True Cost Experiment

[ajax98]

That the current Range (shooting) modifiers have an impact on the "true" value of the Ranged units, I wonder how these new variables would factor into the current "cost" program for units. Or if the "cost" program be updated or modified to account for some of the changes in the game.

I can understand how I would be loathe to reevaluate the costing structure of a significant part of the game, but 10-20-30 points here or there can be a relevant factor in widening the use of many units and enhancing the viability and usability of many "less than optimum" units.

I am sure that the 'hard core' gamers among us would look favorably upon such an experiment

Let us start the "True Cost Experiment".
This is for all units that have the stigma of being “over priced”. As such things may change over the course of time due to other factors, but a certain base line of data should be evident.

I propose that it will be a bid process. Any unit you feel is “over priced", agree with your opponent to a new cost price and keep track of that. Simple Record keeping is an important part of this Experiment. Both for immediate game purposes and long term analysis.
(A record keeping standard form will be forthcoming.)

This could be as little as squeezing in the start up purchase of Command Card(s) or upgrading unit(s).

If both sides have such units then a parity of costs can be "exchanged".

If only one side has a bid, then if agreed upon, a knowledgeable opponent will permit a reasonable new cost.

If not sure of the proposed bid, those point differences can be possibly exchanged during the game for a Command card, for the non bidding player, at an agreed upon exchange rate and at an agreed upon turn in, like no more than one CC per player turn. Or exchanged for Victory points/conditions at an agreed upon rate.

The "new cost" should reflect the closeness of the bid and the studied observances of the player base.
To that matter please feel free to post here your considerations for bids as a starting point.
Please follow the form:
FACTION   UNIT NAME    (Cost on Card)   BID   (difference)
Any remarks for supporting your submission.

Example:
UNDEAD   Skeleton Horde   (149)         124   (25)
My initial line of thought is how close the difference is to the cost of a Command card. So its like opt for SH get a free CC.

As a further example, an opponent might not like that so much and would suggest the the Undead Bidder take 2 SH as proposed and the opponent would get One CC immediately (or at a specified turn).

What is to be realized here is data based on experience. That should give the play testers a basis to analyze.

[ajax98]

(Constructive suggestions welcome)
TCE RECORD SHEET (to be submitted in this thread; any descriptions of battle should be sent to session reports)
Date
Players (optional)

Final agreed upon bids:
FACTION   UNIT NAME    (Cost on Card)   BID   (difference)



ANY NEGOTIATIONS:



PLAYER 1 -  FACTION:
Scenario:
BIDS?   Y  /  N
Victory  /Tie  /  Defeat   Score:

[Subjective observations]
Set up         (+)     (0)     (-)

Skill      (+)     (0)     (-)
(Understanding the game)

Luck (dice)   (+)     (0)     (-)


PLAYER 2 -  FACTION:
BIDS?   Y  /  N
Victory  /Tie  /  Defeat   Score:

[Subjective observations]
Set up         (+)     (0)     (-)

Skill      (+)     (0)     (-)
(Understanding the game)

Luck (dice)   (+)     (0)     (-)


Legend:
(+)   Positive general remark concerning line item (as in very Knowledgeable (Skill) of the game)
(0)    Neutral general remark concerning line item (as in Average set up)
(-)   Negative general remark concerning line item (as in Unlucky with dice)

Negotiations - notes on any give or take concerning the cost changes agreed upon.

[Quelmotz]

I propose that Umenzi worthy have their price decreased.

UMENZI TRIBESMEN  Worthy   (256)   236 (-20)
Worthy are rubbish. I'll use berserkers as a base of comparison. (5) 5/6 loses out to (6) 5/6 quite obviously, nothing to say about that. 2/2 defence to 1/2 defence just about balances it out. Controllability is nice, but I've never heard of "umenzi stand-and-shoot armies" or worthy running around the flanks at the same speed as the rest of the army to pinch... Also, 13 courage is nothing compared to unflappable courage. Also, the leadership range isn't really useful as changing this guy into a warrior will give you a shaman which has FAR better leadership range and spellcasting abilities.
Therefore, I propose that worthy's price gets lowered by 20 to 236, as it is still SLIGHTLY better than berserkers (though I'll still take berserkers anytime anywhere). This allows upgrading of a warriors unit to a spearmen unit, which is nice. It also allows an upgrade from spearmen to javelineers or gives extra points that can be combined with some leftovers for a command card or straight upgrade from warriors to javelineers, shamans to high priests, etc.

High Elves  Elder Blade Battlesquad  (220)  230?? (+10) * reasons mentioned later on
These guys aren't worth the 33 points more than the HE battlesquad. They are identical except for a +1 in power. The +1 power is NOT worth the 33 points at all. If it was 10 points or so it could work out but definitely not 33 points. The reason I didn't give a point cost is because if Elder Blade Battlesquad's cost was reduced to 200 points or so, it'll just be a slightly upgraded HE battlesquad that will still not be commonly used. I propose that the cost remains the same or increase slightly, but their offense becomes (4) 6/6 instead of (3) 6/6. The extra dice is incredibly worth it as with 3 dice isn't going to hit much on anything but 4 dice is a huge improvement (see high elves-archers/bowriders).

