum is useless. But math in a statistics based system is a good gauge of patterns and probabilities. When I see poor players rolling around with stormcast cavalry and rerollable 2++ saves doling out buckets of mortal wounds and suddenly winning tournaments here, which I have, and then run the numbers and see that the formula is showing their army as having a really high power coefficient... yes I come to trust the math. The math also led me to a solid dozen grand tournament top 10 placings back in the late 90s and early aughts. So I do have a tendency to trust numbers more than peoples' feelings because it won me a bunch of trophies and certificates and free armies from high placings.

I don't even care about things being somewhat out of balance, but baby jesus some of this stuff...

If you take all of the things that were really nasty in 2016, we discussed it here as going to be nasty.
Same with last year.

Yeah there's ways to git gud and get around that, but there are still plenty of "why would you never take that" units. And when I said fyreslayers were going to be pretty gross I got laughed out of the room. Now they are allegedly everywhere.

The only thiing that I said that hasn't happened is that the skeleton armiies aren't dominating the tournament scene right now.

But I don't think thats because they couldn't... rather they don't have an updated book and I don't see any legacy armiies at public events hardly. Bring out an updated skeleton book with command traits and what not and leave the points and abiliteis as they are and I'd bet my left testicle that they sit at the top of the power curve. Right now they suffer from no new models and no modern book and thats a player psychology thing. I know a bunch of players personally that are chomping at the bit for a new skeleton book so that there are new models and updated spells and command traits, and not because they think the army is weak.

And rumor has it we will see a skeleton book soon. If that happens, believe me I will be VERY keen on seeing how the tournament scene looks shortly thereafter.

 auticus wrote:
I had a fun conversation with someone today on BOLS about how math can't be used in game design. Its a gem.

I'm wrong and incorrect and a bad man.

"Blightkings at 160 points are just fine. They won't be dominating the tournament scene"

Fallacy: that the tournament scene is the conclusive evidence that is needed to determine something's power. That 4 or 5 large scale events a YEAR are conclusive evidence.

"You saying blight kings are undercost and very efficient now is just plain wrong because I'd take skyfires every time."

Fallacy: that if another unit is more powerful then that means the unit in question cannot be efficient at all because something more powerful exists.

Fallacy: that if out of 1000 units, a unit comes in at say... #15 in raw score efficiency that because units #1 - #5 are grossly undercost that means that coming in #15 out of 1000 doesn't mean its one of the most efficient units in the game. Because saying that is "vague".

The community is on a roll today. A roll I tell ya.

I've got some more blight kings to put together. If anyone complains I'll just tell them that math doesn't matter and that they should just git gud

I want to see that argument

Its on bols right now. I don't believe we are allowed to link to that stuff here and I don't want to violate forum rules. Just do a search on my name in Disqus. I've finished the conversation with said individual since we are just running in circles now and I think that said indiviidual is a poster on TGA since I had almost an identical conversation months ago.

 auticus wrote:
I had a fun conversation with someone today on BOLS about how math can't be used in game design. Its a gem.

I'm wrong and incorrect and a bad man.

"Blightkings at 160 points are just fine. They won't be dominating the tournament scene"

Fallacy: that the tournament scene is the conclusive evidence that is needed to determine something's power. That 4 or 5 large scale events a YEAR are conclusive evidence.

"You saying blight kings are undercost and very efficient now is just plain wrong because I'd take skyfires every time."

Fallacy: that if another unit is more powerful then that means the unit in question cannot be efficient at all because something more powerful exists.

Fallacy: that if out of 1000 units, a unit comes in at say... #15 in raw score efficiency that because units #1 - #5 are grossly undercost that means that coming in #15 out of 1000 doesn't mean its one of the most efficient units in the game. Because saying that is "vague".

The community is on a roll today. A roll I tell ya.

