NCE Gang Rating: Credits and Stash

p0dde

Gang Champion
Mar 2, 2016
439
516
113
Copenhagen, Denmark
I have been thinking about the rules for Gang Rating, and namely how your stash (equipment and credits) do not count towards your gang rating. I thought it would be interesting to hear the what you all thought about this rule.

Personally i see a complicated set of pros and cons. I am tempted to think that it would be an improvement to include the stash value in the rating, but on the other hand it feels like an infringement on my personal freedom, as a citizen of Necromunda.

My main Pro: Only what you bring to the battlefield counts towards the rating. This seems fair. The Lascannon in your stash should'nt affect your powerlevel when comparing your gang to your opponents.

My main Con: Rating speculation seems silly. Not buying a batch of grenades, because it 'inflates' your rating, results in you keeping the credits in your stash: You end up with a more trimmed gang, but without any fun grenades.

What is your take on this? Would a Gang Rating the includes the Stash ruin the game? Has anyone tried house rules on this area?

EDIT: Originally wrote 'should' by mistake.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tiny

Azzabat

Hive Guilder
Yak Comp 1st Place
Tribe Council
Jan 24, 2013
3,736
7,157
183
53
Bristol, UK
Not counting your stash is to do with balancing the Gang mechanics/rating.

Take 2 identical Gangs, one with Lots of expensive kit, one without. The one with all the kit can’t use it all the time (but doesn’t want to get rid of it) so they are equal to the identical Gang. Only once they start taking the good kit to use does the (now not) identical Gang get a benefit from having a lower Gang Rating.
 

sebwiers

Gang Champion
Feb 17, 2011
446
343
63
Saint Paul, MN
Would it RUIN the game? Nah, probably not. Its not like balance is so fine tuned that a couple hundred GR either way is gonna make it unplayable.

On the other hand, why WOULD you? It seems like extra work for no gain. Unless maybe the point is to encourage people to quickly sell (or assign to use) un-used items and spend cash. Also, what do you do with things like the Mung Vase?
 

Stoof

Yakmarines 2nd Co. Word Priest
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Jun 1, 2016
3,077
9,794
213
Ellon, United Kingdom
Honesty never thought about it, and now that I have I think the way it is is fine. Rating being what you are using for the current battle makes far more sense than the lascannon you have back in your dormitory affecting things.

I don't know anyone who's unequipped stuff just to artificially lower their rating, certainly not done it myself. Is it something that happens? Doing so is putting yourself at a disadvantage for the game - after all, you bought the stuff to use presumably because it is tactically advantageous.
 

Ben_S

Hive Guilder
Honored Tribesman
Jul 26, 2015
4,728
7,590
158
Southampton, UK
My main Pro: Only what you bring to the battlefield counts towards the rating. This seems fair. The Lascannon in your stash should affect your powerlevel when comparing your gang to your opponents.
The strange thing is that this is not true generally. A fighter missing the game, due to the scenario or an OBW, still counts towards your gang rating. So the Lascannon in possession of your Heavy is counted, even when he's not in the game and it has no influence.

It therefore seems anomalous to discount a Lascannon simply because it's in your stash. (It'd be even worse if you could shift it from your Heavy to your stash after rolling for your OBW or whatever.)

But, on the other hand, Blood Bowl used to count treasury money towards team value and that was a real pain if you had a bunch of unspent money. While the current system may not make perfect sense, it more or less works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trollmeat

Azzabat

Hive Guilder
Yak Comp 1st Place
Tribe Council
Jan 24, 2013
3,736
7,157
183
53
Bristol, UK
A fighter missing the game for whatever reason is different to the stash.

I Imagine the stash being secret, wrapped in a grease covered rag and stored in a safe.

A fighter missing from on OBW is geared up, ready to go, and drops out at the very last minute.

That’s how I see it anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: spafe and Stoof

sebwiers

Gang Champion
Feb 17, 2011
446
343
63
Saint Paul, MN
Weirder than stash is that serious injuries (other than death) have no effect on gang rating. If you have two gangs with identical gear, fighter selection, and advances, they have the same gang rating, right? But in fact they might have very different stats and behavior. If one has several members with head wounds, and the other has no meaningful injuries at all, then they are in no way equal if pitted against each other in a fair fight.

Given that, I see
 

Azzabat

Hive Guilder
Yak Comp 1st Place
Tribe Council
Jan 24, 2013
3,736
7,157
183
53
Bristol, UK
But some of the wounds have no effects like missing fingers, and others offer a positive bonus like horrible scars (limited I grant you.).

For me it’s these wounds, and the randomness skill/stat increases that make the original ‘Munda so fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stoof

sebwiers

Gang Champion
Feb 17, 2011
446
343
63
Saint Paul, MN
I'm not arguing for or against serious injury affecting gang rating - I'm just pointing out that the gang rating doesn't even account entirely for stats and abilities (since serious injury can remove or add either), let alone consideration of the intangible (but real) on table benefit of having a bunch of creds in stash (it allows riskier play etc).

