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.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Dandelion wrote:
Question: How did a thread about possible modifications to PL devolve into arguing whether PL is good or not?

Because the proposed change to PL made PL into points, thus defeating any possible reason to have PL in the first place.

I do think there's a middle ground. The current game gives us models and gear and lets us mash those together however we wish and just pay the cost. I think there's ways to do PL that keeps its simplification while also "paying" for Wargear.

To use DW vets as an example, being probably the messiest thing I can imagine for PL. Currently they're an insane 9 PL but kind of assume everyone has a Storm Shield / Frag Cannon or something like that. One way to do it would be to categorize the costs a little bit more. There's some of this already (DW Vet +2/Term +3/etc) but it could be groups in such a way that they only cost +2 with the following weapons or something like that. Alternatively, PL could be done with an "equpiment budget" for the squad. Basically, you could bake in a certain amount of cost by saying the squad can take X number of items from this group and Y from that or something like that.

In any case, I've enjoyed the simplification of PL overall. It generally works just fine for a lot of the game. Where it seems to fall apart is at the troops with special weapons level. I don't think its unworkable, I just think they need to present it differently to better fit the kind of game its looking to create.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sorry, but games like this and D&D and etc. aren't for you if you can't do that basic math. I certainly wouldn't want an opponent that can't do math, because they likely couldn't strategize well and actually give me a good game.

That's an odd assumption to make. I've met plenty of intelligent people over the years who weren't particularly good with math, for various reasons, including one of my favourite Chess opponents.

Darsath wrote:
I can't imagine planning a game of 40k, or a pick-up game, and only allowing 3 minutes to make a list. If you have that little time, then 40k isn't the game you should be playing. Rush playing always sucks. Use points, or just eyeball it. Power Level is mostly useless anyways.

I've never understood why people show up at a venue without lists already prepared, but the world would be a boring place if we were all the same.


Honestly, though, the time thing is kind of secondary, IMO. Ultimately, it's the simple fact that PL are easier (regardless of how much of a rush you're in to put your list together) and it's more forgiving for people who just build their models how they like them rather than for what makes a 'good' list.

 insaniak wrote:
That's an odd assumption to make. I've met plenty of intelligent people over the years who weren't particularly good with math, for various reasons, including one of my favourite Chess opponents.

Chess is not a game where even basic strategy depends on knowing and calculating statistics for your possible decisions. 40k is, and a player with weak enough math skills to find adding up points difficult is unlikely to be able to make good strategic decisions because they don't know the math.

It's more forgiving for people who just build their models how they like them rather than for what makes a 'good' list.

It is no such thing. In fact, the opposite is true: PL punishes you for taking anything but the most powerful upgrades (and all of them you can legally take), while normal points at least make your unit cheaper if you don't take that lascannon because it doesn't look as cool as more bolters. If you don't like list optimization then playing with normal points is your best option.

 Peregrine wrote:

It is no such thing. In fact, the opposite is true: PL punishes you for taking anything but the most powerful upgrades (and all of them you can legally take), while normal points at least make your unit cheaper if you don't take that lascannon because it doesn't look as cool as more bolters. If you don't like list optimization then playing with normal points is your best option.

It only 'punishes' you if you're still looking at it from the point of view of list optimisation being the default.

You're assuming that the guy with the sub-optimal list is going to suffer because his opponent won't have a sub-optimal list. Which, once again, overlooks the playstyle that PL is designed to encourage, and, also again, overlooks the fact that a player with a sub-optimal PL list is also going to have a sub-optimal points list, and so is likely going to run into even bigger problems in points-based games on account of playing against people who take list building more seriously.

Peregrine wrote:I can't believe we're really at the point of arguing that adding 521+118 is meaningfully difficult, especially in an age where everyone has a calculator on their phone. And yes, you could accidentally type 181 instead of 118, but you can also do that when adding up PL points.

If your argument defending points is "it's okay to need a calculator because everyone has one", then you're missing the point. The point is that I shouldn't need a calculator.

And no, before you insult my intelligence again, I've been playing 40k for years. I've played games since before 8th, so have definitely known the list building of previous editions. I didn't mind it, but the simplified way of doing it in 8th is infinitely more preferable to me.

I *could* play Matched, I *could* calculate everything if I wanted. But I don't want to have to.

Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
That's an odd assumption to make. I've met plenty of intelligent people over the years who weren't particularly good with math, for various reasons, including one of my favourite Chess opponents.

Chess is not a game where even basic strategy depends on knowing and calculating statistics for your possible decisions. 40k is, and a player with weak enough math skills to find adding up points difficult is unlikely to be able to make good strategic decisions because they don't know the math.

I can calculate well enough. I shouldn't HAVE to. If I want a simple version, which I am not advocating you embrace, I should be able to play that way.
I could make strategic choices, I could play competitive strategic play. But I don't WANT to.

