Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rdhight
You could think of the one axis as "What will I get for a marker on this card after it's taken some fire?" By that reckoning, the Krav and 4th Mass, for instance, would indeed rank higher than the Airborne.
|
Yep.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rdhight
On the other axis, though... would you be counting up the synergy benefits received or only the benefits offered? Would someone like Ne-Gok-Sa, who receives boosts from SBN and Romans, get a bump? And what about double attackers and Deadly Shots who can double-dip on certain boosts?
|
I think I'd focus on Synergy Bonuses offered. Squads that
bond would have lower offensive potential than something like the
Airborne Elite, but the fact that they can bond would increase their synergy score.
Ne-Gok-Sa's most noteworthy trait would be his durability, but he might get a slight score boost in synergy based on the off-chance that Mindshackle could actually work.
Raelin would have the highest synergy score of any figure, because she's just that versatile.
Einar Imperium and
Omnicron Snipers wouldn't get much of a synergy score, but
Empress Kiova and
Taelord would.
One thing I keep thinking about is how to incorporate cost when looking at offensive and defensive ability.
Charos and
Q9 are both much tougher than
Deathreavers, but they also cost far more.
One idea I have is to use a simple formula:
(Number of figures or lives per card)*(10)*(Defense score)/(Point cost)+C= Durability (where C is a constant added for Common status of the card)
A similar formula could also be made for Offense.
Edit: Out of curiosity, I tested the formula out, with a value of 0 for C. (This gives no bias to common units.)
Deathreavers have a value of 4.0,
Q9 a value of 1.56, and
Charos a value of 2.14. The
AE have a value of .73. It might also be worthwhile to add in constants for certain special abilities, such as counterstrike, stealth dodge, and ninja disappear.