The fact the different injuries have different (or no) effect could to accounted for by simply giving them different GR values, so I don't think the reason is mechanical. It seems the game designers embraced randomness and didn't worry much about the relative value of random results, and a lot of fans like @Azzbat like that. I'm fine with it too, and well aware that systems that do track every little thing, often end up no better balanced, or even worse off because they assume there will be balance when none exists.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: spafe and Stoof

p0dde

Gang Champion
Mar 2, 2016
439
516
113
Copenhagen, Denmark
The strange thing is that this is not true generally. A fighter missing the game, due to the scenario or an OBW, still counts towards your gang rating. So the Lascannon in possession of your Heavy is counted, even when he's not in the game and it has no influence.

It therefore seems anomalous to discount a Lascannon simply because it's in your stash. (It'd be even worse if you could shift it from your Heavy to your stash after rolling for your OBW or whatever.)

But, on the other hand, Blood Bowl used to count treasury money towards team value and that was a real pain if you had a bunch of unspent money. While the current system may not make perfect sense, it more or less works.
I just realized that I wrote 'should' and meant 'should not', when talking about the Lascannon in the stash. Also I am not sure if you can stash equipment from fighters that have infected wounds and the likes, while they are unable to participate.

I think that gang rating is a very big part of the game, and having the lowest rating, and getting to pick the scenario, is a very big deal. Outlawed gangs are not able yo make any credits if they do not get to be the attackers, and choose a profitable scenario. I like making gangs without heavy weapons and lots of Juves, because that means that I get a lot of fast advances, in the first couple of games. I also like to always have around 100-200 credits in my stash, in case of an emergency, or if a top tier rare items shows up, but sometimes that feels a bit like i am exploited the rating system.

@sebwiers, it think adding a gang rating reduction from serious injuries is a good idea. It just seems fair. In a campaign you always have the one gang, that just seem to attract Serious Injuries, and this would stop them from falling behind. A way to keep the math more simple, you could say that you get a -50 rating reduction for each 5 serous injuries in your gang. Or some other increment, that seems fair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebwiers

Ben_S

Hive Guilder
Honored Tribesman
Jul 26, 2015
4,728
7,590
158
Southampton, UK
A fighter missing the game for whatever reason is different to the stash.
I'm not denying that. I'm responding to:

My main Pro: Only what you bring to the battlefield counts towards the rating. This seems fair.
It's never been the case that only what you bring counts, and it would be a far more wide-reaching change to make that the case.

In fact, if we're distinguishing between a Lascannon in your stash (which is not currently counted) and a fighter with an OBW (who is currently counted), I'd suggest it ought to be the other way round. The Lascannon is available to you for the fight* - if you don't use it, it's only because you choose not to bring it - whereas the fighter with the OBW is not available even if you want him.

*I'm assuming you have a heavy. I guess there would be cases where you don't, in which case it might be argued the Lascannon isn't really available - but the point generalises to other weapons anyway.
 

sebwiers

Gang Champion
Feb 17, 2011
446
343
63
Saint Paul, MN
@sebwiers, it think adding a gang rating reduction from serious injuries is a good idea. It just seems fair. In a campaign you always have the one gang, that just seem to attract Serious Injuries, and this would stop them from falling behind. A way to keep the math more simple, you could say that you get a -50 rating reduction for each 5 serous injuries in your gang. Or some other increment, that seems fair.
Certainly workable, as long as it only applied to serious injuries that actually had an actual negative impact. That would mean any roll 36 or lower that you record on your sheet (for NCE, I'd include "Infected Wound" in this, because you record it until the fighter recovers, and a gang member who can't fight is surely worth a GR reduction). Captured fighters.... well, I guess they should reduce GR, but honestly I think they shouldn't be included in GR at all!

Its not carefully balanced, but its not any WORSE balanced, and is equally random. I don't see why you'd do -50 per 5 when you could do -10 per. But yeah, -10 points per wound seems about right - same as XP needed for an advance, give or take.
 

p0dde

Gang Champion
Mar 2, 2016
439
516
113
Copenhagen, Denmark
@sebwiers Captured fighters are transferred to the captors and do not count towards rating. Regarding infected wound I'd rather not count the fighter while it is out, than count the injury. But with OBW I'd rather count the injury, than the entire fighter in case where the OBW forces them to miss the game. Does that make sense?

When looking at this thread it sounds like a way to design a fair rating would be to count everything that is available to the gang. And use the injuries recorded on the the fighters to reduce gang rating?

Also the main criticism seems to be the trouble of keeping track of this. A system like yaktribe.games has the technology to offer different ways of calculating rating. And all the data is available in the system. I imagine that something like this is not for everyone, but in some campaigns, I think it could be useful.
 

