Are mercenary solo's/units shunned in your local gaming area ?

[Trygle]

But you're still considering the "undercosted" model's price in a vacuum, and as long as you do, you won't understand my entire point. So there's no point in discussing it with you further.

What is a point cost for?

What is the purpose of point costs if you are only allowed one item?

What is the purpose of variable point costs?

These things are given points costs to value them and weight them across the rest of the items in the game. There is your answer.

[ReaverQueen]

But, but Skaldi!

[HeadHunter]

These things are given points costs to value them and weight them across the rest of the items in the game. There is your answer.

You play an ARMY list - a list with a total number of points. You're not playing a model by itself, though that's what you're evaluation of an "undercosted" model's points cost is when you assess it in a vaccum. You continue to disregard the fact that most of the model's benefits are meaningless unless they're applied to another model or unit - at which point one must consider the total cost of the models to determine if the points are worth it.

I'm not seeking an "answer" - I'm trying to explain an underlying principle of army composition, in any game like this.

[Trygle]

You play an ARMY list - a list with a total number of points. You're not playing a model by itself, though that's what you're evaluation of an "undercosted" model's points cost is when you assess it in a vaccum. You continue to disregard the fact that most of the model's benefits are meaningless unless they're applied to another model or unit - at which point one must consider the total cost of the models to determine if the points are worth it.

I'm not seeking an "answer" - I'm trying to explain an underlying principle of army composition, in any game like this.

Tell me. Tell me how you evaluate models into a list. You have made me curious as to how you do it.

[ReaverQueen]

lol this is bound to be good.

[The Sentinel]

Tell me. Tell me how you evaluate models into a list. You have made me curious as to how you do it.

As you build a list, you realize what roles you need to fill to achieve your desired win conditions and you choose models to fill those roles from the choices you have available.

That sounds simple because it is simple.

The important thing to realize is the best lists aren't made by simply filling your points allotment with the best or most cost-effective units in a vacuum but as they relate to your list.

[joelker41]

I dunno about other factions, but Mercs are generally the better price per model *and* better ROI than Cygnar faction options. Nyss, for example, are a better unit than the Long Gunners at the same cost. Forge Guard are a slightly longer melee threat range and better armor than Storm Blades for a discount on the full unit. Sword Knights tie the Steelhead Halberdiers for point cost, but the latter unit is generally more useful. Etc.

Virtually all factions have better infantry than Cygnar. I used to play them, and the other 4 factions I played (Ret, Gators, Mercs, and Khador) all had way better infantry.

Cygnar s strength isn't infantry, but we all knew that.

[Trygle]

As you build a list, you realize what roles you need to fill to achieve your desired win conditions and you choose models to fill those roles from the choices you have available.

That sounds simple because it is simple.

The important thing to realize is the best lists aren't made by simply filling your points allotment with the best or most cost-effective units in a vacuum but as they relate to your list.

Yes I understand that. I want Headhunter to answer.

If there is a role for a model that is consistently usurped by a model with a lower point cost, then is that model undercosted for it's role.

[HeadHunter]

It's simple. Some models work better with certain units than they do with others. Character X may work better with unit Y than Unit Z. Even if the raw points cost is the same for each combination, the effectiveness for each may vary. One force may not benefit measurably at all, another may become more powerful. But since those results cannot be predicted solely on the standalone evaluation of either the character or the unit, one cannot conclusively state that X or Y or Z is "overcosted" or "undercosted".

As an example, would you say that eSorscha would perform as well in an all-MoW army as she would in a WGDS army with a Marauder or Juggernaut? Obviously, she doesn't. So it becomes abundantly clear that one model's effectiveness depends greatly upon what other models it is paired with. In a broader example, a character that gives bonuses to ranged combat may seem "undercosted" if you're using it in an all-shooty army, but it's underpowered if misused in an all-melee force.

Stop being so obstinate and ignoring the point. The Sentinel illustrated the point just as clearly. If you still can't see that, go look for your answer elsewhere, because you obviously won't find it here. Sorry.

[The Sentinel]

Why is it a problem if a mercenary unit or solo does a role well and is therefore taken often by the factions that have access to it?

Isn't that the point of mercenaries in the first place?