[ajax98]

High Elves  Elder Blade Battlesquad  (220)  230?? (+10) * reasons mentioned later on
These guys aren't worth the 33 points more than the HE battlesquad. They are identical except for a +1 in power. The +1 power is NOT worth the 33 points at all. If it was 10 points or so it could work out but definitely not 33 points. The reason I didn't give a point cost is because if Elder Blade Battlesquad's cost was reduced to 200 points or so, it'll just be a slightly upgraded HE battlesquad that will still not be commonly used. I propose that the cost remains the same or increase slightly, but their offense becomes (4) 6/6 instead of (3) 6/6. The extra dice is incredibly worth it as with 3 dice isn't going to hit much on anything but 4 dice is a huge improvement (see high elves-archers/bowriders).

Ah, so. You have brought up another interesting point and Variation. I am glad that you have pointed out some interesting factors for differentiating units within a Faction that don't seem to have much difference except cost. I have pretty much viewed the EBB as you have - I just didn't take it one step further to ask what would make it worth while.
From one viewpoint an increase of attack dice by 33% is significant enough to take notice.

I am not sure if this case is unique or other such may be found. If one or two more such suggestions show up here we will have to start another experiment.

For this experiment I must adhere to the parameters of simple "over priced".

If somebody starts putting up info pointing out units that are "under priced", that would be another experiment. 

[Quelmotz]

High Elves  Elder Blade Battlesquad  (220)  230?? (+10) * reasons mentioned later on
These guys aren't worth the 33 points more than the HE battlesquad. They are identical except for a +1 in power. The +1 power is NOT worth the 33 points at all. If it was 10 points or so it could work out but definitely not 33 points. The reason I didn't give a point cost is because if Elder Blade Battlesquad's cost was reduced to 200 points or so, it'll just be a slightly upgraded HE battlesquad that will still not be commonly used. I propose that the cost remains the same or increase slightly, but their offense becomes (4) 6/6 instead of (3) 6/6. The extra dice is incredibly worth it as with 3 dice isn't going to hit much on anything but 4 dice is a huge improvement (see high elves-archers/bowriders).

Ah, so. You have brought up another interesting point and Variation. I am glad that you have pointed out some interesting factors for differentiating units within a Faction that don't seem to have much difference except cost. I have pretty much viewed the EBB as you have - I just didn't take it one step further to ask what would make it worth while.
From one viewpoint an increase of attack dice by 33% is significant enough to take notice.

I am not sure if this case is unique or other such may be found. If one or two more such suggestions show up here we will have to start another experiment.

For this experiment I must adhere to the parameters of simple "over priced".

If somebody starts putting up info pointing out units that are "under priced", that would be another experiment. 

What about the Worthy? Do you agree or disagree?

[ajax98]

I agree that the Umenzi Worthy don't get played that much for all the listed reasons.
I would say that you were kinder to them than I.

I would bid (-30) to make them equal to Berserkers and I would probably still go with the Berserkers. But with that many points saved I could possibly get in a card or an upgrade to another unit.

It makes a good choice between no courage checking (something I greatly appreciate) and One more damage box in the green and over all. The always Close for the Berserkers is offset some what with the 6 Attk dice.

[Quelmotz]

I agree that the Umenzi Worthy don't get played that much for all the listed reasons.
I would say that you were kinder to them than I.

I would bid (-30) to make them equal to Berserkers and I would probably still go with the Berserkers. But with that many points saved I could possibly get in a card or an upgrade to another unit.

It makes a good choice between no courage checking (something I greatly appreciate) and One more damage box in the green and over all. The always Close for the Berserkers is offset some what with the 6 Attk dice.

I didn't want to "humiliate" them so much by reducing them to same cost as berserkers. After all, they're supposed to be "worth it".

[RushAss]

I didn't want to "humiliate" them so much by reducing them to same cost as berserkers. After all, they're supposed to be "worth it".

Cute 

The Worthy are not all that bad in and of themselves.  They are actually pretty good tanks.  IMO, The problem with them is that there is a huge points void between the Chosen at 381 and the Berserkers at 226 and the Worthy are the only units to fill that void.  When playing Umenzi, most players tend to use so many low point cost units (as they should) that when they decide to toss something potent into the mix, it's something REALLY potent like the Giant War Elephant or the Chosen because they can afford it.

I hardly use Worthy myself, but not because I feel they are over costed.  I think they stand up well to just about any other infantry unit in the mid-200 range.  I just find them to be an awkward fit when constructing an army when there are so many other options available.  Every faction has it's black sheep.

[GoIndy]

Worthy are overcosted?  You ever compare them to, like, every other races dudes that cost that much?

And they can be faith armored?

You have a tough sell in front of you telling me they should cost less.

[Quelmotz]

Worthy are overcosted?  You ever compare them to, like, every other races dudes that cost that much?

And they can be faith armored?

You have a tough sell in front of you telling me they should cost less.

