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.
2020/09/04 14:15:37
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Jidmah wrote: Since we aren't really seeing any new arguments here from four years ago...
Would the contra-PL people consider using it when units like the aforementioned vanguard veterants would increase in PL when they buy expensive gear and decrease when they don't?
For example, daemon princes increase in PL when they buy wings. How about something like "vanguard marines can have a TH and SS (+1PL per model)?
Since GW aparently wants to make all options equal anyways, that wouldn't be too much of a difference compared to points, right?
I will consider using PL when it comes in increments of 0,05, then we can have two kinds of pts and everyone will be happy because you'll still have PL right?
There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/09/04 14:52:11
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Jidmah wrote: Since we aren't really seeing any new arguments here from four years ago...
Would the contra-PL people consider using it when units like the aforementioned vanguard veterants would increase in PL when they buy expensive gear and decrease when they don't?
For example, daemon princes increase in PL when they buy wings. How about something like "vanguard marines can have a TH and SS (+1PL per model)?
Since GW aparently wants to make all options equal anyways, that wouldn't be too much of a difference compared to points, right?
I will consider using PL when it comes in increments of 0,05, then we can have two kinds of pts and everyone will be happy because you'll still have PL right?
There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
2020/09/04 16:53:34
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
vict0988 wrote:The codex values are out of date. Do you want me to play using CA19 pts values? Bolt pistol 0, chainsword 0, grav-pistol 5, lightning claw 5, plasma pistol 5, power axe 5, power fist 10, power maul 5, power sword 5, thunder hammer 15, boltgun 0, combi-flamer 10, combi-grav 10, combi-melta 10, combi-plasma 10, storm bolter 3. Most of these values were changed to be base 5 in CA20.
Okay. What's that got to do with PL? What makes you so sure that points going to base 5 had anything to do with PL? Might I remind you that in previous editions (notably 5th-7th), nearly all weapons were costed in base 5? And, funnily enough, PL didn't exist at that time either.
Rather faulty logic, if I do say so.
The philosophy of CA20 has been impacted by PL notions of "balance doesn't matter" and having the math be easy to do is more important than making as many options as possible viable.
As I've said - that's got nothing to do with PL. You're blaming PL on something that really has nothing to do with it.
Got a problem with points? Fine. Don't bring a completely different system into it.
The problem is that PL player cannot keep your PL to yourselves
Errr, what? I've never imposed my opinions on points or advocated for PL to replace any system. I'm perfectly happy with PL as it is, and I have no intention of forcing it on anyone else - but I'll defend my preference of PL as long as people keep saying how it's "objectively terrible".
Sounds like you're just looking for a scapeoat.
and complain about people wanting balanced pts costs, so here it is, I'm here to complain in return for what your gakky system has led pts to become.
Yeah, you've got some *real* issues there.
Here's a hint - PL has nothing to do with what you're describing. Take a breathe, step back, and look at the situation with fresh eyes. PL, and PL players, have nothing to do with your problems with points. Grow up.
vict0988 wrote:
Jidmah wrote: There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
That's a non-apology.
They/them
2020/09/04 17:30:49
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Jidmah wrote: There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
That's a non-apology.
He asked about how PL haters would feel about moving the system slightly more in a pts-esque direction. I answered that I did not personally feel that it was anywhere near far enough and then I added some snark that was meant for you, not Jidmah, any offense caused to Jidmah was therefore unintended, which is why I apologized by saying sorry and that's really all there is to an apology. I added that some will and some won't to answer the alternate question of whether PL haters as a group would like that change and it's hard to say, I am sure a lot of people hate PL and I have no clue how many would like the change, for me it's kind of all or nothing, if I cannot have pts I might as well go with PL as it is now, at least the math is easy.
You didn't even have a clue about the pts changes that made me unhappy in the first place despite me explaining the changes that had happened you somehow assumed they had not happened and looked in your out of date codex pts to confirm your suspicion that I was talking nonsense. PL is basically what old editions were, with intentionally terrible balance and an attitude of "should we take a look at the cost of a unit after buffing it?" "Nah we might sell more models if we don't, waste of time and profits". It's everything wrong with old GW and it's seeping back in and has corrupted 9th edition. Every option ought to be viable in some circumstance, no models should ever have to be torn apart.
2020/09/04 19:14:54
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Jidmah wrote: There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
That's a non-apology.
Ignore button works wonders.
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life.
2020/09/04 19:40:16
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Jidmah wrote: There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
That's a non-apology.
