Kirb your enthusiasm!


"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him

Monday, October 4, 2010

Reply to "Forumitis: 'Earning your points back.' "

This is a little different for me, trying to make sense of a serious issue in the the way the general populace rates and quantifies the value of unit choices. I want to, with some help from the community, design a new non-mathhammer based system to value a unit based on both its codex and the function that it performs within.

The good list-hammer bloggers out, there, Kirby, Stelek, and others can assess a unit and rate it appropriately. Fact.

As such, let us assess what makes a unit good, and bad and what consitutes an example of each.

When we are rating a unit, we need to weigh its cost vs effectiveness in a particular role. This role based Return-On-Investment (ROI) is key to the valuation of a unit.

For instance, lets take Gretchin/Grots

Cost: 3pts each.
FOC: Troops.
Ranged offense: 12" S3 AP- Pistol
CC Offense: S2, 1 Attack
Defense: - Save

So for 3 points I get a S3 pistol with a S2 CC Attack.
So, obviously their role in the army is not to be a deathstar. You can get big blogs of them cheap-ish so they can tarpit if required.
The role here is to hold objectives, cheaply, and to be a cover screen for more valuable units, both of which they do admirably.

Intarwebs Rating: FAIL
fester Rating (Ork review): Average
New Rating: Shooting: 1/10. CC: 1/10. Holding Objectives: 8/10. Cheap cover screen: 10/10

Overall, used in the roles designed for them in the codex, an awesome unit. Used outside these roles, not particularly valuable at all.

What about VT2's example, Rhinos

Cost: 35pts
FOC: Transport, 10 capacity, 2 firepoints
Ranged Offense: 24" S4, 2 shots
CC Offense: None
Defense: Light Armor

So, for 35 points I get a transport with basically SFA Guns.
So, obviously not a battletank.
So what are they used for in the codex.
Rhinos are designed to transport your units in relative safety from Point A to Point B. How successfully do they do this is the key requirement. What flexibility beyond that design do they actually exhibit?

A Rhino is reasonably immune to 50% of the fire your opponent puts out.
It also allows, due to the top hatch, a unit to use it like a bunker and for them to fire from the relative safety it provides. It also allows you to successfully perform its role, of going from Point A to Point B.
They can be used for blocking, mobile terrain pieces, and probably lots of other things I cant think of.

New Rating: Shooting: 3/10. CC: 0/10. Holding Objectives: 8/10. Cheap cover screen: 8/10. Effective Transport: 9/10

Let's look at something which probably doesn't win out in my ratings.


Cost 15pts/ea
FOC: Elites
Ranged Offense (BS2), S8 AP3 Assault 1, Glory Hogs rules
CC Offense: S3 Furious Charge
Defense: 6+

So we have what must be, based on name and outfit, an anti-tank unit.
They can do some CC if required, but can't ignore armour saves.
So how do we rate: We have no transport options, only hit 1 out of 3 times (meaning 45 points per landed shot) and are relatively expensive in the codex.

New Rating:
Shooting: 4/10. BS2, awesome gun, crappy rules.
CC: 4/10.
Holding Objectives: 0/10.
Cheap cover screen: 0/10
Reasonable Threat: 4/10.

Basically, I am not looking to everyone to come back with a rated list of their codex, as it changes daily depending on requirements. What I am hoping to do is get a consensus on how the Pink Army rates choices so that when we have an argument over something (which we inevitably do), we can refer to the same baseline for arguments.
My ideas are outlined above, and I will leave more intelligent players to shape these into a cohesive point of view.

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...