Power Ratings vs Point value

[Brother Glacius]

First off, still getting my toes wet with 40K, and am finding power rating a good way to go. However, not so great at estimating how many points to use as a cap. I do know the pitfalls of using PR vs PV, but right now the games are for learning and friendly. If I want a game to last within 2 hours, about how much PR is that?

And would like to know people's experience with using PR vs PV so far.

[InfestedKerrigan]

PR is quick and easy. PV is bookkeeping.

[peter.cosgrove]

8E is very simple, very smooth. ONCE you get the rules down, which are very basic.

It is very easy for 2 players who know the rules and their army to finish a 2k point game in about 2.5 hours.

However, there is a moderately inclined learning curve. 2 hours for 2 relatively new players is about 750-100 points. so 35 to 50 ish power points.

[Purajh]

I have been doing Power Level games at dice age ranging from 20-80 ish PL.

With list building on the fly, setup and cleanup games run about 2.5 hours.

20 point games tend to go faster and we keep it to a 4x4 table if 50 Power Level or less.

This setup has tended to work fairly well for new folks to the game.

Knowledge of your army and its gear will greatly impact the speed of the game. More time in books is usually where it all goes.

[peter.cosgrove]

I don't have the words to extemporize just how FAST 8E is. Once you get your rules down and the general play down. It is REALLY fast. The only thing making the game slow down is just how many dice you have to roll.

[andy]

1 PL is roughly equal to about 20 points, so a 50PL game is a quick scenario while 75-100PL is a bigger commitment. I like 100PL myself, though the occasional 120PL is fun 'cuz you can bring more of the big toys. 8th definitely plays faster, both due to the overall speed of the game but also because of the relative deadliness... models just vanish off the board. In most of the games I've played, the end of turn 2 looks like the end of turn 4. It's brutal. Not that brutal is a bad thing exactly, it's just different. The whole game feels like it got bumped towards the beer & pretzels end of the spectrum which gets 👍 👍 from me.

[peter.cosgrove]

Andy's post. This. this is it.

[peter.cosgrove]

The only really odd thing that I do that I have found helps ALOT, is instead of removing models from the table, lay them down when they die so you keep an accurate track for the end of turn morale check. Then once the morale check is done remove them

[Guest]

Power Level is a general way to determine how strong a unit is. It is very noteworthy that power levels don't account well for upgrades, and often reflect what an optimized version could be, but might not reflect what it is. For example, CSM havocs can be 65pts for a minimum squad, but have a power level of 7. The same quality CSM troops are 65pts and have the same stock gear, but only have power level 5. I believe they are assuming that you are taking 4 heavy/special weapons on your havocs to account for the difference, but the unit is not required to include them.  

There are also some in-game interactions with power level. For example Daemonic summoning is based on power level regarding what numbers are required to roll on 3d6. So power level 17 bloodthirsters are almost impossible to summon while power level 3 chaos furies are hard to fail at summoning. 

Points is a more accurate way to keep track of game balance, but it still doesn't account for bad tactics or poor unit builds. 

And, at present, neither system is good for adjusting army costs to account for model synergy. 

[WestRider]

2 hours ago, paxmiles said:

Power Level is a general way to determine how strong a unit is. It is very noteworthy that power levels don't account well for upgrades, and often reflect what an optimized version could be, but might not reflect what it is. For example, CSM havocs can be 65pts for a minimum squad, but have a power level of 7. The same quality CSM troops are 65pts and have the same stock gear, but only have power level 5. I believe they are assuming that you are taking 4 heavy/special weapons on your havocs to account for the difference, but the unit is not required to include them. 

Power Level is based on the average of the absolute cheapest build with that Model count, and the absolute most expensive build with that Model count. It's basically average those, divide by 20, and round to the nearest whole number.

As such, it favours Units that have many upgrade options over those where the main option is buying more dudes. But outside of a few specific cases (Renegade Knights, for example), it usually works out reasonably well as long as no one is actively trying to abuse it.

[Guest]

Yeah, I'm not sure what power level is based on, so you are probably right there.

