Prediction Time

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.

**johnpjones1775**

a_typical_hero wrote:
johnpjones1775 wrote:
Why would a bolter cost more a BS2+ than on a BS4+? The weapon should cost the same across the board because you’re already paying a premium on the 2+ model compared to the 4+ model.

It costs more because the boltgun hits more often. That's why in practice it needs to be the other way around. You don't pay for the BS of a model when looking at the model cost.

How much is BS2+ worth on any model? You can't tell because it depends on the weapons available. 2+ on a model that can only take a laspistol is relatively worth nothing compared to a model that can take a lascannon. I elaborated on it a few posts prior.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Canadian 5th wrote:
How does this work with, for example, giving a power sword to the Sergeant leading a Devastator squad? It's technically a power boost and he does have the same WS as a Sergeant leading another unit but the impact of the weapon is much reduced due to the unit's role.

Currently, I make no exception for it. I understand that you could make an argument for it because a ranged unit - in theory - should engage less often in melee combat. That is were finetuning would come in afterwards, after establishing a baseline.

and yet the effectiveness of a weapon largely relies on how often it hits. A S22 AP-7 D10 weapon is a good weapon no doubt but in the hands of a BS6+ unit it’s not going to make much of a difference, so yes the BS is arguably more important than the weapon. Especially if you’re talk lascannon vs plasma cannon.

**Canadian 5th**

johnpjones1775 wrote:
and yet the effectiveness of a weapon largely relies on how often it hits. A S22 AP-7 D10 weapon is a good weapon no doubt but in the hands of a BS6+ unit it’s not going to make much of a difference, so yes the BS is arguably more important than the weapon. Especially if you’re talk lascannon vs plasma cannon.

Obviously weapons need to hit, but most armies can already mitigate that and such a unique weapon would probably only be found on a few units anyway (likely Orks given the crazy stats and low odds to hit) and could be baked into the unit's cost.

**vict0988**

Dudeface wrote:
vict0988 wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
vict0988 wrote:
Upgrading a laspistol to a bolt pistol is worth more than 0, if you're unwilling to set the smallest non-zero points value in 40k below 1 then 1 is the best value that can be used for upgrading a laspistol to a bolt pistol and it will only be worth it in cases where you have nothing else to spend your point on

So you might say... they're worthless.

No, their value is very clearly non zero, I said that many times, that's the opposite of worthless. Overcosted does not mean worthless. What's worthless is a strictly worse weapon that isn't cheaper.

Let me pluck that bit out for you again:

1 is the best value that can be used for upgrading a laspistol to a bolt pistol and it will only be worth it in cases where you have nothing else to spend your point on

I'll leave it there, but if you only take something with the explicit purpose of having nothing else to spend points on and it's only value to you is to make your list add up to 2k exactly, it has no real worth and might as well be free.

You take it because you want the extra 1 strength on your pistol, not to add up your pts to 2000. Now give me a reason to take a 0 pt bolt pistol when you can take a 0 pt plasma pistol.

**Dudeface**

vict0988 wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
vict0988 wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
vict0988 wrote:
Upgrading a laspistol to a bolt pistol is worth more than 0, if you're unwilling to set the smallest non-zero points value in 40k below 1 then 1 is the best value that can be used for upgrading a laspistol to a bolt pistol and it will only be worth it in cases where you have nothing else to spend your point on

So you might say... they're worthless.

No, their value is very clearly non zero, I said that many times, that's the opposite of worthless. Overcosted does not mean worthless. What's worthless is a strictly worse weapon that isn't cheaper.

Let me pluck that bit out for you again:

1 is the best value that can be used for upgrading a laspistol to a bolt pistol and it will only be worth it in cases where you have nothing else to spend your point on

I'll leave it there, but if you only take something with the explicit purpose of having nothing else to spend points on and it's only value to you is to make your list add up to 2k exactly, it has no real worth and might as well be free.

You take it because you want the extra 1 strength on your pistol, not to add up your pts to 2000. Now give me a reason to take a 0 pt bolt pistol when you can take a 0 pt plasma pistol.

