MajorSoB
Moderator
The oldest
THE GRUMPY OLD MAN!
Posts: 2,135
|
Comp
Apr 23, 2008 17:16:13 GMT -5
Post by MajorSoB on Apr 23, 2008 17:16:13 GMT -5
From what I understand about army power level in Fantasy is that there is less of a divide than in 40k between army power levels. I would disagree with this statement. I would say that in 40K there is more balance between armies than in fantasy. From what I have seen Fantasy caters to the favorable matchup moreso than 40K. Just my opinion, and we all know what opinions are like... ;D
|
|
boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Comp
Apr 23, 2008 23:32:21 GMT -5
Post by boldo on Apr 23, 2008 23:32:21 GMT -5
Well perhaps there should be more gradiations like s4 T4 infantry cost points or Sv1 cav. I am not oppoesed to saying that the following list of units are 1 pt. I still believe there are caracteristics which make easier to play armies like fear, high armor, s4 shooting, lots of magic, or fighting skirmishers. Unfortunately some armies have no choice but they are still easier to play.
So perhaps Lord 1pt magic level 1pt magic item 1 pt for each 25 pts of value rounded down Character mounted on creature greater than us2 1pt Character mounted on a terror causing creature or chariot 2pt fear causing unit of size 20 1pt cav Sv2+ 1pt missile armed troops of S4+, BS4+ or with poison 1pt non -shooting skirmisher 1pts terror causer 2 pts Chariot 1pt Artillery 1pt rare artillery +1pt terror causer 2pt
Any ideas?
Boldo
|
|
|
Comp
Apr 25, 2008 15:28:50 GMT -5
Post by skyth on Apr 25, 2008 15:28:50 GMT -5
Here's a thought. Granted, I don't know all the armies all that well yet, but here's something I cooked up based on something I saw someone post online.
You divide the units in an army list into three categories -
Good: Balanced for the point cost Bad: Underpowered for the point cost Ugly: Undercosted for the power level.
You can do the same with magic items.
It would be the assumption that everything is 'good' unless otherwise specified.
You start with a small (Say 5-6) points in comp.
You lose points as follows:
Bad units/items: You never lose any points. Take as many as you like.
Good units/items: For each duplicate slot of Good units (Or each Good item) , you lose 1 point (IE if you have a 'Good' unit that is a 2 for 1 special slot and take two, you don't lose any points)
Ugly units: You lose 1 point for non-duplicate ugly unit slots/Items. For each duplicate slot/item, you lose 2 points.
An example from the Lizard book:
By default All magic items/units are Good.
Bad: Skink Cohorts 3rd Gen Slann
Ugly: 4th Gen Slann Totem of Prophecy Totem of Huanchi Diadem of power Jaguar Charm
Good: Mark of Tepok (Normally marks would not be counted on the list).
Why isn't the 2nd Gen Slann on the list? Shouldn't it be worth losing points if you take it? Well, you do lose points if you take it. The 2nd Gen takes up 3 slots. As a 'Good' (Default) unit, you lose 1 point for every duplicate slot, thus you lose 2 points for taking a 2nd Gen.
Now, if you have a small number of points (5-6) then each penalty point hits hard. Just scale the final score to the points allotted to comp.
As I don't know most of the armies, this system would need help to determine the ranking of units.
Another way to use this is not to have comp as a punishment, but rather use it for match ups. Comp does not contribute to who is the winner of the tournament, but match ups are arranged by similar comp scores and then similar records with similar comp scores. That way the chance of having to play an army with a radically different power level is reduced, the army power levels are roughly equal, so generalship is the determining factor and you don't have people complaining about being punished for playing an army that they like.
|
|