I've got some more blight kings to put together. If anyone complains I'll just tell them that math doesn't matter and that they should just git gud

*edit* this thread has gotten far enough off-topic without my help. If you want to see the discussion Auticus is referring to, follow this link and look at the comments: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2018/01/battletome-maggotkin-gw-rules-reveal-tidalwave.html

"Point formulas are by far the worst way to point cost units."

Even when I did the roleplay ruleset for my online-warcraft server, had to use a mathematical formula for balance. Yeah, we changed many things to give "flavour". but always respecting the mathematical basis of the whole system to avoid great imbalances.
You NEED a mathematical formula to be the hard core of your rules. Then, with playtesting, etc... you can fine tune it. But you NEED math to do a proper game. (If the game has stats , costs and stuff, of course)

I don't see it as a big misrepresentation sorry. The crux of the argument is

* math can't be used to design strategy game points because tactics change values and you can't math them. That math formulas are the *worst* way to point cost units.

* that saying blight kings and ork brutes are one of the more efficient units invalidates my entire argument because other units are more powerful and ork brutes aren't dominating tournaments and there are other units that said individual would take every time which means that ork brutes and by virtue of my i nvalid argument, blight kings, are not efficient since other units would be taken over htem every time.

thats pretty much the two major points in that discussion against my argument.

The fallacy portion in my quote are the summarization of my counter argument.

Unless you're seeing something different in that discussion that I'm not seeing.

The guy did make some stupid statements, but you can't just disregard everything he says because he disagrees with you.

I'm not disregarding anything. I'm posting what I saw as his major points of contention and my rebuttals. If there's something in there that you ssee that I miss let me know, I'll add it and then discuss a counterpoiint to that, those are the two that I remember vividly though.

The problem with Ironjawz Brutes is exactly what I said early. They are mathematically very efficient, but by the context of the faction (They lost all the d6 bonus movement in the hero phase), they can't really compete agaisn't other units. Shooting armies, etc...

Thats why Destruction is nearly non existant in the competitive scene.

And I agree that many people compares everything with the 3-5 most broken units in the game. Tau in 7th edition for example, wheren't winning tournaments. But they where REALLY powerfull. They could bully many armies without a problem (And I play tau!).
If people tried balance by reaching a "middle point", instead of "Everything needs to be able to compete with the FOTM units."

Thats a pretty good assessment. That is kind of inline with how I think about them as well.

Right now shooting is ... very busted in AOS because you can do it whenever you want and its not a complex to grapple with the notion that an attack that has 18" effective range is greater than one with 1" effective range.

Any tournament list I create for AOS would maximize shooting and mortal wounds at range. Because I can do it whenever I want. Assault combat armies just can't keep up.

That doesn't make brutes not efficient or at the top of the unit curve, nor does it make them undercost. It means that in the context of the ENTIRE GAME that they are up there, but not at the busted pinnacle like skyfires are.

The concept of requiring tournament domination to be efficient is a fallacy to me. Its the difference between a professiional footballer to a college footballer, and an all pro footballer to a professional.

A professional is at the top of his game. An all pro is the best of the best. A professional is still very efficient compared to all footballers.

 Galas wrote:
The problem with Ironjawz Brutes is exactly what I said early. They are mathematically very efficient, but by the context of the faction (They lost all the d6 bonus movement in the hero phase), they can't really compete agaisn't other units. Shooting armies, etc...

Thats why Destruction is nearly non existant in the competitive scene.

Ironjawz problem has nothing to do with their army vs others and entirely due to the shooting meta that random initiative supports (hey, anyone remember when we said random initiative would create a shooting meta). Shooting armies gain much more from a double turn than melee armies, such that a round 1-2 double is the strongest thing in the game.

Wayniac wrote:
But has it? I Mean, I like auticus (now, anways; we butted heads on BOLS long ago). But I do think he puts a little too much faith in his math and his comp system. It's good, yes, and probably better than SCGT/GHB Matched was or will be, but it's not perfect. The game isn't quite as degenerate as the doom and gloom has predicted. I get that his area is full of min/maxing tryhards who will jump on anything and everything if it gives an advantage, that's very unfortunate, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be that bad across the game.