He asked about how PL haters would feel about moving the system slightly more in a pts-esque direction. I answered that I did not personally feel that it was anywhere near far enough and then I added some snark that was meant for you, not Jidmah, any offense caused to Jidmah was therefore unintended, which is why I apologized by saying sorry and that's really all there is to an apology.
You didn't apologise like that, though that would have been an acceptable apology. You said "sorry if you were offended", that's putting the blame on Jid, not taking responsibility yourself for messing up who you were directing your snark towards.
You didn't even have a clue about the pts changes that made me unhappy in the first place despite me explaining the changes that had happened you somehow assumed they had not happened and looked in your out of date codex pts to confirm your suspicion that I was talking nonsense.
Yes, I see that in the new updates, it has moved to base 5. Remind me what that has to do with PL?
PL is basically what old editions were
Sorry, what editions were you around in? Because in all my editions, PL is unique. If you're looking for what happened in older editions, you're actually closer with current base 5 points, as previous editions loved using base 5.
Again - no idea why you've brought PL into this grievance you have with base 5.
Every option ought to be viable in some circumstance, no models should ever have to be torn apart.
If you want to tear apart your models, you're welcome to, but I've never felt that PL has encouraged or even made my armies which I made long before PL invalid.
That sounds much more like a mindset issue, a desire to always be "meta" than a PL specific problem.
Just to confirm - I'm not disagreeing that points might not what you like. But that's got NOTHING to do with PL, and I have no idea why you're blaming PL and PL players for that.
Jidmah wrote: There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
That's a non-apology.
Eh, it was good enough for me. I would have preferred a real answer, but there is no need to fight over this now.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/09/05 09:14:15
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Jidmah wrote: There is no reason to be this toxic in response to a perfectly normal question.
Some will, some won't, sorry if you were offended.
That's a non-apology.
He asked about how PL haters would feel about moving the system slightly more in a pts-esque direction. I answered that I did not personally feel that it was anywhere near far enough and then I added some snark that was meant for you, not Jidmah, any offense caused to Jidmah was therefore unintended, which is why I apologized by saying sorry and that's really all there is to an apology.
You didn't apologise like that, though that would have been an acceptable apology.
You said "sorry if you were offended", that's putting the blame on Jid, not taking responsibility yourself for messing up who you were directing your snark towards.
Saying "sorry" is taking responsibility, saying "not my bad you were offended" would be blaming Jid for taking offence, but in saying sorry I am .aknowledging the offence was reasonable and caused by me. You don't say sorry when a waiter spills red wine on another guest on the waiter's accord, but if you through some large gesture with your arms cause the waiter to spill wine on someone else you say "sorry if you got wet" to the other person.
7th pts were awful in base 5, PL in base 20 in 8th was awful but still, lots of people defended it and attacked base 1 pts in 8th despite many improvements over the years, claiming that PL was superior to pts or saying unbalanced games are more fun and now 9th is using base 5 and balance has been thrown to the wolves. Connected? Who has been pushing for a higher pts base other than PL players? The lack of balance can alternately be blamed on podcast hosts and tourney players wanting to shake up the meta regardless of balance. I have advocated for operating in base 5 for pts costs over 80 and base 20 for costs over 300, because 566 pts is a silly value, but certain weapons going from 2 to 0 pts has made them an auto-include and others going from 2 to 5 will lead to parts of models being torn off to shave off pts and retain as many models as possible in 9th, despite rising prices.
2020/09/05 23:21:35
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Having just done a 75 pl / 1500 pt list... 75 pl at 1497 pt.
I came out 5 points ahead on some things, 20-40 points behind on a bunch of units. One trio of Crisis suits came out 45 points ahead, each armed with 3 fusion guns.
That said, almost all upgrades in the Tau army require a PL to purchase. For example, a “heavy weapon” for a fire warrior squad is 15 pt or 1 pl. Besides Crisis suits, most units lose about 1 pl / 20 pt compared to buying in points... but since Crisis suits seem to be looked down on, so maybe maybe PL is more accurate.
2020/09/06 00:48:26
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
While an extra 168 points sounds like a lot, I took every “free” upgrade I could. About 140 of those “free” points range from
useless (15 points on Dozer Blades give +1 to hit when a vehicle charges... I put one an artillery piece. 40 points on Vox Casters, completely useless)
to very low value (15 points Augur array allows once per battle reroll of a *single* to hit roll, 15 points Heavy Stubbers, 20 points Power Swords for Infantry Sarges)
To long-shots I wouldn’t normally spend points on (15 points on HKM, 20 points on Power Fists for order giving officers).
