Alternative Character Point System

[Palatinus]

I was looking at the stuff on the Power Balance site and read the stuff about the character cost system used there.  This system seemed overly hard to use but I really liked the level of thinking behind it.  To that end I came up with a different, simpler method.  Forgive me if this has been presented by someone before.

Basically, the idea is that 6, 7, and 8 are the magic numbers in Overpower.  1-5 are not so important.  So, 0-5 is worth 1 point, 6 = 2, 7 = 3, 8 = 4.  The fastest way to calculate this per character is the number of stats they have plus the number of teamworks they can play.

With this point system, I came to 26 as the total cost.  This is because the average value of every character in Overpower under this system is a little more than 6.  The best I could do with Beyonder is make Beyonder cost the same as Galactus at 12.  The same would have to go for 4-stat Galactus.  I have attached a spreadsheet that contains the old cost and new to compare.  I did some calculating and I think that even give the slightly cheaper cost of 3-stat characters this deck sum can still include 3 and 4 stat characters without different rules.  Also, characters who have alternative costs as IA are already cheaper because of this system so don't really need the IA.

[chuu]

my current team is illegal?! shenanigans!

CAPTAIN AMERICA   20   8
ZEALOT   20   7
THE STARJAMMERS   19   6
HAWKEYE   17   6
   76   27

[Palatinus]

my current team is illegal?! shenanigans!

CAPTAIN AMERICA   20   8
ZEALOT   20   7
THE STARJAMMERS   19   6
HAWKEYE   17   6
   76   27

Not if you use 3-stat Hawkeye.  Also, it may be that 26 isn't the perfect fit.  As long as the point system fairly compares the value of each character's grid then the actual total for the team can be adjusted to make the most sense.

[chuu]

3 state hawkeye can't play dynamite delivery from reserve. Might as well play another fighter.

[PowerBalance]

Palatinus - Ha ha, good thinking. I'm glad you see the logic behind the new point system. You may find it's not as hard to use as you think. Just simply find your character's point value on the spreadsheet and see if the total adds up to 80.

In any case, your system will still be more fair than the current point value system. Just be careful that the usefulness of the stats 6, 7 and 8 don't increase in a linear fashion but more exponentially.  Otherwise, good work on trying to improve on an already great game! Keep it up!

[Palatinus]

Even if it seems restrictive at first it actually opens up a lot of characters to being used that normally are not and reduces the over-use of certain other characters.  In any event, it is a fun idea for variant play.

[Nostalgic]

Even if it seems restrictive at first it actually opens up a lot of characters to being used that normally are not and reduces the over-use of certain other characters.  In any event, it is a fun idea for variant play.

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but occasionally I've used the Neo system of cost-capping characters and it makes remembering a character's point cost even easier than the standard rules.  I believe the inventors' goal was make characters cheaper and allow more team variety.  Each character starts at 15 points. The first 6 in a character's stats doesn't count if they have no other stats that are 6 or higher.  The second 6 =1, each 7 =2, and an 8 =4. If a character would be cheaper under normal costing rules then you use that number.  I'll list some examples. The first number in parenthesis will be the normal cost and the second will be the neo cost.

Cap. America 2-8-4-6 (20/20)
Darkseid 6-3-8-6        (23/21)
Superman: 7-4-7-3    (21/19)
Spidergirl: 4-6-5-3      (18/15)
Starjammers: 3-7-4-5 (19/17)
Apocalypse: 5-5-7-6   (23/18)
Ghost Rider: 6-6-6-2  (20/17)
Daredevil: 2-7-4-6      (19/18)
Gambit 6-6-4-4          (20/16)
*Hulk: 1-3-8-6           (18/18)
*Professor X 8-2-1-7 (18/18)

If a character was placed in reserve you added 2 points to their neo cost up to a max of whatever their normal cost would be. So Gambit would be 16 points on the front line, but 18 if you put him in reserve. I don't know if that had something to do with other rules in their system or what.

Also I noticed that 2 characters, Invisible Woman and Blue Beetle, were costed at 2 points higher than their 'normal' neo cost would be. I guess it had to do with their inherent abilities, but Longshot didn't have the same cost increase on the table I saw.

[Palatinus]

I think there are some characters who should be cheaper, but there are also a lot of characters who should be more expensive.  Professor X is a great example.  He has an 8 and a 7 but is cheaper than a lot of max 6 characters.  Meanwhile a lot of max 6 characters have high costs so don't get played.  I was a aiming for a way of valuing characters to make the playable pool larger in both directions.

[PowerBalance]

Palatinus - Yes, I love your line of thinking. It's really good being able to play the max-6 characters because they don't cost so much under the new Point Value system, whilst max-8 characters and dual stat characters who are more effective are given a higher Point Value.

Perhaps it would be still worth trying out the Power Balance Point Value system, as Power Balance was attempting to achieve the same thing. All Point Values were mathematically derived, taking into account heaps of factors that affect gameplay. This includes how much contribution secondary and tertiary and quaternary stats provide for each Character's power grid, and what cards each Character is able to play as a result of the Power Grid. It is also weighted to ensure that the mean, mode and median Point Values of all available characters in OverPower are exactly 1/4 of the Point Value limit imposed, meaning 4 average characters would fit exactly on a team and useage of better characters would have to result in a sacrifice somewhere else. Sure, maths doesn't equate to the exact gameplay, but it would likely be a closer and more accurate representation, right? LOL!

In any case, great to see your approach is still very analytical and methodical - that's just awesome!

[Nostalgic]

I think there are some characters who should be cheaper, but there are also a lot of characters who should be more expensive.  Professor X is a great example.  He has an 8 and a 7 but is cheaper than a lot of max 6 characters.  Meanwhile a lot of max 6 characters have high costs so don't get played.  I was a aiming for a way of valuing characters to make the playable pool larger in both directions.

I think my examples covered that, Ghost Rider =17 and Gambit = 16, both now cost less than Prof X.  Of course if they didn't cap the cost at the character's standard game cost Prof would be 21 points.

@ PowerBalance
I haven't looked at your points calculations so I'm not sure yet but I'll check it out. I think yours takes in to account the limitation on multipower cards (a good rule by the way  ) that's not in the standard game so that might skew things a bit.

[Palatinus]

Nostalgic, both of those things you pointed out, the fact that Powerbalance is based not just on the characters but also on new rules specific to Powerbalance and also what you pointed out about NEO not making characters cost more in addition to earlier when you said some characters had additional cost you didn't know for sure where it came from are reasons that I was thinking of a simpler system like the one I started this post for.  You can take any character and figure out its value quickly.  Aside from being easy it seems to give a better balance and make a wider range of characters necessary to make decks.

[PowerBalance]

Nostalgic - Yes, the Power Balance Point Value system certainly does into account the MultiPower rule, so the representation on the characters would be a little different. Very insightful!

Palatinus - Definitely - it is definitely worthwhile coming up with a system that permits use of those max-6 characters. Feel free to use the point value system of Power Balance as a reference to help you with your task!