I'll stop supporting Auticus' assessments when they stop being right. But more than that, I am a player who has a ton of experience with AoS, and experience with balancing point costs that goes back further than GHB1. I don't need math to tell me that 160 points for 4-wound blightkings is OP. It's obvious. And it really should be to GW as well.

That said, still looking forward to the battletome. It's going to be sweet to have so many options, new units, and new fluff to chew through. I'm just frustrated because a big aspect of Nurgle for me was the skill needed to build a really successful army, and if these previews hold up (I am still hoping there's something missing to even things out) that will have been seriously reduced. My advice will be reduced from a thread's worth of paragraphs and tactics to: "Take a Harbinger, 7 Blightking units, Plaguetouched battalion, and fill the rest with whatever you want. If your opponent also brought a broken list remember to actually try." Right now it takes skill in listbuilding and gameplay to really excel with Nurgle, there's a certain respect that's earned from that, and I'm afraid it's going away. I see Tzeentch players being treated like low-skill metagamers even when they show up WITHOUT power lists, and it's a shame.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Worth mentioning; there's a guy and my flgs who sometimes shows up with an army that has 8 blightking units, and it kicks ass. The local seraphon tournament player even has trouble against it. That is with blightkings as they are NOW.

Well, there's a rumor there's a battalion with a Lord of Blights (new guy with the gallows on his back) and like 3 (presumably 3+) Blightkings that gives them all within 7" the ability to shoot (instead of just 1 unit) and -1 Rend to boot. So that might be the new go-to Battalion if it's true.

Me, I'm happy with an OP list because I'm like that, as long as there's flexibility to build things if you don't want to bring the cheese. Don't quite care if I'm considered a "low-skill metagamer" since my area tends to not be competitive anyways and I'm known as a "punching bag" with my Flesh-Eaters anyways...

Yeah there's a hero that lets blightkings shoot. The shooting attack by itself is not that bad, but when buffed with 6s to hit = mortal wounds + normal damage and being near a GUO (6s to wound = mortal wounds) this could be very... phreshhhh.

My new years resolution for gaming is to not care so much anymore. The direction of the current gen of gamers is obviously very much against what I normally enjoy so I can either stfu and just adapt and be a deckbuilding cheesehead with them or go play solo games like kingdom death and when i put out Prima Victoria stick with that. (15mm fantasy battles, I'm getting ready to sink a large chunk of my retirement savings into model production, as 15mm i don't need a ton of detail and I can get more bang for the buck)

So bring on the broken rotbringers.

Worth mentioning; there's a guy and my flgs who sometimes shows up with an army that has 8 blightking units, and it kicks ass. The local seraphon tournament player even has trouble against it. That is with blightkings as they are NOW

We just finished our league campaign last saturday. I went undefeated with my nurgle force and seeded 1st out of 17 players. The final battle was a four-way (the top four players), against an ogre player, seraphon, and tzeentch arcanites. My three opponents from the opening bell pounded on me the entire game. I almost won regardless... the final turn I was winning and only had to survive, but the seraphon player went on a blitzkrieg of summoning spells and brought in lord kroak and then plowed me with like 25 mortal wounds that I couldn't do anything about, giving the win to the tzeentch player. (summoning in this event was not matched play point cost, it was just harder to cast the summoning spells but the seraphon player successfully cast anything on doubles which slipped through the event pack so he was getting in free 1000 points or so a game worth of big monsters)

Next league campaign it won't be a four way and my nurgle force will have a significant upgrade (16 wound great unclean ones, cheaper and more powerful blightkings, better buffs and synergy).

But context, this was a campaign league and only two of the 17 lists were really tourney powered and they were both in the finals against me. Tourney lists would definitely own my nurgle list right now as it stands because I can't deal with aos min/max gunlines very well.

