Math-Hammer Deluxe: Where do the points come from?

So, please forgive me if this is a taboo topic or one in another thread somewhere. I have a simple question: Has anyone reversed the math to determine exactly how each point in each stat and rule are weighed to determine a model's base cost?

I ask because my group is embarking on a heavily narrative campaign, and we want to make some unique characters and units that are at least balanced with their own army lists, and doing "counts as" feels like a cop out. I know this is a little mad scientist like, but think it could be fun.

I am also a little lazy and don't want to do a full break down if it is ground somebody else has covered and shared.

Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

My guess is that if there was any formula it was long forgotten and replaced by "gut feelings"

People often use similar magic items to determine if a special character is over/under costed (compared to a similarly equipped regular character)

When it comes to making regular units, if you're actually interested in balance (unlike GW...) you probably just want to run some simulations.

How does 200 points of your new unit stack up against 200 points of several other units?

200 points of special should be better than 200 points of core.
200 points of rare should be better than 200 points of special.

(or maybe not? I've never tried to balance any systems before)

And then other mitigating factors come in... what kind of support units are available to your new unit? That can make it cost more than it would have otherwise due to the potential of the support (ie, Temple Guard pay (at least a little) for the abilities they get if you have a Slann with them.)

Do you have no access to shooting? or magic? Maybe your troops are a little cheaper to compensate.

I'm just thinking out loud though, it could be that all of that is totally crazy talk.

I wonder if this might be broken down a little in the Mordhiem rules...

Thanks for the replies.

to hdctambien: Not crazy talk at all. I was gibbering similarly to my friends when we first mentioned the idea. There are soooo many factors. "Gut Magic" should be left with Ogres not game developers (Oh well...). I was afraid that was the truth, no real calculation at all. Thank you for your suggestions, they have really helped.

To n810: i have been reviewing mordheim stuff as a starting place. (I'm glad there's a community made Lizzie list ) On a side note, why do the really cool skirmish games (i.e. Mordheim and Necromunda) get no support?

To everybody a basic question: Do you think army wide special rules, i.e. Predatory Fighter, are calculated into cost or are they freebies for choosing that army?

We had some debate on that one. What other army core has a similar stat line to a Saurus Warrior and what is the cost difference? Might be a good place to start, I'm at work and don't have my brb with me...

BaronSilasGreenback said:

Do you think army wide special rules, i.e. Predatory Fighter, are calculated into cost or are they freebies for choosing that army?

Click to expand...

I think so yes. Saurus also have Cold Blooded and Scaly Skin to consider..

BaronSilasGreenback said:

What other army core has a similar stat line to a Saurus Warrior and what is the cost difference?

Click to expand...

Saurus Warriors are very similar to Dwarf Longbeards (taken with Shields).

They have the same armor save, Strength, and Toughness.

The Dwarfs have 2 better Weapon Skill and 1 better Initiative

They also have Immune to Psychology, +1 Str on charge or +1 parry if charged, and they have a 33% change of Hatred against everything they fight.

And the Dwarfs can have Great Weapons and a magic banner.

The Saurus Warriors have Predetory Fighter, 1 more attack, and Cold Blooded Ld 8 (which is better than Ld 9)

Longbeards (with Shields) cost 2 points more per model than Saurus Warriors.

But Saurus Warriors can be magically buffed!

Thanks for the Longbeard info dump! I believe I may be on to something with aggregate functions of the stat lines.

To be more specific I am looking at vanilla Core stat lines. Averaging seems the way to go. When I did Saurus, off the top of my head, so my I may get home and discover massive wrongness in me maths, I got 3.2~ for their line average.

more on the method later, more work just walked in...............................................

This sounds like a job for linear algebra!

After much algebra and calculus (derivatives, thought "Why not") I must concede that going with the gut seems to be how its done. Sigh.

Comparing new creations to similar models is how its going to go down for our campaign.

For the record we were going to create some remnants of the beings from before the Old Ones. They are mentioned as still being out there in our army book.

Thanks for all the input.

