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.

My friends and I discovered 40K this winter, and have started out with very different, small armies. There is some disagreement on how to create a "fair" match-up. What do you all think about using Points and/or Power to calculate fair match-ups; and if either of those are important, how close to those scores need to be to be "fair" (e.g. Power within two; Points within 100, or 50, or 10, etc...)?

All of us are brand new, so there's really no subjective balancing of "skill."

Thanks for the opinions (or straight up facts)!

usually players accept 0 distance, I would say 10% if an army is too strong or too weak.

Welcome to Dakka and 40k.

Especially when starting out with friends, a few points/PL either way should be fine. Eventually you will want to hit set marks, like 2,000 points, and not go over.

There are pros/cons with both points and power. Both can be exploited. Some units are “better” for their cost than others. GW tries to balance things, but never gets it exactly right. This can be complicated buy army/unit selection within your group.

If you are just starting out in a small group, you might want to look at the crusade rules. They can be a fun way to grow an army.

Just echoing what Nevelon said. Power Level tends to be less balanced but also lets you try out and get a feel for sub-optimal options. Which can be nice for new players. Example: I love giving power blades to my warp spider exarchs because they're cool, but it's hard to justify the cost when using points.

Points are more balanced, but the game isn't very well balanced even with points. Especially at a smaller game size where armies can end up with exaggerated strengths or weaknesses, and especially among newbies who might not realize how optimal/suboptimal some choices are.

The "best" way to have a balanced game is basically just for everyone to intentionally power down their own army if they win a lot of games in a row (by taking less powerful units and upgrades) and then power back up if they end up losing a lot.

If you really wanted to, you could introduce a "rubber band" system where players get an extra number of points/PL based on how many times they've lost in a row. Ex: I get 100 extra points every time I lose, so 3 losses gives me 300 extra points. But that's probably too complicated and wonky if you're just starting out.

Terakian wrote:
My friends and I discovered 40K this winter, and have started out with very different, small armies. There is some disagreement on how to create a "fair" match-up. What do you all think about using Points and/or Power to calculate fair match-ups; and if either of those are important, how close to those scores need to be to be "fair" (e.g. Power within two; Points within 100, or 50, or 10, etc...)?

All of us are brand new, so there's really no subjective balancing of "skill."

Thanks for the opinions (or straight up facts)!

1980-2000 pts per side.

If one army looks OP once you get to the table then set up terrain so that at least it doesn't give the OP army an additional advantage. Whether an army is OP comes down to what is currently used in tournaments and whether both armies have answers to their opponent's units, if your primary damage dealing comes from mortal wounds and my army has a 1/3 chance of ignoring damage caused by mortal wounds then terrain should not favour me. Dice will sometimes make a fair match seem unfair or an unfair match seem fair, there is no way to make every game fair without changing the rules of the game in the middle of the game, but if either both you and your opponent are aiming at making a 7/10 list or a 9/10 list then you just need to keep playing games and some of them will turn out to be fair.

PL is gak, unfortunately pts were ruined in CA20 and have not been entirely fixed yet, but I have had a lot of fair games with a really balanced win ratio playing pick-up games.

If all of you are beginners maybe the best advice would be to not look at what the internet says but instead let fluff and what looks cool decide how you build your army. Since 8th the game overall is balanced good enough that it works without heavy list tailoring. Sometimes an army can lack abilities when you start building your forces, like when you lack antitank-weapons. In that case you should agree with your opponent how to solve that.

As others have said, terrain is very important, you usually shouldn't be able to shoot across the board in turn 1. Also try out different mission formats, crusade offers more interesting choices than eternal war, maybe you get a hand at some 8th edition Chapter approved which also had more interesting missions (and they still work since the differences between 8th and 9th are in Codizes and missions mostly). After having played different kinds of missions you should get a feel how to write your own scenarios which I personally feel makes the game much more fun.

If you want real balance you need to abandon points entirely. The points aren't even intended for balance. Just a way to get "good enough" quickly and to work as marketing tool for gw.

For people who are new to the hobby perfect or even reasonable balance is almost impossible to get. Reasonable balance is achieved after learning how to master an army and after having the models to make significant changes to the lists.

At first I'd suggest to play 1000 points, get the models you like the most focussing on "basic" stuff though (not monsters, heroes, flyers, or other "super" stuff) and proxying after a few games if balance seems impossible to reach.

It may take a few years to create a group of players in which reasonable balance is achieved while playing WYSIWYG.

If you want perfectly balanced games you probably need to play mirror lists on symetrical tables. Apart from that, you likely need to be tolerant of some unfairness in your games while playing 40k because it has never been a fair game for all factions.