But hey, by all means, don't let me rain on the "if you don't want to play Matched, you can't make strategic decisions" parade.

It's more forgiving for people who just build their models how they like them rather than for what makes a 'good' list.

It is no such thing. In fact, the opposite is true: PL punishes you for taking anything but the most powerful upgrades (and all of them you can legally take), while normal points at least make your unit cheaper if you don't take that lascannon because it doesn't look as cool as more bolters. If you don't like list optimization then playing with normal points is your best option.

Except it encourages me not to take upgrades for aesthetic reasons. I can't take a power fist on Tactical Sergeant 2 because it'll cost me and might stop me taking something else - I am being punished because I want an aesthetic upgrade.

If you're looking at PL with the outlook of "if I don't take the best thing, I'm nerfing myself", you're exactly the kind of person who shouldn't be playing PL, and certainly not someone I'd want to play against.
You're welcome to play like that if you want to, but I don't want to be part of that.

It's almost as if people aren't super worried about trying to guarantee a win when building a list based on math and more worried about their army's strategy in game. Obviously anyone who has ever played this game would like to buy the best units and only ever equip them with the most optimal weapons available.

You can tell because you never see a heavy flamer or missile launcher in a tactical squad when people show off their armies. You never see a fire warrior or kroot in a Tau army when you watch battle reports.

It is well known that the best tournament players all run the best and most optimal builds of the strongest armies in the game all the time.

That's why it is so obvious that power level is so abusable that nobody ever uses it. Why didn't I see it before.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Ok, how much is the range on a lascannon worth on a city fight board? How about if you are starting play with the enemy surrounding you at 12" away versus having the hammer and anvil deployment?

Power mauls and fists can each only kill to be model per hit, but the mail hits more often. There may not be more types of unit the mail is better at killing, but I am willing to bet there are more models on the average table the maul kills more efficiently.

Horde? I'd be happier with the maul. Got a character or big model out there? Glad I grabbed the fist. Paying triple the points for a fist that may end up only ever swinging at one wound models at toughness three seems like a weird way to value things.

People simply aren't maxing out every list with all available options and wargear. Most kits don't have them on the sprue, and anyone who would buy 5 of the same kit to field 5 models with the best weapon is probably not looking at power level anyway (that's a lot of money to toss out if you aren't going to tournaments to win stuff)

Since tournaments have restrictions on terrain set up, mission options, and list building, the points start to become more accurate.

A base power level system, with small add ons to represent better gear would be fine. It would help necrons immensely and was already done with several forgeworld models (the wraithseer comes to mind) so the original idea has merit.

Except, if both are the same price (free with PL), what's the point of the Maul existing? You either take the overall better weapon for free, or a worse weapon. For free. On top of that more people are likely going to have Power Fist models compared to Power Maul models.

So what IS your defense? You don't seem to have one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Peregrine wrote:I can't believe we're really at the point of arguing that adding 521+118 is meaningfully difficult, especially in an age where everyone has a calculator on their phone. And yes, you could accidentally type 181 instead of 118, but you can also do that when adding up PL points.

If your argument defending points is "it's okay to need a calculator because everyone has one", then you're missing the point. The point is that I shouldn't need a calculator.

And no, before you insult my intelligence again, I've been playing 40k for years. I've played games since before 8th, so have definitely known the list building of previous editions. I didn't mind it, but the simplified way of doing it in 8th is infinitely more preferable to me.

I *could* play Matched, I *could* calculate everything if I wanted. But I don't want to have to.

Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
That's an odd assumption to make. I've met plenty of intelligent people over the years who weren't particularly good with math, for various reasons, including one of my favourite Chess opponents.

Chess is not a game where even basic strategy depends on knowing and calculating statistics for your possible decisions. 40k is, and a player with weak enough math skills to find adding up points difficult is unlikely to be able to make good strategic decisions because they don't know the math.

I can calculate well enough. I shouldn't HAVE to. If I want a simple version, which I am not advocating you embrace, I should be able to play that way.
I could make strategic choices, I could play competitive strategic play. But I don't WANT to.

But hey, by all means, don't let me rain on the "if you don't want to play Matched, you can't make strategic decisions" parade.

It's more forgiving for people who just build their models how they like them rather than for what makes a 'good' list.

It is no such thing. In fact, the opposite is true: PL punishes you for taking anything but the most powerful upgrades (and all of them you can legally take), while normal points at least make your unit cheaper if you don't take that lascannon because it doesn't look as cool as more bolters. If you don't like list optimization then playing with normal points is your best option.

Except it encourages me not to take upgrades for aesthetic reasons. I can't take a power fist on Tactical Sergeant 2 because it'll cost me and might stop me taking something else - I am being punished because I want an aesthetic upgrade.