Would it really be better if every faction had their own Eiryss (or whatever) equivalent? If so, should they be functionally identical and only different in name and figure or should they be a little different? If they should all be a little different to make them unique, wouldn't everyone complain that they'd rather have some other faction's version?

[Panzeh]

I can say, straight up, that Cygnar generally pays a premium on marginal units because of having a lot of unit buffs across some very good casters, and mercs generally aren't paying that premium. Ret, for example, would appear overpowered because their units are just plain good compared to similar units in mercs or just about any other faction(except for houseguard rifles). Of course, the thing is, the Ret casters can't really provide much support for them.

While you can't look at models and units in a vacuum, you can look at the capabilities of a unit, the buffs available, and the point costs, and get a good idea of how worth it a unit is. I know there are a lot of people who want to say this game is totally balanced, and I think it actually is fairly well balanced, but some units just plain suck, or can be had better from mercs. I wish all shooters in warmachine didn't have to measure up against Nyss Hunters, but here we are.

[Trygle]

It's simple. Some models work better with certain units than they do with others. Character X may work better with unit Y than Unit Z. Even if the raw points cost is the same for each combination, the effectiveness for each may vary. One force may not benefit measurably at all, another may become more powerful. But since those results cannot be predicted solely on the standalone evaluation of either the character or the unit, one cannot conclusively state that X or Y or Z is "overcosted" or "undercosted".

As an example, would you say that eSorscha would perform as well in an all-MoW army as she would in a WGDS army with a Marauder or Juggernaut? Obviously, she doesn't. So it becomes abundantly clear that one model's effectiveness depends greatly upon what other models it is paired with. In a broader example, a character that gives bonuses to ranged combat may seem "undercosted" if you're using it in an all-shooty army, but it's underpowered if misused in an all-melee force.

There we go. Substance, even if a bit.

You have to evaluate a model for a role it has been given. As a game designer, You have to place a point cost on a model. You have to make the decision. You can;t just go all Socratic and claim there can't be one. So now that your hand is forced... How would you go about it?

In order to proceed you need to make a comparison. Less then , greater than, and equal are necessary atomic values to make this comparison. So there has to exist something you can compare it's cost to, or else the entire point system is meaningless.

Sorscha has no point cost, so I'm afraid your comparison doesn't work.

For the solo that buffs shooting only:

You should evaluate the model on the basis of the strongest combination first.
If it is costed to anything less than it's full potential then we will end up with something like Kovnik Joe and Bane Lord Tartarus.
If we cost things to the average we run the same risk.

[Varius]

Isn't that the point of mercenaries in the first place?

Why dont we just scrap faction and have just casters with whatever mercenaries they can take?

I mean, that would be fine right?

[ReaverQueen]

Ideally Mercenaries would operate with less overall power and less cost to the benefit of HUGE games. So at like 300 pts you go, wow, we ran out of WGI, well these Steelhead Riflemen aren't as good as our men, but this major assault requires them. Let's hire them!

In practice, however, FA escalates with Warcasters which escalate in game pt cap. So at 300 pts you have an FA of something like 9 on WGI, so you really CAN take tonnes of them.



Like if Mercs had a unit of Risen as an option. Not even with Alexia. Just a mob of 10 Risen for like 2 points. Just saturate the board with hundreds of Risen. They'd statistically suck really hard, but they'd be dirt cheap and endless as mercs ought to be.

[Trygle]

Why is it a problem if a mercenary unit or solo does a role well and is therefore taken often by the factions that have access to it?

Isn't that the point of mercenaries in the first place?

I honestly thought the point of mercenaries was to add flavor to the game through the patching of holes in a factions original line-up. Meaning that roles that were not fulfilled in the original faction could be alleviated through merc choices.

I feel that some mercenaries supersede in-faction choices at a cheaper cost for the same role is just an unfortunate screw-up. Could have been alleviated in MKII but instead as made worse as granularity in the point system was greatly reduced.

[Defenstrator]

I can say, straight up, that Cygnar generally pays a premium on marginal units because of having a lot of unit buffs across some very good casters,

I think this is a myth that is used to try and justify the amount of mediocre infantry Cygnar has. I don't believe it for a couple of reasons. The first is that if it's true someone forgot to tell the game designers. Both Kara Sloan and Constance Blaize should be more powerful if they are supposed to be carrying the army.

