Power v Points (balance issue)

[Guiltysparc]

3 of the 4 8E games i've played had been with power level rather than points.  All played similarly balanced.  Points are designed to be as close to balance as possible for scenarios where that really matters, ie tournament play.  Power level is close enough to have fun with and still get roughly similar armies.  

[Marqol]

LutherMax nah I don't think it makes you a power gamer, the two points system are just choices in the end. What ever works for you better is the best one for you. 

[Gen.Steiner]

Wot Marqol sed. Dat oomie like a brainboy. :D

[Adeptus]

To use Power effectively AND be WYSIWYG you basically have to give all your models all the best, most expensive upgrades – which then might not be good for points games.

The problem lies in the desire to use power 'effectively'.

 

Don't.

 

Just take the models you think are cool, with the upgrades you think are cool, and play the game. Don't let your opponent go crazy by counting all his weapons as something else, or counting one type of model as another, that's not the point of power levels. If he wants to play like that, then play points.

[Eddie Orlock]

Points are designed to be as close to balance as possible for scenarios where that really matters, ie tournament play.

Points create the illusion of balance by applying more granularity. Fact is, they were and are only ever an estimate, an linear approximation of a non-linear system subject to chaotic externalities.

 

If any of the linear effectiveness estimating methodologies truly modeled the systems we could randomly select our forces up to the allotment with confidence that it would have little effect on the outcomes of our games. We can't. We spend a lot of skull sweat cooking up ways to create positive synergies in our forces for even tiny bits of multiplicative effect. Just a wee bit of edge.

 

Taking a proper mix of tools for the foe, the mission, and the environment tends to matter more than +/- 10% or so of nominal rating from an inherently flawed rubric. And would so matter more regardless of which estimating methodology was selected.

 

Just because a tool is more precise doesn't make its use any more accurate.

[LutherMax]

Eddie - you are correct. I was thinking the same thing on my way home from work. It's not possible with complete accuracy to say "Unit A is X amount better / more powerful than Unit B and therefore should cost exactly Y more points."

 

It's very abstract, very subjective, and those choosing the points for each unit can only estimate.

[Trevak Dal]

I noticed point value inflation compared to 7th with my Tau, and point value deflation with my CSMs.

 

Then again I was taking Devilfish, railHeads and a balanced number of firewarriors.

 

Tanks and vehicles in general are at Lambo prices. Particularly when you are buying two smart missile systems for them :(

[Gen.Steiner]

You say that, but my vehicle-heavy mechanised Guard force has dropped in value from 7th - it was 5,000 points bang on; now I have enough room for a barebones Banesword...!

Certainly vehicles have gone up, but lots of other things have gone down to compensate.

[LutherMax]

Vehicles are tougher / better in 8th (in theory - I haven't played a game yet - but I've heard this is the case). So you could argue their increased cost is justified by this. But you could also argue they were too expensive given their fragility in 7th!

[Trevak Dal]

Well my Tau vehicles are all skimmers (so Fly so they can't be kept from shooting) I could assault your tanks, break away and then give them the business up close.

 

They also got 8 s5 24" shots from the dual sms which costs and arm and a leg compared to the drones...which have more use for chump blocking shots.

 

And my suits got more expensive too. Plasma came down, but it wounds marines on 3s. Fusion is worth the points because you can make Bad Thing Go Away with a Final Flash commander (Quad Fusions). Or 2 (or three...)

 

But for power level to power level, even without going Pimp My Hammerhead and being conservative, my Tau lists, even at exact Powerlevel are a couple hundred points above the chaos lists I have made.

 

I converted Wade Pryce's old old old (like..4th Ed I guess? It used the Gav dex) World Eaters army that was features in a white dwarf tactics article.

 

In 8th it's 100+ points cheaper (it was 2498 or something)

[Warhead01]

LutherMax, 

 you mentioned the points difference between the two armies but have you made an army with points and found the difference in power rating?
My first 2000 point list were roughly 111 to 121 power level.  
Just something to consider.

[LutherMax]

The new list I have is 1995 points and 106 power. My opponent's (Eldar) is 1998 points and 95 power. So it seems Eldar get more points for their power than Blood Angels...

[Quixus]

A fairly rigorous adherance to WYSIWYG makes power levels much more balanced. Your Death Company can only have as many Thunder Hammers as you actually have Thunder Hammer models. Since there's effectively no roster in a power level game (you just pay the points and add the unit to your roster, upgrades are free so why list them?) then really, WYSIWYG is the only way to tell how your various units are outfitted.

Why is there no roster in PL games? Don't you still build battle-forged armies to get the command points?

 

[Adeptus]

The power levels aren't arbitrarily set. They're based off points values.

 

From memory, if you take the median points value between a naked squad and a fully upgraded squad, then divide that number by 20, that should be the power level of your unit.

 

So if you take more upgrades, you get more mileage out of your points. If you take less, you get less. The only trick is to approach the game from a cooperative, gentlemanly spirit of competition rather than desperately seeking to squeeze every advantage from the system. And DEFINITELY no taking advantage of the free upgrades by counting all your weapons as the best/most expensive kind just because you can.