So, were I to drop those items, I’m closer to 1528 “points” of army.. 2% margin of error in my view. Yes, it’s 11% more points if I include everything, but those points, if taken in a “points” list would have been traps. They aren’t worth taking, unless they’re free. Even at “no cost” I’d literally never use Dozer Blades or the Vox Caster Rules. The 15 points on HKM *might* produce d6 wounds on a hard target, but on average will only do about 2 points of damage assuming T8, 3+ save.
Building by PL gives an advantage to Infantry Squads... Id say they’re underpriced for the way I use them. Over the course of the army though, I don’t see a functional difference in how a points version or PL version would play on the table.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (If someone else could throw a couple experiments up here, whatever PL suits your fancy, I’d be interested. I don’t know other armies well enough to fudge up a list. For the experiment-iness of it, maybe try to max out on “freebies” and see how that compares to regular points?)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/06 15:15:39
2020/09/06 20:19:14
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
While an extra 168 points sounds like a lot, I took every “free” upgrade I could. About 140 of those “free” points range from
useless (15 points on Dozer Blades give +1 to hit when a vehicle charges... I put one an artillery piece. 40 points on Vox Casters, completely useless)
to very low value (15 points Augur array allows once per battle reroll of a *single* to hit roll, 15 points Heavy Stubbers, 20 points Power Swords for Infantry Sarges)
To long-shots I wouldn’t normally spend points on (15 points on HKM, 20 points on Power Fists for order giving officers).
So, were I to drop those items, I’m closer to 1528 “points” of army.. 2% margin of error in my view. Yes, it’s 11% more points if I include everything, but those points, if taken in a “points” list would have been traps. They aren’t worth taking, unless they’re free. Even at “no cost” I’d literally never use Dozer Blades or the Vox Caster Rules. The 15 points on HKM *might* produce d6 wounds on a hard target, but on average will only do about 2 points of damage assuming T8, 3+ save.
Building by PL gives an advantage to Infantry Squads... Id say they’re underpriced for the way I use them. Over the course of the army though, I don’t see a functional difference in how a points version or PL version would play on the table.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (If someone else could throw a couple experiments up here, whatever PL suits your fancy, I’d be interested. I don’t know other armies well enough to fudge up a list. For the experiment-iness of it, maybe try to max out on “freebies” and see how that compares to regular points?)
I think the big skew here would be if you loaded up on"free" sponsons for LRBTs... that could really mess things up if you have a bunch of tanks with free plasma/meltas rolling around
No, I took (Plasma) sponsons on two Russ and a Lascannon on the hull. List for discussion’s sake.
Spoiler:
Batallion 1 - Scions
3/55 - Tempestor Prime w/ Power Fist and Command Rod
3/55 - Same
3/85 - 5x Scions w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist, 2x Plasmagun
3/85 - Same
3/85 - 5x Scions w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist, 2x Meltaguns
3/85 - Same
Batallion 2 - Catachan
2/50 - Company Commander w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist
12/255 - Russ Commander w/ Executioner, 2x Plasma, Lascannon, all vehicle upgrades
12/240 - Russ Commander w/ Battle Cannon, 2x Plasma, Lascannon, all vehicle upgrades
3/82 - Infantry Squad w/ Bolter, Power Sword, Vox, Plasmagun, Lascannon
3/82 - Same
3/82 - Same
3/82 - Same
2/35 - Commissar w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist
2/35 - Same
3/55 - Sergeant Harker
2/35 - Master of Ordnance
2/40 - Junior Officer w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist
8/165 - Manticore w/ Heavy Bolter, all vehicle upgrades
75/ 1688 - Total
(My bad, 188 pats over of which 140 are useless, so 48 points of functional overage)
So if I drop a Commissar, fiddle a couple upgrades and drop the junk points... it’s very close to 1500 points. 50 points is about 3% over... are GW’s points within 3% of accurate?
With Guard, their Infantry are the winners in PL. The vehicles consistently cost as much or more, discounting the upgrades that are all pretty crap. Beware the Infantry horde in PL games.
But seriously... make a list or two, trying to abuse PL and see what you come up with!
Blanket statements like “PL is worthless” does not seem to be accurate when I build lists, even trying to take advantage of the “no cost” upgrades.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/09/06 21:09:05
2153/09/07 02:09:22
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
greatbigtree wrote: No, I took (Plasma) sponsons on two Russ and a Lascannon on the hull. List for discussion’s sake.
