This article’s topic is a little more niche, but is
responding to a specific question that comes up surprisingly often: how do you
balance homebrew profiles created for the MESBG ruleset? This hobby is filled
with wonderful, creative people who have pulled together all sorts of
interesting rules for models and factions that aren’t in the core game. But
balancing those new rules so they fit seamlessly into the rest of the game is
hard, and a lot of players don’t necessarily know where to start. And if they aren’t
balanced appropriately, then it can be hard to use those models alongside
existing profiles without one side or the other having a bad time.
Hence, this handy guide for all your homebrew-balancing needs. Just follow these 5 steps, and your model should be at least as well-balanced as the Dragon Emperor was on release.
Step 1: Make the profile
This step is the one that people are generally pretty good
at, and honestly there isn’t to much to say here. Let your creativity run wild!
One thing to be aware of is that the further your model diverges from existing
profiles, the harder steps 2-5 are going to be. If your profile for Anárion is
just Isildur with 1 Fate and 3 Will then it will be really easy to balance him;
on the other hand, if he has a unique auric buff that gives nearby warriors +1
Attack but -1 Fight value, then it’s going to take a lot of playtesting to
price him appropriately. That’s not at all to discourage creativity in
designing profiles, but just to encourage awareness about this difficulty.
In any case, once you’ve got the profile sorted, then it’s time to…
Step 2: Pick a comparison model
This is arguably the most important and challenging step in
the whole process: picking a model against which to compare your new profile. The
two key things to master here are picking a model that’s performing the same
role, and making sure your comparison model is appropriately balanced.
The first of these is simple enough generally: if your new
profile is a standard combat hero, then you’re better off comparing them to a
profile like Éomer than to Saruman. Similarly, if they’re elite heavy infantry
then Uruk-hai Warriors would be a good starting point, rather than Orc
Trackers. This just makes your life easier when comparing them, as you don’t
have to do too many adjustments to take into account the different roles
they’re fulfilling. One more key trap to avoid here is comparing combat heroes
that can purchase mounts to those who can’t. A hero walking around on foot has
to be substantially underpriced compared to one who can buy a mount, simply
because mounts themselves cost so much less than they should (see this throwback article for why). So it’s much
easier for you to compare a foot hero to Glóin, or Rhutabi, or Shagrat, rather
than to Éomer or Aragorn.
The second thing to take into account here is making sure
that the model you’re balancing from is at the right level to start with. Any half-competitive player can tell you that Suladân is a bit too cheap for what he
does; if you decide to balance a new profile by comparing it to Suladân, it
follows that your new profile will end up a bit undercosted. Going the other
way, if you price your model off King Brand then they will end up a little
overcosted, because King Brand was overcosted to begin with.
Generally, you’re looking to find a happy medium, where your
models are equivalent in value to things that are seen in competitive lists,
but not in an oppressive way. Think Mordor/Morannon Orcs, or Éomer, or any of a
swathe of other profiles that are broadly paying the right price for their
stats and rules.
Once you’ve written your profile and found the right model
to compare it to, then it’s time to start pricing!
Step 3: Adjust for stats
Up next, we adjust the price of that comparison model to
take into account the stats differences of your new profile. Generally, GW uses
a simple formula for this: for warrior models, add +1 to the model’s points
cost for every additional Fight, Strength, Defence and Courage, add +2 for
every additional Attack, and add a varying amount for additional Shoot value,
Movement and Wounds. For heroes, multiply all these numbers by 5, and add 5
points for every Might, Will and Fate.
These numbers can be seen in the Battle Companies book, and
are pretty evident in a lot of the game’s pricing decisions. Morannon Orcs have
+1D and +1S over Mordor Orcs, so they cost 2 points more. Mordor Uruk-hai have
+1F and +1C but -1D relative to Morannons, so they cost one extra point. Simple,
easy to understand, and a decent starting point all around.
However, these numbers aren’t perfect, and even GW has come
to realise this in recent years. To start with, not all of these stats are
created equal: extra Courage is nice, but it’s distinctly worse than extra
Fight value, which is itself normally worth a little less (on warriors) than
extra Strength or Defence. Extra Shoot value is either critical or useless, 1
pip of Movement is never worth 1 point, and 1 Might is clearly worth a lot more
than 1 Will or 1 Fate.