[Adeptus]

 

A fairly rigorous adherance to WYSIWYG makes power levels much more balanced. Your Death Company can only have as many Thunder Hammers as you actually have Thunder Hammer models. Since there's effectively no roster in a power level game (you just pay the points and add the unit to your roster, upgrades are free so why list them?) then really, WYSIWYG is the only way to tell how your various units are outfitted.

Why is there no roster in PL games? Don't you still build battle-forged armies to get the command points?

 

It's not that there's no roster, it's that my roster for a PL game looks like this:

 

Grandmaster

 

5 Terminators

 

6 Paladins

 

Dreadnought

 

While my roster for a points game looks like this:

 

Grandmaster (Halberd, Psycannon)

 

5 Terminators (5 Stormbolters, 3 Falchions, 1 Halberd, 1 Hammer)

 

6 Paladins (4 Falchions, 1 Hammer, 1 Stave)

 

Dreadnought (TL Lascannon, TL Autocannon)

 

For a PL game all my models are WYSIWYG so there is no capacity to pull a fast-one on my opponent and no need to record any upgrades taken. For a points game I need to show that all my units upgrades have been appropriately paid for so they all need to be listed.

[Trevak Dal]

The new list I have is 1995 points and 106 power. My opponent's (Eldar) is 1998 points and 95 power. So it seems Eldar get more points for their power than Blood Angels...

It warms my Heart that Phil Kelly is still helping out :(

Edited July 9, 2017 by Trevak Dal

[Warhead01]

The new list I have is 1995 points and 106 power. My opponent's (Eldar) is 1998 points and 95 power. So it seems Eldar get more points for their power than Blood Angels...

That could also come down to army construction. 

[Lord Abaia]

I've run into a particular issue twice now with list building in 8th. Sometimes people aren't adding additional PL when they increase the size of the unit. I feel a little weird about double checking people's lists but I think I might have to start. I checked his list afterwards because it seemed odd, and he had 20 more PL than I had thought. I'm sure some people may be doing something similar with points too, maybe if they don't know that they need to add up all the points for wargear.

 

And my last opponent also had an illegal Chosen unit, but that didn't affect much the way the game worked out. He could have had two five man units and it would have been legal.

 

But a 21 PL handicap sure explains why I got spanked so badly. The moral of the story? Double check your and your opponent's lists if it seems uneven.

[LutherMax]

^ That's partly why I use BattleScribe!

 

 

The new list I have is 1995 points and 106 power. My opponent's (Eldar) is 1998 points and 95 power. So it seems Eldar get more points for their power than Blood Angels...

 

That could also come down to army construction.

True, maybe has all the most expensive upgrades on his units - would increase points without necessarily increasing power...

[Gen.Steiner]

About lists, if you have them, just swap lists at the beginning of the game and have a look-see. It's not like WFB 5th Edition where secrecy was part of the game (Who has the Black Gem of Gnar?), after all.

[Adeptus]

I've run into a particular issue twice now with list building in 8th. Sometimes people aren't adding additional PL when they increase the size of the unit. I feel a little weird about double checking people's lists but I think I might have to start. I checked his list afterwards because it seemed odd, and he had 20 more PL than I had thought. I'm sure some people may be doing something similar with points too, maybe if they don't know that they need to add up all the points for wargear.

 

And my last opponent also had an illegal Chosen unit, but that didn't affect much the way the game worked out. He could have had two five man units and it would have been legal.

 

But a 21 PL handicap sure explains why I got spanked so badly. The moral of the story? Double check your and your opponent's lists if it seems uneven.

Yeah, the data sheets is a totally new system and some people are making some rookie mistakes, because at this point we're all rookies! Had a game against one fellow who thought the Dark Lances on his Ravagers were all free, because on the data sheet they were included, not realising that in a points match he needed to pay an extra 20 points for each Dark Lance!

[Gen.Steiner]

Yeah, it can be quite confusing, but a quick chat before or after can clear up most egregious mistakes and prevent them happening again.

[CrimsonReign]

power level is roughly 

the average of (the cost of the unit with no upgrades  vs  with the most expensive upgrades) / 20

 

it doesn't work amazingly when units are very cheap, or when units have very expensive options (deathwatch for example, power level would have a special issue bolter and a frag cannon be worth the same, when one is free vs 30+ pts)  in this case taking all frag cannons you'd be way over the 20x, and taking no upgrades you'd come out well below

[Jacinda]

In the min-max world of things, if you are going to be taking the biggest weapon upgrades, go with Power Level games.  If you want to put the most models on the table, go with Points.

[Calyptra]

I like power level because I like that players - particularly newer players - are able to quickly plonk models on the table and play games, and do so without ending up in a totally one-sided match. Sure, the points won't be completely balanced, but point values have never been perfect either.

 

I also like giving my models stuff, because I like variety and I think giving my unit leaders weapon upgrades and the like makes the game more characterful and fun. Giving my Acothyst a hexrifle that will almost certainly accomplish nothing all game is not a thing I would do in a pointed game, but I like that with power level I get to (without being punished for it).

 

I think a lot of it will come down to personal preference.

 

If nothing else, power level seems less unbalanced than formations were in the previous edition.