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.

Quick question regarding power levels. My buddy and I are about to play our first game of 9th this weekend and agreed to use power level cuz we have been hearing the points were kind of imbalanced lately. Regarding power tho, does a model get all particular upgrades for free (an example being an overlord getting its weapon plus a phase shifter for no additional cost)? I was looking in the new power level rating faq that just came out and it looks like it's mostly just on a per model cost. I'll be playing necrons and him dark angels. Is using power vs them a mistake? Thank you!

Nixalys wrote:
Quick question regarding power levels. My buddy and I are about to play our first game of 9th this weekend and agreed to use power level cuz we have been hearing the points were kind of imbalanced lately. Regarding power tho, does a model get all particular upgrades for free (an example being an overlord getting its weapon plus a phase shifter for no additional cost)? I was looking in the new power level rating faq that just came out and it looks like it's mostly just on a per model cost. I'll be playing necrons and him dark angels. Is using power vs them a mistake? Thank you!

Points right now are very definitely wonky and poorly managed, but are substantially more detailed than Power Level. Power level is basically a much simpler, less granular version of points for playing something where nobody really cares about balance but wants something to help manage the approximate size of forces. You can take a unit and stuff it to the gills with all the upgrades it can possibly take and its power level will be the same as if it were naked, they're really more intended for just grabbing whatever you already have ready to go and slapping it on the table without worrying about the details, rather than using it for intricate army construction.

Which you want to use is up to you, there's no right or wrong, it's more about how you and your opponent are looking to play. With the current state of 9E, as long as neither player is really looking to abuse either system, it probably doesn't matter a whole which you use, they're both going to have wonky issues. If/when GW gets around to readjusting points values, they'll be better for pickup/competitive play.

Ooo I see. Ok thank you. We will def be going back to points then. The newest points being the CA 2020 and then for the indomitus models, the points being in the munitorum field manual 2020? These would be the two most up to date sources for points if i'm not mistaken? Now that I look at the munitorum faq, i'm not actually seeing any point values for the new indomitus models. Do they exist somewhere else?

I'm not sure what that dude's problem is, but power level was just updated as well. It's also the system required for 9th edition's main selling point. The designers definitely want you using power.

PL is much, much more worse than points. You cannot put the power of a unit in one number. Let me give you an example. Two company veterans with boltgun/chainsword are PL3. If you add one more veteran you have PL8. Adding 50% more models increases your PL by 267%. A dreadnought is PL7. Every experienced player will tell you that a dreadnought is more powerful than three company veterans with boltgun/chainsword. Now, lets look at the points. Three company veterans are 51 pts. A dreadnought with assault cannon, stormbolter and CCW is 113 pts. Dreadnought costs more than twice points, because it a more powerful unit. Which is more realistic than PL8 to PL7. This changes when we put more powerful weapons on the veterans. If we give them plasmaguns, and powerfists, their points go up by 60, to 111. This is more balanced, because they now have stronger weapons. PL stays the same, at 8, because weapons are free.

All upgrades are free, yeah. And the balance with points is not particularly better, yeah.

One thing I have learned from the power/points split as compared to AoS (for those who do not know AoS points work like 40k power levels, there is no granular equivalent) is that GW is currently unable to manage balance well enough for the granularity to matter. IMO, it would be better to just stick with power levels until such a point that GW wishes to invest in more thorough balancing.

This is obviously a particularly subjective position, however.

Well i can't seem to find any assigned point values for the new necron indomitus models so i think i may have to stick with power level regardless unfortunately. Thank you for all the responses though. Hopefully my opponent doesnt bring a super cheesey dark angels list rip haha. Hopefully in the next month or so GW will give us something. At least with 8th, everyone got indexes at the same time.

I prefer the idea of power levels, but there's what I consider a major issue of upgrades in its execution. There's a huge difference in some cases between a stripped down vs. fully upgraded unit. Even if playing pretty reasonably (no one cheeses out things for their most expensive upgrades on everything) fodder units become overpriced, and those serve a purpose esp when trying to fit everything you need in an army.