I've just found that Power Level isn't very useful by itself. It grants a vague understanding of a unit's strength. And if you don't mind facing a vague aproximation of an "equal" army, then power level could be a good one for match-ups.

A balanced game needs a more exact system.

[peter.cosgrove]

1 hour ago, WestRider said:

But outside of a few specific cases, it usually works out reasonably well as long as no one is actively trying to abuse it.

So, would you count 5 Havocs with 4 lascannons/Combi-Melta/Power Axe as an abuse? Or 5 Fallen with Lascannon/4 combi-plasma/power axe?

This is the part I don't like about power level. Some units are supposed to have big expensive weaponry, but the power level for them is based on their initial loadout. Buying those units means buying the models with the big expensive weaponry. There really isn't something in place that prevents someone from bringing, say, 24 lascannons for 36 power levels other than if they actually have the models with the lascannons.

[andy]

IME Power Levels aren't for competitive games, instead work best in friendly games with people you know and have a shared understanding of the meta. My group has been using PL and we're quite fond of it. List design is very quick, and games have been balanced -- I've found that a lucky opening draw of Tactical Objectives is far more unbalancing than the 'float' in PL.

If I was attending a tourney I'd certainly expect to use Points. For a pickup game at a local store I might lean towards Points... but if my opponent suggested using PL, I'd probably go for it especially if we played WYSIWYG. And if I saw 24 lascannons coming onto the table I'd concede and congratulate my opponent on his well-earned win.

[peter.cosgrove]

There was a point there, quite a while ago, where I was trying to build models that would fit in a variety of situations. Back then you had the force org where you took 2 HQ/6Troops/3Elite/3HS/3 FA. And that was it. So I figured, ok, well, I need 3 units of heavy support, but what weapons do I take? so.. I need 12 lascannons, 12 missile launchers, 12 multi-melta's, 12 heavy bolters. Black Templars could take a heavy weapons and special weapon in a 5 man squad with a razorback. And the lascannons were only 10 points.

Same thing with Blood Angels. How many melta's can I put on the board? 32? ok. let's put that together. The balance is the cost. 

As long as a 5 man unit is limited to 2 expensive weapons, like Sternguard or Assault marines or whatever. Then PL is fine, it's just when you get to units that can take as many as they want that you have issues.

[WestRider]

1 hour ago, peter.cosgrove said:

So, would you count 5 Havocs with 4 lascannons/Combi-Melta/Power Axe as an abuse? Or 5 Fallen with Lascannon/4 combi-plasma/power axe?

This is the part I don't like about power level. Some units are supposed to have big expensive weaponry, but the power level for them is based on their initial loadout. Buying those units means buying the models with the big expensive weaponry. There really isn't something in place that prevents someone from bringing, say, 24 lascannons for 36 power levels other than if they actually have the models with the lascannons.

Those are both around 27 Points per Power Level, which isn't too bad as long as someone's not spamming Units like that. Someone whose list consists only of Spearhead and Vanguard Detachments filled with those would be pretty obviously abusing the system, but having a Squad or three at that level isn't a problem.

It is absolutely not suited for competitive situations where strict balance is important. It is very convenient for beer and pretzels games where there's nothing on the line and everyone's just there to throw dice and have fun.

There is nothing wrong with either type of play, but if you're someone who naturally leans to competitive play, you should stick to Matched Play Points, because that's what those are made for. The people who Power Levels were made for don't have the kinds of collections that lend themselves to that kind of spam. Different strokes for different folks.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, peter.cosgrove said:

So, would you count 5 Havocs with 4 lascannons/Combi-Melta/Power Axe as an abuse? Or 5 Fallen with Lascannon/4 combi-plasma/power axe?

It's more specialization than abuse. Your havocs aren't going to do much if the opponent brings a horde instead of a few, giant-single model targets. And, seriously, Missile Launchers would be much better in this case. 

I will note that the chaos champions swap both weapons for a combi-weapon, so they can't take a power axe and a combi-melta. Stupid, but that's the current wording.