Points. PL is wonky as some have said but when you become better at the game you'll find PL restrictive. Points offer granularity in the sense that they don't force you to take set amounts of model and you can shave one or two models off a unit to free up point to take models elsewhere. For example if you're just shy of taking another carnifex you can drop a squad of 20 genestealers down to 18 to get a bit extra.

 Da Boss wrote:
If you want perfectly balanced games you probably need to play mirror lists on symetrical tables. Apart from that, you likely need to be tolerant of some unfairness in your games while playing 40k because it has never been a fair game for all factions.

What he said. People who worship "balance" play chess or use mirror matches in 40K on those above mentioned tables.

Points, never power level, and start small and grow. Start with 500 point games. play a few, then move up to 750, 1000. You'll start to get a feel of what units combos work and don't work.

Also, terrain is everyone's best friend.

I'd say power levels is a fine way to get your foot in. However, I would encourage players to adopt the guideline of what you see is what you get when it comes to the models in the units. Some units will be much stronger than other with power levels but both players are in a position to have their cake and eat it too for their unit options. Regardless of what people on the internet say and advocate for it's your group and you should has hit out. Which ever way give you all the most fun. Once you've played for a while you are likely to adjust how you like to play but don't be afraid to try every option available. It's more about how you play with than what you play.
Best of luck!

Some units will be much stronger than other with power levels but both players are in a position to have their cake and eat it too for their unit options

Nope. Some armies can't really do it at all with very few exceptions (Craftworlds, necrons and to some degree tyranids, for example, largely lack unit options). More recently, for some armies (DG, some dark eldar units) have been severally curtailed by the box set limitations on legal weapons.

If someone is bringing one of those armies to the table, they just don't get cake in a PL environment, while (particularly older imperium armies) have an open season to exploit every single flaw of the PL system.

It's fine for vets who know what they're doing and proactively agree to be underpowered, but it's a horrible trap for new players.b who don't need to look for exploits, just stumble on horribly good or hiilariously bad things that sound cool.

Voss wrote:

Some units will be much stronger than other with power levels but both players are in a position to have their cake and eat it too for their unit options

Nope. Some armies can't really do it at all with very few exceptions (Craftworlds, necrons and to some degree tyranids, for example, largely lack unit options). More recently, for some armies (DG, some dark eldar units) have been severally curtailed by the box set limitations on legal weapons.

If someone is bringing one of those armies to the table, they just don't get cake in a PL environment, while (particularly older imperium armies) have an open season to exploit every single flaw of the PL system.

It's fine for vets who know what they're doing and proactively agree to be underpowered, but it's a horrible trap for new players.b who don't need to look for exploits, just stumble on horribly good or hiilariously bad things that sound cool.

Out of curiosity, did you ever actually play a couple of games using PL?

My experience with the kind of units who can "exploit" PL is that they tend to be traditional veteran-style units that can load up on melee weapons, but rarely, if ever, on good ranged or defensive options. Which means that the biggest difference is that the corpse of a marine which has been shot dead just like in any other game was holding a thunderhammer instead of a chainsword. Most of those units also aren't that great to begin with.

Also keep in mind that PL isn't calculated from the points baseline, but from the average between the cheapest and most expensive load-out. For example, 5 bare nobz are 6 PL but only 90 points. If I equip all of them with double killsaws and get an ammo runt, I can inflate them to 185 points, but that unit still doesn't actually deal vastly more damage than it would have at 120 points, especially if the unit just dies before fighting.
Even the "worst" offenders or this, the wolf guard terminators, have already rolled 5-10 points of gear rolled into their PL base costs.

Newbies can't "stumble" into things like the the legendary all-thunderhammer jumping death company squad which is 16 PL instead of 400 points, because such cases require heavy kit-bashing and/or conversions and knowing what you are doing. And even then, you can just move on to points and void all that work TFG put into it.

Units that just take all the most expensive options from their box tend to be fairly close to the PL written on their datasheet. It's absolutely fine for new players to use this.

Newbies can't "stumble" into things like the the legendary all-thunderhammer jumping death company squad which is 16 PL instead of 400 points, because such cases require heavy kit-bashing and/or conversions and knowing what you are doing. And even then, you can just move on to points and void all that work TFG put into it.

It isn't a problem, but if it is, you can just move on to points?

Yeah... so... points, then.

Balance is difficult since there are lots of paper rock sissor builds. if you play imperial knights and your opponent brought imperial guard spamming lascannons in infantry squads the kinght player is going to have a bad time despite the lascannon imperial guard not being a very good army against much else.