If your group prefers decent equipment (rather than either extreme) and has a similar mindset, I'd say that power level would be cool. Other than that, points are worth a little extra time.

The fact that upgrades are free is a feature of the system, not a flaw. The power level system is designed for beginners and casuals and narrative players and modellers. These are the kinds of people who put together cool looking models first, and worry about gameplay as a distant second. The kinds of players who use every option in the box to make the models stand out more. Points systems punish those players by penalizing their cool models as statistically inefficient.

When looking at PL, you shouldn't think 'a minimum squad isn't worth their PL.' The point is to load your units to the gills with cool stuff. All those marginal upgrades you'd never take, now you just can. PL just has to be roughly in the ballpark, and over the spread of an entire army the actual power should even out.

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

Nixalys wrote:
Well i can't seem to find any assigned point values for the new necron indomitus models so i think i may have to stick with power level regardless unfortunately. Thank you for all the responses though. Hopefully my opponent doesnt bring a super cheesey dark angels list rip haha. Hopefully in the next month or so GW will give us something. At least with 8th, everyone got indexes at the same time.

Indomitus points are on the last page of the Munitorium field manual; after all the forge world points(because GW makes sense, you see).

DarkHound wrote:The fact that upgrades are free is a feature of the system, not a flaw. The power level system is designed for beginners and casuals and narrative players and modellers. These are the kinds of people who put together cool looking models first, and worry about gameplay as a distant second. The kinds of players who use every option in the box to make the models stand out more. Points systems punish those players by penalizing their cool models as statistically inefficient.

When looking at PL, you shouldn't think 'a minimum squad isn't worth their PL.' The point is to load your units to the gills with cool stuff. All those marginal upgrades you'd never take, now you just can. PL just has to be roughly in the ballpark, and over the spread of an entire army the actual power should even out.

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

This pretty much sums it up, if you want "balance"(why are you playing a GW game?) points are your system(I guess).

 DarkHound wrote:

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

The game is designed for the former and not the latter though.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 DarkHound wrote:

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

The game is designed for the former and not the latter though.

Hrm, while GW has expanded the use of PL in mechanics outside of army building, but I'd hardly say the game was strictly designed for it (mostly it appears to be a sandbox vehicle trying to fit any possible way people want to play with their toy space soldiers). GW provides for both systems, and most people appear to continue to use Points. While I haven't played a game of 9E yet (due to no gaming venues being open), I never encountered anyone or any events that used them in 8th myself, and that doesn't seem to be any different for 9E from what I'm seeing thus far.

Power isn't "only for narrative games/casuals" or whatever nonsense people want to continue placing on it.

It's a method for people to play the dang game, not needing to worry about "oh I only come out to 1997/2000 pts now I need to rework everything!"...because that's literally a thing I kept having to contend with when I kept caving to people who "only want to play points!!1!!". I have a finite amount of time to play a game, I want to play a game. You seeing my list and then immediately reworking yours from the ground up just to sneak something in that you think might counter something else of mine eats into that time.

Switching to playing Power only has been one of the most de-stressing things I've ever done relating to 40k. I wish I were kidding, but I'm not. It cut down the people I play with significantly...but screw it. I get a better quality of game now and I actually enjoy my hobby again.

And yes, I realize that an argument to that is "but if you played with those people using points you'd have an even better game!!1!", but sometimes even just asking "Hey, are you okay with playing Power instead of Points?" gets you all the answer you would need as to the kind of game and person you're in for. When they insist on points, I just say "Oh. Well, sorry I don't have the most updated points values yet" and then let them find someone else to play with.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Power isn't "only for narrative games/casuals" or whatever nonsense people want to continue placing on it.

