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.

yes, as it shows that you don't need a point system at all to have fun, with the right people and easily accept flaws of the game is cheap

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 kodos wrote:


any game can be fun with the right people

Any game also doesn't cost triple to quadruple digits. Having fun with people in Monopoly costs how much?

Does monopoly or the price of it impact the points system in 40k 10th edition?

yes of course in a hyperbolical fashion. Commitment and expected product quality are tied to the price no`? Maybee a bit of a closer comparison is .f.e. Turnip 28. Despite being positivly symplistic it has better balance, morale rules and far cheaper higher quality models available since it is based upon historicals which allow including offerings of the perry brothers.

40k on the other hand, solely a rulebook and single codex allow me comparativly to get 3 full turnip armies and left overs.

 catbarf wrote:

nou wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Little Timmy has a smartphone, is better at using it than you are, and has no problems downloading a listbuilding app to do the math for him.

Not so long ago there was a thread here along "name three things in wargames, that are a no-go for you". Mandatory app was the highest ranking objection.

His generational cohort has been raised on inherently competitive recreational activities like e-sports, and he is likely much more okay with granular listbuilding, seasonal updates, and a focus on balanced competitive play than the older and more casual players here for whom wargaming is a primarily social activity.

Yeah there's this generational divide going on here but people also misunderstand who/why "casualization" or "simplification" efforts should be geared towards.

There's a large contingent of people who think these changes should be made for newer younger players, and yet as you say the younger generation is coming at 40k from a completely different perspective. A lot of the very good 40k players I know, locally and more broadly, are in their low-mid 20's. Many of the best players I know locally started in 9th and are fresh out of uni or actively attending one. They're not the ones who complained about seasonal updates or complex rules; they actively sought those out and liked them.

Who these "simplifying" measures are for are for 40+ year old dads who are juggling a full-time career, 2+ kids and whatever else.

It's very telling that a lot of the 20's-early 30's crowd in my local area (i.e. my crowd) have all basically dropped off 40k for the moment and a bunch of the 40-50 dads have started up again.

there is a difference between a mandatory and and an app that works as "aid" to support

and a problem is that 40k is on a level were without an aid, you have a hard time to make an army list, simply because there is too much in too many different places to have get it simply done

writing an army list in 10th needs you 3 different pdf documents or an app
removing points from options did not solve the basic problem of list writing in 40k

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 kodos wrote:


any game can be fun with the right people

Any game also doesn't cost triple to quadruple digits. Having fun with people in Monopoly costs how much?

Any game: You've never heard of or priced out Golf have you?
Monopoly: I don't know, what value do you place on friendship?

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 kodos wrote:


any game can be fun with the right people

Any game also doesn't cost triple to quadruple digits. Having fun with people in Monopoly costs how much?

Does monopoly or the price of it impact the points system in 40k 10th edition?

Does your opponent? Because that's the point, people brought up that they had fun with power level if you played with the right people.

Which has feth all to do with power level and is entirely due to "the right people". I literally made this exact point when I said you could have fun playing snakes and ladders, which is basically a non-game, if you were playing it with an awesome person who makes everything fun with their personality.

Fun is a measure of many things, not just the quality of a game you're playing. This topic is about one specific aspect of the game, not the group you play it with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
yes, as it shows that you don't need a point system at all to have fun, with the right people and easily accept flaws of the game is cheap

None of which is actually relevant to the topic, which is specifically about a narrow aspect of game design.

Andykp wrote:

It’s just a ball ache to keep up with, an army you designed and painted is all of a sudden over or under the points? And where are they? Online, in an app, is the pdf I have the latest version and then they tried to charge you for the points. I cannot be arsed with any of that. I like simple, and that is not simple. If I was more bothered about balance and all that it would be worth the hassle but I’m not, all that doesn’t help me have a better game.

ok but its litterally just :

-Open the app
-Click on battleforge
-click on list
-"Oh, its now x points over/under 2k"

Do people really only make a single 2k list and stop there?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nou wrote:

And as I wrote earlier, and everybody just skipped over: go and witness for yourselves how people are helpless with basic "2+2*2=" riddles. I'm old enough to have exactly zero faith in general population's ability to perform even the simplest math, when half of them don't even know what the proper order of operations is.

we didn't skip over it... many of us pointed out that you don't require PEMDAS to build a 40k list. It's litterally all additions, made by an app for you, so you don't even need to know what math is, just make sure you don't go over the pts limit for your game (which the app also warns you if you do)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nou wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Little Timmy has a smartphone, is better at using it than you are, and has no problems downloading a listbuilding app to do the math for him.