As previously discussed, that's not possible:

Dudeface wrote:

The other side of that being the "lesser" options need some utility or other virtues to make them something other than "the worst one", I'm not against things being pointed as long as it's worthwhile doing so. If you can balance a laspistol vs a bolt pistol to parity at the same cost/free then a plasma pistol being more points but outright better is ok. Otherwise the simple answer is to consolidate the profiles into "sidearm" and "better sidearm" as needed.

Again, if they are to be the same points the other weapons utility adding and/or consolidation of profile.

**Breton**

Its amazing to watch all the people complaining about "bloat" in the Marine Dex calling for 3 page length calculus equations to determine the point cost of each unit in your army.

**Brickfix**

It's a back-end vs front-end thing.
Good point costs for a basic but diverse set of weapons should result in a better playing expwrience opposed to stacks upon stacks of special rules that are similar but not the same

**a_typical_hero**

Canadian 5th wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
The role doesn't matter... the raw numbers do...

If you think paying 5pts for a powersword on a devastator unit is not worth it, don't pick the weapon, it doesn't change the fact that the sword will kill 4 guardsmen (random number to make a point), regardless of if its on a devastator or an neophyte.

That's untrue.

A meltagun on a unit that moves 4" per turn is less valuable than one on a unit that can move 24". A lascannon is less valuable on a unit that wants to hide in cover to hold an objective than it is on a unit that wants to move and hunt tanks. Your system will lead to people taking nothing but naked tactical squads again because they can't use weapons that are priced to prevent another unit from abusing them.

While your concern is valid, I can tell you from practice - not just theory - that this is not whats happening. Your mandatory troop selections as a Space Marine are too expensive to just sit around naked doing nothing. If you want them to sit back, you give them a heavy weapon and maybe the Tank Hunter ability. If you want to engage, you will give them assault or melee weapons and maybe the Vanguard ability. If you just want them to grab objectives, you can put them in a transport (which gets their sticky objectives rule while being inside).

I like my Intercessor squad with a Pyreblaster and a pair of power claws on the veteran sergeant to contest side and midfield objectives, as even as a basic Marine squad, they are capable of fighting much larger squads to a standstill for a round or two until a proper melee unit arrives for the killing blow.

You would be surprised by how much balance improves even if you just start by using the same calculation for everything.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breton wrote:
Its amazing to watch all the people complaining about "bloat" in the Marine Dex calling for 3 page length calculus equations to determine the point cost of each unit in your army.

Nobody is doing that, but I understand that you hyperbole for attention, otherwise this post of yours would be much less punchy.

For argument's sake, a sample point calculation formula can be just this:

Spoiler:

It only looks a bit complicated because of the VLOOKUPs that are in place so the user can have a more readable selection in a dropdown instead of the raw value. Apart from that, it is basically just adding profile values together, multiplied by wounds and then factoring in armor and invul saves.

**Daedalus81**

vict0988 wrote:
You take it because you want the extra 1 strength on your pistol, not to add up your pts to 2000. Now give me a reason to take a 0 pt bolt pistol when you can take a 0 pt plasma pistol.

A plasma pistol has a 17% chance to kill you, 35% to kill a marine, and 48% to do absolutely nothing.

I made a roller for a bolt pistol and a plasma pistol assuming they each fire every round in a game ( almost impossible ). The values for plasma stop counting if the bearer rolls a 1.

The mathematical average for each firing 5 shots against a marine is 0.42 and 3.47.

The pistol in rolling averages 0.47 across 1000 games.
When you have the bearer die the average for plasma becomes 2.82 instead of 3.47.

If you then presume you're firing only once or twice a game these figures reduce fairly pathetic levels.

So unless you decide to bring reroll 1s you're either risking putting the squad at LD7 or losing a model that can order. Each time you shoot that pistol you take a risk. If you want to shoot that model without calculating risk you take a bolt pistol.

**a_typical_hero**

You don't have to shoot the plasma pistol with the overcharged profile if you don't want to risk your model.

And there are situations where you don't mind, like firing a last time before getting charged by a melee unit for example.