It's a method for people to play the dang game, not needing to worry about "oh I only come out to 1997/2000 pts now I need to rework everything!"...because that's literally a thing I kept having to contend with when I kept caving to people who "only want to play points!!1!!". I have a finite amount of time to play a game, I want to play a game.

I'm not trying to be snarky, but I'm legitimately not seeing the difference you appear to be arguing here, as in both instances the point appears to be "use PL's for casual, non-competitive games where people just want to play with their minis".

You seeing my list and then immediately reworking yours from the ground up just to sneak something in that you think might counter something else of mine eats into that time.

That would appear to be an issue with crappy opponents and play groups as opposed to Points vs PL. At least for the playgroups I've been involved with through my 40k career, nobody is looking at my list before a game and writing up one of their own specifically to counter it, that wouldn't have flown anywhere in any edition. It's pretty much always "I brought a 2k list, can you play 2k? Oh you only brought 1750? I'll drop 250pts from mine, ok done, lets trade lists and get deployment started".

Likewise, that sort of behavior can be done just as much with PL as with Points either way, probably easier since with PL all you need to do is swap in models instead of rejiggering the entire list and sticking to stricter limits to tune it to an opponent.

Power Level is points with a digit removed.
They are essentially, a less granular version of points and therefore inferior outside of a quick pick up and play. But anecdotally, it isn't really that hard to add up some numbers.


To make the whole thing easier I suggest downloading Battlescribe. It's a roster calculator.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Power isn't "only for narrative games/casuals" or whatever nonsense people want to continue placing on it.

It's a method for people to play the dang game, not needing to worry about "oh I only come out to 1997/2000 pts now I need to rework everything!"...because that's literally a thing I kept having to contend with when I kept caving to people who "only want to play points!!1!!". I have a finite amount of time to play a game, I want to play a game.

I'm not trying to be snarky, but I'm legitimately not seeing the difference you appear to be arguing here, as in both instances the point appears to be "use PL's for casual, non-competitive games where people just want to play with their minis".

You'll notice that I didn't say a damn thing about "competitive" games because "competitive" is nonsense, if we're going to be brutally frank. It's not even relating to the points issues--it's because everything becomes the same thing.

I have zero interest in playing a game with a list that I can spot as being numbercrunched to the gills. I want someone to actually build a list and figure out something that works for them.

You seeing my list and then immediately reworking yours from the ground up just to sneak something in that you think might counter something else of mine eats into that time.

That would appear to be an issue with crappy opponents and play groups as opposed to Points vs PL. At least for the playgroups I've been involved with through my 40k career, nobody is looking at my list before a game and writing up one of their own specifically to counter it, that wouldn't have flown anywhere in any edition. It's pretty much always "I brought a 2k list, can you play 2k? Oh you only brought 1750? I'll drop 250pts from mine, ok done, lets trade lists and get deployment started".

And there's the rub: playgroups. My local area had two of them that I know of prior to 8th, and both were more or less "tournament"(read: local tournaments...maybe. kinda. never saw more than half of the people in the groups ever at events.) oriented.

I've always been a fairly casual player and I would go out of my way to always ensure that I brought two copies of my list "just in case" there were ever any kind of disputes over things. A good chunk of these folks would only use Battlescribe and need to print their list at the last second. ..which y'know, isn't a thing that "tournament players" should ever be doing.

Likewise, that sort of behavior can be done just as much with PL as with Points either way, probably easier since with PL all you need to do is swap in models instead of rejiggering the entire list and sticking to stricter limits to tune it to an opponent.

Sure, it's just as easy to do with PL. Easier even.

But the kinds of people, in my locality, who did that nonsense won't even entertain the idea of playing Power Levels. Which is why I literally said what I did.

I guess if you want me to give you a better response, let me phrase it this way:
Try playing Power matches the same way you would Points. Literally the only advantage you get with Power versus Points is that if you have a game where you end up playing against a wild skew list? You don't need to just throw your hands up and say "Just playing objectives, I guess!". You have enough wiggle room to actually swap things around a bit to ensure both players have fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

To make the whole thing easier I suggest downloading Battlescribe. It's a roster calculator.