Not so long ago there was a thread here along "name three things in wargames, that are a no-go for you". Mandatory app was the highest ranking objection.

it's not mandatory lol, you can use Excel/pen and paper just as easily as people have for 20+ years. Addition isnt a hard concept for anyone out of first grade


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vict0988 wrote:
I really liked the 2+2*2 argument, it puts things into perspective, I can see how 5*18+10 is even harder and would therefore lead to illegal lists or just a lot of frustration.

in what world are you doing "5*18+10" when listbuilding for 40k?

vict's sarcasm/absurdity is often very dry but when they say something kind of silly, 99% of the time it's sarcasm. You can tell because the rest of the post is full of it.

(To be clear, I say this as a fan of vict's posting style, don't take it the wrong way )

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
in what world are you doing "5*18+10" when listbuilding for 40k?

3rd/4th Edition
5 Grey Hunters, 18 points per model + Melter, 10 points

 kodos wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
in what world are you doing "5*18+10" when listbuilding for 40k?

3rd/4th Edition
5 Grey Hunters, 18 points per model + Melter, 10 points

So
18+18+18+18+18+10

Also pretty intuitively (and logically) won't be 5*(18+10)

but as someone pointed out, vict might have been sarcastic on that comment

 Bosskelot wrote:

Who these "simplifying" measures are for are for 40+ year old dads who are juggling a full-time career, 2+ kids and whatever else.

It's very telling that a lot of the 20's-early 30's crowd in my local area (i.e. my crowd) have all basically dropped off 40k for the moment and a bunch of the 40-50 dads have started up again.

As a 40+ year old dad. . . give me my points-for-wargear-options back! I enjoy optimizing and fine tuning lists just as much as I did when I was 14. Also, when I talk to other 40+ year old dads, they don't like the change either, because it's obviously stupid on the face of it.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

Who these "simplifying" measures are for are for 40+ year old dads who are juggling a full-time career, 2+ kids and whatever else.

It's very telling that a lot of the 20's-early 30's crowd in my local area (i.e. my crowd) have all basically dropped off 40k for the moment and a bunch of the 40-50 dads have started up again.

As a 40+ year old dad. . . give me my points-for-wargear-options back! I enjoy optimizing and fine tuning lists just as much as I did when I was 14. Also, when I talk to other 40+ year old dads, they don't like the change either, because it's obviously stupid on the face of it.

Right. 40 y.o.s (okay fine I'm not quite there yet, but spiritually I am) may struggle with remembering a lot of random rules crap, but we never struggled with Battlescribe or building lists. I personally struggled with quarterly seasons and patches, but a good app would've fixed that IMO. And even now, GW haven't delivered on the app side (meanwhile raising the price of it today LOL).

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
in what world are you doing "5*18+10" when listbuilding for 40k?

3rd/4th Edition
5 Grey Hunters, 18 points per model + Melter, 10 points

So
18+18+18+18+18+10

Also pretty intuitively (and logically) won't be 5*(18+10)

but as someone p ointed out, vict might have been sarcastic on that comment

better said it was intuitively and logically not 5*(18+10) for the kids 20 years ago


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

Who these "simplifying" measures are for are for 40+ year old dads who are juggling a full-time career, 2+ kids and whatever else.

It's very telling that a lot of the 20's-early 30's crowd in my local area (i.e. my crowd) have all basically dropped off 40k for the moment and a bunch of the 40-50 dads have started up again.

As a 40+ year old dad. . . give me my points-for-wargear-options back! I enjoy optimizing and fine tuning lists just as much as I did when I was 14. Also, when I talk to other 40+ year old dads, they don't like the change either, because it's obviously stupid on the face of it.

as a 40 year old dad myself, I don't like it but also have given up on 40k to play it with tgf kids
Despite all the nice models and the lore too read for them, I am too old to waste time on games that are mediocre and play something that is easier to learn but still as fun with them

It was never adding points that I had or have an issue with, it’s all the other issues in the game GW cannot ever seem to understand.

And I actually enjoy building lists a lot before, and my marines are mostly using basic gear since I think bolt weapons are iconic for them, and chainswords are a brutal and fitting weapon for what’s marine represented.
My mistake for digging into that theme it seems.

nou wrote:
And as I wrote earlier, and everybody just skipped over: go and witness for yourselves how people are helpless with basic "2+2*2=" riddles. I'm old enough to have exactly zero faith in general population's ability to perform even the simplest math, when half of them don't even know what the proper order of operations is.