Spoiler:
Batallion 1 - Scions
3/55 - Tempestor Prime w/ Power Fist and Command Rod
3/55 - Same
3/85 - 5x Scions w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist, 2x Plasmagun
3/85 - Same
3/85 - 5x Scions w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist, 2x Meltaguns
3/85 - Same
Batallion 2 - Catachan
2/50 - Company Commander w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist
12/255 - Russ Commander w/ Executioner, 2x Plasma, Lascannon, all vehicle upgrades
12/240 - Russ Commander w/ Battle Cannon, 2x Plasma, Lascannon, all vehicle upgrades
3/82 - Infantry Squad w/ Bolter, Power Sword, Vox, Plasmagun, Lascannon
3/82 - Same
3/82 - Same
3/82 - Same
2/35 - Commissar w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist
2/35 - Same
3/55 - Sergeant Harker
2/35 - Master of Ordnance
2/40 - Junior Officer w/ Plasma Pistol, Power Fist
8/165 - Manticore w/ Heavy Bolter, all vehicle upgrades
75/ 1688 - Total
(My bad, 188 pats over of which 140 are useless, so 48 points of functional overage)
So if I drop a Commissar, fiddle a couple upgrades and drop the junk points... it’s very close to 1500 points. 50 points is about 3% over... are GW’s points within 3% of accurate?
With Guard, their Infantry are the winners in PL. The vehicles consistently cost as much or more, discounting the upgrades that are all pretty crap. Beware the Infantry horde in PL games.
But seriously... make a list or two, trying to abuse PL and see what you come up with!
Blanket statements like “PL is worthless” does not seem to be accurate when I build lists, even trying to take advantage of the “no cost” upgrades.
its worthless to them, so I guess that's something?
but very worthwhile for those of us that understand that there's more to life than fething over the person your playing with.
2020/09/07 04:00:39
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
Build a PL list, compare the points, prove me wrong? Quantitative analysis, instead of an unproven claim?
Edit: I’d initially misconstrued your response... but still... build a list and let’s take a look! The thread is about playing with list building, so we should build lists and check them out.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/09/07 04:06:45
2020/09/07 04:43:15
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
greatbigtree wrote: Build a PL list, compare the points, prove me wrong? Quantitative analysis, instead of an unproven claim?
Edit: I’d initially misconstrued your response... but still... build a list and let’s take a look! The thread is about playing with list building, so we should build lists and check them out.
That's part of why I asked people to check their previously made lists for PL and Points Costs. Those weren't made to "game" the system, they were just made and would be a more honest picture to compare.
My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings.
2020/09/07 14:03:55
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
I haven't been list building recently so can't throw any evidence down, but I'd be curious what range power level might represent. The part that always threw me off is, units have more than one role. For instance, there's a big difference between 5 marines that are there to camp and be something inefficient to deal with, vs. the same loaded out to be a credible threat.
What is the potential points disparity/range between basic and kitted out units? How many "free" points/by what percentage is your army made more efficient by taking options? For example, what's that Guard army rate if it's bare bones everything?
This isn't to argue that anyone is just going to take numbers for their whole army, but there are many units that can just become numbers, and if you want to build that sort of army I expect there can be issues.
TL;DR: The counter-question I propose is, are certain types of lists excluded by virtue of PL? If so, how does this reflect PL as a building model?
greatbigtree wrote: Hell, I was *trying* to break the lists, building armies I would play. I wouldn’t call my results broken by any means.
So far, I’m not seeing the boogeyman lists that people seem afraid of.
I don't think there are boogeyman lists. I'm not entirely sure how GW thinks 100-200PL = 2000 points when it seems like 100PL = 2,000 points. I can't imagine finding 200PL that will fit in 2,000 points.
I do think some of the borderline units change. I was wondering which ones those were.
My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings.
2020/09/07 15:39:18
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
I think GW did a disservice prior to 8th edition, when they claimed that Power Level represents "aveage" updgrades, when by now, they really represent pretty tooled up units.
We're running a Power Level Crusade at the FLGS, and we haven't seen any real issue. The ability to rapidly put down lists of odd sizes is also helpful, FWIW.
In my experience, Power level falls down with one highly specific unit type: the highly customizable unit where both very bare bones and very tooled up versions are options: Leman Russes, Vanguard vets, etc. In 7th, the most efficient build was a catachan Battle cannon Russ with hull heavy bolter, and that was the same PL as a Demolisher with hull lascannon, mulit meltas, and all the trimmings. Vanguard Vets are similar, alghouth Leman Russ powerlevel more or less assumes all the guns, while VV Power level still doesn't assume all thunder hammers.