**Daedalus81**

a_typical_hero wrote:
You don't have to shoot the plasma pistol with the overcharged profile if you don't want to risk your model.

And there are situations where you don't mind, like firing a last time before getting charged by a melee unit for example.

Sure, good point. In the scenario where you don't OC it your damage is 1.4 against a bolt pistol of 0.42 it's strictly better and there would be no good incentive to choose otherwise. Overall regardless of the weapon you choose the outcome will likely be the same as you'll probably shoot it once or twice a game and it will most likely never do anything at all ( 72% chance ). So, I guess if you like the look of a bolt pistol more?

**ccs**

vict0988 wrote:

You take it because you want the extra 1 strength on your pistol, not to add up your pts to 2000. Now give me a reason to take a 0 pt bolt pistol when you can take a 0 pt plasma pistol.

Because that's what my long finished mini is modeled with.

Either the company made it that way (old metal models), or by me in some previous edition for some reason (likely a pts thing whenever I built/modded it). And I don't feel the need to go modding long finished minis just because on this random day in 2023 weapon x now cost 0pts or whatever. I'll just make do with what I've got modeled.
Now a new model I build today? Yes, I might very well build it with that best 0pt option. And years from now? When it's no longer the best option, when the pendulum swings & it now costs pts again? Then I'll pay those pts and play it as its built....

**Canadian 5th**

a_typical_hero wrote:
While your concern is valid, I can tell you from practice - not just theory - that this is not whats happening. Your mandatory troop selections as a Space Marine are too expensive to just sit around naked doing nothing. If you want them to sit back, you give them a heavy weapon and maybe the Tank Hunter ability. If you want to engage, you will give them assault or melee weapons and maybe the Vanguard ability. If you just want them to grab objectives, you can put them in a transport (which gets their sticky objectives rule while being inside).

Even in that case, a heavy weapon can easily lose LoS to worthwhile targets on a board that has an unfortunately placed bit of LoS-blocking terrain.

I will also note that your take on things doesn't appear to align with what top Marine players were doing in tournaments:

Going back to December to avoid the free gear issue we can look at the lists that did well and very few of them wanted anything to do with basic Troops.

Spoiler:

There was a 14th-place BT list that didn't mention troops in the short blurb written about it.

Spoiler:

More blurbs:

Spoiler:

Winning BA lists that faced off against one another:

Spoiler:

It does not seem like your idea that you must pay points for more gear to make troops effective holds much weight among players who actually win with their lists.

Lists are taken from:
https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-in-9th-eternal-grind-pt-1/
https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-in-9th-eternal-grind-pt-2/

**johnpjones1775**

ok, we've been arguing over free upgrades for days and pages on pages now. can we find some other predictions and argue about that instead?

**Daedalus81**

johnpjones1775 wrote:
ok, we've been arguing over free upgrades for days and pages on pages now. can we find some other predictions and argue about that instead?

It takes a lot of time and data to discover an appropriate result and we're probably riding the edge of enough info to make judgements. It's also an interesting experiment.

There could be other factors where people just don't want to bother buying old models so free upgrades are not prevalent as a consequence. Will someone break on to the scene with tac marines in the near future? I don't think so, but worth watching.

**Dudeface**

johnpjones1775 wrote:
ok, we've been arguing over free upgrades for days and pages on pages now. can we find some other predictions and argue about that instead?

The entire premises of the thread were that marines will take over the world with free upgrades, so it's hardly surprising it's the main discussion.

**alextroy**

You have to discuss something when the primary premise is failing on both points

**johnpjones1775**

Dudeface wrote:
johnpjones1775 wrote:
ok, we've been arguing over free upgrades for days and pages on pages now. can we find some other predictions and argue about that instead?

The entire premises of the thread were that marines will take over the world with free upgrades, so it's hardly surprising it's the main discussion.

and that premise has been soundly put to bed.

did sticky objective rule come out at the same time as the free upgrades? if not i imagine that will contribute to a rise in marine win rates more than free upgrades have.

**EightFoldPath**

johnpjones1775 wrote:
ok, we've been arguing over free upgrades for days and pages on pages now. can we find some other predictions and argue about that instead?

