A profile that's less useful should cost fewer points than a profile that's more useful. Otherwise it's unbalanced. This is the crux of the SMG discussion.
I could get behind that. I'd also like the Zanshi to get a full point's worth of CC stat, because I'm pretty sure CC is ~0.25 or 0.33 per point of attribute increase below 20. So Zanshi should be about CC16 or 17 (and still cost 11 points).
If they replaced SMG with LSG the same thing would have happened. edit: just in case it's not clear, I'm saying SMGs are too cheap, that wasn't an accident, skills and weapons are made that way all the time, and it's only a problem if they design units poorly with it.
I get what you're saying, but I think the contention of this thread is that this is something that they have done.
I do not want a precedent where anything that seems too cheap compared to a Combi deserves a complaint thread. We just had one because Mimetism is too cheap. We're going to have them non stop if we accept the concept that everything should have a balanced cost to each other because that's not how the game is.
On the note of bsg/lsg vs SMG. A big piece I find is that for most (mostly non haqq) models it's a bsg or a rifle not both, so a very good short range weapon, or suppressive fire, not both. If the models that had a bsg also came with a weapon that could give that state, there would be more decision between the two I feel. The template is extremely nice, but ending your turn in a very solid aro position is great. So smg, which is a solid short range weapon, also can go in suppressive fire, it leads to a ~shotgun quality short range with suppressive fire for reactive turn defense.
The problem with this stance is that it shuts down any discussion into a problem with the rules. Imagine if next year the redesigned Shavastii get a "Shavastii throwing knife" B3 throwing with a +3 range band out to 24", Silent, Non-lootable, Shock+Viral. Costed at 1 pt. All Shavastii get their racial weapon on their profile, but hey, its OK because at least it costs the same for every trooper who gets it, right? So no-one is allowed to complain. I bet it would sell a bunch of the new Shavastii though.
Since we pay points for profiles when constructing our lists, it's crucial that things should be balanced by cost on some level for the game to be fair.
So there is no need for balance on a point-based game? Why should your 300 points be worth more than my 300 points? That's pure nonsense
That's why I specifically said "profile" not "weapon". I'd like each individual component to be priced sensibly, but in the end, what really matters is that the whole profile is balanced.
No, it doesn't. If someone said "these new SMG troops should be changed because they aren't showing enough cleavage" I don't have to agree with them because they're right for the wrong reasons. I talk about issues all the time. But the list of equipment that should be changed to be in line to Combi cost is probably over 75% Every fucking post tries to bait people in to derailing by saying this, someone needs to make a "CB POWERCREEPS TO SELL NEW MODELS" thread to get it out if their system. "Equipment isn't balanced in cost so they can raise the cost of powerful troops or increase the power of weak troops without adding artificial points. That way things are balanced on a troop or list level where it matters" "So the points should just be random huh?? You don't think things should be balanced?" How am I supposed to not call you mean names?
Look, the bottom line is, putting all equipment and skill costs in line with each other would require a total overhaul of the game, N4 levels. And would make unit design more difficult because powerful or weak combos can't be balanced out. If that's what you want don't hold your breath, and you're clueless. If you just have a problem with the new profiles that are abusing SMG as a primary equipment, it's probably too late to fix them without changing the SMG, so you would be right. I wasn't taking issue with either of the people who said that. You have to see that agreeing with the others that came to the conclusion for the wrong reason is opening the door to endless bitching.
I think a bunch of units/profiles with SMGs as their primary weapons are underpriced. I mistakenly(?) thought you were disagreeing with this.
I think your base premise with this statement is fundamentally flawed. All equipment and skills are already in line with one another, you can very simply derive exact points values for equipment, weapons, skills, irregular/fury and stats that are consistent across multiple profiles. In addition, CB have admitted that there is a formula that they use and don't hand-adjust. Just because you are not aware of all the variables at play is no reason to disregard the whole thing. I'd argue that the problem with SMGs is they simply get too much mileage on the troopers that carry them, the addition of twin ammo types without a commensurate cost increase simply pushed them over a psychological (and quite probably mathematical) line.
But that's bad, because it just adds an extra step between holistically adjusting the points cost of a unit to what's appropriate. Plus, as I think happened with the SMG, it's even more powerful than CB understands. And, say, the combi HI profiles are less powerful than CB understands.
While your second point has merit, your first is just plain wrong. If you can't see why I'm simply at a loss as to how to explain it to you beyond it's the very definition of self-evidently wrong.