We will see how I do with them at the adepticon and nova narrative event as well. I know because of how well I did with them this year I take crap for trying to say that the nurgle list right now is meh (everyone hated the blight kings before, they are really going to hate them now)

playing without points has shown us that the only real math that matters on how much of a unit is out there is the number $$ it will cost.

Wayniac wrote:
Well, there's a rumor there's a battalion with a Lord of Blights (new guy with the gallows on his back) and like 3 (presumably 3+) Blightkings that gives them all within 7" the ability to shoot (instead of just 1 unit) and -1 Rend to boot. So that might be the new go-to Battalion if it's true.

Me, I'm happy with an OP list because I'm like that, as long as there's flexibility to build things if you don't want to bring the cheese. Don't quite care if I'm considered a "low-skill metagamer" since my area tends to not be competitive anyways and I'm known as a "punching bag" with my Flesh-Eaters anyways...

I know I'm gunna be busting out PPC way more often to play my Nurgle because honestly I have no interest in an OP army for regular games. I have skryrefyre which is my OP tournament army, so if I'm playing anything else I'm usually under-optimizing my list to match the opponent anyway. That battalion sounds fun, but with plaguetouched at 100 points the buff would have to be way better than that to compete (plaguetouched is -1 to hit in melee for everyone in it). Couple that at 160 one could fit in a 14-man blightking unit into the battalion, or even two by mixing in some marauders...

Well, if it's OP, I have faith in the GHB.
GW seems (to me), to be able to fairly nerf stuff, when they actually do.
It kinda feels like a Skyfires +40 points moment.
That said, I'm now considering starting Tzeentch instead of Nurgle, after I finish BCR.
I'd also defend the Rotbringers, if they had left out the new movement options. To me, AoS is an objective game. That's how you win.
And being slow (but super killy) is pretty balanced. Being fast (and super killy) is not.

Yeah, I do not think they will be as crazy OP as it may seem. But time will tell, as the competitive crowd will find and break anything they get their grubby paws on.

I think in the context of competitive play they will be fine.

I think in the context of casual play, you will need to restrain a liittle bit because as an OP unit they can easily dominate casual play and cause one sided and not very fun games.

 auticus wrote:
I think in the context of competitive play they will be fine.

I think in the context of casual play, you will need to restrain a liittle bit because as an OP unit they can easily dominate casual play and cause one sided and not very fun games.

That's probably pretty accurate. I don't see Nurgle having much in the way of mobility, so objective taking will likely be an issue. Once they get there, though, they're gonna be hard to move. I think in the end, the Blightkings are going to be one of those units that are considered undercosted, but not so much so that they're going to change the tournament meta.

Lots of movement boosting options leaked already... I’m morn sure mobility is going to be much of an issue!

Yeah mobility is a non issue for nurgle with this book.

Blight kings have a bell upgrade already that boosts their movement.

Great Unclean one will have a bell to boost movement around him.

Nurgle wheel has a +2" move buff to all nurgle units.

Spell exists that lets you pick what you want on the wheel so you can pick the move buff.

Feces Tree lets you run AND charge if within 7" of it.

They aren't as fast as a slaanesh or mounted army but they aren't really slow anymore either.

 auticus wrote:
Yeah mobility is a non issue for nurgle with this book.

Blight kings have a bell upgrade already that boosts their movement.

Great Unclean one will have a bell to boost movement around him.

Nurgle wheel has a +2" move buff to all nurgle units.

Spell exists that lets you pick what you want on the wheel so you can pick the move buff.

Feces Tree lets you run AND charge if within 7" of it.

They aren't as fast as a slaanesh or mounted army but they aren't really slow anymore either.

