Hi!

No worries, I will make summaries of conversations across the three formats, so you don't need to go there. Actually the opposition is starting to fade as the initial resistance erodes and people begin to appreciate the formula for what it is.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Yeah, I've been following the FB thread quite closely. The opposition is not as strong as some of the posts seem to be at first. From what I'm seeing, most people are open to the idea of a formula, but many of them are just not "mathematical thinkers" and cannot follow the logic of the formula itself. Having seen some results from it through, they mostly like what they have seen. I think. I could be misinterpreting something. I do that.

Glad to hear that someone else likes it too. The intent is to allow players to create (or re-create) any form of model & formation they want, and to have it all be (reasonably) balanced. Of course, it is a work in progress, so any models and formations valued with it may be subject to change.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

I think your appreciation is accurate. At the beginning it seemed a lot didn't understand the formula, and also they were looking at outdated data. Once Magnus and I started posted the latest tweaks and comparisons to gold, resistance softened and now comments are directed at certain aspects of the formula that need tweaking.

In the end it seems the argument (which I have made forcefully) that we need OBJECTIVE guidelines is resonating. Comparing or trying to hold the original GW costs as some kind of standard is not logically defensible (those values are the epitome of arbitrariness). While no formula can be perfect, if it is applied equally to everything then no one has an advantage, all are measured the same and superior stats/game utility result in higher cost.

Many have noted the sometimes MARKED price reduction of certain formations. While people tend to focus on the cost of the obviously overpowered units, I have always known that many basic formations were overpriced, the formula shows this. Magnus even posted percentages as to how many went down instead of up. It is staggeringly in favor of price REDUCTION, not increase.

I personally do not mind more bang for the buck.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Yeah, some of your points have perhaps been a bit too forceful. You have come close to vilifying people who like the GW way, and that just hurts the cause. While I agree that the GW way is the wrong way to do it, other people have the right to have dissenting opinions.

Remember, preference is not always a logical thing, nor does it have to be. You and I prefer the logic of the formula, but if someone else does not, well, that is fine too.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

True enough.

Unfortunately I have the baggage of 5 previous revisions trying to accomplish an actual pricing structure, only to have to default to "eyeballing it".

It would be nice to try something like the formula for a change.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

It would be good to see some of the "latest tweaked" values here too (as I'm sure your summary will provide, at least in part).
The formula is still somewhat subjective in my opinion, due to the assigning of various factors. But it is consistent, which is very important when it is a global community trying to decide on things. An arbitrary statement of "I think this unit should be x points" is much harder to apply across different armies with different playing groups.
I think for that reason a formula wins for me.

Edit: just saw the points cost comparison on the epicentre website. Nice work guys!

_________________
.'.
http://ragged-they-kill.blogspot.com.au/

Interesting reading the comparison on the EPICenter.

So my *GUT* tells me that Infantry are overvalued and Flyers are undervalued. No actual logic involved there, just pure gut.

Is movement too cheap, would be my first thought.

Read it wrong...Left is Formula, right is seat of pants.....

_________________
MadMagician
Epic Tyranids

Gotcha, yeah, I'll be updating the posts here soon. Just wanted to get quick summaries up on the facebook thread as things happen quicker there than here.

I'll also update the OP of each thread with the most recent values to make finding them easier.

Making those threads stickied would probably b e a bad idea, as then all other threads would be on page two! On the other hand, putting them in their own sub-forum off below "NetEpic Gold Army Lists" could be a good idea to contain them while not monopolizing that sub-forum.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

I have already started a comparison document which is available at the Epicenter Here:

http://www.netepic.org/uploads/2/2/1/0/ ... n_list.pdf

I will continue to update it until its completed.

You have summed up my thoughts as well. I thin it is hard for some to relate that NO formula is completely balanced and without bias, that is not the point of the formula, it is the UNIFORM APPLICATION of it that is important because then the bias and subjectivity in it is applied evenly to all units, which offers a balance in that regard.

We have already identified several areas for improvement, which is the point. The discussion should be how to we better it, not whether we should use it.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Agreed

Primarch, make sure that you only put values marked as from Tweak3 in that document, as including ones from before would be misleading. I'll get the rest of tweak 3 posted soon.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

Yup, that is what I have been doing. Since I have followed your posting closely, I knew where they were originally and started with IG.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

I know that I'm probably in a minority of one, but I really don't have a problem with the current points system. It's not perfect, I know, however, I haven't seen anything that's really a significant enough improvement to persuade me to support it.

I agree that the rules for flyers are not well integrated into the game. Again though, I cannot see a good alternative to the current rules. I fear that this could take a very long time to sort out, assuming that we can reach any sort of consensus.

On the -1 penalty to shots over half range or when moving. No, I don't like that idea. The ranged mechanism works very well as things stand. Let's not bring in Warhammer style penalties to a ranged combat system refreshingly free of them.

_________________

Not a minority, everyone (myself included) has that feeling at first. Start thinking over the potential benefits and I think the necessity becomes clear. A couple of examples are a new army list or adding the latest flavor models from 40K. It becomes a much easier task to balance new units and armies if the points framework does not involve a dartboard.



I feel the points framework starts to address this issue in a meaningful way. Fliers have a piss poor balance between cost and power today. It was ok when there were only a few models back in early 2nd Ed, but now it is prety bad and my group doesn't even bother with flyers.



I can see your point here. I am curious, how do you feel about the flow of battle in NE Gold? Do you prefer a game with more strategic maneuvering or a stand up and fight style?

The good news is that NE Gold is staying pat and this is really a discussion about different directions.

_________________
MadMagician
Epic Tyranids

Could I beg you to put the "Current" values on the left and the "Formula" values on the right? it is throwing me off !

_________________
MadMagician
Epic Tyranids