Personally i like power level and open war for fun games since it gets people to use units that might not be ideal points wise. This only works if you and your opponents are not min maxing everything and abusing some units with optional equipment (liek the all jet pack dual wielding thunderhammer death guard). assuming both players are on the same page though it can lead to some great games

 G00fySmiley wrote:
Balance is difficult since there are lots of paper rock sissor builds. if you play imperial knights and your opponent brought imperial guard spamming lascannons in infantry squads the kinght player is going to have a bad time despite the lascannon imperial guard not being a very good army against much else.

Personally i like power level and open war for fun games since it gets people to use units that might not be ideal points wise. This only works if you and your opponents are not min maxing everything and abusing some units with optional equipment (liek the all jet pack dual wielding thunderhammer death guard). assuming both players are on the same page though it can lead to some great games

I agree completely!

New players need to have a good time in as many games as they can or it isn't very likely they will stick around.

Voss wrote:

Newbies can't "stumble" into things like the the legendary all-thunderhammer jumping death company squad which is 16 PL instead of 400 points, because such cases require heavy kit-bashing and/or conversions and knowing what you are doing. And even then, you can just move on to points and void all that work TFG put into it.

It isn't a problem, but if it is, you can just move on to points?

Yeah... so... points, then.

So, you concede that you are both wrong and have never tried it?

I also wouldn't call a mismatch of 80 points "a problem". You can do much worse with actual points.

I'll chime in with something tangential to the subject - a good terrain setup.

This runs $130 and gets you a full table of what constitutes a "good" terrain setup. Some people will be mad about this particular dynamic, but terrain like this will help make for more interesting games.

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1064339609/40k-full-table-terrain-set-competitive?ref=yr_purchases

 Jidmah wrote:

Voss wrote:

Some units will be much stronger than other with power levels but both players are in a position to have their cake and eat it too for their unit options

Nope. Some armies can't really do it at all with very few exceptions (Craftworlds, necrons and to some degree tyranids, for example, largely lack unit options). More recently, for some armies (DG, some dark eldar units) have been severally curtailed by the box set limitations on legal weapons.

If someone is bringing one of those armies to the table, they just don't get cake in a PL environment, while (particularly older imperium armies) have an open season to exploit every single flaw of the PL system.

It's fine for vets who know what they're doing and proactively agree to be underpowered, but it's a horrible trap for new players.b who don't need to look for exploits, just stumble on horribly good or hiilariously bad things that sound cool.

Out of curiosity, did you ever actually play a couple of games using PL?

My experience with the kind of units who can "exploit" PL is that they tend to be traditional veteran-style units that can load up on melee weapons, but rarely, if ever, on good ranged or defensive options. Which means that the biggest difference is that the corpse of a marine which has been shot dead just like in any other game was holding a thunderhammer instead of a chainsword. Most of those units also aren't that great to begin with.

Also keep in mind that PL isn't calculated from the points baseline, but from the average between the cheapest and most expensive load-out. For example, 5 bare nobz are 6 PL but only 90 points. If I equip all of them with double killsaws and get an ammo runt, I can inflate them to 185 points, but that unit still doesn't actually deal vastly more damage than it would have at 120 points, especially if the unit just dies before fighting.
Even the "worst" offenders or this, the wolf guard terminators, have already rolled 5-10 points of gear rolled into their PL base costs.

Newbies can't "stumble" into things like the the legendary all-thunderhammer jumping death company squad which is 16 PL instead of 400 points, because such cases require heavy kit-bashing and/or conversions and knowing what you are doing. And even then, you can just move on to points and void all that work TFG put into it.

Units that just take all the most expensive options from their box tend to be fairly close to the PL written on their datasheet. It's absolutely fine for new players to use this.

Tau can absolutely exploit the PL-points discrepancies.
2 drones are 1 PL, shield drones are 15 pts each or 20 pts when taken in a tactical drones unit.
Crisis suits can load up with CIBs and cost a fraction in terms of PL compared to their point costs.

Just throwing in some units in battlescribe:
- 1 Commander (4x CIB) + 2 Shield Drones
- 5 Breachers + 1 Shield Drone + 1 Guardian Drone
- 5 Breachers + 1 Shield Drone + 1 Guardian Drone
- 9 Crisis (8x3 CIB each, 2 with Iridium, 1 with Iridium+CIB+relicAFP) + 6 Shield Drones
- 8 Shield Drones
- 4 Shield Drones
Total: 50 PL but a whopping 1445 points. Almost 500 points over a 1000 points game limit that would correspond to 50 PL.
I'm sure you could build a list which costs even more while staying within 50 PL.

The only way to have a "balanced" game is to literally build a list with one another involved in the decisions.

Power Level is ok for this but remember its also the most ridiculous crap when used by TFG players.

"but my units only PL7!"

"Ok, cool, but it has 200+pts of upgrades on it that are functionally free."

If you want a "balanced" game I always suggest going with 1 of 2 options.