If you're looking at PL with the outlook of "if I don't take the best thing, I'm nerfing myself", you're exactly the kind of person who shouldn't be playing PL, and certainly not someone I'd want to play against.
You're welcome to play like that if you want to, but I don't want to be part of that.

Here we go!

Power Fists aren't an aesthetic choice, and never WERE. They are a wargear choice. It's as though the regular point system makes you decide on what's important for your game, rather than "TAKE EVERYTHING!!!!1!", huh?

You weren't buying those Power Fists and Plasma Pistols because they were aesthetic choices. You bought them because you hoped to use them, and you felt cheated when you didn't because it was spent points in a shooting squad you equipped to go into melee for whatever reason. Now you want them for free just on the off chance you CAN use them.

That seems like a WAAC hidden as a Casual person to me.

Also nobody is impressed you played games before 8th. I'm from the beginning of 4th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
It's almost as if people aren't super worried about trying to guarantee a win when building a list based on math and more worried about their army's strategy in game. Obviously anyone who has ever played this game would like to buy the best units and only ever equip them with the most optimal weapons available.

You can tell because you never see a heavy flamer or missile launcher in a tactical squad when people show off their armies. You never see a fire warrior or kroot in a Tau army when you watch battle reports.

It is well known that the best tournament players all run the best and most optimal builds of the strongest armies in the game all the time.

That's why it is so obvious that power level is so abusable that nobody ever uses it. Why didn't I see it before.

You don't see ML anywhere because they're worse than Lascannons and Heavy Bolters. Did you know Devastators with 2 Heavy Bolters and 2 Lascannons were considered more effective against a variety of targets than 4 ML?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Power Fists aren't an aesthetic choice, and never WERE.

They are if you're choosing them because they look cool on the models you're building, rather than for their in-game effect.

Which is how a very large number of casual players design their armies.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Except, if both are the same price (free with PL), what's the point of the Maul existing? You either take the overall better weapon for free, or a worse weapon. For free. On top of that more people are likely going to have Power Fist models compared to Power Maul models.

So what IS your defense? You don't seem to have one.

Two reasons.
One, and the one which your "omg must take best weapon at all time tacticool playz" mind would appreciate - on a S4 model attacking a T3 one with low armour save or none (GEQ) a power maul is better, because it doesn't suffer the -1 to hit penalty, and still wounds on a 2+ with no save.

Secondly, and the one which I would probably have - because I think the maul looks cooler, and I want my guy to look cool.

Good enough defense? Or does personal aesthetic taste and preference not register to that "omg tacticool playz" mindset you have there?

Here we go!

Power Fists aren't an aesthetic choice, and never WERE. They are a wargear choice. It's as though the regular point system makes you decide on what's important for your game, rather than "TAKE EVERYTHING!!!!1!", huh?

No, power fists are modelled on the model. They're aesthetic first and foremost to me.
You think of models in regard to their wargear and how they interact on table first and foremost? Nice, you go gal! I don't think of it that way, but you're welcome to that.

I think differently. My opinion is just as valid as yours. Get over it.

You weren't buying those Power Fists and Plasma Pistols because they were aesthetic choices. You bought them because you hoped to use them, and you felt cheated when you didn't because it was spent points in a shooting squad you equipped to go into melee for whatever reason. Now you want them for free just on the off chance you CAN use them.

Woah guys, we've got a mind reader over here!

How does it feel knowing that your arm has fully left this solar system with the amount of reaching you're doing here?

That seems like a WAAC hidden as a Casual person to me.

You got any proof of that, or is just you trying to desperately claw back some kind of control here? Because you're just spouting off assumptions about my personal likes and dislikes without ever having met me, and I'm pretty sure the whole forum can see how utterly ridiculous that is.

Also nobody is impressed you played games before 8th. I'm from the beginning of 4th.

Lovely, same. Your point being?
Mine was letting Peregrine know that I've played for years since before PL was a thing - just to dispel any kind of doubt on the whole "if you play PL, you're dumb" argument of his.

And your reason? Weird flex, but ok.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You don't see ML anywhere because they're worse than Lascannons and Heavy Bolters. Did you know Devastators with 2 Heavy Bolters and 2 Lascannons were considered more effective against a variety of targets than 4 ML?

I don't know, maybe because some people like the look of how missile launchers look?

Is that too complicated for you?

I also LOVE how you completely missed the sarcasm of that post - people DO take missile launchers, just not the kind of players like you. You're so self-absorbed in your own idea of the game that you completely missed the sarcasm poking fun at that exact kind of attitude.

 insaniak wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Power Fists aren't an aesthetic choice, and never WERE.

They are if you're choosing them because they look cool on the models you're building, rather than for their in-game effect.

