Mattman wrote:
Cheers Magnus, it is very handy to see the working out in a spreadsheet and I can see if I have missed anything.
You are welcome. I tried to post the file as an ods, but it wouldn't allow that, so I converted to xls. Hopefully no formulae were lost in the transition. I really should have posted that a while ago, if for no other reason than to explain the mathematical tech-speak I used a ways above to explain why I was changing my mind and saying that your Formations document should just use values as if BP was always 1/2. See columns Z through BJ for the actual math used.
Mattman wrote:
One thing that is different is the CAF calculation. I was using the CAF multiplied by 4 system whereas you are using the other system that uses the Type/Move/Modifier values.
Reading back in the points post I noticed you mentioned that being one way of working out the CAF value, what is your reasoning for moving to that system?
The rationale for the change (IE tweak) to the CAF calculation was explained over in that thread. Let me see if I can find that fairly quickly.* I am planning on shifting the Points Formula over to that, as well as the tweak to Ranged values (base cost of 1 for direct fire rather than 4, and halving the base cost of templates). As a result, all of the values I've generated for Platinum have used these tweaks, and I strongly feel that you should use them as well.
* I am not finding where the change to CAF was discussed, so I'm thinking it must have been in some other thread, but I have no idea where. The thought is that the faster a model can move, the more valuable it's CAF value is. In other words, a +2 CAF should have a higher cost for a model with a Move of 25cm than for one with 10cm. Similarly, that same +2 should be more expensive for a Command, Skimmer, Flyer, etc than for a model without these, as such model will be able to get into close combat more easily than a slower moving & maneuvering model.
Mattman wrote:
I also added a value to the total based on the Morale of the stand, although there was nothing written in your calculation document, you give a value in your Tactical Marine example of 8 (there is only the bit about formations getting a saving or costing more based on their morale value). So I used that under the assumption that the base morale is 4 for 0 pts, with each point of morale costing 4 points, so 4pts for a morale of 3, 8pts for a morale of 2, 12 for a morale of 1 etc.
Um, that is incorrect. The modifiers for Morale, Break Point, Chain-of-Command, and Formation type most definitely are in the Points Formula posts [NetEpic Alternate Rules / The Great Points Formula Debate / page 10, posts 6 & 7]. I had to put the 'model value' and 'formation modifiers' in separate posts as they were too long as one post, but they are most definitely there. If you were referring to the spreadsheet posted above, you are still incorrect. Column X covers the modifiers for Morale scores, though it does not explain them.
I don't know where you are getting a value of 8 for Morale for a ... ah, just realized. Yeah, the example of a Tactical Marine stand in the Points Formula itself is very old and out of date and those examples should be deleted / ignored. I'll try to remember to update them when I next edit those posts.
Your assumption that a Morale value of 4 is baseline is correct and has no modifier to the final cost. However, Morale values varying from 4 do not have a fixed value. Rather they apply a multiplier to the 'model value' (total of Move, Save, CAF, Weapon(s), & SA). Refer to column X in the file for examples of this. Morale 5 gives a 10% reduction in cost. Morale 3 increases cost by 10%, Morale 2 increases by 20%, and Morale 1 increases by 30%. Models with "Fearless", "AI", or who otherwise have a Morale score of "--" have their cost increased by 40%.
Mattman wrote:
For the time being I am going to start populating the army list based on the the single stand/model costs, now that I have a better understanding of the formula, but with Company stands/models getting a 10% discount (and everything getting tweaked for range). Should give us an idea of were we stand and areas that may need tweaking in the cost formula. Will also give me a chance to try out my own tweaks for some of the new rules/models/options.
Do please include the modifiers for Morale and BP, especially since you so vehemently wanted me to include them when I wasn't going to. But you convinced me that they should be there, so they should be there.
For reference, column Y would be the one to refer to for a 'final value' for Support Formation elements. It includes all adjustments (for Marines) aside from Formation type. Reducing that by 10% for Company Formation elements would be appropriate, and 20% for Special Formation elements.