So this was an idea I had posited on the /tg/ (Traditional Games) section of 4chan last night, and I’m curious to hear your feedback about the idea. This is a meeting of two different projects I’ve had brewing in the back of my mind for a while, and matching them up seems like it could produce something wonderful. I love the setting of 40K, but the game balance leaves me cold, and I think something like this could really help it
The Elevator Pitch:
In essence, 40K Mishmash (Name up for change) allows you to play 40K with any 3e codex or afterwards, against an army from any other codex and/or edition. This is purposefully designed to include as few errata and rule revamps as humanely possible, as I’ve noticed that the more changes you make to a set of common rules, the less likely everyone is to accept or adopt them.
Underlying all of this is the Point Feedback System (PFS). This is a fancy term for a series of forms (Probably through Google Docs) where players can vote on whether they think armies, units, and/or wargear are over/undercosted. Through this feedback, eventually a happy medium of point costs would be reached for all of the armies, meaning they would be balanced to such a point that they could be played against each other without worrying about tabling your opponent due to a model being over or undercosted.
Firstly, the reason the Mishmash Project would use only 3e or later codexes is because the 2e and Rogue Trader rules were insanity. Fun insanity, but so incredibly jumbled and contradictory that I highly doubt they would even begin to mesh cleanly with any of the later codices or rules (A favorite example is Chainfists, which had a huge Armor Piercing value that included rolling at least three different dice, one of which was a d20!). 3e really cleaned everything up and set a baseline that the later editions have followed, more or less.
The point balancing will have several layers. Initially, the Google Forms will only be available for the uppermost layers, but moving to the more detailed layers when the voting indicates that it is needed.
The layers will look like the following, with the uppermost layer first
- Army Cost as a Whole
- Individual Unit Selection Costs
- Individual Unit Wargear Options Costs
People could access the forms and vote for whether they think a choice is:
- Too cheaply costed (Undercosted, which would adjust the point cost upwards)
- Too highly costed (Overcosted, which would adjust the point cost downwards)
- Costed just right (Goldilocks zone, no change to point cost)
- Costed right overall, but units/wargear need price adjustments
The first two options would adjust prices up or down, and this would be divided out over the total number of votes. For example, if 40 people say the price is Too High, 50 Say it’s Too Low, and 10 say it’s Just Right, the balance of votes is 10 towards Too Low. 10 divided by 100 total votes gives 10%, so the point costs would increase for that choice by 10%.
If another 100 people voted, and the new votes were 45 for Too High, 45 for Too Low, and another 10 for Just Right, the totals are 85 Too High, 95 Too Low, and 20 Just Right. This makes for 10 votes towards Too Low, over a total of 200 votes, making the point change now an increase of 5% instead.
If enough votes are garnered to indicate that a codex needs internal point balancing, then I would break out a new Form for that particular army codex and start tallying votes there. If at that point there are enough votes indicating that a unit choice needs internal balancing with wargear and such (If options are costed so cheaply they are always taken, or so expensive they are never taken)
For ease of play, the change in points to an army as a whole would just change the points they can build a list from (So if they have enough Too High cost votes to indicate a 10% change, a player with that army would build their army with 2,200 points instead for a 2000 point game)
The wargear and unit costs would be multiplied together to get the change for a wargear option. For example, if a unit’s cost is indicated to go up by 50% (x1.5) but one of their wargear options should decrease by 50% (x0.5), the actual change to that wargear’s cost would be x0.75 (1.5*0.5).
This system is built on the idea of “the player knows best.” It’s designed to help account for changes in the meta that a lone author would never be able to predict (For example, Tyranid Warriors high cost when viewed in light of a meta with high volumes of S8 Instant-Death-inflicting weapons).
The nice thing about the point cost system is it requires literally no new rules. All you need is a printoff of the point changes and the codex of your choice!
So what are your thoughts about a system like this? Would you be interested in participating?