Custom Competition Balanced Unit Costs: Delta/Delta+

[The_X_Marker]

NEW THREAD FOR PLAYTESTING AND DELTA ACTION CLICK HERE

∆

You have yourself some prime HeroScape!

HeroScape Delta is an alternative unit cost system for Heroscape. This system is designed so you can play with the official figures the way they were written, but with an alternative cost system so all units are equally competitive.

HeroScape Delta+ is also an alternative unit cost system. This sister system is designed so that every credible figure, official and custom, can be played as written, but with an alternative cost system so all units are equally competitive.

The point costs of the same official units differ between Delta and Delta+ because Delta+ has the figures costs adjusted based on custom units as well as their standing officially.

Originally Posted by Typhon2222

I just don't want casual readers, or people interested in perhaps trying Delta for the first time, to think that it's only half-baked, or not 'tested' enough to be worth it. It's totally functional and totally worth it as it is, right now. It will just be even slightly MORE worth it, as a few prices here and there are adjusted.

Here's how to get started:

Spoiler Alert!

1- Sign up for HeroScape Delta play testing. Signing up is easy! Just respond to this thread with your chosen point total and armies.
2- Decide on which units you wish to play test with the current Delta points, and at which point total. More totals is better!
3- Post your findings of that unit at that point total, and give it a rating.
4- See step 2!

Each unit used will be rated on a scale of 1-10, following MegaSilvers Unit Debates method of unit rating, with a brief explanation on why that rating was chosen.

A cost will be raised, lowered, or left alone depending on the results. No unit will be raised too much or lowered too little at a time.

1. Playability at Point Value
2. Overall Usefulness
3. Better or Worse at Point Value
4. Army Builds
5. Best Strategic Use
6. Situational Usefulness
7. Best Format for this Value

Points are optimized for any point total between 400 and 600, but any total desired is welcome.

It's easy!

Important Note

We who are truly pushing for HeroScape Delta are not pushing it as a fix. It is not a fix to anything. It is a point customization idea that we wish everyone would try once in a while.

FAQ

Spoiler Alert!

What is HeroScape Delta?

Excellent question! As Heroscape is now out of print, and only custom units are getting released, for those who want another new addition, Delta is it. It is the seasonal, evolving game, where point costs change from season to season.

What is HeroScape Delta Plus?

This is simply the change in prices with customs added. The customs help the old units in many ways, so a separate point list should be made to keep it all compatible.

So, you just want to spit in the face of the games designers?

No, not at all. While we realize that tournament play was not at the front of the designers minds, we do also realize that a few of the units are not even balanced for the scenarios in the game guides. Looking at the tournaments of past years does show that many units who perform well, show up consistently in the top spots, while those that perform good, but not as well, either aren't represented or are underrepresented.

There are other ways to add variety. Ever heard of the CUC, SOV, C3V, or more than just a Kill'em'All format?

While this is true, each of these has their own problems, some of which maintain the lack of variety in games.
CUC- How many tournaments are allowing CUC? It is a bold effort, but many of the complaints of Legacy also apply to CUC. Where, instead of just changing a point value, they change stats and abilities.
SoV,C3V- The customs are incredibly well done. That said, there are more people who don't play them for many reasons. The unofficial feel, monetary need, and the availability of figures are a few.
Formats- Probably the best way to balance figures at this point is the Reverse the Whip format. Other formats sway who is the best unit depending on the format. Another note is that if more formats are made, than they will have overlapping elements of previous formats.

How can you expect perfect balance? It wont happen!

We do not expect perfect balance, but rather a more rich variety of armies in any given scenario or format that can do just as well, with their new point values, as any other unit in the format.

This system is too hard, my group won't deal with it.

The system is as easy as it is now to make an army. Just look up point values of units you wish to use, and total them to the point total that is needed.
If you don't want to though, you don't have to follow the system, no big deal.

This system is inefficient, it takes too long to play test. Why use it?

The system moves faster as the amount of play testers goes up. A unit doesn't have to be play tested every season, it can be play tested in one, than skipped over as another unit is tested. And, we're testing whole armies, so the amount of units tested per game may be quite a bit.

The Current Points

This is our starting block, where every unit will be tested from for the 2012-2013 season. This season will end when Winter ends.

Each season is a normal season. The units who are played will be updated every Winter and Summer, as the results come in.

