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.

Voss wrote:
'Not counting' when counting is definitely a different way.
'Less granular' is likely not the proper term when 6 models = 10 models and grenade launchers are the same as plasma guns.

Not that I disagree with your overall point (no pun intended), but aren't plasmaguns the same as grenade launchers even under the current point system?

 Ordana wrote:

ccs wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm all in of PL. Throw the points away!

State what benefits a less granular system provide?

*Saves me a few moments by not having to look up pts values for this/that/something else.
*I don't have to pay any attention to CA volume whatever.

Now if only I could bank those saved moments & put em towards the time wasted with all the re-rolls.....

Hate to break it to you but AoS still gets points changes so CA would not be going away.

You mean the Generals Handbook? OK, so what? I'm still ignoring Chapter Aproved.

I'd be pretty happy with PL used instead of points. it would make army building a lot easier. It works well for AoS.

Most modern books datasheets are written like AOS warscrolls. The only thing we would loose is the option to have odd numbered squads. When it's 5PL per 5 marines, you won't want to take a 7 man squad.

AoS hasn't been PL based for list building since 1.0 though.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
The first isn't an inherent benefit of the system, just GW crappy way of hiding points in an appendix (or another book). They could easily put points next to PL on the datasheet.

Apropos!

I feel a need to point out that not only is the issue that you need to flip through the book to figure out your points costs, you also need to figure out the actual cost of a base model. That entry is pretty special in both providing the costs on the datasheet, and apparently including all the default wargear in the model's base cost.

More typically it's look at the unit entry, flip to the back to get the base cost, flip back to the unit entry, figure out what upgrades you want, flip to the back and find every one of those upgrades in a long undifferentiated list of weapons and wargear, then add them all up.

It sucks, and this is even assuming your codex costs are accurate and haven't been patched, which adds yet another layer of complexity. Frankly, I can't blame anyone who looks at that and concludes that less granularity is an acceptable price for being able to build army lists on the fly. If GW could just represent significant upgrades in the PL system (like in Apocalypse) I think it would get a lot more traction.

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm all in of PL. Throw the points away!

You have a hard time counting to 2000 or something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm all in of PL. Throw the points away!

State what benefits a less granular system provide?

*Saves me a few moments by not having to look up pts values for this/that/something else.
*I don't have to pay any attention to CA volume whatever.

Now if only I could bank those saved moments & put em towards the time wasted with all the re-rolls.....

If you can memorize the PL for something, why can't you memorize the point cost? You don't have to pay attention to CA right now, just use battlescribe and the points automatically update. I guess PL is for people too lazy to spend literally 2 mins while taking a dump to throw a list together in Battlescribe. If that's too much effort for someone, I wonder why they play 40k. Even during the days of paper lists in the 90s, I never thought "man this is just way too complicated for my koala smooth brain, I wish they would make a system that does nothing whatsoever to account for unit size or upgrades so I don't have to sit here and do simple math for 5mins".

 catbarf wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
The first isn't an inherent benefit of the system, just GW crappy way of hiding points in an appendix (or another book). They could easily put points next to PL on the datasheet.

Apropos!

I feel a need to point out that not only is the issue that you need to flip through the book to figure out your points costs, you also need to figure out the actual cost of a base model. That entry is pretty special in both providing the costs on the datasheet, and apparently including all the default wargear in the model's base cost.

More typically it's look at the unit entry, flip to the back to get the base cost, flip back to the unit entry, figure out what upgrades you want, flip to the back and find every one of those upgrades in a long undifferentiated list of weapons and wargear, then add them all up.

It sucks, and this is even assuming your codex costs are accurate and haven't been patched, which adds yet another layer of complexity. Frankly, I can't blame anyone who looks at that and concludes that less granularity is an acceptable price for being able to build army lists on the fly. If GW could just represent significant upgrades in the PL system (like in Apocalypse) I think it would get a lot more traction.

this is the main reason why i think if battlescribe and wahapedia somehow get shut down, i'll stop playing 40k. Its just sooo fething bad UX. I can't believe it passed QA

Toofast wrote:
If you can memorize the PL for something, why can't you memorize the point cost?

