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.

 Stormonu wrote:
*shrug*, haven't played 40K since earlier this year, so falling back to 8E's points isn't an issue for me. I'll go by whatever is in battlescribe anyways, I wager.

Funnily enough, last game I played we used power and it worked for me, didn't see an issue at all.

The big discrepancy with PL comes up when you have an army with tons of unit upgrades and an army with none.

If it were posslble would use old ones. Certainly more balanced that way. But l doubt that will fly in face of convenince of sticking with official. 40k llves largely due to convenience


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
*shrug*, haven't played 40K since earlier this year, so falling back to 8E's points isn't an issue for me. I'll go by whatever is in battlescribe anyways, I wager.

Funnily enough, last game I played we used power and it worked for me, didn't see an issue at all.

The big discrepancy with PL comes up when you have an army with tons of unit upgrades and an army with none.

In theory, in practice never　seen that. Nobody has had those bazillion thunder hammer storm shield death company models.

And 9th points are going pl style anyway

 vaklor4 wrote:
it seems to me more than a few people are entirely of the mind that the points are so garbage in 2020 that itd be preferable to just keep using the 8th points, both online and in my community. What are your opinions on the matter? I personally will use the new points, but agree that theyre flawed heavily.

Those people are idiots and should not be listened to.

yukishiro1 wrote:
The new points are a terrible lazy hack job, but you can't really not use them, any more than you can say "you know what, I don't like X part of 9th, so we'll just pretend it doesn't exist." You can do that among friends, but you aren't playing standard 40k any more.

Now it's true that if enough people agree to depart, you get a new game. Just like competitive 8th ran nearly 100% on an alternate terrain ruleset. But that's much easier to get people to buy into when the game itself doesn't have any rules in that area to speak of. If GW in 8th had had some complex terrain system that simply sucked, I don't think you would have seen 95% of competitive formats buy into something else. It's because there basically were *no* terrain rules that that was possible.

People are too fixated to official rules anyway. Rules aie starting point rather than end.

Oh and i'll let you secret. There wasn't one(or even 2 or 3...) standard 40k in 8th either.

The new points will be played. They are bad. People will agree on this but use them because they are the latest official release.

I will play with whatever is easier and more available. Right now that's 8th on bsttlescribe. When I'm in foront of my PC I can use the excel file but some of my friends won't do that. So either way. It's gaming that's important.

What Ive gathered from TTT vids is that these points are all based on future updates/codexes. The guys seemed very frustrated that they couldint explain exactly what they meant or why GW would choose to do this.

does anyone know if battlescribe for 9th exists ?

yukishiro1 wrote:
The new points are a terrible lazy hack job, but you can't really not use them...

Sure you can, if you have a group that's amenable to using the CA19 points rather than the slapdash and utterly nonsense 9th Ed points values.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
*shrug*, haven't played 40K since earlier this year, so falling back to 8E's points isn't an issue for me. I'll go by whatever is in battlescribe anyways, I wager.

Funnily enough, last game I played we used power and it worked for me, didn't see an issue at all.

The big discrepancy with PL comes up when you have an army with tons of unit upgrades and an army with none.

If you're running PL why would you run an army without upgrades? The upgrades are free, PL gives you the incentive to stuff your armies to the brim with all the special weapons you can get your hands on.

Corizin wrote:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
*shrug*, haven't played 40K since earlier this year, so falling back to 8E's points isn't an issue for me. I'll go by whatever is in battlescribe anyways, I wager.

Funnily enough, last game I played we used power and it worked for me, didn't see an issue at all.

The big discrepancy with PL comes up when you have an army with tons of unit upgrades and an army with none.

If you're running PL why would you run an army without upgrades? The upgrades are free, PL gives you the incentive to stuff your armies to the brim with all the special weapons you can get your hands on.

Not every army has that option, look at necrons, their units have maybe 1 weapon swap option like gauss or Tesla for immortals and no Sargent or special weapon guys, warriors until the new kit had no options other than adding a new dude to the unit. Most of the necron line has a weapon swap option and that’s it, no other upgrades for the unit.

That and if you play wysiwyg a lot of the time I will not take all the options when I build my models because in normal games I won’t take all the bloat upgrades.

The whole idea behind PL is that you can just toss a unit onto the table and then check the models for whatever gear they have when it comes up.
Not to mention that upgrades like Cybork shouldn't cost points to begin with.

I'm going to use the new points - maybe there are some "bad" points in there. But...this has always been the case.

Here's a hot take about points:
Point changes, and the resulting changes in what's "efficient", shake up the meta and cause people to use different units and tactics. The fact that meta is in flux is good and prevents stagnation - points having "exploitable" imperfections in that way is good (as long as things don't go way out of line, of course)
Also, the goal of the points values doesn't need to be a perfect reflection of unit power, it can also be an incentive/disincentive to play armies a certain way. A certain set of stats can be discounted for some armies and come at a premium in others to reflect the flavor of those armies presuming attention is paid how the whole army works.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

Not every army has that option, look at necrons, their units have maybe 1 weapon swap option like gauss or Tesla for immortals and no Sargent or special weapon guys, warriors until the new kit had no options other than adding a new dude to the unit. Most of the necron line has a weapon swap option and that’s it, no other upgrades for the unit.

That and if you play wysiwyg a lot of the time I will not take all the options when I build my models because in normal games I won’t take all the bloat upgrades.

I'm not really familiar with Necron costs but assuming GW put any thought into it at all, they would have assigned Necron PL costs to be roughly balanced against other armies who decked their armies out with special weapons. Immortals and Battle Sisters for instance both have the same Power Level(4) but the immortal defaults to a much stronger weapon(Gauss Rifle vs Boltgun) and has a stronger stat baseline. The fact the sisters get to pimp out their sergeant and get 2 special/heavy weapons just lets them play catch up. This line of thinking also checks out if you compare with the points cost where the basic sister costs 11 while the immortal costs 18. For a squad of 5 sisters that means the squad has to buy 35 points of weapons to be 'even' in PL, incidentally 35 is pretty close to what it will cost you to buy the weapons for the sergeant + 2 sisters.

If that small sample is anything to go by it seems to me that in a PL game Necrons will have a fair game against armies that have taken advantage of all their options and may be overpowered against armies that have chosen to not take their special weapons.

It makes sense to me GW choose to balance this way because what will their playerbase find more fun to assemble and paint, 100 infantry with basic bolters or infantry wielding all manner of crazy guns?

tneva82 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
*shrug*, haven't played 40K since earlier this year, so falling back to 8E's points isn't an issue for me. I'll go by whatever is in battlescribe anyways, I wager.

Funnily enough, last game I played we used power and it worked for me, didn't see an issue at all.

The big discrepancy with PL comes up when you have an army with tons of unit upgrades and an army with none.

In theory, in practice never　seen that. Nobody has had those bazillion thunder hammer storm shield death company models.

And 9th points are going pl style anyway

Big discrepancies come both from units that use more upgrades than GW was expecting and units that don't use all the upgrades they have. Deathwatch Veterans are functionally unplayable under PL, because you're paying about double what you do in points for your storm bolter/storm shield veterans because they could have a frag cannon, even when they don't. PL works fine most of the time but the edge cases where it doesn't really need a couple of upgrades costed in PL the way putting jump packs on some units is a PL upgrade.