A theory about points

[gorillanator]

I think that if you are playing in a game where the objective is destroying all the opponent's figures, that no matter what card you pick, if it destroys it's point total in points, it was points well spent.

For example:

I pick the Marro Warriors (50), and my opponent picks Marrden Hounds (90)

If my Warriors kill a Hound they get 30 points(90 points divided by 3 hounds)

So if my Warriors kill 2 Hounds then they have destroyed a total of 60 points which is ten over there total, therefore, the Warriors killed a little over 1x there point total.

An example of not picking a good army card is this:

I pick Sgt. Drake(110) while my opponent takes the Venoc Vipers(40)
My opponent's Vipers land the first turn frenzying like crazy until Sgt. Drake is defeated. The Vipers amazingly killed 2.7x there point total which means they were good points spent while Sgt. Drake was not.


Your thoughts on this theory?

[cbs42]

Well, yeah. If you keep a higher point to point kill ratio than your opponent, you will win the game (assuming it's a last-man-standing affair).

Most of my buddies and I use premade armies, so we rarely use the drafting system. It seems that the point-kill-ratio idea would be best applied in a draft situation where you can respond to your opponent's choices with units to specifically counter his. Of course, he'll be doing the same thing to you...

[Jason]

This isn't always true. Raelin will almost never kill 80 points worth of figures in a game yet she is awesome. Here is another example. Say your Mimring Kills their Alistair and then dies. Point wise you are -40 but by killing him you made all their McDirk Warriors pretty crappy.

[gorillanator]

Aw your right, I thought I had something going.

I'll have to try to develop some kind of point total for synergies and things like Raelin/Taelord/Saylind

[AbducteeLeader]

Thing thing that you have to remember about counter drafting, is that even though all your units may be able to counter specific units in your opponents army to great effect, your opponent could have an army, though while all of his figures are weak to some unit in your army, work better together.

I've actually used this method of thinking to a certain degree for quite a while, but ultimately in the end it always seems to come down to who managed to draft the army that best worked together and/or who had the ungodly rolls that allowed them to take out someones entire army with just one card(<----has happened several times in our games).

So basically, what I'm trying to say is balance between counterdrafting and actually composing an army that works, it's not advisable to draft Taelord in a primarily melee army just to prevent your opponent from using the range + Tae combo, it'll ultimately hurt you in the end.

[spacemonkeymafia]

I agree with your system G'nator though I see the flaws as pointed out by others. I think that it is on the right track as points, whether drafted or premade, determine alot on the field. So a unit like dumetef guard taking out charos (extreme example) is a major blow to the charos player. But, as jason pointed out, this system breaks down when factoring in synergies like raelin (probably the best example in the game). However, this is not as broken as it appears. Raelin, by herself, will get taken down by forces much cheaper point wise. So, unit to unit comparison works surprisingly well on a point basis.

I come from a M:tG background and this is harkens back to similar analysis within that game. Cost comparison is important but only on a basic level. i still think it is a great tool and a good concept to realize. I know its simple but the framework of this argument of point-to-point unit comparison shouldn't end with the draft- it should continue into the gameplay as well as it works on a strategic and psychological level. Marro warriors taking out krug before he has a chance to really get going is a major blow to anyones army and shows inherent flaws in strategy and or die rolling (I just happen to roll 20s).

I'm glad G'nator brought this up, because I've been thinking on this as well and would like to see it advance beyond basic use (ie, the weight of synergy, etc.)

[Captain John Parker]

Florence NightenKelda might be an even better example than Raelin. Assuming she doesn't kill her patient, she is a great multiplier of killing power.

[SyvarrisX]

Yes, you have to take into account auras and stuff. More for support. Of defense.

[Mystyc]

This is confounded not just by auras and such, but diminishing returns on certain units. Killing the first Zettian Guard does more for you than killing the second, as it both removes a figure and negates their special ability. Killing an AE unit before it tosses its grenade is much better than killing it afterwards. There are other examples.

Still, it's not bad as a baseline measurement for simplification, as long as you know there are points where it doesn't quite cover you.

[Feng Shui]

So, essentially, if I kill 500 of my opponent's 500 point army and he kills 450 of my 500, I win?



Sorry, couldn't resist. I do see how that would make sense. I can also see how I myself loosely follow this tactic. I generally go for game importance based on scenario and mid to late game, based on positioning of mine and my opponent's units. This strategy could be useful though in planning a game out.

[Fallen Templar]

Originally Posted by Mystyc

This is confounded.

Wow thats a term i haven't heard in a while

[K/H_Addict]

my raelon killed 100 points last game i played. she got the final kill. i laughed at my opponent. my raelin killed Gallus, but onlybecause taelord was weaken him while she was moving in...she just happend to give him his final wound...



taelord rarely kills 180 points, but is still in every army i build,


how's this:

Tagawa samurai-120 points
They kill:
2 TVW (25 pts)
2 Legionairres (25)
2 McDirk warriors (40)
1 Alistair McDirk (110)
2 KMA (66.6. lets round to 67)
1 DW9000 (140)


EDIT: Forgot abouy the DW the killed
120 points for 407 points. (3.4x themselves)
We were using 1000 point armies, so about 1/8th of my army took out a little under half of my opponents army.