Very few posters predicted anything due to their lack of moral fibre. As I'm not a Dakkanaut but instead a Chaddanaut, I did actually predict that Custodes, Daemons and Guard would do very well. It is going pretty well for me...

**Breton**

a_typical_hero wrote:
Canadian 5th wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
The role doesn't matter... the raw numbers do...

If you think paying 5pts for a powersword on a devastator unit is not worth it, don't pick the weapon, it doesn't change the fact that the sword will kill 4 guardsmen (random number to make a point), regardless of if its on a devastator or an neophyte.

Not quite. The Sgt has more attacks, and the base Chainsword (which also has a value people are ignoring because you don't "pay" for it) will kill 5+ guardsmen because the powersword overkills them vs extra attacks on the Chainsword.

That's untrue.

A meltagun on a unit that moves 4" per turn is less valuable than one on a unit that can move 24". A lascannon is less valuable on a unit that wants to hide in cover to hold an objective than it is on a unit that wants to move and hunt tanks. Your system will lead to people taking nothing but naked tactical squads again because they can't use weapons that are priced to prevent another unit from abusing them.

While your concern is valid, I can tell you from practice - not just theory - that this is not whats happening. Your mandatory troop selections as a Space Marine are too expensive to just sit around naked doing nothing. If you want them to sit back, you give them a heavy weapon and maybe the Tank Hunter ability. If you want to engage, you will give them assault or melee weapons and maybe the Vanguard ability. If you just want them to grab objectives, you can put them in a transport (which gets their sticky objectives rule while being inside).

I can tell you from theory and practice you can't generally give SM units in 9E 40K the "Vanguard ability" or the "Tank Hunter" ability. I can also tell you SM Troops choices are neither "naked" nor "sit around ... doing nothing"

I like my Intercessor squad with a Pyreblaster and a pair of power claws on the veteran sergeant to contest side and midfield objectives, as even as a basic Marine squad, they are capable of fighting much larger squads to a standstill for a round or two until a proper melee unit arrives for the killing blow.

I'm not exactly sure you can take a Pyreblaster or a pair of power claws, or even a veteran sergeant on Intercessors.

You would be surprised by how much balance improves even if you just start by using the same calculation for everything.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breton wrote:
Its amazing to watch all the people complaining about "bloat" in the Marine Dex calling for 3 page length calculus equations to determine the point cost of each unit in your army.

Nobody is doing that, but I understand that you hyperbole for attention, otherwise this post of yours would be much less punchy.

For argument's sake, a sample point calculation formula can be just this:

Spoiler:

=(B5+C5+E5+F5+G5)*D5*VLOOKUP(H5;B26:C30;2)*VLOOKUP(I5;D26:E31;2)+(VLOOKUP(J5;F26:G30;2;FALSE)*D5)

It only looks a bit complicated because of the VLOOKUPs that are in place so the user can have a more readable selection in a dropdown instead of the raw value. Apart from that, it is basically just adding profile values together, multiplied by wounds and then factoring in armor and invul saves.

So you're saying you replaced two pages with VLOOKUPs that refer back to the other two pages? And does that include the price increase for a bolter on a model with BS3 instead of BS4 or a refund on a unit with movement 12 instead of movement 6? And then what percent of that refund you still get if you replace it with a Plasma Cannon that then becomes BS4 if you move and fire on the 12" move unit?

What I'm saying is yeah, they are.

**Dysartes**

Canadian 5th wrote:
There was a 14th-place BT list that didn't mention troops in the short blurb written about it.

4th – Thomas Pelletier – Black Templars: Primaris Crusaders holding the flanks of a big unit of buffed-up Assault Centurions, with Eradicators to provide long-ranged firepower in support.

*looks at the MFM to check slots*

I'm curious - just what slot do you think the "Primaris Crusader Squad" sits in?

**Breton**

Daedalus81 wrote:
vict0988 wrote:
You take it because you want the extra 1 strength on your pistol, not to add up your pts to 2000. Now give me a reason to take a 0 pt bolt pistol when you can take a 0 pt plasma pistol.