It's also become way too big of a crutch to people these days.

According to the never wrong and always 100% accurate, Battlescribe, if you are pitting the Indomitus box contents against each other then the Space Marine side is 49 PL / 1,000 points and the Necron side is 50 PL / 995 points.

Given that the primaris units have no optional upgrades, it is interesting looking at the following 5 PL units:
Primaris Captain 105 pts
Primaris Chaplain 85 pts
Assault Intercessors 95 pts
Bladeguard Ancient 85 pts
Bladeguard Veterans 105 pts
Eradicators 120 pts

Seems like a bit of imbalance already.

You can also go here and literally see every Power Rating the game currently has.

They have never pretended that PL to Points is a 1:1 ratio.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

To make the whole thing easier I suggest downloading Battlescribe. It's a roster calculator.

It's also become way too big of a crutch to people these days.

A crutch for what?

The new PL values are just as screwed up as the new points, so play with whichever system you're most comfortable with.

Every. Time.

Exact same positions, exact same “points”, exact same counters. Exact same “my way’s best and the other people are Wrong.”

Playing optimized PL games vs playing optimized POINT games just changes the meta.

Neither is terribly accurate. One is more granular. The illusion of increased accuracy is sustained by points.

Interestingly, one can extrapolate how a unit is “intended” to be used based on PL. I tend to go upgrade heavy. My lists are usually within 2 PL of the equivalent points value. Ie 1500 point lists usually wind up between 73 and 77 PL. A less than 2% difference in over 90 % of cases.

Do I think that GW is accurately costing units to within 2% of true value? NO! I think it would be generous to believe they’re within 10% of true value of units.

The entire process of creating “competition” lists is to create maximum exploitation of “undercosted” units and synergies. Points and PL just create different outcomes as to which units are most “broken”. If someone makes a super powerful list using points, they are making a list more-powerful than the points would suggest. There are just more minutiae to manage. It’s simply *easier* to determine power-lists using PL, if one chooses to do so.

The funniest thing is that points can very easily be shown to be inaccurate. Take a squad like Vanguard Vets or Death Company.

Imagine a squad of 10 dudes, all equipped with the same upgrade. Let’s say a power fist for the sake of it. For example purposes, let’s say a “naked” marine costs 20 points, and a PF Marine costs 30.

Now, in POINTS the player realizes they’re apt to lose models before being able to benefit from said power Fists. So instead of taking 10 PF, maybe they take 4. So the points total for the unit is 240. Now we assume someone is brand new, and instead takes all 10 PF, and the unit costs 300 points.

The game starts. The unit takes 6 casualties before hitting home. 4 power Fists make it to combat. 300 points was overcosted. Those extra upgrades were worthless.

That same 10 man unit is 13 PL. So when the player takes all the upgrades they feel like, the unit might have cost 300 plus points... but when 4 guys make it to combat, the unit is slightly less efficient than POINTS for 4x PF. (240 points is equivalent to 12 PL).

The purpose of my example, is to show that while points are trickier to figure out in list building, once the models hit the tabletop the cases that people tend to bring up almost always even out. I mean, who takes Choppy Marines *without* taking upgraded weapons? PL just let’s you go whole hog on them, instead of relying on experience to let you know how many chumps to take to maximize the investment.

Exactly the same response. *shrug*

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

To make the whole thing easier I suggest downloading Battlescribe. It's a roster calculator.

It's also become way too big of a crutch to people these days.

A crutch for what?

Didn't you hear? He brings two lists in case those.... filthy, unwashed, smelly, uber-riding sweatballs named competitive players find any discrepancies.
I wonder if there was an app that found these.. discrepancies and assisted with point calculation.

If only.

Huh, someone should make an app like that.
Is there any in the market right now?