The other reason is that Cryx has a bunch of warcasters that are just as powerful as what Cygnar is bringing to the table but also have much of the best infantry in the game.

[Northern Ronin]

I'm something of a faction purist myself, and even I have a Thrullg (just because I like the Model, I'd use him more if he was any good), and I've got no problem with anyone running as many mercs as they like. Legion just dons't get that many hire'ed hands. Once your employees realize you're never going to pay them, and just blight them instead, it's hard to get new folks wanting to sign on . . .

Anyone who tries to push this faction purity standard on anyone else should read page 5, and then be ejected from the LGS.

[HeadHunter]

Sorscha has no point cost, so I'm afraid your comparison doesn't work.

You really are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees. I don't know if you're incapable of anything but literal thinking, or if you just "don't get it". Regardless, I'm done trying to reason with you. It's obviously impossible. Easier to just ignore you going forth.

[Trygle]

You really are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees. I don't know if you're incapable of anything but literal thinking, or if you just "don't get it". Regardless, I'm done trying to reason with you. It's obviously impossible. Easier to just ignore you going forth.

Nice talking to ya! See ya around.

Your words are different than most, and your jabs are very well written. Honestly had they been more to the point and blunt we would have seen more moderation.

[Runewyse]

I liked Mercenaries better when their kills didn't count for victory points. Coin helped you with the battle, but didn't help you win the war, or favor, or reputation. Eiryss kept all that for herself. How's that for original flavor and intent?

[Raktra]

Hey! They used to be popular, I swear! :P

@Raktra: converted Menoth? Are you doing an army of the old faith list, like from that one insider?

Evil Menoth . I'll stick some pictures up on MPAM when I get a working camera.

[The Sentinel]

I honestly thought the point of mercenaries was to add flavor to the game through the patching of holes in a factions original line-up. Meaning that roles that were not fulfilled in the original faction could be alleviated through merc choices.

The fact that some mercenaries supersede in-faction choices at a cheaper cost for the same role is just an unfortunate screw-up. Could have been alleviated in MKII but instead as made worse as granularity in the point system was greatly reduced.

can you cite your sources for it being a screwup?

[The Sentinel]

The other reason is that Cryx has a bunch of warcasters that are just as powerful as what Cygnar is bringing to the table but also have much of the best infantry in the game.

maybe you should play cryx if you don't like cygnar

[The Sentinel]

Why dont we just scrap faction and have just casters with whatever mercenaries they can take?

I mean, that would be fine right?

doesn't sound fun to me

[sleet01]

Nice talking to ya! See ya around.

Your words are different than most, and your jabs are very well written. Honestly had they been more to the point and blunt we would have seen more moderation.

That's got to be the kindest accusation of mealy-mouthed weasel-wording I've ever read. Brought a tear to my eye. ^_^

[Varius]

doesn't sound fun to me

That is essentially what is happening in Cygnar. So how is it ok? Just because it is Cygnar? Or because it isnt you?

[The Sentinel]

That is essentially what is happening in Cygnar. So how is it ok? Just because it is Cygnar? Or because it isnt you?

no one is making you abandon Cygnar faction units

Cygnar seems fine to me

[Varius]

no one is making you abandon Cygnar faction units

Cygnar seems fine to me

So its fine that merc units are better than cygnar ones, but cygnar units are fine?

[Deo85]

Its interesting that Cygnar is given such hate in there infantry yet I have not run into one Cygnar player who takes merc units in place of there in faction options. yep Templar knights / storm blades / gun mages are just awful you know...*shrugs* On the matter at hand Mercs offer players a chance to fill in the holes or diversify there army line up allowing you the chance to bring more combos instead of being pidgin holed into certain builds.

I find it vary sad that people would go as fare as giving other players guff for for taking the tools that enhance there enjoyment in a game that is not there responsibility to design or maintain. Lets face it we are playing with little toy soldiers on a make believe battle field as grown men? Do we rly have any leg to stand on to give guff on what toy the other guys got across our make believe battle field? Now ware your damn tin foil hat and deal with it!