A plasma pistol has a 17% chance to kill you, 35% to kill a marine, and 48% to do absolutely nothing.

I'm guessing that 48% is with everything in the Plasma Pistol's favor? And reality is more than 48% chance do doing nothing? With a 12 inch range you're probably only shooting it even one time, let alone more than once if you have highly mobile melee oriented units (Assault/Vanguard/etc) where you can jump 2" away, and then charge 2" after the shooting phase then rinse and repeat a turn or two later. If you can.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:
vict0988 wrote:

You take it because you want the extra 1 strength on your pistol, not to add up your pts to 2000. Now give me a reason to take a 0 pt bolt pistol when you can take a 0 pt plasma pistol.

Because that's what my long finished mini is modeled with.

Either the company made it that way (old metal models), or by me in some previous edition for some reason (likely a pts thing whenever I built/modded it). And I don't feel the need to go modding long finished minis just because on this random day in 2023 weapon x now cost 0pts or whatever. I'll just make do with what I've got modeled.
Now a new model I build today? Yes, I might very well build it with that best 0pt option. And years from now? When it's no longer the best option, when the pendulum swings & it now costs pts again? Then I'll pay those pts and play it as its built....

Even when it's not a modeling decision doesn't mean it's "free unbalanced stuff" - Take the BGV where you could have modeled the pistol in a holster and thus model all three choices at once. They were already pretty good. A lot of other stuff got cheaper. Sometimes double dipping on both the body and wargear price drops. The BGV did not get cheaper on the bodies, and only has one upgrade on the Sgt for 1 of three different pistols making not a points drop, but an efficiency boost. "Everything else got cheaper" - they didn't want the BGV to get cheaper so they got "better" which still gives the Marine army a minor boost - the Stormraven Gunship had something similar - rather than making the airframe 2X points cheaper, they made the two Hurricane Bolters free.

**Canadian 5th**

Dysartes wrote:
Canadian 5th wrote:
There was a 14th-place BT list that didn't mention troops in the short blurb written about it.

4th – Thomas Pelletier – Black Templars: Primaris Crusaders holding the flanks of a big unit of buffed-up Assault Centurions, with Eradicators to provide long-ranged firepower in support.

*looks at the MFM to check slots*

I'm curious - just what slot do you think the "Primaris Crusader Squad" sits in?

My bad, but they still aren't mentioned as having any upgrades nor does it change the general trend as shown by the other examples shown.

**a_typical_hero**

Canadian 5th wrote:
...

My bad, I should have made it more clear that I was not writing with 9th edition in mind. We were talking about different point costs and such and I mentioned upgrades and rules interactions that are only available in a different ruleset.

Breton wrote:
So you're saying you replaced two pages with VLOOKUPs that refer back to the other two pages? And does that include the price increase for a bolter on a model with BS3 instead of BS4 or a refund on a unit with movement 12 instead of movement 6? And then what percent of that refund you still get if you replace it with a Plasma Cannon that then becomes BS4 if you move and fire on the 12" move unit?

What I'm saying is yeah, they are.

Nah, the VLOOKUPs are there so for example you can select "flying monstrous creature" instead of the point value that is assigned to this specific combination. I linked my points calculator a few posts above. Let me attach a picture that shows everything that is needed for the calculator to work:

Spoiler:

1/3 of the length is really just weapon range having specific values attached to each stepping.

To answer your question:
- Yes, it does include a difference in point cost based on the likelyhood of the bearer to hit their target.
- It does take the movement value of a creature into account into the base cost of the creature, not the weapon.
- Heavy weapons can only be shot by infantry if they don't move in the ruleset where this calculator is being used for, so there is no need for that specific case.
- Some units like Terminators that are capable of moving and shooting pay for it through the "relentless" special rule.

And also yes, this is not just theory, but works very well in practice. Got a local community of about 14 players where roughly half of them meet up once a week to play a custom 40k ruleset which uses this calculator for unit costs. Games are fun, quick and balanced, with much more options available to every army in how they want to play and what they are able to bring to the table.

**Tyel**

Kind of think the predictions are panning out as expected.

