Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
JPjr

What with current posts on whether PTG is balanced and the 'Gunkulator'...

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, JPjr said:

this was really interesting, thanks! (and also chimes with my uneducated, un-backed up belief that despite making the most noise online and being the most visible tournament/competitive AoS players probably make up just a minuscule fraction of the overall community).

I've talked with people about this a lot. Tournament scenes make up 20-200 people in an area depending on the scene. I can sit in my local GW and paint for a day and see more than a 100 people come in on a Saturday buying models. I live in a pretty big city so this number is irrelevant to my point. My point is more unique people enter a shop to buy models every day than unique people who show up for a tournament in our area -- which are advertised months in advance. 

 

As a DND player I know more people who buy nighthaunt models for roleplaying games than people who actually play aos. Competitive play is interesting to me but I am fully aware I am in the minority of people in this hobby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lemon Knuckles and @JPjr it's been a fun conversation.

Lemon I think fundamentally all wargamers think points should reasonably correlate with expected value  on the table top.    Otherwise on what other basis should we be using them for list building with a goal of building   fairly 'balanced' lists (read armies  that have reasonably similar expected tabletop 'value'.)  If there is no correlation between points and value why use them for list building (as opposed to wounds, or colors, or calculated total base surface area etc.)   Wargames where you have the ability to build your own list are built on the assumption points are a reasonable approximation of table top value.  

Your hardline stance against that is pretty mystifying to me.     

When you are using GUNK to looking for points efficiencies vs value you are trying to find places where you get a little more then expected value for the points investment.   When you talk about people suggesting a unit should be 20 more or less points they are saying value doesn't match points as well as it should (and Gunk to calculate value seems to suggest they are right) why are you parsing how that correllates to Gunk if you don't think value and points have any correlation.

I get it on a micro level (a single table top moment or in a game) there is no correlation. But in the context of list building for a wargame  (which is when we actually use point values)   we want things to generally have a reasonable relationship between expected tabletop value and points.  Otherwise we get to a situation of uncomfortable imbalance the 'broken army' or the 'broken obvious unit choice' which makes gamers sad (because we can't/won't  all just switch to the new hotness unlike in say a card game) that's the Negative Play Experience often in Wargaming.   There are tolerance levels on the accuracy of points vs value but this kind of game assumes there is a reasonable correlation.  

Edited by gjnoronh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if it's been frustrating.  I guess I'm chasing an elusive notion and pissing people off in the process.  Sorry if that's the case.  You've been generous in the discussion and I've learned a lot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too it's been fun (and sometimes frustrating :)).    I have the sense you are chasing something pretty esoteric in your framing  of the gaming world.   I had thought over the last few days  we could do this easier in a phone call or preferably over a beer.  If you are in the US or Eastern Canada I'd look forward to sharing a cold one with you and some of our other participants in this thread!

Go look at that Blood Bowl math (and the chess math) when you are thinking about your GUNK math.   There's a wealth of data there that's had a lot more careful long term parsing then AoS has (and I would probably as a bit of  nihilist say AoS  has too many  highly random factors to make it  able parsed to an in depth level.  But I know you are a devoted believer in the parsing.    We haven't even talked about Realm Rules and expectations of approximate value.)  

As a scientist who understands your inquiring mind (I think)  I  would say the key generalizable take home is to understand and carefully delineate your underlying assumptions when you are trying to figure something out and remember how it effects the accuracy of your model when you try to extrapolate it to other situations.        

Edited by gjnoronh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've moved around a lot, but live in Colorado now with some family in Eastern Canada.  Yes, Colorado is legal for recreational use, and no, I don't think that's why I write the way I do :).  I also travel a lot on business.  Would be quite happy to sit with you and share some beer if the stars aligned.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to dredge up the whole "way we should determine cost" discussion again, but rather toss out a small thought of mine regarding value: players, at least the really good ones, will try and maximize every ability they have available to them from a given unit. Generally speaking this means that when you look at value it's fairly safe to look at it in the most optimal sense due to the way we naturally approach the game.

It's actually the thing that turned me off of Namarti heavy Deepkin as an army concept: due to the entire army being built with small "wholey within" aura bubbles it hurt the value of the Namarti units because it was too hard to properly maximize their strengths. 

That said, I feel like cost and value should basically stay separate concepts, but that might be the fact I've gone through economics and bookkeeping courses before speaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×