My primary issue is that a lot of things seem arbitrarily priced, with no real thoughts aside from "I want these guys/this guy to be awesome and cheap!"

Case in point:
White Lions VS Templeguard

Temple Guards cost 1 point more than White lions, or 7,5% more.
Statwise, Temple Guards have +1 Attacks and +1 toughness and +1 AS in melee, but the same against ranged attacks.

White Lions have +1 Movement, +1 WS, +4 BS (Which is pointless, i know), +1S (GW compared to halberd) and +3 Initiative

Special rules are the breaker, obviously. Coldblooded makes their otherwise equal Ld better, but White Lions have stubborn, which Templeguards can only get if you pay for a slann. The extra attack temple guards have, only applies in the first rank - and this is countered by the White lions "Martial prowess", which means that at 3+ ranks, white lions have the same number of attacks, not counting Predatory fighter - which, if going by front row attacks only, is unlikely to ever be more than 2 additional attacks.

White lions strike at +1 S compared to the TG. They have GWs, but because of their innate ASF, they still strike first against most non-ASF attackers anyway, at initiative 5. They also have Forest Strider, which makes the more versatile.

Templeguards become stubborn with the slann, and automatically passes look-out sir attempts.

So to summarize:
Templeguards are better at:
-Toughness
-Protecting a Slann (Look-out and stubborn)
-Each PF attack is 1 attack more than the WLs
-1 better armour save in CC

White Lions have better:
-Movement
-Weapon Skill
-Strenght
-Initiative
-Always stubborn (Doesn't get taxed to activate this ability either)
-Forest Strider
-Cheaper

So Templeguards primary benefits (Stubborn and auto-look out sirs) require a massive tax, and puts the entire unit at risk from miscasts. They are marginally more durable in close combat, and the attacks are barely worth mentioning.

I can't think of 1 good reason temple guards costs more than white lions. Worse, if we go by supporting choices, White Lions are still better - A High Lore mage can grant them a good ward save with a few casts, they can pick a banner that makes the unit all but invulnerable to all magic, weapons included, and have units that can force -1 S and ASL on enemies in close combat with it - We Lizardmen have nothing this powerful to back them up. We also have access to the same lores, and the ward save is argueably better if you want to reinforce their powerblock.

So despite being better at everything, having better stats and rules, AND better supporting choices, White Lions still cost 1 point less than Temple Guards. This alone makes me sincerely believe that there is no "system" to determining point values, other than author bias, or "gut feeling" as some people call it.

BaronSilasGreenback said:

Has anyone reversed the math to determine exactly how each point in each stat and rule are weighed to determine a model's base cost?

Click to expand...

I tried once. I did not bother reversing the math. I scrapped their system and tried to derive my own.+++

SilverFaith said:

...White Lions still cost 1 point less than Temple Guards. This alone makes me sincerely believe that there is no "system" to determining point values, other than author bias, or "gut feeling"...

Click to expand...

I have never seen anybody reveal they have a system but I have seen plenty of posts opining that one unit or another is over or under point costed. There are enough stock analysts, computer programmers, data miners and other people with a mathematical bent to their profession in Real Life that I am really surprised no one has done something like what the OP suggests. Some folks who do publish 'results' (without showing their work) seem to use a Skaven-Slave as the smallest unit of measure.

+++If the goal is a point costing/army balancing system*** then the GW point values will have to be scrapped. The newest models, that need to be sold are always a better combat value for the assigned points than previous products.

***An impartial entity, with no profit motive or marketing scheme, would need to assign a rival, independently derived system of point values if a fair & accurate army balancing system will ever exist.

Isn't White Lion and Temple Guard strength the same or do White Lions have a base strength of 4? I thought both units hit at strength 5.

White Lions have a base strength of 4 and are armed with great weapons; giving them a strength advantage over our Temple Guard.

Dang... I wonder why my buddy doesn't run them more often.

lordkingcrow said:

Dang... I wonder why my buddy doesn't run them more often.

Click to expand...

Not sure about your buddy's case, but a lot of High Elf generals like to go with Phoenix Guard (with their built in 4+ ward save) instead.