I guess the unexpected caveat is that, very broadly, like the last season, I'd say the game is reasonably balanced. This doesn't mean every faction has the same chance of winning a GT - but at least for now there's considerable variety in the factions and lists, which means the sort of skews seen in past ages aren't happening. I mean you've got 22%~ or so Marines, 8%~ Guard 8%~ CSM, 7%~ Custodes. Then most others around the 3-5% range.

I wouldn't have predicted that given the scale of changes in AoO. But I think it points to the fact GW has been getting tighter on points. Even with the big reductions (either explicitly, or with free stuff) Marines are not putting 70% win rates out there.

I think this mainly relates to how 40k has evolved into more of a game of objectives than "I just table you with dramatic mathematical advantage." "I've got 2 more multi-meltas than I should" isn't usually the dividing line now. But again, that's because points are not miles out of whack.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

I'll never understand why the Plasma Pistol isn't S5/6? It makes zero sense to me why a Plasma Pistol was ever 7/8.

**ccs**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'll never understand why the Plasma Pistol isn't S5/6? It makes zero sense to me why a Plasma Pistol was ever 7/8.

For the same reason Las, Bolt, Shurikin, etc pistols aren't weaker than their larger versions.
•Damage is determined by type of ammo (ie, plasin,
•Range is determined by the guns size.
Beyond that? Don't overthink it because there isn't really science/physics etc involved. Just make-believe.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

Yeah, I get setting = all rules are BS, but from a gameplay mechanic, S8 pistols for 5pts on a cannoness make her stupidly powerful. Same with cheap spammed plasma pistols in guard officers. Plasma breaks the game. Keep Melta because there is a tradeoff with distance and # of shots, but plasma is a anti-tank weapon with zero downsides. In pistol form. Make it heavy 1 so it can't be used in CC or make it kill the user on a 1 or 2. Just balance it for the cost.

**JNAProductions**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Yeah, I get setting = all rules are BS, but from a gameplay mechanic, S8 pistols for 5pts on a cannoness make her stupidly powerful. Same with cheap spammed plasma pistols in guard officers. Plasma breaks the game. Keep Melta because there is a tradeoff with distance and # of shots, but plasma is a anti-tank weapon with zero downsides. In pistol form. Make it heavy 1 so it can't be used in CC or make it kill the user on a 1 or 2. Just balance it for the cost.

One S8 AP-3 D2 shot at 12" isn't stupidly powerful. Especially given a 1/6 chance of outright killing your 60+ point character.

**EviscerationPlague**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Yeah, I get setting = all rules are BS, but from a gameplay mechanic, S8 pistols for 5pts on a cannoness make her stupidly powerful. Same with cheap spammed plasma pistols in guard officers. Plasma breaks the game. Keep Melta because there is a tradeoff with distance and # of shots, but plasma is a anti-tank weapon with zero downsides. In pistol form. Make it heavy 1 so it can't be used in CC or make it kill the user on a 1 or 2. Just balance it for the cost.

I can't tell if this is satire or not because this is the first time I've seen anyone complain about Inferno Pistols LOL

**Breton**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'll never understand why the Plasma Pistol isn't S5/6? It makes zero sense to me why a Plasma Pistol was ever 7/8.

Because almost all Plasma is 7/8 - the difference between "types" beyond the type is usually number of shots and range. I understand the pistol more than I understand the Heavy Plasma Incinerator or the Assault Incinerator.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JNAProductions wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Yeah, I get setting = all rules are BS, but from a gameplay mechanic, S8 pistols for 5pts on a cannoness make her stupidly powerful. Same with cheap spammed plasma pistols in guard officers. Plasma breaks the game. Keep Melta because there is a tradeoff with distance and # of shots, but plasma is a anti-tank weapon with zero downsides. In pistol form. Make it heavy 1 so it can't be used in CC or make it kill the user on a 1 or 2. Just balance it for the cost.
One S8 AP-3 D2 shot at 12" isn't stupidly powerful. Especially given a 1/6 chance of outright killing your 60+ point character.

Pretty much - especially when the "main" weapon for these characters is usually their melee weapon with 3+ attacks, potentially in each turn of the battle round.