The real difference is more that for me (I play both), if I ask someone if they want to play a PL game and they look at me like I just shot their dog, they're probably not the kind of person I want to play WITH.

I like both, points are completely fethed & PL allows for feth you lists really easily.

It really boils down to mindset more than anything. If you're purposefully trying to break the game, you'll succeed(with either system). If your not, its really easy to throw a list together on the fly and roll some dice.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 DarkHound wrote:

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

The game is designed for the former and not the latter though.

Hrm, while GW has expanded the use of PL in mechanics outside of army building, but I'd hardly say the game was strictly designed for it (mostly it appears to be a sandbox vehicle trying to fit any possible way people want to play with their toy space soldiers). GW provides for both systems, and most people appear to continue to use Points. While I haven't played a game of 9E yet (due to no gaming venues being open), I never encountered anyone or any events that used them in 8th myself, and that doesn't seem to be any different for 9E from what I'm seeing thus far.

How much a percentage of the rulebook is devoted strictly to Power Level play? How much for points? One of those is vastly larger than the other.

The game isn't designed around PL.

Points have been part of the game for decades and are the main way people play.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 DarkHound wrote:

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

The game is designed for the former and not the latter though.

Hrm, while GW has expanded the use of PL in mechanics outside of army building, but I'd hardly say the game was strictly designed for it (mostly it appears to be a sandbox vehicle trying to fit any possible way people want to play with their toy space soldiers). GW provides for both systems, and most people appear to continue to use Points. While I haven't played a game of 9E yet (due to no gaming venues being open), I never encountered anyone or any events that used them in 8th myself, and that doesn't seem to be any different for 9E from what I'm seeing thus far.

How much a percentage of the rulebook is devoted strictly to Power Level play? How much for points? One of those is vastly larger than the other.

how is the amount different? all missions can be used for both so.....?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 DarkHound wrote:

To OP's question, they really are two different systems: PL is better at getting lots of cool looking models in a narrative game, points are better for strategic and competitive game.

The game is designed for the former and not the latter though.

Hrm, while GW has expanded the use of PL in mechanics outside of army building, but I'd hardly say the game was strictly designed for it (mostly it appears to be a sandbox vehicle trying to fit any possible way people want to play with their toy space soldiers). GW provides for both systems, and most people appear to continue to use Points. While I haven't played a game of 9E yet (due to no gaming venues being open), I never encountered anyone or any events that used them in 8th myself, and that doesn't seem to be any different for 9E from what I'm seeing thus far.

How much a percentage of the rulebook is devoted strictly to Power Level play? How much for points? One of those is vastly larger than the other.

I'll totally acknowledge they're using it more and more, but I'm not sure that page count or percentages are a good metric to judge that by. Looking at my 4E Rulebook for example, there's a grand total of 10 pages devoted to the typical pickup game missions, while there's many times that page count devoted to other kinds of missions, but I don't recall that content being used much (if at all). Likewise you can still use Points just about everywhere if you want.

I have no real issue with either method. I prefer points, but largely because I'm more used to them and power level seems a bit on the simple side for covering unit upgrades... but if my opponent wants to use them? No problem.

That said... we're all pretty familiar with our own collections and it's not too tricky to put a roster together, via whatever method, even getting to a point where you can remember how much your units cost anyway.
Without wanting to sound elitist about it, if your maths is enough of a weakness that you can't figure out points without an app? Then 40k, with its oodles of buckets of dice and repeated modifiers, may not be the best game for you.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

To make the whole thing easier I suggest downloading Battlescribe. It's a roster calculator.

It's also become way too big of a crutch to people these days.

A crutch for what?

Pretending that it's a replacement for a codex or actually having an inkling of what their rules do or how to build an army from scratch. I've seen too many people throwing Relics onto places they shouldn't be able to and then getting salty when called out upon it. Read your army book. Write a list by frigging hand. Don't trust Battlescribe.