As for the page long debate between Trygle and HeadHunter pnts seem to be a bit miss leading in units especially when I have access to 10 models for 5 measly pnts and they can be re cycled for another 2 pnts... go go CRYX! Vacuum discussions are silly...

Yes I see a lot of the same Merc in many faction lists but they all serve a purpose and sorry that PP has not come up with clones of these models in every faction that would be just as boring also. Here are a few I constantly see:

Nyss Hunters - You want CRA range unit with decent survivability cool
Gorman - You need to handle rly rough models or need to help your guys crack armor
Eiriss - sniping solos or putting jacks out of commission is a great lever to pull
Piper - You want to buff your infantry to survive better
Saxin Oric - Help get those models get through rough terrain

These all serve great niches that help complement any army that needs those gaps glued up or just want to enhance there army options. If you decides that your not interested in the tools don't go persecuting every guy who decides to use their hammer to pound in a nail just because you found some cool rock on the side of the rode.

[The Sentinel]

So its fine that merc units are better than cygnar ones, but cygnar units are fine?

some cygnar units are better than some merc units

different units have different strengths and weaknesses which suits them to work in different types of lists and roles

I don't feel like I have to take a lot of merc units

but even if I did, I'm not convinced that's a bad thing

I haven't seen a single rational argument to support that idea

[PG_Nemlock]

Partially the funniest part about all this is I think about Ret, and the celebrations they would throw if they suddenly had access to Boomhowler. Meanwhile Cygnar is upset because they feel they need to take it in some lists.

[Varius]

some cygnar units are better than some merc units

I don't feel like I have to take a lot of merc units

but even if I did, I'm not convinced that's a bad thing

I haven't seen a single rational argument to support that idea

Aside from gun mages I would tend to disagree.

[Varius]

Partially the funniest part about all this is I think about Ret, and the celebrations they would throw if they suddenly had access to Boomhowler. Meanwhile Cygnar is upset because they feel they need to take it in some lists.

Ah, but if we start getting to compare factions, we would get yelled at that factions are different, so you cant compare them. But at the same time, we could compare Cygnar and Merc units to Cryx/Menoth units, and realize that the problem is even worse then we thought.

[The Sentinel]

Aside from gun mages I would tend to disagree.

can you point me to these arguments?

[Mod_Gemini]

Let's keep this civil and keep the discussion on the topic at hand. No more remarks about "trolling" or this thread gets locked. This is the only warning.

[Trygle]

can you cite your sources for it being a screwup?

Sorry I should not have said screw-up for that one. I can't claim to know what the intention for mercs were, I just know the from what I have picked up in the reading.

I'll correct it in a bit.

[Breadsmith]

If Merc. units are so good, why are Merc. lists taken up with Kayazy, Gun Mages and even Long Gunners? The Nyss are better than your shooting unit because they are a character unit. Character units tend to be better at what they do than mundane run of the mill units.

[ReaverQueen]

And like 90% of Mercs are characters. That's the thing.


Again, it's a lack of the pt structure of the game supporting the inherent limitations of the units. Nyss are FA C which is a major restraint. If you're playing a 200 pt game you only get 1 unit of Nyss. Period. The hassle is, no one really plays that point level, not competitively anyway. So that restriction or artificial balance doesn't really come into play.


It's especially interesting and potentially troublesome where the character units have specific roles. Like Boomhowler & Co as tarpits. You only need the one tarpit unit, so you might as well take the one that can have solid 4, 5 , 6 Tough all the time. You're never going to need more than the one unit. Then you want a shooting element, so you can grab Nyss. You don't need 2 major shooting units or 2 major tarpits so the FA C element barely factors.



Reasonably, character restrictions help with this whole mess. Only being able to have said units in 1 list out of 2 or 3. That doesn't really effect casual play though.

[Asp]

So tired of seeing Nyss in most any army that can field them. So rarely seen before MKII, now they are everywhere, naturally it's not the boost in effectiveness that drove this change...

[MagnustheJust]

So tired of seeing Nyss in most any army that can field them. So rarely seen before MKII, now they are everywhere, naturally it's not the boost in effectiveness that drove this change...

Nyss Hunters were just as awesome back in the dark days of MK-I...

They just were willing to work for a smaller list of fart nozzles back then.