The short hand for the current prices is (First letter of the Season, either 1 for Northern Hemisphere Winter, or 2 for Northern Hemisphere Summer).(Iteration of the points, which is the number of iterations there has been).(The year it was implemented)

So for the Summer of 2014 rules, it would be 2.3.14.

Point Cost Spreadsheets

Delta 1.1.12


Delta+ 1.1.12

_______________________________________________


DELTA/+ ARMY BUILDER

_____________________________________________________
How We Function

Spoiler Alert!

We have started to gain traction in the forums, so we need a form to our madness. Anyone can join as long as they are honestly willing to play test units.
During the season, we pick which units, that were tested thus far, need a point boost, dock, or neutral change, and we vote.

Voting is simple. The person who tested the unit must submit a change idea, I must vote, and other members of the forum, who are reputable, and are not against Delta, must vote.

___________________________________________________
How to Propose Changes

Spoiler Alert!

My proposal:

Delta:
Warden 816 70 --->80
Granite Guardians 95 ---> 80

Take note on how the higher number is always Red. The lower number is always Dark Green. This shows the change of gaining or losing value easier. Also, the proposed value is always Bold.
____________________________________________________
We wish not to leave anybody out, as keeping people out of the loop creates friction and dissent, so anyone can join. If it comes to it, we will establish a voting council, which consists of myself and 4 other members, who will be the final say in every change that is brought up.

Delta Quote of the Now

Originally Posted by belrix

There were many competitive games and mostly rare armies. 5 of us who practiced together the week before the Tourney ran 3 armies that would never be at a tourney without Legacy/Delta. I'll take 60% new armies over rehashes of Glads vs. Gruts.

Our Goals

Spoiler Alert!

The goal of this committee is to bring balance and variety to all official units. We hope that one day the disparity between A+ units and F units is gone, as all will be played almost equally on the battlefield. By evolving the points each unit costs, we can further enhance the balance of each unit.

We also hope to integrate the customs of C3V and SoV as soon as support for this picks up.

Imagine a war story where Anubian wolves were the most valuable unit of that game, it may be a stretch now, but with Delta, it is going to be possible.

This concludes, for now, our look into HeroScape Delta, any and all are welcome to try it, as long as they try it!

Regards,
The X Marker
HeroScape Delta Director

[kolakoski]

Well met!

From a recent post/blog:

P.S.: I am pleased that there is renewed interest in the Legacy point system, as evidenced by the recent discussion, and the formation of the Legacy Committee. I will suggest to chas (and Taeblewalker, if he attends) that we use Legacy for this game, and will stipulate its use for games I host for the foreseeable future.

I don't know how much "official" testing/reporting will go on, but, to the extent possible, you have my full support. I will suggest to the rest of The Gang of Four that we use Legacy when they are hosting, but whether they choose to do so is, of course, up to them.

[Codeman]

So your plan is to keep the winter 2010 Legacy Points intact and not "tweek" them until after the winter of 2013?

[The_X_Marker]

Cornpuff never went past that in his point values. I believe that it is the best place to start off. The updated points will be presented in the beginning of spring of 2013. Which is also the end of the upcoming winter.

Sent from my Kyocera Loft.

[Codeman]

Originally Posted by The_X_Marker

Cornpuff never went past that in his point values. I believe that it is the best place to start off. The updated points will be presented in the beginning of spring of 2013. Which is also the end of the upcoming winter.

Sent from my Kyocera Loft.

Just wanted to know how long the posted legacy points are valid... don't want people playing with too many different versions.

Of those of you who have been playing with the 2010 Winter legacy points... do they need to be "tweeked" very much? How much of a change do you think there will be left to do?

[MegaSilver]

Hmm, interesting to see my Unit Debates method being used to compare new vs. old. Novel, indeed.

Carry on.

[The_X_Marker]

Originally Posted by kolakoski

Well met!

From a recent post/blog:

P.S.: I am pleased that there is renewed interest in the Legacy point system, as evidenced by the recent discussion, and the formation of the Legacy Committee. I will suggest to chas (and Taeblewalker, if he attends) that we use Legacy for this game, and will stipulate its use for games I host for the foreseeable future.

I don't know how much "official" testing/reporting will go on, but, to the extent possible, you have my full support. I will suggest to the rest of The Gang of Four that we use Legacy when they are hosting, but whether they choose to do so is, of course, up to them.