I think thats a big problem. In MOBA's theres this "movility creep", that they keep adding to the games. Because movility is fun, it allows you to be where you want to be and do things you couldn't otherwise do. At the same time, players love complete heroes. They don't like heroes with weakness. They aren't "as fun to play".
The same translates to armies. People don't like armies that have obvious and strong disadvantages. They want to be able to do everything. And that translates in developers adding ways to make the "disadvantages" of a given faction a non-issue.
I'm not saying Nurgle forces couldn't have some movility buff. But they should be pricey and in small numbers.

 auticus wrote:
Yeah mobility is a non issue for nurgle with this book.

Blight kings have a bell upgrade already that boosts their movement.

Great Unclean one will have a bell to boost movement around him.

Nurgle wheel has a +2" move buff to all nurgle units.

Spell exists that lets you pick what you want on the wheel so you can pick the move buff.

Feces Tree lets you run AND charge if within 7" of it.

They aren't as fast as a slaanesh or mounted army but they aren't really slow anymore either.

I don't really see that competing against armies like Tzeentch who have 16" move on disks and an extremely solid melee battleline with run+charge on a base 6' movement. I've always been a proponent of waiting to see how a rule actually plays on the tabletop, though. Things often look better/worse on paper than they end up being on the tabletop (see the cries of 8th ed. 40k being a MSU edition, and Necron Warriors with RP being to most broken thing since leafblower). Pre-orders should be up soon, so we'll be able to see the full warscrolls for the first wave of units! Side note: Looks like the Maggotkin of Nurgle category has been added to the webstore. Currently just has the already-available models.

People don't like armies that have obvious and strong disadvantages.

I agree with your premise as well. One of the main complaints with WHFB I heard for years was that block movement "screwed you over" because if you got out of position you could be out of the game and that was "not fun".

Now I think thats definitely a PART of GW's new boner for making everything so fast. The other is that they actively want armies charging each other in turn 1. Because thats more exciting and "more fun".

Both 40k and AOS feature the strong fast movement to engage in melee by turn 1... which I think is 110% related to people complaining that shooting armies have an advantage so to get rid of that advantage, they let melee engage in turn 1 too.

It wrecks immersion but immersion is no longer a goal of game design as much as it used to be.

Immersion is "not fun".

I don't really see that competing against armies like Tzeentch who have 16" move on disks and an extremely solid melee battleline with run+charge on a base 6' movement.

Well right tzeentch armies are 16" move and are pretty much at the extreme end of mobiility.

But I can move my rotbringers 4" + 2" (wheel) and another 2" for the unit bell and another 3" for the GUO bell so they have an 11" movement base, plus a potential 6" run for a 17" move and then a 2d6" charge on top of that. Potentially with the buffs, blight kings have a 1:6 chance of moving equal to tzeentch 16" discs, a 1:6 chance of moving FASTER than the discs, and a 2:3 chance of moving a bit slower than those.

Thats not very slow IMO. Thats much faster than my chaos dwarf army or even my dark elf army as it stands right now.

People don't like armies that have obvious and strong disadvantages.

I agree with your premise as well. One of the main complaints with WHFB I heard for years was that block movement "screwed you over" because if you got out of position you could be out of the game and that was "not fun".

Now I think thats definitely a PART of GW's new boner for making everything so fast. The other is that they actively want armies charging each other in turn 1. Because thats more exciting and "more fun". Maneuvering and movement phase setting up charges etc, is "not fun" or "not as much fun" as getting right to combat right away and rolling dice. Thats more exciting.

Both 40k and AOS feature the strong fast movement to engage in melee by turn 1... which I think is 110% related to people complaining that shooting armies have an advantage so to get rid of that advantage, they let melee engage in turn 1 too.

It wrecks immersion but immersion is no longer a goal of game design as much as it used to be.

Immersion is "not fun".

I pray that they don't do the same thing with the Middle Earth game.