Leman Russ under PL: 10

Leman Russ under points: 130 base, then 5 for a Battle Cannon or Demolisher, Eradicators, Executioners, and Vanquishers are free, Exterminators are 15, and Punishers are 20. Then you've got another 15 for the hull Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer (not included in the base cost because lmao), or 20 for a lascannon. If you want sponsons then HBs and HFs are the same price, but Plasma Cannons are 20 apiece, and Multi-Meltas are 25. Then for wargear you can take Augurs, Dozers, Heavy Stubber, Hunter-Killer, or Track Guards for 5, or a Storm Bolter for 3. And don't go looking in your codex for these values because most of them have been updated since then.

Hmm, you tell me, how could one of these possibly be harder to memorize than the other?

'Just use a third-party app to make up for the byzantine default system being overly difficult to use in its intended manner' is a non-answer, and it's bs to pretend it's always been this messy. I never had a problem putting lists together in 3rd-5th just going through the unit entries and adding the upgrade costs (printed right there) onto them, but the codex is barely usable nowadays for points-based list creation.

I think using Battlescribe is an excellent solution to the problem. I'm not sure why it being a 3rd party app is a problem. It hasn't always been this messy but I remember making Space Wolves lists in excel in the late 90s. If you're going to spend hundreds of hours building, painting, and playing with an army, I don't think 10 mins in excel or 2 mins in Battlescribe to throw a proper list together is a huge ask. If that step is so complicated for people, I wonder how they even play this game.

Has someone else taken the reigns at Battlescribe though? I seem to recall the original creator was retiring from updating the app soon.

 AdmiralRon wrote:
Has someone else taken the reigns at Battlescribe though? I seem to recall the original creator was retiring from updating the app soon.

The app will run fine for a long time as is and users are updating the data files.

 catbarf wrote:

Toofast wrote:
If you can memorize the PL for something, why can't you memorize the point cost?

Leman Russ under PL: 10

Leman Russ under points: 130 base, then 5 for a Battle Cannon or Demolisher, Eradicators, Executioners, and Vanquishers are free, Exterminators are 15, and Punishers are 20. Then you've got another 15 for the hull Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer (not included in the base cost because lmao), or 20 for a lascannon. If you want sponsons then HBs and HFs are the same price, but Plasma Cannons are 20 apiece, and Multi-Meltas are 25. Then for wargear you can take Augurs, Dozers, Heavy Stubber, Hunter-Killer, or Track Guards for 5, or a Storm Bolter for 3. And don't go looking in your codex for these values because most of them have been updated since then.

Hmm, you tell me, how could one of these possibly be harder to memorize than the other?

'Just use a third-party app to make up for the byzantine default system being overly difficult to use in its intended manner' is a non-answer, and it's bs to pretend it's always been this messy. I never had a problem putting lists together in 3rd-5th just going through the unit entries and adding the upgrade costs (printed right there) onto them, but the codex is barely usable nowadays for points-based list creation.

Honest question-how long does it take you to make a list, with points?
I'm sure PL is shorter, but for me, the main time sink in making a list is DECISIONS, not math. The math, while slightly tougher with points than PL, isn't nearly as much mental processing as figuring out "What do I include?"

Toofast wrote:
I think using Battlescribe is an excellent solution to the problem. I'm not sure why it being a 3rd party app is a problem.

If you've watched GW start its own streaming service before C&Ding fan animations, and don't see a Sword of Damocles hanging over a direct competitor to GW's own (broken, poorly designed) app, you haven't been paying attention.

Let alone the fact that Battlescribe's 40K repos are not always accurate (I've reported a number of corrections myself, and there have been tournament-placing lists that weren't found to be illegal until after the fact) and doesn't always work. Sometimes it refuses to launch if it can't connect to the data repos; some versions of Battlescribe don't play nicely with certain versions of Android and iOS. A phone app shouldn't be required to play a completely physical dice-based wargame, particularly when it isn't even using the app to do something interesting, just make up for an unusable army creation system.

With PL, for all its flaws that I've criticized, it's at least trivial to construct, reduce, expand, or re-tune a list on the fly without needing external aids. Does it take me hours upon hours to build a list using points? Of course not, especially if I can use Battlescribe or Wahapedia- but for a pick-up game it's faster to just pick my units, total the PL, tweak as needed with relation to my opponent's list, and play WYSIWYG than to set up a list with full upgrades in Battlescribe.

And to be clear, all of this is beside the point, which is that GW has made using points a lot harder than it needs to be, and whether you like Battlescribe or not, it shouldn't be necessary.

Toofast wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm all in of PL. Throw the points away!