Ben_S

Hive Guilder
Honored Tribesman
Jul 26, 2015
4,728
7,590
158
Southampton, UK
Regarding infected wound I'd rather not count the fighter while it is out, than count the injury. But with OBW I'd rather count the injury, than the entire fighter in case where the OBW forces them to miss the game. Does that make sense?.
That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. The fighter is either there, unaffected by the OBW, or not.

But if you want gang rating to be some 'fair' reflection of a gang's power, I think it needs rethinking almost from the ground up. For instance, I don't see why experience should increase gang rating. Advances (skills or characteristics) make a gang more powerful, but experience that does not produce advances does nothing. (Note that in Blood Bowl team rating is increased by skills/advances, not by star player points themselves.)
 

p0dde

Gang Champion
Mar 2, 2016
439
516
113
Copenhagen, Denmark
That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. The fighter is either there, unaffected by the OBW, or not.

But if you want gang rating to be some 'fair' reflection of a gang's power, I think it needs rethinking almost from the ground up. For instance, I don't see why experience should increase gang rating. Advances (skills or characteristics) make a gang more powerful, but experience that does not produce advances does nothing. (Note that in Blood Bowl team rating is increased by skills/advances, not by star player points themselves.)
Rules are not entirely clear on OBW, but the way i understand it, you roll it after the scenario roll (or at least that is how we play it, mainly based on fluff). Also OBW does not count as missing the game, and can still be used in the post-game sequence. Not that it is a major issue, I could see it as the other way around. Also, I am pretty sure, that the concept of fair rating, will never be fair enough, but I think that there is some low hanging fruit that i will like to try to pick.

When I make rule propositions, I try not to influence other sections of the rules. So if a campaign want to use a different rating system, they can do it, without having to change other parts of the game. I try to see it as different rules-modules, that you can pick an choose from. Also, just because it isn't perfect it can still be an improvement. I am not saying that 'rethinking it from the ground up' is a bad idea, but it is just not my approach.

I am working on some wording for a rating system that includes Stash and Injuries, but I would like to include Territories as well. I am not sure how to do this, but I could easily see it becoming very complicated? Also it need to work with outlaws, that only have one (very bad) territory. Any ideas would be very welcomed =)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ben_S

Ben_S

Hive Guilder
Honored Tribesman
Jul 26, 2015
4,728
7,590
158
Southampton, UK
When I make rule propositions, I try not to influence other sections of the rules. So if a campaign want to use a different rating system, they can do it, without having to change other parts of the game.
That all makes sense, but it doesn't follow that the revised gang rating module should be only a minor tweak. You could have a totally different rating system that can still be swapped in and out without affecting other game rules.

I am working on some wording for a rating system that includes Stash and Injuries, but I would like to include Territories as well.
I'm not convinced this needs doing. It's true that, over the course of a campaign, having better territories is a big advantage. But that advantage comes from earning more money and buying more stuff. Since the value of that stuff is already accounted for in the rating, I don't see that you need to include the territories in the rating on top.
 

p0dde

Gang Champion
Mar 2, 2016
439
516
113
Copenhagen, Denmark
@Ben_S You are probably right that I should leave out territories. When writing the draft for the rule concept, I started thinking, how tunnels/vents affect the gangs power level, but I will leave it out. Thanks for the feedback.

I find that the scale of the 'tweak', can be hard to measure. Some players find a slight change to be drastic overreach, and others see it the other way around. My suggestion is base on what i feel is necessary, to make the rating system more fair, and what I feel realistically could see some play.

The idea of making the gang rating based on advances in stead of xp is interesting, but I am not sure it is an improvement. The way that increased stats and combinations of skills create synergies, means that the late advances are way more powerful. This is reflected very well in the exponetiality of the current advancement system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ben_S

Fold

Gang Hero
Oct 26, 2013
1,529
3,275
143
London E2
fromthewastes.com
In the rules, the winning gang in a campaign is the one with the highest gang rating. This shows you that the idea behind gang rating is really about prestige and reputation, not an accurate record of the gang's true power. This is the context in which, for me, injuries and missing fighters still contributing to gang rating makes perfect sense. After all, if gang rating is a measure of the strength of your reputation, why do competing gangs need to know that Bob has an injury that flares up occasionally? Or that Jimmy now has a limp? If anything getting injured and surviving only adds to the cachet surrounding a gang.

Sadly I find that few campaigns actually take the gang rating as a factor in determining who is winning. This encourages minimising gang rating in order to game the system (scenario choice, underdog bonus). Because, once you remove the biggest = best incentive, there is no reason not to minimise GR.

But if people included this rule as part of their campaign rules, you'd probably find that lots of concerns about the "fairness" of the gang rating system disappear.