Although the above example is more like an exception to the rule, but that also how I think it is, combi rifle is free, and the cheaper guns (chainrifle, shotguns, submachine guns, etc.) come with a point discount. Otherwise a Fusilier would cost 2 pts, so give that guy a chain rifle, and let me fill out all my list with AVA total 3pts regular orders.
It went through window long ago. Maggie's 360 visor alone costs more than entire troopers with 360 visors. Gimme those -3 pts (as in, negative point cost) Odalisques and -13 pts Thorakites; on non-visor profiles, obviously. I believe that in the end we pay for the profile as a whole. Point cost formula is more like an aid or sanity check for CB themselves, although they seemingly prefer to be more or less consistent with it. And on auxbot cost - remember that auxbot is a separate model with its own point cost that could matter in zone control and kill points missions. It's not out of question that their points could be thrown around between owner and auxbot to adjust their weights in those missions.
It seems to me that there is one chassis for infantry on top of which every S2 is built: 4-4, 13, 10, 10, 12, 0, 0, 1, 2 Moderators get: +3 BTS (1 point) Shock Immune (1 point) Combi (7 points) swaps knife for electric pulse (free) Totals 9 points. Alguacil get BS, WIP, ARM (1 point each) and a Combi (7) for 10 points. Some stats rapidly start costing more (BTS), others are pretty linear until you start getting big increases (ARM), (PHY might well depend on weapon loadout as sometimes it seem linear, other times not). CC is odd as it seems to be sorted into sets of three, with jumping from somewhere in a lower set into the next costing 1. So 13 to 14 is 1 point, but so is 13 to 15 and 13 to 16 (but this is where I'm convinced fractions come in and rounding happens, looking at Keisotsu for example). The chain rifle comes up a lot as negative points, but I think frenzy/impetuous isn't just a discount but a retrospective multiplier (irregular is pretty consistent, impetuous/frenzy isn't, so my guess/calculation to it's cost is at best an approximation).
Well, I guess if there's a general formula like "factor * cost of the rest of the kit" that is static with the exception of that variable, we could say it's not exactly hand-adjusted. I meant that things do cost differently depending on what they're on, though. That's very evident when it comes to SWC, but same happens to pts as well, which isn't always well-received by some people for some reason.
The amount of times I've tried to explain to people how a formula works. Some people just don't want to understand that the formula can't be blamed for them not understanding every variable involved. Heres some basic principles making it rather difficult to take the thing apart in its entirety: Additive Modifiers - Most basic weapons are always the same cost. - This works both ways, removing a weapon flat out makes a trooper that much cheaper. Multiplicative modifiers - G:Jumper, Frenzy, Irregular, Impetuous, Camo and some other things reduce, or increase cost in a non linear or multiplicative way. - I actually haven't the foggiest if this takes the entire Profile into account, uses a default Profile i.e. without weapon cost, is percentage based or scales asymetric. All I can say for certain is it ain't linear. Breaking Points - Some Profiles are a point off, like the Hospitaler Doc with Combi vs the Hospitaler Doc with Multirifle. This suggests there are percentage based modifiers in the formula that result in non integer but becimal values before rounding up or down towards full points. Special Modifiers - There are interactions in between gear and skills that impact cost outside of the above, like Breaker RIfles + MMS L2. Again no solid idea how that works (mostly because of a very low sample size making it hard to evaluate any scaling). That much is just scratching a bit on the surface. CB had years to evolve the formula and obviously has access to all the variables. It's a PITA to deconstruct a grown system with no access to any hard numbers. Triangulating every correlation until you can nail down a few constants to build on has been interesting but requires meticulous doublechecking. As CB asked not to publish a deconstructed version of the formula (and because I don't not have one... yet?) this is where I'll leave it Thank you for your time, I hope someone found that useful on his path of enlightenment to escape the hand adjustment conspiracy theorists.