Which is how a very large number of casual players design their armies.

How many of these players are buying all these boxes of models and putting them together before buying their codex? The answer might surprise you: none.

So you want the power fist? Pay the points. Just don't be surprised when the Tactical Squad never uses it because they're not a melee squad.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Power Fists aren't an aesthetic choice, and never WERE.

They are if you're choosing them because they look cool on the models you're building, rather than for their in-game effect.

Which is how a very large number of casual players design their armies.

How many of these players are buying all these boxes of models and putting them together before buying their codex? The answer might surprise you: none.

Incorrect. At least one.

Hi there. I'm Smudge, pleased to meet you.

So you want the power fist? Pay the points. Just don't be surprised when the Tactical Squad never uses it because they're not a melee squad.

Or, I could play Power Level, and not be penalized for wanting to make my guys look cool. Why should I have to even consider the in-game limits because I want my guys to look cool?

Just a thought.

Also, I'm going to bring this up until I get an answer from you:
"I'm asking that you recognise that there's more than one way to have fun, and that if people find PL more fun, their opinions are just as valid as yours.

Do you agree with that? "

You'd be surprised just how many times my non-melee squads have beaten people to death in melee.

Being a melee squad isn't about being better at melee than shooting. It's about being better at melee than the guy in front of you.

That said, a PF on a Tac squad is not a competitive choice.

Bharring wrote:
You'd be surprised just how many times my non-melee squads have beaten people to death in melee.

Being a melee squad isn't about being better at melee than shooting. It's about being better at melee than the guy in front of you.

That said, a PF on a Tac squad is not a competitive choice.

Oh absolutely. But sometimes, having the squad sergeant pointing out a target for the squad's plasma cannon with a massive oversized boxing glove just looks so cool.

I had whole units in metal and eventually finecast. I didn't have any options on gear for some of them.

My sky claws had plasma guns because they wanted to emulate the fire wolf in the sky. The pack leaders for them and my swift claws had wolf claws and the same helmet because they were twin brothers who were constantly fighting to accumulate the most kills in a battle. My thunderwolves had two power mauls because I wanted to pay homage to my Polish ancestry with the mace aesthetic.

My orks had a stompa, my wraithknight always went with the sword and shield, my corsairs and craftworld eldar ran falcons instead of waveserpents, I built twin sword wraithblades instead of wraithguard.

There are many reasons to build a unit with a particular load out. Not getting penalized for spending points thematically is a great addition to the game, as far as I and others are concerned.

I can understand that people don't like PL, but I cannot understand how people can defend points as a good system.

"Or, I could play Power Level, and not be penalized for wanting to make my guys look cool."
Similarly, you could play Power Level, and be penalized for wanting to make your guys look cool.

I've only played a few PL games. One of them, I agreed, set up my list which included a Harlequin Troupe with only 2 Pistols and 2 Kisses (my "main" Harlequin Troupe is equipped that way). The other guy drops down 3 max squads of proxied Wolfen "with all the upgrades". It was still a fun game, but PL cut both ways.

It's like playing D&D. In 3/3.5 the Druid is OP. How many games did that negatively impact for me? 0. Because you don't play D&D for a competitive challenge.

Similarly, you don't play PL for a competitive challenge. Get yet guyz on the board quickly and simply for a what-the-hell game? Works just fine. Fine-tune your list and strategies to get better at the game? Not tuned tightly enough.

Making Power Levels account for Wargear makes it more complicated in exchange for more granularity. If you want that, Points has already done that for even more granularity. Do we really need a 3rd "in between" system?

(Inb4: technically at least the 4th: "just play what you want, no points" is also on that continuum, way off in the low-granularity end.)

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Except, if both are the same price (free with PL), what's the point of the Maul existing? You either take the overall better weapon for free, or a worse weapon. For free. On top of that more people are likely going to have Power Fist models compared to Power Maul models.

So what IS your defense? You don't seem to have one.

Two reasons.
One, and the one which your "omg must take best weapon at all time tacticool playz" mind would appreciate - on a S4 model attacking a T3 one with low armour save or none (GEQ) a power maul is better, because it doesn't suffer the -1 to hit penalty, and still wounds on a 2+ with no save.

Secondly, and the one which I would probably have - because I think the maul looks cooler, and I want my guy to look cool.

Good enough defense? Or does personal aesthetic taste and preference not register to that "omg tacticool playz" mindset you have there?

Here we go!

Power Fists aren't an aesthetic choice, and never WERE. They are a wargear choice. It's as though the regular point system makes you decide on what's important for your game, rather than "TAKE EVERYTHING!!!!1!", huh?

No, power fists are modelled on the model. They're aesthetic first and foremost to me.
You think of models in regard to their wargear and how they interact on table first and foremost? Nice, you go gal! I don't think of it that way, but you're welcome to that.