1: As already mentioned, build your lists together so you know what everyones bringing. This removes the "surprise" element of skew either intentional or accidental. It also helps eliminate bad matchups, for instance you bring a Super heavy at a low points game and your opponent doesn't have the ability to deal with it.

and option

2: Go full hardcore competitive. Believe it or not, the game is much better balanced when players are going hard into competitive builds. But again, this can be less fun if you run into skew builds. For instance, when I play friendly games, unless I am helping a friend get ready for a GT I DO NOT run my Alphork strike list. Its incredibly boring in fun games because the games usually end turn 1-2 with my opponent feeling cheated he didn't get a chance to do much thanks to my army basically being in your deployment zone turn 1.

Honestly, just communicate with your friends and work from there. Stop players early from developing into TFG or WAAC and you can always move on and have more fun.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'll chime in with something tangential to the subject - a good terrain setup.

This runs $130 and gets you a full table of what constitutes a "good" terrain setup. Some people will be mad about this particular dynamic, but terrain like this will help make for more interesting games.

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1064339609/40k-full-table-terrain-set-competitive?ref=yr_purchases

Wow, someone's buying that? At $130 you're being ripped off for that package. There's nothing there that can't be replicated with a sharp blade, some glue, a few sheets of cheap plasti-card & about an hours worth of minimal effort.

ccs wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'll chime in with something tangential to the subject - a good terrain setup.

This runs $130 and gets you a full table of what constitutes a "good" terrain setup. Some people will be mad about this particular dynamic, but terrain like this will help make for more interesting games.

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1064339609/40k-full-table-terrain-set-competitive?ref=yr_purchases

Wow, someone's buying that? At $130 you're being ripped off for that package. There's nothing there that can't be replicated with a sharp blade, some glue, a few sheets of cheap plasti-card & about an hours worth of minimal effort.

An hours worth, eh? You'll have to post a how-to video then.

I'd suggest points over PL, but you'll have a better experience if you don't min-max to squeeze the most out of your points possible.

Go by rule of cool and what you get in the boxes to start with; stay away from Internet competitive advice or you're liable to get into an arms race, and that can quickly suck the fun out of things as you're pressured into optimal builds.

 catbarf wrote:
I'd suggest points over PL, but you'll have a better experience if you don't min-max to squeeze the most out of your points possible.

Go by rule of cool and what you get in the boxes to start with; stay away from Internet competitive advice or you're liable to get into an arms race, and that can quickly suck the fun out of things as you're pressured into optimal builds.

Are you still mad at me for starting our friendly firearms race that ended with the Department of Energy seizing your Nuclear Warhead you built from Smoke alarms?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'll chime in with something tangential to the subject - a good terrain setup.

This runs $130 and gets you a full table of what constitutes a "good" terrain setup. Some people will be mad about this particular dynamic, but terrain like this will help make for more interesting games.

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1064339609/40k-full-table-terrain-set-competitive?ref=yr_purchases

Wow, someone's buying that? At $130 you're being ripped off for that package. There's nothing there that can't be replicated with a sharp blade, some glue, a few sheets of cheap plasti-card & about an hours worth of minimal effort.

An hours worth, eh? You'll have to post a how-to video then.

Here you go, someone's beat me to it:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=how+to+glue+plasticard+together&docid=608054510447648712&mid=3315EFE226B5214DB37F3315EFE226B5214DB37F&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

130$ is a very high price for that tiny amount of terrain. TTCOMBAT for example could give you twice the amount of terrain for that price, and they're also much better looking buildings/ruins!

 Blackie wrote:
130$ is a very high price for that tiny amount of terrain. TTCOMBAT for example could give you twice the amount of terrain for that price, and they're also much better looking buildings/ruins!

This. It's hard to get better terrain value than the TTCombat stuff, must of my personal terrain I use for games in my home is from them.

And no, you can't build all that within an hour.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
130$ is a very high price for that tiny amount of terrain. TTCOMBAT for example could give you twice the amount of terrain for that price, and they're also much better looking buildings/ruins!

This. It's hard to get better terrain value than the TTCombat stuff, must of my personal terrain I use for games in my home is from them.

And no, you can't build all that within an hour.

I've bought both this and TT Combat. This stuff was way easier to put together. Also, the TTC kits are $100 US and some aren't much more than half of what this terrain layout is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

Here you go, someone's beat me to it:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=how+to+glue+plasticard+together&docid=608054510447648712&mid=3315EFE226B5214DB37F3315EFE226B5214DB37F&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

That doesn't even come anywhere close to proving that you can do that much terrain in an hour with plasticard especially when he spend half a minute cutting off a tiny burr. If it were true then tournament organizers would have been doing this for ages.