Moreover, these stats all vary in value according to the
model that they’re on. Having a second Attack on a warrior model is worth about
2 points when that warrior has bad stats (see: Orc Warriors v Hunter Orcs), but
is worth much more than that when the model has good stats (see: Dwarf
Warriors v Iron Guard). That’s because an elite model will get much more value
out of that second Attack than a random mook would, as they’ll survive longer
and deal more damage. Similarly, an extra Might point is probably worth about 5
points on Grishnakh, but potentially 50 points on Sauron or the Balrog.
This complexity is a lot of why Step 2 is so important, but
hopefully you’ve done that step well and don’t have to make too many changes. Assuming
that’s the case, then just start with that base cost and adjust in increments
of 1/2 or 5/10, before adjusting a bit to take into account the relative value
of those increases on the profile you’re designing. Treat Courage, Shoot and
Movement as about half an increment each, and you should end up with a fairly
balanced starting point.
From there, it’s time for the really tricky bit:
Step 4: Adjust for special rules
Special rules are fun, and are a great way to add uniqueness
to a new profile. On the other hand, they’re also a lot more complicated to
price than a stat increase or decrease. GW takes the approach in their Battle
Companies book of pricing special rules generally as 2 point for warriors, or 10 for heroes. That is, frankly, a dumb approach. Don’t do that.
Instead, have a look at your special rule and see which of
the following four categories it fits into. Is it:
- a Ribbon rule. This is a rule that’s there for flavour, but only very rarely impacts the game. A classic example is Rangers of Mirkwood getting Hatred (Spiders), which is clearly not impacting the power of the Legion overall, but rather adding some lore-appropriate flavour. Ignore these rules for the purposes of costing your model.
- Niche. These rules do come up, but they’re rarely worth as much as a simple stats boost. Think Woodland Creature, or Stalk Unseen, or Shieldwall. They are relevant to the pricing, but generally as ‘half points’ like extra Courage or Movement. A classic example are Warriors of Minas Tirith, who (relative to Morannons) trade one Strength for one Courage and Shieldwall. Those two half-boosts are roughly equivalent to the one proper stats boost of the Morannons, so the two profiles are approximately balanced against each other.
- Relevant. These are rules like Wall of Blades, or Burly, or Bodyguard, that are likely to materially impact a game and are therefore worth at least one increment of points. Often these are fairly easy to price: Burly is about twice as good as +1S, so it should cost twice as much. Wall of Blades is the same but only triggers about half the time, so it should cost about the same as +1S. Other rules like Blood and Glory are trickier, but by estimating how often they’ll trigger and how big a deal it is when they do you should be able to fudge a value for them.
- Game-changing. These rules, like Mighty Hero– free Heroic Combats or the ability to cast lots of powerful spells– are hard to balance. You can’t just stick Mighty Hero on Isildur’s profile and say ‘okay, now he should cost 30 points more.’ He’s no longer doing the same thing, so it’s best to compare him to a model that does, like Aragorn. Other examples here include wargear like the Banner of Gondor or Thranduil’s Circlet, either of which radically changes what that model brings to the army (and both of which, incidentally, are very undercosted).
Putting these first 4 steps together, we see that balancing
a profile is basically writing its rules, picking an appropriate comparator,
and then adjusting the price to take into account the changes to the models
stats and special rules relative to that comparator. The key with all parts of
this is trying to remember that a model is more than the sum of its parts, and
altering one stat or special rule will have flow-on effects to the value of the
rest of the profile.
All of that is frankly hard though, and very easy to
mess up. That’s why we have the final step…
Step 5: Playtest (and playtest
again, and playtest again)
Even the most diligent of pricing methodologies still messes
up sometimes, and the way you pick up on that is playtesting. Try the model out
in different lists, against different enemies, in different scenarios. The more
unique the profile, the more playtesting it’s likely to need before you land on
the correct price. So get in those practice games, and pay close attention to
whether the model is performing how it should. One way of doing so is to keep
asking yourself after each game whether you would have preferred the 'balanced' comparator profile you priced it off. If the answer is yes, then maybe the price is
too high; if it’s a strong no, then maybe the price is too low.