See comparison with berserkers...

(5) 5/6 is crap compared with (6) 5/6, and berserkers never rout! 1/2 with 2/2 is a disadvantage, but it is evened out by the extra attack dice and unflappable courage. Controllability is nice, but who cares? I don't see anyone trying to maneuver a unit moving at the same speed as the rest of the army around the flank... Leadership range is nice, but the shamans and HPs usually handle that overly well. See my point?

IMO, if you want to fill in the gap between Worthy and Chosen, it'll make sense to upgrade worthy to (5) 6/6 or 2/3 or something like that. It'll still fall short of Chosen, but it is at least closer.

[GoIndy]

Right, I hear what you are saying, but have you compared this to every other races dudes that cost this much?

I'd say you should add 20 to the berserker way sooner than I would subtract 20 from the Worthy.

You also seem to be forgetting about the extra health, especially the extra green health, that the Worthy has, and you are dismissing his leadership completely.  I also think a unit with a +1 defense is much stronger than a unit with the 1 extra attack die, personally.  Ranged units will have a good time with the berserkers, so it's a good thing they don't rout, laugh.

[RushAss]

You also seem to be forgetting about the extra health, especially the extra green health, that the Worthy has, and you are dismissing his leadership completely.  I also think a unit with a +1 defense is much stronger than a unit with the 1 extra attack die, personally.  Ranged units will have a good time with the berserkers, so it's a good thing they don't rout, laugh.

3.5 leadership really can be dismissed.  It sucks.  It will only effect units adjacent to it and if they wander off a bit, the leadership is gone.  Remember that it's 3.5 inches from the unit's front center point.  I never, ever use Worthy for leadership.  Chosen maybe, but never Worthy.

That being said, I totally agree with the Worthy being costed just fine.  Quelmotz , if you want specific infantry units from other factions in that points range for comparison I'll supply a few.

Dwarven Hammermen, Battle Axemen
Ravenwood Bearkin
High Elf Rangers
Orc Spearmen
Hawk Greatswordsmen

I think Worthy fit in well with any of these dudes.  The Hawk Greatswordsmen are a bit stronger, but they are also 15 more points.

We've got to be careful before this thread turns into a "help the Worthy" thread

If anything, I hope that we can reach a points settlement on the Undead Skeleton units.  While I'd love to see the points adjusted on Dwarven Balistas, the Undead units in question are far more essential than the Balistas as they are 2/5 of the Undead's core units.

[Quelmotz]

You also seem to be forgetting about the extra health, especially the extra green health, that the Worthy has, and you are dismissing his leadership completely.  I also think a unit with a +1 defense is much stronger than a unit with the 1 extra attack die, personally.  Ranged units will have a good time with the berserkers, so it's a good thing they don't rout, laugh.

3.5 leadership really can be dismissed.  It sucks.  It will only effect units adjacent to it and if they wander off a bit, the leadership is gone.  Remember that it's 3.5 inches from the unit's front center point.  I never, ever use Worthy for leadership.  Chosen maybe, but never Worthy.

That being said, I totally agree with the Worthy being costed just fine.  Quelmotz , if you want specific infantry units from other factions in that points range for comparison I'll supply a few.

Dwarven Hammermen, Battle Axemen
Ravenwood Bearkin
High Elf Rangers
Orc Spearmen
Hawk Greatswordsmen

I think Worthy fit in well with any of these dudes.  The Hawk Greatswordsmen are a bit stronger, but they are also 15 more points.

We've got to be careful before this thread turns into a "help the Worthy" thread

If anything, I hope that we can reach a points settlement on the Undead Skeleton units.  While I'd love to see the points adjusted on Dwarven Balistas, the Undead units in question are far more essential than the Balistas as they are 2/5 of the Undead's core units.

Still, Worthy don't fit in well enough with the Umenzi. As far as I know, greatswordsmen, hammermen and rangers are all common in their respective armies, though not an auto include, but their "rarity" in an army is still better than Worthy. Orc Spearmen and Battleaxemen are also good, used reasonably often too. Ravenwood Bearkin aren't too good from the comments.

[ajax98]

...We've got to be careful before this thread turns into a "help the Worthy" thread

If anything, I hope that we can reach a points settlement on the Undead Skeleton units.  While I'd love to see the points adjusted on Dwarven Balistas, the Undead units in question are far more essential than the Balistas as they are 2/5 of the Undead's core units.

  "help the Worthy" thread

That might be 3/5 core for Skeletons?
UNDEAD   Skeleton Spearmen   (167)         142   (25)

UNDEAD   Skeleton Bowmen     (150)         125   (25)

My initial line of thought is still how close the difference is to the cost of a Command card. So its like opt for Skeleton Infantry units and get a free CC.

They are just so paper thin for damage. Their attack stats usually only last for the the first round of combat. So straight up the average is they last for 3 combat rounds.

[ajax98]

...  While I'd love to see the points adjusted on Dwarven Balistas, ...

DWARVES   Dwarven Ballista   (294)   269  (25)

I still think that getting a Command Card for an initial balancing is a good trade for starting.