I think differently. My opinion is just as valid as yours. Get over it.

You weren't buying those Power Fists and Plasma Pistols because they were aesthetic choices. You bought them because you hoped to use them, and you felt cheated when you didn't because it was spent points in a shooting squad you equipped to go into melee for whatever reason. Now you want them for free just on the off chance you CAN use them.

Woah guys, we've got a mind reader over here!

How does it feel knowing that your arm has fully left this solar system with the amount of reaching you're doing here?

That seems like a WAAC hidden as a Casual person to me.

You got any proof of that, or is just you trying to desperately claw back some kind of control here? Because you're just spouting off assumptions about my personal likes and dislikes without ever having met me, and I'm pretty sure the whole forum can see how utterly ridiculous that is.

Also nobody is impressed you played games before 8th. I'm from the beginning of 4th.

Lovely, same. Your point being?
Mine was letting Peregrine know that I've played for years since before PL was a thing - just to dispel any kind of doubt on the whole "if you play PL, you're dumb" argument of his.

And your reason? Weird flex, but ok.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You don't see ML anywhere because they're worse than Lascannons and Heavy Bolters. Did you know Devastators with 2 Heavy Bolters and 2 Lascannons were considered more effective against a variety of targets than 4 ML?

I don't know, maybe because some people like the look of how missile launchers look?

Is that too complicated for you?

I also LOVE how you completely missed the sarcasm of that post - people DO take missile launchers, just not the kind of players like you. You're so self-absorbed in your own idea of the game that you completely missed the sarcasm poking fun at that exact kind of attitude.

1. No it isn't a defense because both weapons still cost the same. Power Fists are going to be more effective in the long run, which is why, surprise surprise, they cost more. Would you argue they should be priced the same in a point system because they're of equal value?
I personally don't care that you make bad decisions because something looks cool. I made an Asterion stand-in but don't use it because he's not good. If you wanna show off a model, do it out of the game, not in the game, if it's a poor choice.
2. You didn't just buy the models and then built them and then read the codex. You don't have an excuse. And no, not all beliefs are valid or even, and it's that attitude that's led to more flat earthers and anti-vaxxers feel validated.
3. You didn't deny you put the points aside to potentially use those upgrades though. So I win.
4. Perigrine is right about your basic personality though. And yes if you can't do math with triple digits in your head the game isn't for you, nor are any games that use numbers. You aren't doing calculus.
5. It proves the point the ML is a bad weapon even in a system where it is effectively free, and it needs to possibly be redesigned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Trollbert wrote:
I can understand that people don't like PL, but I cannot understand how people can defend points as a good system.

Because points are a closer approximation to the units actual power?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

How many of these players are buying all these boxes of models and putting them together before buying their codex? The answer might surprise you: none.

That answer does surprise me... But only because I'm absolutely amazed that anyone who has supposedly been playing since 4th edition could think such a thing.

For the record, my first two 40k armies, bought way back in the late '90s, were assembled before I had a codex for either of them.

I've encountered more people than I can count over the years, either in person or online, who started buying and assembling their models before they had a codex, or before they had become familiar enough with the rules to know which options were better than others.

It's frankly rather astounding that you wouldn't have encountered similar, unless your gaming has been confined to a small, specific group.

@Smudge:
My SM Company (VII of Wings Of Dawn, battle company of a homebrew chapter) 1st squad Seargent always brings Vox Aurora into battle - a relic Power Fist (no special rules, obviously), that traces their heritage back to before their founding. Pointing out enemies with his fist for his squad (Tacs) is always an important part of any engagement.

I know exactly what you mean.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Bharring wrote:
You'd be surprised just how many times my non-melee squads have beaten people to death in melee.

Being a melee squad isn't about being better at melee than shooting. It's about being better at melee than the guy in front of you.

That said, a PF on a Tac squad is not a competitive choice.

Oh absolutely. But sometimes, having the squad sergeant pointing out a target for the squad's plasma cannon with a massive oversized boxing glove just looks so cool.

Then model a slightly bigger fist. Or a regular fist. It isn't hard.

"Perigrine is right about your basic personality though. And yes if you can't do math with triple digits in your head the game isn't for you, nor are any games that use numbers. You aren't doing calculus. "

I had a friend in highschool. We were at a Math League meet, and looking at the scoreboard for the season - about 5 local schools, 4 previous meets, 3-digit scores at most for each box. He pulled out a calculator to add those numbers.

Is he not good enough at math to play Warhammer? He doesn't, AFAIK. But he was top-10 in State for Math League all four years. First a couple times. Taking 500-level courses (graduate level) by 10th grade. He, his brother, and I put our (rural public) school in the top *60* in the *Nation* for the AMC-12. Went to MIT. Etc, etc.