Bonus step: Don’t believe everything
you read on the internet
Eventually, you’ll want to share your cool (and balanced!)
profile with others. And if you’re doing so online, then be prepared for immediate
howls of indignation that the model is overpowered and undercosted.
These howls will be wrong.
Well, they might not be. Sometimes things are
actually overpowered or undercosted. But for whatever reason, the automatic
response of most people to a new profile appears to be seeing it as too good
for its points, whether it is or isn’t.
So, when people leave the hate comments about how this model
would break the game, filter through them for people who are applying some kind
of comparison to fairly-balanced base models. That kind of analysis is useful,
and worthwhile listening to. The rest of it? Don’t sweat it.
At the end of all that, you should have a profile that’s balanced against the rest of the profiles in MESBG. Or rather, that’s balanced against the well-balanced models: if you’ve done your job right, then it should be less efficient than the Witch King but more efficient than Gandalf the White.
I think there is one point you might have missed that is a good idea to have and that is think about in which army the new model will be in. This can be more important than any of the other considerations.
ReplyDeleteJust like you have to compare a new profile to an existing profile that matches your intended role you also have to think how that role could be different in the faction your new model will be in.
A new Rohan hero like Eomer in Rohan will be easy to balance. But an Eomer in a dwarf, shire or goblin list might be way too powerful thanks to suddenly having a M10 model with expert rider and horse lord(quite relevant with 3 fate) who can also fight is giving an existing list something they previously didn't have access to.
A morannon orc profile with access to shields and spears would be pretty nuts in a lot of Good lists. Imagine elves that don't have to ally with numenor for S4 supports but can now get that S4 for cheaper and with D6! Or hunter orcs with elves. Imagine Cirdan with his buffs and F5-6 elf supports for that 8pt A2 S4 attack frontline would be insane.
A profile that in itself is very fair and balanced can break the entire game depending on what faction it is in. Cirdan, LoL, Isildur, Beornings and all of Arnor are good examples of models that are balanced by the restrictions on what models you can play them with and without the opportunity costs from the alliance system restrictions would be pretty easy to do broken stuff with.
A great point, I totally agree. And those are perfect examples as well, they definitely make the point. Picturing a Hunter Orc/Rivendell list is filling me with joy and anger in equal measure!
DeleteA very enjoyable article - my son and I created a few custom profiles for Star Wars Imperial Assault during the COVID lockdown and we actually used two reference profiles for those (one that was similar to the end concept, but not nearly as strong as what he was looking for and one that was similar to the end concept, but much stronger than what he wanted). That gave us a range to play with and gave us a pretty good guess on the first or second try to get the pricing right. Of course, IA games only involve armies of 40pts with individual heroes costing between 2-13pts each, so the bounds made the pricing element a lot easier.
ReplyDeleteI think your last point about iterative play-testing (and ignoring internet hate) is really important - not only because you'll want to test your profile against a variety of army types to see if it's broken in general or just hard-countered by certain match-ups, but also because the model might not behave on the table like you wanted when designing it. If you build a model that's a beat-stick hero but find out that they don't have enough Will to actually DO the fighting if there's a wizard present in your first game, you might get put out a bit, since you didn't get to use your shiny new toy. Testing several times against several different list styles should give you a pretty good idea of how things actually are - and might prompt further iterations over the character to make them more enjoyable (though I think models don't become magically balanced just because they have a hard counter).
All great points, especially the use of multiple models to balance. It does get tricky when those models aren't balanced against each other, though; I was recently trying to balance an Evil warrior that shared similarities with both Mordor Uruk-hai and Black Numenoreans. It felt undercosted when compared to the former, but overcosted when compared to the latter. Very annoying!
DeleteThe point on testing against multiple armies is also critical. That same model had immunity to Terror (as well as causing Terror itself), and when I was testing it against Angmar it felt extremely good. But my Hunter Orcs rinsed them happily enough, so I think they've landed up in the right spot. In any case, you'll be able to read more about them once the full armies are released later this year!