You have a hard time counting to 2000 or something?

You have a hard time counting under 2000 or something?

If you can memorize the PL for something, why can't you memorize the point cost? You don't have to pay attention to CA right now, just use battlescribe and the points automatically update. I guess PL is for people too lazy to spend literally 2 mins while taking a dump to throw a list together in Battlescribe. If that's too much effort for someone, I wonder why they play 40k. Even during the days of paper lists in the 90s, I never thought "man this is just way too complicated for my koala smooth brain, I wish they would make a system that does nothing whatsoever to account for unit size or upgrades so I don't have to sit here and do simple math for 5mins".

PL is for people who don't see the reason to pretend that every option should have to be paid for or that there are really "options" to begin with. In no way, shape, or form should an Omnispex be treated the same as an Enhanced Data-Tether. Nor should the Transauranic Arquebus be treated the same as a Plasma Caliver or an Arc Rifle.

missed a page

 catbarf wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
The first isn't an inherent benefit of the system, just GW crappy way of hiding points in an appendix (or another book). They could easily put points next to PL on the datasheet.

Apropos!

I feel a need to point out that not only is the issue that you need to flip through the book to figure out your points costs, you also need to figure out the actual cost of a base model. That entry is pretty special in both providing the costs on the datasheet, and apparently including all the default wargear in the model's base cost.

More typically it's look at the unit entry, flip to the back to get the base cost, flip back to the unit entry, figure out what upgrades you want, flip to the back and find every one of those upgrades in a long undifferentiated list of weapons and wargear, then add them all up.

Don't forget that some dataslates don't include stats for all the weapons they can take, so (especially for some of the more esoteric weapons) you have the additional step of flipping to the long list of weapons to find the relevant stats and see if you actually want to take any of them or not.


I can't help but look back fondly on the 4th edition Tyranid codex. Every model had its point cost right there in its unit entry. Not only that, but all its weapons and wargear also had their associated costs listed right beside them.

I loved the fact someone said that using Battlescribe was a point against regular points because I've seen people defending PL here that can't do basic math needed for PL anyway.

I prefer less granular points as well. Either that or less options to have to keep track of.

 auticus wrote:
I prefer less granular points as well. Either that or less options to have to keep track of.

yeah, i think this is the main issue with 40k, too many options that are basically one number being shuffled around (power weapons/heavy intercessor guns).

Merge these profiles together, kinda like what they did with Harlequins (minus the keyword part) or to the rumored Chosen/Terminator weapons

 catbarf wrote:

Toofast wrote:
I think using Battlescribe is an excellent solution to the problem. I'm not sure why it being a 3rd party app is a problem.

A phone app shouldn't be required to play a completely physical dice-based wargame

It's not required, just easier. I never had a problem making lists before it existed, I don't really understand how making a list with points requires some Herculean effort. Last week I had a game and I literally threw a list together while on the toilet at work. It's probably the easiest part of the entire hobby between building, painting, learning all the rules, packing all my stuff in the truck, and driving across town for a game. I had to repeat a math class in high school and don't have any problem with it. Anyone who can tie their own shoes should be able to come up with a 2k list...

 catbarf wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
The first isn't an inherent benefit of the system, just GW crappy way of hiding points in an appendix (or another book). They could easily put points next to PL on the datasheet.

Apropos!

I feel a need to point out that not only is the issue that you need to flip through the book to figure out your points costs, you also need to figure out the actual cost of a base model. That entry is pretty special in both providing the costs on the datasheet, and apparently including all the default wargear in the model's base cost.

More typically it's look at the unit entry, flip to the back to get the base cost, flip back to the unit entry, figure out what upgrades you want, flip to the back and find every one of those upgrades in a long undifferentiated list of weapons and wargear, then add them all up.

It sucks, and this is even assuming your codex costs are accurate and haven't been patched, which adds yet another layer of complexity. Frankly, I can't blame anyone who looks at that and concludes that less granularity is an acceptable price for being able to build army lists on the fly. If GW could just represent significant upgrades in the PL system (like in Apocalypse) I think it would get a lot more traction.

So you would be OK with the more granular point system if all of the points were on the data sheet? Being frustrated by having to flip pages isn't a fault of the system it's a fault of the editor(s).

Toofast wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Toofast wrote:
I think using Battlescribe is an excellent solution to the problem. I'm not sure why it being a 3rd party app is a problem.