He could multiply 8-figure numbers in his head. But he pulled out a calculator to add some 3-digit numbers.

There are many reasons to not use complexity beyond not being able to handle it. I prefer points, but that's not because I'm "smarter" than those who prefer PL.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Trollbert wrote:
I can understand that people don't like PL, but I cannot understand how people can defend points as a good system.

Because points are a closer approximation to the units actual power?

Are they really? Apart from the nonsensical ruling that a power fist costs the same for a HQ with 4A WS2+ as for a 2A WS3+ seargent and a 6A WS3+ Khorne Berzerker. Or that a Lascannon costs the same per shot no matter how durable the platform is, but makes a difference between BS3+ and 4+. Or that Plasma/Melter/Flamer cost the same, no matter how fast the platform is.
Or that a character with an aura costs the same, no matter how many units he can effect?

Would you want a system where you had to check 3 tables per weapon before knowing what it costs? Or a system where you even had to check a table and multiply the cost by a factor depending on the game size to see how much a unit costs?



Points are dogshit, PL are horsegak. Different flavors, but both are gak.

Bharring wrote:
"Or, I could play Power Level, and not be penalized for wanting to make my guys look cool."
Similarly, you could play Power Level, and be penalized for wanting to make your guys look cool.

I've only played a few PL games. One of them, I agreed, set up my list which included a Harlequin Troupe with only 2 Pistols and 2 Kisses (my "main" Harlequin Troupe is equipped that way). The other guy drops down 3 max squads of proxied Wolfen "with all the upgrades". It was still a fun game, but PL cut both ways.

I'm not meaning to have a go, but just because something is technically 'legal' or 'not illegal' doesn't make it morally 'right'. Seeing those wulfen plonked down in front of me would have... raised some eyebrows at the very least.

Bharring wrote:

It's like playing D&D. In 3/3.5 the Druid is OP. How many games did that negatively impact for me? 0. Because you don't play D&D for a competitive challenge.

Agreed that the Druid was op in 3.5 (I played a Druid in a campaign once and to be fair, it was quite fun). And I'm glad it didnt impaxt your games.

That said, I dont necessarily agree with the notion that you don't play d&d for a competitive challenge. While i, like yourself I assume, do, my own experience of RPGing is more limited (I've played in 3 or 4 campaigns back in uni - rolemaster, d&d, and a bit of gurps and sotc), for a few of my closest friends back home, RPGing was their thing, and thry knew people who did exactly what you describe - they were all about 'winning' the game, at the expense of everything/everybody else, fluff and everything else be damned. this was their 'thing' and I've heard plenty stories from them (and seen some!) of try-hard munchkin powergaming RPG gamers that ruined campaigns, and were only interested in breaking systems and only abusing the most OP of in-game options. Ironically, they said the exact same things of the more 'narrative' based less-than-optimal-but-still-characterful gaming as some of our more competitive wargamers here say about the same thing.

Bharring wrote:

Similarly, you don't play PL for a competitive challenge. Get yet guyz on the board quickly and simply for a what-the-hell game? Works just fine. Fine-tune your list and strategies to get better at the game? Not tuned tightly enough.
Making Power Levels account for Wargear makes it more complicated in exchange for more granularity. If you want that, Points has already done that for even more granularity. Do we really need a 3rd "in between" system?
(Inb4: technically at least the 4th: "just play what you want, no points" is also on that continuum, way off in the low-granularity end.)

Agreed.

Personally, after a lot of years playing mk2 warmachine/hordes, I prefer less-granular points, not more granular. Table-top wargames are not an 'exact science' and I've often found that a less granular accounting system was better at covering the rough edges. Getting more fiddly numbers doesn't make a game better if you ask me. It just gives more room for issues to seep in.

That said, here's a question - is it possible to have a less granular system, with an option for 'upgrades'?

In WMH, you could buy weapon attachments and unit attachments for x points that often added extra rules/abilities to a unit. Personally, I think paying a cost for a 'specialist' or 'gunner' (in kill team speak) is a good idea. But it has to be bolted on to other 'load-bearing structures'.

Trollbert wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Trollbert wrote:
I can understand that people don't like PL, but I cannot understand how people can defend points as a good system.

Because points are a closer approximation to the units actual power?

Are they really? Apart from the nonsensical ruling that a power fist costs the same for a HQ with 4A WS2+ as for a 2A WS3+ seargent and a 6A WS3+ Khorne Berzerker. Or that a Lascannon costs the same per shot no matter how durable the platform is, but makes a difference between BS3+ and 4+. Or that Plasma/Melter/Flamer cost the same, no matter how fast the platform is.
Or that a character with an aura costs the same, no matter how many units he can effect?