That's a nonsense argument and you know it. Those riddles are deliberately ambiguous and completely free of context, in the real world even if you have an equation that is ambiguously written you almost always have some context that tells you how it should be interpreted. If you're building a 40k list and you see 5*10+5 you know based on the unit that it's either "5 copies of a 10 point model plus a single 5 point upgrade" or "five copies of a 10 point model, each with a 5 point upgrade" and it's then very obvious how you should do the math. Nobody is sitting there struggling to understand if they should add the cost of the 5 point upgrade to the 10 point model before or after they multiply by 5.

(And yes, some people are either small children or have a mental disability that prevents them from doing even that level of basic math. Those people aren't playing 40k.)

2+2*2 has no ambiguity. None. If you find it ambiguous, you need to refresh your math skills.

 JNAProductions wrote:
2+2*2 has no ambiguity. None. If you find it ambiguous, you need to refresh your math skills.

And that isn't the equation that actually gets people stumped.

It is stuff like 8÷2(2+2), which involves implicit multiplication. To see why it is ambiguous, if you were to write it as a fraction would you have 8*(2+2) as the numerator, or 2*(2+2) as the denominator?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
2+2*2 has no ambiguity. None. If you find it ambiguous, you need to refresh your math skills.

And that isn't the equation that actually gets people stumped.

It is stuff like 8÷2(2+2), which involves implicit multiplication. To see why it is ambiguous, if you were to write it as a fraction would you have 8*(2+2) as the numerator, or 2*(2+2) as the denominator?

Also unambiguous. There is a reason the mnemonic PEDMAS exist. It reminds you of the correct answer. Not that it really has anything to do with 10th Ed Unit Upgrade philosophy.

P.S. 8÷2(2+2) = 16

 alextroy wrote:
Also unambiguous. There is a reason the mnemonic PEDMAS exist. It reminds you of the correct answer. Not that it really has anything to do with 10th Ed Unit Upgrade philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Mixed_division_and_multiplication

It's ambiguous because there is a conflict between the strict interpretation of the written numbers and symbols and the implicit meaning of the way they are written. Nitpicking that the common use is not technically correct is missing the point.

You are correct, though, that this has nothing to do with 40k. Not only does 40k not use any of this the riddles are deliberately stupid. In any real use of math you will have context for what the math represents and it will be obvious how you're supposed to interpret any ambiguity or conflict between literal and implicit representations. It's only relevant to obnoxious KIDS THESE DAYS CANT DO MATH CAN YOU SOLVE THIS?????? facebook memes shared by tech-illiterate boomers.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Also unambiguous. There is a reason the mnemonic PEDMAS exist. It reminds you of the correct answer. Not that it really has anything to do with 10th Ed Unit Upgrade philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Mixed_division_and_multiplication

It's ambiguous because there is a conflict between the strict interpretation of the written numbers and symbols and the implicit meaning of the way they are written. Nitpicking that the common use is not technically correct is missing the point.

You are correct, though, that this has nothing to do with 40k. Not only does 40k not use any of this the riddles are deliberately stupid. In any real use of math you will have context for what the math represents and it will be obvious how you're supposed to interpret any ambiguity or conflict between literal and implicit representations. It's only relevant to obnoxious KIDS THESE DAYS CANT DO MATH CAN YOU SOLVE THIS?????? facebook memes shared by tech-illiterate boomers.

As others above wrote, there is absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever in any of such riddles. Anybody who thinks otherwise should seriously reconsider their perspective on their math prowess. The linked wiki on mixed multiplication and division only applies to polynomials - there is no such thing as an implicit fraction bar for non-polynomial equations. If you see an inline notation of just numbers with a division in it, it is resolved in normal order of operations. You want it to be treated as a fraction bar? You have to use parentheses. Period. And no, you don't need a fething context to solve 2+2*2 properly. If there is no context given, it is resolved directly as written.

And while it no longer exists in 40k, why do you all think GW got rid of U melee strength and U strength modifiers? Exactly because of the order of operations causing problems and unnecessary disputes, especially since the wrong interpretation was the more advantageous one.

nou wrote:

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Also unambiguous. There is a reason the mnemonic PEDMAS exist. It reminds you of the correct answer. Not that it really has anything to do with 10th Ed Unit Upgrade philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Mixed_division_and_multiplication

It's ambiguous because there is a conflict between the strict interpretation of the written numbers and symbols and the implicit meaning of the way they are written. Nitpicking that the common use is not technically correct is missing the point.

You are correct, though, that this has nothing to do with 40k. Not only does 40k not use any of this the riddles are deliberately stupid. In any real use of math you will have context for what the math represents and it will be obvious how you're supposed to interpret any ambiguity or conflict between literal and implicit representations. It's only relevant to obnoxious KIDS THESE DAYS CANT DO MATH CAN YOU SOLVE THIS?????? facebook memes shared by tech-illiterate boomers.