As others have said, Power Level shifts the meta, as some units become comparatively more expensive because it assumes you are buying upgrades you might not want (Tau pathfinders get hosed, as PL assumes you take Ion rifles, even though you lose the markerlights you actually want). On the flip side, spendier options become more intriguing.
At this point, most of the most strident anti-Power Level issues are personality driven. It's people that cannot stand that somebody is "getting something free" or that they can somehow unlock something unintended. It's just a combination of natural suspicion and fear of change.
2020/09/07 15:47:08
Subject: Re:Ever played with Power Level list building?
All four lists I have made for 9th, made using pts, checked the PL on Battlescribe. What differences might I have made if I was playing PL? Free weapons on Sergeants and heavy weapons on infantry squads, no big changes, I could see someone complaining about the AM list in a PL game despite it being a perfect 100PL=2000pts list and I just felt like trying out an AM list with a bazillion special weapons and sponsons, so what if you've given plasma sponsons on all your tanks? Then you're just going to be at an advantage compared to the person that prefers running their tanks leaner. Vostroyan Plasma Spam [100 PL, 2,000pts]
C'tan Shard of the Deceiver [10 PL, 190pts]: Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Star-God Fists
C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer [9 PL, 165pts]: Gaze of Death, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow, Scythe of the Nightbringer
Transcendent C'tan [10 PL, 195pts]: Crackling Tendrils, Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Antimatter Meteor, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow
Transcendent C'tan [10 PL, 195pts]: Crackling Tendrils, Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Antimatter Meteor, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow
Craftworld Attribute: Ulthwe: Foresight of the Damned
+ HQ +
Autarch Skyrunner (Legends) [6 PL, 110pts]: 5: Mark of the Incomparable Hunter, Banshee Mask, Laser Lance, Peerless Agility, Reaper Launcher, Ride the Wind, The Path of Command, Twin Shuriken Catapult . Blazing Star of Vaul: Remnant of Glory . Craftworlds Warlord: Warlord
Farseer Skyrunner [7 PL, 135pts]: 0. Smite, 2. Doom, 4. Executioner, Ghosthelm, Psyker (Farseer), Ride the Wind, Rune Armour, Runes of the Farseer, Shuriken Pistol, Twin Shuriken Catapult, Witchblade
greatbigtree wrote: Hell, I was *trying* to break the lists, building armies I would play. I wouldn’t call my results broken by any means.
So far, I’m not seeing the boogeyman lists that people seem afraid of.
I don't think there are boogeyman lists. I'm not entirely sure how GW thinks 100-200PL = 2000 points when it seems like 100PL = 2,000 points. I can't imagine finding 200PL that will fit in 2,000 points.
I do think some of the borderline units change. I was wondering which ones those were.
I think the PL in 100-200 is the size of both armies, to allow PL players to have uneven battles. So that would be 50-100PL per side in an even match up equating to 1000-2000pts per side.
2020/09/07 19:08:13
Subject: Ever played with Power Level list building?
My limited experience also seems to be that PL seems to assume well kitted squads, with Guard Infantry squads being a significant outlier. Raising them to 3 PL would mostly sort them out, and adding 1 PL to the base 5-man Scion squad and keeping the +5 dudes at current pricing feels about right.
I would like to see more Tau-style PL, where upgrades generally cost a PL. For example, Guard Infantry 2 PL without upgrades, or 3 (4?) but allowed to take a tooled up Sarge, Special and Heavy.
SM squads could be similar, 5 basic dudes are “X” PL. Add 5 more dudes for X-1 PL. For +2 PL, take a tooled up Sarge and either a Special or Heavy. If 10 man, +1 PL to take an additional special or Heavy.
For highly customizable squads, there comes a break point where additional cc weapons aren’t valuable, as you know they’ll suffer some casualties on the way in. There’s a reason 5-man Death Company only take 2 dudes with upgrades... the rest are expected to die on the way in, or you will just overkill a target. Which I why I don’t mind the idea of 5 or 10 man squads of highly customizable infantry being based on a “half-way” upgraded value... half likely aren’t going to make it to delivery.
I would also, personally, prefer to see more units “pigeonholed” into a role. I’d rather see PL based on fully kitted Guardsmen, to make them less efficient space fillers and more of an active combat unit. But I digress, wishes and fishes and all that.