Would you want a system where you had to check 3 tables per weapon before knowing what it costs? Or a system where you even had to check a table and multiply the cost by a factor depending on the game size to see how much a unit costs?



Points are dogshit, PL are horsegak. Different flavors, but both are gak.

Look at a comparison of PL the moment you add an additional member to several different units. 15 Necron Warriors is equal to 20. Adding a single Vet to Imperial Guard Veterans raises it by how much? What's the difference in PL between 6 Tactical Marines with Bolters and a Plasma Gun compared to a 10 man squad with everything?

One is clearly a better system and we need to support that system.

Bharring wrote:"Or, I could play Power Level, and not be penalized for wanting to make my guys look cool."
Similarly, you could play Power Level, and be penalized for wanting to make your guys look cool.

You're not wrong, however, I don't mind that. In most cases, actually, I'm probably hampering myself. But I at least always know that a Tactical Squad will cost X, I'll always know a Razorback will be Y, etc etc. That consistency pleases me.

I've only played a few PL games. One of them, I agreed, set up my list which included a Harlequin Troupe with only 2 Pistols and 2 Kisses (my "main" Harlequin Troupe is equipped that way). The other guy drops down 3 max squads of proxied Wolfen "with all the upgrades". It was still a fun game, but PL cut both ways.

It's like playing D&D. In 3/3.5 the Druid is OP. How many games did that negatively impact for me? 0. Because you don't play D&D for a competitive challenge.

Similarly, you don't play PL for a competitive challenge. Get yet guyz on the board quickly and simply for a what-the-hell game? Works just fine. Fine-tune your list and strategies to get better at the game? Not tuned tightly enough.

Making Power Levels account for Wargear makes it more complicated in exchange for more granularity. If you want that, Points has already done that for even more granularity. Do we really need a 3rd "in between" system?

Exactly. You want competitive challenges? Don't play PL. If you wanted a challenging football game, you wouldn't jump into a children's park and take on the kids there.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:1. No it isn't a defense because both weapons still cost the same. Power Fists are going to be more effective in the long run, which is why, surprise surprise, they cost more. Would you argue they should be priced the same in a point system because they're of equal value?

But do you deny that a power maul is better than a power fist in that situation, yes or no?
That's what you asked.

And as I've said regarding the points system, it's flawed because it relies on opportunity cost, a cost which cannot be balanced with the amount of potential choice in the game. You can buy a flamer, but it's useless if no-one gets within 8" of you. You can buy a lascannon, but it's wasted if your opponent has brought an army of pure Termagants (something which I've arranged to play against soon, actually).
Points are a great way of making a precise approximation, one based off opportunity costs for what it *might* do, but it's not foolproof.

I personally don't care that you make bad decisions because something looks cool. I made an Asterion stand-in but don't use it because he's not good. If you wanna show off a model, do it out of the game, not in the game, if it's a poor choice.

Sorry, but I don't have that kind of money to make a list that looks cool, and one that pleases your personal whims which I don't care for. You have no right to tell me to not use my models because I wanted them to look good rather than be 0.1% better.

I'll play PL, thank you very much.

2. You didn't just buy the models and then built them and then read the codex. You don't have an excuse.

Got any proof for that? Or am I going to have to point out yet ANOTHER lying assumption you've made?

I might even start a counter.

And no, not all beliefs are valid or even, and it's that attitude that's led to more flat earthers and anti-vaxxers feel validated.

Hold on, you're comparing flat-earther and anti-vaccers to someone not wanting to play 40k that way you do?

Holy moly that's some special kind of insecurity there!

Can you not stomach the idea of someone having fun in a different way to you so much that you lump them in with people who are responsible for the deaths of children?

(Flat earthers, I don't care for. They're welcome to their ignorance as long as no-one gets hurt. Anti-vaccers are responsible for the sickness and deaths of some of the most vulnerable of society. If their choices didn't affect others, I wouldn't care either, but the fact that they clearly do makes them a non-comparison here.)

3. You didn't deny you put the points aside to potentially use those upgrades though. So I win.

What?
Even if I said I had, you've clearly not shown yourself to be possessed of the ability to stop assuming other people's thoughts and feelings.

But hey, because why not, yeah, I'll deny it? Because I didn't.

4. Perigrine is right about your basic personality though. And yes if you can't do math with triple digits in your head the game isn't for you, nor are any games that use numbers. You aren't doing calculus.

What is Peregrine right about?

Sorry, guess I'd better stop playing 40k because I don't want to have to do hard mode maths when I could just do easy mode instead.

If the entire 40k community was a toxic as you, I'd genuinely consider it.

5. It proves the point the ML is a bad weapon even in a system where it is effectively free, and it needs to possibly be redesigned.

Possibly. At the same time, I like how it looks, so two of my tactical squads have one. That wouldn't change if they were the worst weapon in the game - that's what my guys have, and that's what I'm using them with. Aesthetic > rules, in my opinion.