As others above wrote, there is absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever in any of such riddles. Anybody who thinks otherwise should seriously reconsider their perspective on their math prowess. The linked wiki on mixed multiplication and division only applies to polynomials - there is no such thing as an implicit fraction bar for non-polynomial equations. If you see an inline notation of just numbers with a division in it, it is resolved in normal order of operations. You want it to be treated as a fraction bar? You have to use parentheses. Period. And no, you don't need a fething context to solve 2+2*2 properly. If there is no context given, it is resolved directly as written.

And while it no longer exists in 40k, why do you all think GW got rid of U melee strength and U strength modifiers? Exactly because of the order of operations causing problems and unnecessary disputes, especially since the wrong interpretation was the more advantageous one.

As someone that recently just had the whole discussion and is a mathematician, 8÷2(2+2) is ambiguous though.
Partly because ÷ has had different definitions throghout the years and based on where you live. One of the first things you learn these days when studying serious mathematics is to never use ÷ for this reason: it's not part of formal standard mathematical notation anymore because of it's ambiguity.
If you go back 100 years, if you had asked someone what 8÷2(2+2) was, they'd have told you it was 1... and for the time that was most definitely the correct answer because ÷ meant you divided the result of the terms on the left of it by the result of the terms on the right of it.
Because of all this abiguity, ÷ has been replaced by less ambiguous are more strictly definied symbols in formal mathematics, like the humble /

But I digress...

 alextroy wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
2+2*2 has no ambiguity. None. If you find it ambiguous, you need to refresh your math skills.

And that isn't the equation that actually gets people stumped.

It is stuff like 8÷2(2+2), which involves implicit multiplication. To see why it is ambiguous, if you were to write it as a fraction would you have 8*(2+2) as the numerator, or 2*(2+2) as the denominator?

Also unambiguous. There is a reason the mnemonic PEDMAS exist. It reminds you of the correct answer. Not that it really has anything to do with 10th Ed Unit Upgrade philosophy.

P.S. 8÷2(2+2) = 16

Apparently you're unaware that PEDMAS is not, in fact, a universally acknowledged rule.

There are, in fact, multiple such rules that vary the order of operations (usually either reversing division and multiplication or giving them equal weight - e.g. BEDMAS, PE(MD)AS.)

Thus, the answer to that equation is indeed ambiguous because it depends on which mathematical rule you have been taught (or choose) to use.



PS. please don't bother replying to tell me how your preferred mathematical rule is obviously the best and correct because I couldn't give a damn and I have no interest in arguing such. My point is not which system is "best" or most popular - merely that other systems (and thus other interpretations) do exist and such ambiguity should be acknowledged, even if you don't personally agree with those other systems.

nou wrote:
The linked wiki on mixed multiplication and division only applies to polynomial

The link literally explains, with examples, where the ambiguity exploited by the meme is. You can be the tech-illiterate FB boomer and KIDS THESE DAYS all you want over the meme but the fact that you're technically correct about the math doens't change the implicit meaning of how the equation is written. Writing conventions matter just as much as formal math rules when interpreting what writing is meant to say.

And while it no longer exists in 40k, why do you all think GW got rid of U melee strength and U strength modifiers? Exactly because of the order of operations causing problems and unnecessary disputes, especially since the wrong interpretation was the more advantageous one.

GW got rid of modifiers because there was no reason to have them. There is no reason to list Sx2 for a weapon's strength value if the user's strength is always 4 and the weapon's base value is always 8. It was nothing more than a relic of the era when standard weapon profiles were in a table at the back of the codex and applied to all units equipped with them. A power fist had to have Sx2 because it would be equipped on units with different strength values. But when a "power fist" is a separate weapon on each datasheet that is no longer the case, you can just give its profile the appropriate value directly.

By the Olde Gods. I know that this is Dakka, and tirades are expected here, but what, exactly, does all of this talk of mathematical equations have to do with 40k? A system that takes into account different prices for different wargear and equipment only requires knowledge of basic addition. No mathematical equations beyond that are required.

Can we please come back to reality now?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
By the Olde Gods. I know that this is Dakka, and tirades are expected here, but what, exactly, does all of this talk of mathematical equations have to do with 40k?

Nou's claim was that his boomer FB meme proves that people can't do math and therefore 40k needs the simplest possible point system. The rest is pointing out why it's self-congratulatory nonsense.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
By the Olde Gods. I know that this is Dakka, and tirades are expected here, but what, exactly, does all of this talk of mathematical equations have to do with 40k?

