Just thinking about ways to save space in the book since we are adding lots more info.

Fixing the Break Point for all possible formations at 50% would mean that the player would never be able to build formations with an odd number of elements.

A more realistic approach to that avenue would be to have it vary by type, but be fixed for that type. For example, we could define all Marine Vehicle Support formations have three elements and thus a BP of 2. (As per Gold) However, that breaks what Mattman wants to do with variably sized formations, so we cannot do that either.

I did have an idea late last night which was that we could figure out the average cost based on all possible Break Points for that specific element within a formation type (IE Company, Support, or Special), and then price it according to that average. This is not a perfect solution, but it could work.

I agree that any specific Support formation should be entirely composed of the same element. Having an option for Support formations of mixed elements would be acceptable to me, but the default should be all being the same. I also agree that each detachment in a Company should be allowed to be of a different element, so long as the detachment is entirely the same element.

Interesting idea there Primarch, but that is really where Morale values kick in and have their influence.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Take 2 managed two on one page.

On the break point will it really effect games if they are all priced the same or all formations follow the rules to find the break point.

Just pay for the models don't factor in how much it will cost for their break value. don't modify the final cost at all. If all are worked that way then their is no disadvantage, if however you want to have a higher break point for units then how about you charge a cost per vehicle to increase it from a division of 2 rounding up to a division of 1.5 or 1.2

For example I have a company consisting of 16 models normal break point is 8. For marines or veterans we want of higher break point, the list will say "to find the Break point divide the number of units by 1.5 (for 16 it will give a Break point of 11) for a cost of 5pts (out of thin air) per model in the formation.

I don't know the complete effect but it will give higher break points for units and make them pay the cost for doing so. we could just incorporate the xx pts into the final price of the model so the player doesn't see. Just list it as they are to divide by 1.5 or 1.2 rounding up to find the break point.

That looks damn good squiggle. Was going to suggest moving the optional characters to that empty space next to the HQ. I have some other ideas which I might try and articulate in a bad drawing over the next few days.

The average option that magnus mentioned was something I was considering, you work out a base value from the different combinations of models in the formation. Obviously for some formations there are dozens of combinations. At the end of the day I would like to see people just pick up the army list and add some numbers together.

Hi!

At this juncture I would provide two options (since net epic is what options are all about), the "quick and easy" version with an average value as Magnus has stated, then a separate option for those whom desire a more exact cost determination.

For purposes of the cards being proposed the would use the "simple" method as a default and the full method of cost determination can be listed in the core NEP section or as an addendum in each army section.

Since I plan on adding the formula explanations in the book for those whom wish to build their own formations/elements, I think it is easy to achieve the inclusion of both options.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Thanks Mattman I await with baited breath.

I agree with Primarch after a bit of thought the simple option is the best for a pick up and play. The other option will give the maths hammers amongst us something to get their teeth into to find the most optimised options.

Hi!

A game should always be "accessible". Presenting its simplest most quickest route to getting into it. So a simple presentation works there.

Once you have some more experience, then you may want to tinker with the system and thus the "full" formula is there to work with.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

yup primarch I agree that's what I was trying to say.

Done a bit of work with the armoured units I will hold off now till Mattman sends me his drawings.

Hi!

This layouts are awesome SquiggleAmp!

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

I just realized that I had actually not looked at your attached files from post 1. So I fixed that.

I noticed what I'm guessing are a few typos.

Formations document

Page 1 the third paragraph says: "Once all transports for a formation have been determined the total Break Point of the formation is the total number of models (stands and vehicles) in that formation." To me, this says that you are saying that all Marine formations have a Break Point equal to the number of elements in the formation. In other words, 100%. If this is intentional, then it removes the problem of costings varying depending on the size of the formation, but somehow I doubt it was intentional.

Page 4, under Company Options you have "Replace any Vanguard Veteran Stand with a Vanguard Veteran (On Foot) Stand at a saving of xxx pts per stand". Why would replacing a thing with the exact same thing save any points? Also should remove the bit where it says "at a savings of..." as that is covered by the next column (assuming it will show a negative value).

You have the same thing with Assault Marines under Battle Company & Assault Company. Everything is 'on foot' at this point, as Transports have not yet been selected, so why is that even mentioned?

Hmm, you also have the same entry in the Vanguard Veteran and Assault Marine Detachments. Either this is a very persistent error, or I'm missing something.

Page 19 appears to be entirely empty, but that could be a document conversion error on my end, as I'm looking at it in Open Office.

Looking at the Stats document, I see what I was missing above. The default Vanguard Veteran and Assault Marine have Jump Pack and the (on foot) version does not. Gotcha. Hmm, it may be a good idea to rename one of the two variants of each, as calling both "Assault Marine" is confusing. Perhaps "Jump Marine" for the one with that ability and "Assault Marine" for the one without. Similarly with Vanguard Jump and Vanguard Veteran. Even if renaming is not an option, then please specify (Jump) after the one being replaced.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

As I changed on my sheet Magnus I thought it was better to put in the option to remove the jump pack with a - to the points value. We could have it similar to the terminator were we can replace the vanguard stands with assault veterans.

The comment about BPs should be half the number, marines definitely aren't that good.

Indeed as you have spotted, Assault marines (both the normal and vet versions) come in two variants, one with jump packs, one with out (on foot). This is one of the concessions to allow players to still stick their assault marines in vehicles if they want to, but they have to remove their jump packs. The "saving" term might not make it into the final draft, it is just there as a nudge to remind people that your men will cost less, the points saving will be shown with a negative symbol.

With regards to descriptors, with or without jump packs, they are still called assault marines (and vanguard vets), that is why I have tried to differentiate them with "On Foot" and "Jump Pack". Calling things Jump Marine will cause more confusion as that is something that doesn't actually exist.

To be honest, I almost didn't include the "on foot" options and was just going to have assault and vanguard marine with jumpacks as their only option, and still have them not able to get in vehicles, but as I said, I am trying to find solutions for as many people as possible.

Going forward I think I will just go with the following terms:

Assault Marine - This will be the name for the version without jump packs.
Assault Marine (Jump Pack) - This will be the name for the version with jump packs.

Ditto for the Vanguard Vets.

I am also thinking, to remove any sort of confusion over minus and plus points when toting up the total of the formation, I will start with the default versions of the stands in the formation being the non jump pack versions, and then people can upgrade them to take jump packs for + xxx pts.

Good solution Mattman I agree with the upgrade to jump pack

That seems more logical, and it works in the same way as upgrading Special Characters (Librarian, etc) with Jump, Bike, or Terminator armor. It is good to be consistent.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Cool.
What do you guys think about the different names for the various fliers? I have tried to keep the original name with the original stats and gave the new modern versions a variant of the name.
Likewise I have tried to differentiate some of the vehicle variants with just a simple abbreviation of the weapons being carried.