Trollbert wrote:
I can understand that people don't like PL, but I cannot understand how people can defend points as a good system.

Because points are a closer approximation to the units actual power?

*Potential power.

A lascannon is not pointed correctly against a horde of Hormagants.

Bharring wrote:
"Perigrine is right about your basic personality though. And yes if you can't do math with triple digits in your head the game isn't for you, nor are any games that use numbers. You aren't doing calculus. "

I had a friend in highschool. We were at a Math League meet, and looking at the scoreboard for the season - about 5 local schools, 4 previous meets, 3-digit scores at most for each box. He pulled out a calculator to add those numbers.

Is he not good enough at math to play Warhammer? He doesn't, AFAIK. But he was top-10 in State for Math League all four years. First a couple times. Taking 500-level courses (graduate level) by 10th grade. He, his brother, and I put our (rural public) school in the top *60* in the *Nation* for the AMC-12. Went to MIT. Etc, etc.

He could multiply 8-figure numbers in his head. But he pulled out a calculator to add some 3-digit numbers.

There are many reasons to not use complexity beyond not being able to handle it. I prefer points, but that's not because I'm "smarter" than those who prefer PL.

Nobody believes you when you say someone multiplied that many digits and couldn't add three digits. I'm calling you out on that.

Bharring wrote:@Smudge:
My SM Company (VII of Wings Of Dawn, battle company of a homebrew chapter) 1st squad Seargent always brings Vox Aurora into battle - a relic Power Fist (no special rules, obviously), that traces their heritage back to before their founding. Pointing out enemies with his fist for his squad (Tacs) is always an important part of any engagement.

I know exactly what you mean.

Sounds awesome!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Look at a comparison of PL the moment you add an additional member to several different units. 15 Necron Warriors is equal to 20. Adding a single Vet to Imperial Guard Veterans raises it by how much? What's the difference in PL between 6 Tactical Marines with Bolters and a Plasma Gun compared to a 10 man squad with everything?

One is clearly a better system and we need to support that system.

Agreed.

Let's abolish points, people!

Oh wait, you meant points? Sorry, but unless you're imposing your opinion as fact, one system is not a "clearly better" while people still have subjective differences.
Let people have fun, dude. Is that alien to you?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Look at a comparison of PL the moment you add an additional member to several different units. 15 Necron Warriors is equal to 20. Adding a single Vet to Imperial Guard Veterans raises it by how much? What's the difference in PL between 6 Tactical Marines with Bolters and a Plasma Gun compared to a 10 man squad with everything?

One is clearly a better system and we need to support that system.

Pointing out that there are flaws in the Power Level system doesn't prove that it's an inferior system to the also flawed points system, particularly when you're doing so in a thread that was specifically stated to discuss an idea for improving the system.

And there is no 'clearly' about it. Which system is better, as has been explained over and over in this thread, depends entirely on what the player is looking for from the game. There is no particular reason to 'support' one over the other. If you prefer playing with points, then do that.

"Nobody believes you when you say someone multiplied that many digits and couldn't add three digits. I'm calling you out on that."
Fair enough. Emphasis on:
"and *couldn't* add three digits".

Reread the story. Nowhere does it say he *couldn't* add three digit numbers. It says he *didn't*.

I didn't go to Dairy Queen for lunch today. That statement does *not* mean I couldn't.

That difference was the crux of the story. If you can't understand that, you won't understand why many of us play this game.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Trollbert wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Trollbert wrote:
I can understand that people don't like PL, but I cannot understand how people can defend points as a good system.

Because points are a closer approximation to the units actual power?

Are they really? Apart from the nonsensical ruling that a power fist costs the same for a HQ with 4A WS2+ as for a 2A WS3+ seargent and a 6A WS3+ Khorne Berzerker. Or that a Lascannon costs the same per shot no matter how durable the platform is, but makes a difference between BS3+ and 4+. Or that Plasma/Melter/Flamer cost the same, no matter how fast the platform is.
Or that a character with an aura costs the same, no matter how many units he can effect?

Would you want a system where you had to check 3 tables per weapon before knowing what it costs? Or a system where you even had to check a table and multiply the cost by a factor depending on the game size to see how much a unit costs?



Points are dogshit, PL are horsegak. Different flavors, but both are gak.

Look at a comparison of PL the moment you add an additional member to several different units. 15 Necron Warriors is equal to 20. Adding a single Vet to Imperial Guard Veterans raises it by how much? What's the difference in PL between 6 Tactical Marines with Bolters and a Plasma Gun compared to a 10 man squad with everything?

One is clearly a better system and we need to support that system.

Better doesn't mean good.

IMO making PL work is far easier than making points work.