Thank you for your support. It may not seem like you 4 are a lot, but if each of you plays just one 500 point army with Legacy, assuming an average of 4 unit types per army, it would be a play test of 16 units per game. That adds up, almost exponentially.

Originally Posted by MegaSilver

Hmm, interesting to see my Unit Debates method being used to compare new vs. old. Novel, indeed.

Carry on.

Ah, so it was you who invented it! Wasn't sure, but it couldn't have been done without your own novel idea. Credited!

[flameslayer93]

It might be interesting to have 1 rather good army go against 1 rather crummy army using Legacy points. Just to see what sort of gap there is.

[The_X_Marker]

Originally Posted by flameslayer93

It might be interesting to have 1 rather good army go against 1 rather crummy army using Legacy points. Just to see what sort of gap there is.

That is to be done as well. So far, there seems to be no difference in playing any of the armies, as compared to how they were played under Vanilla.

But wow! The spider army rocked so far! They get +2 move, +1 attack with positioning, and just roll through with the Wyverns. This seems to be their optimal army.

I'll post reports and such as soon as possible, as well as the unit comparisons.

[Typhon2222]

So glad to see this revived!

My gaming group in Berkeley played extensively with the Legacy pricing system. In fact, many of them never played with anything other! (Mainly because our group of 7-8 always played solely with my 'Scape stuff, and I instituted Legacy early on. Many of them learned the game with Legacy pricing.)

Our general opinion was that it may have been a bit conservative. I know others who played with Legacy felt the same. It didn't do quite enough to lift the bottom-of-the-barrel units up.

At some point, CornPuff produced a second, revised, version of his Legacy pricing, which he called Legacy: Evolution. It was more radical. Probably a bit too radical.


So... I'm glad to see that you're starting with the earlier (less extreme) price list.

[The_X_Marker]

Originally Posted by Typhon2222

So glad to see this revived!

Our general opinion was that it may have been a bit conservative.

At some point, CornPuff produced a second, revised, version of his Legacy pricing, which he called Legacy: Evolution. It was more radical. Probably a bit too radical.


So... I'm glad to see that you're starting with the earlier (less extreme) price list.

Well thanks for the support!

It starts conservative, but we're hoping that it will be more realistic in future patches.

Evolution was way, way too radical. I really don't forsee any unit going past the 230 point mark that isn't a Marvel figure.

Give this time, and I'll be sure to have it be less conservative feeling. Even if it takes months, it will be worth the wait.

EDIT: I'm doing extensive play testing on many armies. Please be patient as I don't want to bog down this forum with posts of one match at a time.
The four armies posted are going to be played for between 7 and 12 games each, versing each other army an equal number of times.

It's also not going to be actual battle reports. Just general feels and thoughts on each army, as they are played.

[Just_a_Bill]

Fascinating concept. I was vaguely aware of "Legacy" some time last year but really only started paying attention to it now. I think it's a great idea, and fully concur with the apparent goals of blowing the dust off the embrace-the-suck units, increasing the number of viable builds, and indeed perhaps moving past that toward a place where we no longer even think in terms of a "number" of viable builds, but rather just a sea of build types that yield a seemingly endless potential for different viable armies.

Having said that, now I'm going to just rush the china shop with a few observations, opinions, and preferences, recognizing full well that it's easy for me to sit here and opine when other folks have been doing (and will continue to do) the hard work to make all this goodness happen.

I've read this entire thread, but did not go back to the Legacy threads, so some of what I'm about to say may have already been suggested or refuted. Apologies in advance.

Conservative/Liberal Approach?

When there is some doubt about the adjustment for a unit (such as the inevitable 5-point vacillating that happens at the end of an adjustment phase), I would recommend erring toward the adjustment that is slightly larger in magnitude, meaning err on the side of overcompensating by aggressively pushing units toward the center. If you do this and it went 5 points too far, it should show up in the next interval's games, and then can easily be scaled back toward the original value. But if you don't quite go far enough, then next time around it might not be perfectly clear if it needs another offset of 5 or 10 (or possibly more), combined with the fact that what I will call "interest fatigue" tends to make people less excited about balancing the same unit yet again in the same direction.

The iterative process you're already using (stepwise convergence on an ideal value over time) is great for this; I'm just suggesting that you not feel compelled to try to "sneak up on it and nail it." Instead, feel free to "go past the mark" just a bit and then adjust backwards in the next phase. This may help you find true equilibrium in fewer steps, and could be more fun as well (or at least produce a few wacky stories to tell our grandnerds).