A phone app shouldn't be required to play a completely physical dice-based wargame

It's not required, just easier. I never had a problem making lists before it existed, I don't really understand how making a list with points requires some Herculean effort. Last week I had a game and I literally threw a list together while on the toilet at work. It's probably the easiest part of the entire hobby between building, painting, learning all the rules, packing all my stuff in the truck, and driving across town for a game. I had to repeat a math class in high school and don't have any problem with it. Anyone who can tie their own shoes should be able to come up with a 2k list...

Yeah all you're doing with battlescribe is replacing your physical sheet of notebook paper/a used dinner napkin/your palm/dozens of sticky notes with an app. There's nothing saying you have to use it.

My problem with points isn't points. I've played with points since 2nd edition. My problem is the living rule book points adjustments garbage.
I'd dealy love to have the points in my codex remain useable for an entire addition and if there are new units or drastically needed changes I am fine with buying another book.
Granted the codex itself is an issue for me as having collected for this many years I'd like an option to just buy the printed data sheets and rules without all the extra stuff which no longer serves a purpose, my opinion. I like the idea of power levels aligned with either a set of fixed loadouts for units or a wysiwyg rule in the game. Honestly paying for unit upgrades is irrelevant when those upgrades do nothing buy eat points for no benefit to my army. You're free to disagree, it's ok I wont attempt to berate you. 9th edition is a trash fire at best, it could be so much better but it wont.
Given the lethality and difficult to use terrain rules why pay for anything past the starting cost on anything. I would much prefer a completely different means of buying upgrades during army construction. something like an allowance for the entire army which is a set number. If power levels will let me throw cool models in a list and jump right in I'm all for it. But as I say I see 9th as a trash fire and have zero expectations for a better game with 10'th edition.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AdmiralRon wrote:

Toofast wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Toofast wrote:
I think using Battlescribe is an excellent solution to the problem. I'm not sure why it being a 3rd party app is a problem.

A phone app shouldn't be required to play a completely physical dice-based wargame

It's not required, just easier. I never had a problem making lists before it existed, I don't really understand how making a list with points requires some Herculean effort. Last week I had a game and I literally threw a list together while on the toilet at work. It's probably the easiest part of the entire hobby between building, painting, learning all the rules, packing all my stuff in the truck, and driving across town for a game. I had to repeat a math class in high school and don't have any problem with it. Anyone who can tie their own shoes should be able to come up with a 2k list...

Yeah all you're doing with battlescribe is replacing your physical sheet of notebook paper/a used dinner napkin/your palm/dozens of sticky notes with an app. There's nothing saying you have to use it.

Unfortunately that's not entirely true. Yes you can do that with friends but then you see a post for a tournament which then requires you to use some app for your army list because for some reason that matters to them. BCP as I understand it has helped TO's a fair bit in the tournament scene. Not all bad, not all good.

Switching to pure power level just completely trashes some factions. 10 ork boyz can get like maximum a combi weapon, power weapon, and heavy weapon for wargear. Compare that to everything you can stack on tac marines, dark eldar, and literally anything else with wargear. With the limited granularity of power level balance like that is basically impossible.
Maybe if power level was increased to around 2k expected for a full game, accounting for wargear.
Oh wait.

 vipoid wrote:

Voss wrote:
'Not counting' when counting is definitely a different way.
'Less granular' is likely not the proper term when 6 models = 10 models and grenade launchers are the same as plasma guns.

Not that I disagree with your overall point (no pun intended), but aren't plasmaguns the same as grenade launchers even under the current point system?

/shrug. They very well could be at this point.
While I'm (re)building my guard army (building a new one? the line is blurry), I haven't been paying much attention to the 9th edition patches to the 8th edition codex. I've found that not bothering to rationalize the points updates and 'balance slates' better for my mental health. Once the bulk of the army is done, the new book and/or 10th edition will be out, so its unlikely to matter. For points or PL, when it comes down to it.

GW has done an exceptionally poor job at points values lately. The big point list at the start of 9th was... weird. Too many things were exactly the same cost as they were in rogue trader, to the point that it didn't feel like a coincidence, but that they were trying to feel out the formula baseline all over again. The absurd adjustments and things that were just obviously wrong on release (which still continues, if devourer gaunts and warriors are any example, if for different reasons) suggests a system that's not only broken, but that they don't know how to utilize

I sympathize a lot more with PL players after the last couple rounds of 'points adjustments,' but its still seems blatantly conceptually flawed to me. Points feel broken, but fixable once they start filling in the hole they dug with 9th edition. They just need to do the work and do it before release, rather than force an overly quickly release schedule with little apparent regard to quality.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AdmiralRon wrote:

Yeah all you're doing with battlescribe is replacing your physical sheet of notebook paper/a used dinner napkin/your palm/dozens of sticky notes with an app. There's nothing saying you have to use it.