Nou's claim was that his boomer FB meme proves that people can't do math and therefore 40k needs the simplest possible point system. The rest is pointing out why it's self-congratulatory nonsense.

Right. We all know that this is just a weird side argument. So, maybe ignore it? As it has nothing to do with the actual question. People can do math. Especially the basic math involved in every edition of 40k up to this one. I could do it when I was a kid. My kids can do it. Basic addition isn't a problem.

Uhh! This is so damned frustrating. I can't help but be dragged back in...

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
By the Olde Gods. I know that this is Dakka, and tirades are expected here, but what, exactly, does all of this talk of mathematical equations have to do with 40k?

It's just straw. Endless straw and the desperate flailings of people who lost the argument 50 pages ago and are still trying obfuscate and make attempts at 'gotchas' when they can't answer the simple questions being put to them, nor counter the points that have been proven page after page after page after page.

Upgrades should cost points. Things that are better than the base equipment should never be free. Points are objectively superior in every respect to non-granular "power level" systems (even when they're called "points" like they are in 10th). Power Level provides no advantage over points in any scenario or situation.

And now I'm leaving the thread again...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Uhh! This is so damned frustrating. I can't help but be dragged back in...

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
By the Olde Gods. I know that this is Dakka, and tirades are expected here, but what, exactly, does all of this talk of mathematical equations have to do with 40k?

It's just straw. Endless straw and the desperate flailings of people who lost the argument 50 pages ago and are still trying obfuscate and make attempts at 'gotchas' when they can't answer the simple questions being put to them, nor counter the points that have been proven page after page after page after page.

Upgrades should cost points. Things that are better than the base equipment should never be free. Points are objectively superior in every respect to non-granular "power level" systems (even when they're called "points" like they are in 10th). Power Level provides no advantage over points in any scenario or situation.

And now I'm leaving the thread again...

Balls.

My first post in this car crash of thread was that it was pointless arguing with the people who demand points for all upgrades because they genuinely believe that their way is the only way to enjoy the game and will call you a liar when you point out that they are wrong and that there are in fact lots of different ways to enjoy a game of 40K, and some of those include not worrying about how much a plasma pistol or tank sponson improves one unit.

80 pages on and it’s exactly the same and I keep getting sucked back in and all it’s achieved is more people on my ignore list.

End of the day, if you really believe the game is “objectively better” with points like they were in 9th edition, can any of you at least concede that some people still manage to enjoy the game with power levels or 10th edition style points?

Andykp wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Uhh! This is so damned frustrating. I can't help but be dragged back in...

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
By the Olde Gods. I know that this is Dakka, and tirades are expected here, but what, exactly, does all of this talk of mathematical equations have to do with 40k?

It's just straw. Endless straw and the desperate flailings of people who lost the argument 50 pages ago and are still trying obfuscate and make attempts at 'gotchas' when they can't answer the simple questions being put to them, nor counter the points that have been proven page after page after page after page.

Upgrades should cost points. Things that are better than the base equipment should never be free. Points are objectively superior in every respect to non-granular "power level" systems (even when they're called "points" like they are in 10th). Power Level provides no advantage over points in any scenario or situation.

And now I'm leaving the thread again...

Balls.

My first post in this car crash of thread was that it was pointless arguing with the people who demand points for all upgrades because they genuinely believe that their way is the only way to enjoy the game and will call you a liar when you point out that they are wrong and that there are in fact lots of different ways to enjoy a game of 40K, and some of those include not worrying about how much a plasma pistol or tank sponson improves one unit.

80 pages on and it’s exactly the same and I keep getting sucked back in and all it’s achieved is more people on my ignore list.

End of the day, if you really believe the game is “objectively better” with points like they were in 9th edition, can any of you at least concede that some people still manage to enjoy the game with power levels or 10th edition style points?

Do you think that's a smart way to enter a discussion?

original wrote:Power Level provides no advantage over points in any scenario or situation.

strawman wrote:they genuinely believe that their way is the only way to enjoy the game

These two are not the same. Now try to respond to the actual message instead of strawmanning him.

Andykp wrote:
End of the day, if you really believe the game is “objectively better” with points like they were in 9th edition, can any of you at least concede that some people still manage to enjoy the game with power levels or 10th edition style points?

"I use PL and it doesn't ruin the game for me" and "PL is a good system that should continue to exist" are not the same thing. Virtually everyone who uses PL would have just as much fun using the traditional point system, and the few who wouldn't would have even more fun if they dumped points-based matched play entirely and used an even simpler system for choosing forces.