After thinking about this some I came to a conclusion that the issue doesn't stem from the difference in number of orders, but from how small the difference in order efficiency between cheaper and expensive units is. This is due to several factors: First, the core game mechanics. Main advantage in any roll comes not from higher attributes, but from additional dice. Having the active turn improves one's units odds significantly more than having units with higher BS. As was said before, orders are the most valuable resource in the game. Getting 1-2 additional orders is a better investment than getting 1-2 additional points of BS, as it not only allows your army to maneuver more freely, but also to roll those additional dice for longer. Second issue is that a wasted order hurts elite list more than it hurts more numerous one. After all losing 10% of your resources is a bigger disavantage than losing 6.67% of them. This means that elite lists require more player skill to avoid losing resources on bad tactics, and that they're more hurt by tied rolls. Third issue is that most of the time units in 20-30+ point range die just as easily as those 1/2 their cost when hit. Again, the real factor is the number of wounds. Having 2W/STR or NWI makes a bigger difference than having additional 1-2 ARM. (BTS has slightly more impact, because it comes in multiples of 3, so on average the difference here is higher). And finally, CB point formula doesn't really work that well at lower point values. Warbands and other cheap units are often able to punch far above their weight in points, forcing unfavourable exchanges on the other player. It's like losing a pawn to take out a knight. These points do not mean that there's no point in investing in elite units. I've been opposing such arguments for years. It only means that the difference in efficiency of different units is lower than the difference in points might suggest. My solution would be to increase this efficiency gap. I've already proposed first part of this solution: making more expensive units more durable, particularly giving NWI to most MI. This would increase the staying power of elite lists, decreasing the cheap units' ability to force an exchange, and lowering the risk of losing expensive unit to to a single unlucky roll. Second part of my solution would be to bring back a rule from N2: higher attributes (after all mods) acting as tiebreakers. This would increase the value of such attributes, simultaneously making it harder for cheaper units to force their way through an elite defender, while decreasing the risk of losing elite list's orders on tied rolls. I know, it'd also make PanO players very happy. Bottom line is this: I'd like this particular piece of balance to be decided not by tweaking the number of orders, but by tweaking their value when used on different kind of units.
@Stiopa makes some excellent points above, but I'd like to add something of my own idea to any proposed changes: giving certain elite units skillsets suited to punching down and efficiently killing cheap units with conventionally-good skills. Any counter to Direct Template Weapons, old-style MSV3 for punching through Camo without losing order efficiency, more accessible boosts to reactive firepower (ORCs in Suppressive Fire will outperform most Skirmishers no problem, but it's hard to spare Orders for this)- any of these and more could greatly assist the current imbalances if applied wisely.
Hmm. Forgive me being nitpicky, and, as we say here, looking up holes in a [something] whole. One problem there would be the propagation of these elite unit skillsets. If memory serves me, MSV L3 is limited to 3 units in the entire game: Aquilla Guard, Asura and Charontid, for example. I.e. a number of factions don't have access to this, regardless of being played as amn "elite list". Suppressive Fire - I find it nice, but only if you can avoid being engaged from beyond it's effective range of 24". Also, you'd need aspecific skill rather than a broad change of the SF rules - because a broad change would mean everyone with SF capability will have them, whether they cost 6 or 60 pts. During the game you can, technically, set up to 4 models in SF by a Coordinated Order. Of course, if you have an Order and a Command Token to spare, and the models in positions where you need them to be. Some of it stems - in my eyes - from the limit of 3 turns introduced in ITS: with a longer game, the amount of Orders-per-turn is less of an issue, and you can afford to take a longer approach. With 3 turns, that's what you have, at best that many Orders. I'm not sayign it is wrong - certainly it makes for shorter games, and makes tournamnet games more sensible, time-wise. Therefore, the issue needs to be handled in a different way. Nope, I have no ideas as to how to do it at this point.