I play a lot of Kingdom Death as well, and if you follow the forums there is a moderate amount of complaining KDM is not fun either because its too hard and thats not fun. The designer there has opted to keep the game where it is though in difficulty as that was his intent, and it still breaks kickstarter records... so it'll be interesting to see how long the current stretch of gamey game design sticks.

I honestly don't know.

 auticus wrote:

I don't really see that competing against armies like Tzeentch who have 16" move on disks and an extremely solid melee battleline with run+charge on a base 6' movement.

Well right tzeentch armies are 16" move and are pretty much at the extreme end of mobiility.

But I can move my rotbringers 4" + 2" (wheel) and another 2" for the unit bell and another 3" for the GUO bell so they have an 11" movement base, plus a potential 6" run for a 17" move and then a 2d6" charge on top of that. Potentially with the buffs, blight kings have a 1:6 chance of moving equal to tzeentch 16" discs, a 1:6 chance of moving FASTER than the discs, and a 2:3 chance of moving a bit slower than those.

Thats not very slow IMO. Thats much faster than my chaos dwarf army or even my dark elf army as it stands right now.

That seems like an awful lot of points to spend to get to that speed, even on an undercosted unit like Blightkings. Far more than what Tzeentch or Slaanesh spends for that same mobility. Rotbringers aren't in the worst spot for mobility, but on paper at least, I feel like they're designed to make a slow but steady march across the battlefield. Again, though, we'll have to see how it actually plays out on the table (and they'll be my next project after finishing my Tzeentch cult). I think they'll be a good army, maybe even very good, but they're not going to be game-changing. Powergamers are still going to be playing the same armies they play today.

The bell comes with the rotbringers, the wheel is free, and the tree is free. The only part of that that requires points is the Great Unclean One, so take that out of the equation and they lose 3" of that movement. Though it should be mentioned the bell is an aura so for the GUO cost, you get all units in his aura able to do these thiings.

For my money I don't think paying for a GUO is too much to grant the speed bonuses but thats subjective.

They aren't going to be a powergamer army simply because they lack the 30" shooting or ability to reliably break the game with mortal wounds.

It will help them get across the table in the first turn so they aren't subjected to a turn of no melee while the power ranged lists draw breath and roll dice on their face though.

They likely aren't going to break the game at a tournament table, but as mentioned above, in a friendly there will need to be restraint, much like beastclaw raider lists right now need to exercise restraint in non powergamer environments.

But the wheel changes every turn, so you would need a sorcerer to choose the +movement cycle to get that bonus reliably, though I guess you could use the GUO to do that. I think this is another case where you and I agree on the principle topic, but disagree on the specifics. The bottom line is that I'm not terribly worried about Rotbringers imbalancing the game. There are bigger thing to worry about as far as the balance of AoS is concerned.

Don't forget there is a nurgle spell that lets you pick what cycle the wheel is on and its not hard to roll (I believe it was a 5). But yeah if you are playing in an all competitive min/max group then this won't affect you much.

 EnTyme wrote:
But the wheel changes every turn, so you would need a sorcerer to choose the +movement cycle to get that bonus reliably, though I guess you could use the GUO to do that. I think this is another case where you and I agree on the principle topic, but disagree on the specifics. The bottom line is that I'm not terribly worried about Rotbringers imbalancing the game. There are bigger thing to worry about as far as the balance of AoS is concerned.

We are also assuming the power is choose the result, rather than just +/- 1 to the current cycle. IIRC the movement one is #1 on the chart, so if it's not choosing, you have to roll a 1 or a 2 to get the +2" movement, and then keep it on there (which #2 is very good as well as it's add 1 to wounds) the entire game, or else you have to wait for the cycle to come to something you can manipulate.

I like how the argument 'but Tzeentch could beat it' keeps being used like it actually means anything.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I like how the argument 'but Tzeentch could beat it' keeps being used like it actually means anything.

Thats because people always try to balance towards the most OP thing instead of the middle. And then complain about powercreep when they are all claiming for their armies to be able to compete with the most powerfull faction.