List Merge

I would recommend against the idea of merging Delta and Plus into a single list, unless this just means one list with two columns. I think it's important to preserve the hard-fought values that seem to be serving Classic so well. Not that I am against the customs! On the contrary, I already own some, have purchased figures that I expect to get released as customs someday, and want to start tracking down the customs that I can make from the figures I already own.

But I know for a fact that I (like many [most?] others) will never have all the customs. It's not feasible from a financial or time-investment standpoint, and there are some I just don't want for aesthetic reasons. Anyway, if the lists get merged and the classic-based numbers get lost, or averaged, then Delta isn't really doing the job it set out to do for those of us who don't have the Cool Custom Heroman unit that "fixes" the Classic Derpies squad so it doesn't need an adjustment (or only needs a tiny one).

Fortunately, it seems that the number of classic units which are different between Delta and Plus (as of this writing) is quite small:

Unit Name           Delta    Plus
Deathwalker 7000       65      70
Deathwalker 8000      100     120
Deathwalker 9000      110     130
Emirroon               75      80
Gorillinators          75      85
Iskra Esenwein         40      45
Jorhdawn               95     100
Morsbane               90      95
Omnicron Snipers      100     110
Warden 816             70      85
Werewolf Lord         130     140

This seems to suggest that there could be a single list that provides Delta costs for classic units in one column, Plus costs for custom units in another, and costs in both columns when considering the expanded universe of figures causes a classic unit to have two different valuations (the 11 current special cases). Here's a sample of what one chunk of the list might look like, but I may have to make up some phony hypothetical new units since I'm not familiar enough with the customs:

Unit Name               Delta  Plus  Explanation for Difference
Valguard                   95    --
Van Nessing                --   110
Varkaanan Blade Dancers    --    75
Venoc Vipers               45    --
Venoc Warlord             125    --
Venom                     165    --
Vulcanmech Incendiborgs    --   200
Warden 816                 70    85  Zettian Infantry
Warforged Soldiers         85    --
Warriors of Ashra          50    --
Water Elemental            35    --
Werewolf Lord             130   140  Van Nessing; Sloggedy Bitterbottom
White Wyrmling             30    --
Wo-Sa-Ga                  125    --
Wolves of Badru            70    --
Wyvern                     95    --

This format would seem super-useful for me. As a person who owns some customs but not others, I can quickly tell what Warden 816's cost should be at my table based on whether I do or do not own the Zettian Infantry custom that makes the Warden more playable.

I wouldn't suggest this if it introduced hordes of complexity to manage; but since there are only (currently) eleven units with price differences, and it's presumably well-understood by everyone here (except me) which custom units account for those differences, it seems fairly easy to add this information. And indeed, it would prove very enlightening to a person coming new into all this to be able to see right away which units help the classic units, just for their own understanding of the Delta system or — more importantly — as a helpful pointer to the specific customs they may want to consider acquiring.

There's also the documentation benefit: during future discussions of unit costs, it's a great way to remind the committee of the exact custom units that need to be considered when a new adjustment change is being proposed to one of those classic units.

It does make the formulas in the Google Docs spreadsheet a little more complex, and for the army builder may suggest some "checkoff cells" where a player can tick off the units he does and doesn't have, so as to fine-tune which valuation he wants to use for the 11 units that have two prices.

End State?

One goal of this effort is clearly to work toward a theoretical "perfection" of unit costs, based on 100% clarity of hindsight across official units and with new insight gained from custom units. That quest will never end in Delta+, assuming new units keep coming, but in classic Delta we would expect it to reach an end or point of diminishing returns.

Once that point arrives, I would propose some "intentional perturbations" be imposed on a not-too-frequent basis. Let's call this "Delta Squiggle" (Delta~ or ∆~) as a temporary placeholder. This would be a series of intentional un-balancing adjustments relative to the established, final-state delta values, designed simply to introduce freshness into the play environment for those who want to use Squiggle. This could, for example, make a few old favorites unfavorable for a short time (three months? I dunno), as well as make other less-favored units become overly strong and humorously popular during that time frame. Then when the time period is over, things go back to normal, or a different set of Squiggle incentives and disincentives come into play. Just a thought. Probably getting ahead of myself on this one. Not trying to undo your work; just spinning out an idea for another variant based on the "near-perfect balance" I think you will eventually achieve.

Okay, that's enough TL;DR for one night.