Well, you're also trusting that the BS volunteers entered all the data correctly. Which... not so much.

Voss wrote:


Well, you're also trusting that the BS volunteers entered all the data correctly. Which... not so much.

The offical PAYING also has data entered incorrectly, so yeah, i'll stick to battlescribe until it doesn't work anymore, at which point i'll probably stop playing 40k because listbuilding is gonna become an inconvenience

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
The first isn't an inherent benefit of the system, just GW crappy way of hiding points in an appendix (or another book). They could easily put points next to PL on the datasheet.

Apropos!

I feel a need to point out that not only is the issue that you need to flip through the book to figure out your points costs, you also need to figure out the actual cost of a base model. That entry is pretty special in both providing the costs on the datasheet, and apparently including all the default wargear in the model's base cost.

More typically it's look at the unit entry, flip to the back to get the base cost, flip back to the unit entry, figure out what upgrades you want, flip to the back and find every one of those upgrades in a long undifferentiated list of weapons and wargear, then add them all up.

It sucks, and this is even assuming your codex costs are accurate and haven't been patched, which adds yet another layer of complexity. Frankly, I can't blame anyone who looks at that and concludes that less granularity is an acceptable price for being able to build army lists on the fly. If GW could just represent significant upgrades in the PL system (like in Apocalypse) I think it would get a lot more traction.

So you would be OK with the more granular point system if all of the points were on the data sheet? Being frustrated by having to flip pages isn't a fault of the system it's a fault of the editor(s).

If the points were on the datasheet, with printable updates so that I don't have to collate three or more sources to figure out the current cost, and universally presented as a base cost including default wargear and then points adjustments given for options, yeah I'd be pretty happy. I mean, that's how it worked in prior editions.

Did I give the impression that I'm anti-points? I'm really not; just saying the way GW has chosen to present points is obnoxious and has poor usability, and I can see how PL is more attractive to people who don't want to deal with any of that. Cleaning up the presentation would be an improvement. Making PL at least attempt to model significant wargear would also be an improvement, in that there would then be a decent alternative.

Toofast wrote:
It's not required, just easier.

 AdmiralRon wrote:
Yeah all you're doing with battlescribe is replacing your physical sheet of notebook paper/a used dinner napkin/your palm/dozens of sticky notes with an app. There's nothing saying you have to use it.

Okay, so is Battlescribe:
-A total substitute for the on-paper army comp system, so the problems with doing it on paper don't matter because you can always use an app anyways, or
-A handy aid but not a substitute, so problems with the app aren't a big deal because you can always do it on paper the old way?

I mean, pick one, please. If you treat Battlescribe as an optional tool, then it obviously still matters if building an army without Battlescribe is a tedious and error-prone process.

I'd rather have a decently designed and well-presented force org system so that you can assemble an army without flipping back and forth through three books, and then can optionally choose to use a third-party app to streamline the process further. I don't particularly care if it's called points or power as long as it gets the job done.

the points system is like USRs were in previous editions : A good system but implemented in the most stupid way possible.

Codexes in general have gotten worse and worse. Like why the hell are crusade rules in between non crusade rules?
It should be : [Codex rules][Crusade rules][Datasheet]

Oh and have ALL weapon options on the datasheet instead of on the back of the book for whatever reason. I don't know how GW thought that system was any good

 catbarf wrote:
it obviously still matters if building an army without Battlescribe is a tedious and error-prone process.

I think whether it is or not depends on your overall intelligence level and familiarity with that aspect of playing games. Judging by some of the comments here, I'm not surprised some people find it tedious and error prone to build lists by hand...

Toofast wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
it obviously still matters if building an army without Battlescribe is a tedious and error-prone process.

I think whether it is or not depends on your overall intelligence level and familiarity with that aspect of playing games. Judging by some of the comments here, I'm not surprised some people find it tedious and error prone to build lists by hand...

I used to use Microsoft Word to make my lists. Battlescribe is just so much greater.