PDA

View Full Version : What would you pay to make a unit Daemonic?



Avian
11-11-2009, 12:56
For the purpose of a Chaos campaign where armies can turn to the dark side get daemon-posessed units, I need to settle on a reasonable upgrade cost to turn an infantry unit daemonic.

The upgrade would be for normal infantry only (no cavalry, ogre-sized nasties, monsters, characters or anything like that). You'd be able to upgrade more than one unit depending on how far you've gone down the path of damnation.

For reference, being daemonic (in this edition) involves the following:

- 5+ Ward save (against anything)
- Immune to Psychology
- cause Fear
- magical attacks
- when you fail a break test (following the normal rules), you don't break but simply lose a number of wounds equal to the amount you failed the test by with no saves


What do you think would be a suitable upgrade cost?


A note for Undead players: undead units would not be able to take this upgrade (at least not for units, maybe characters), so if you do answer, don't answer according to what you'd pay to upgrade one of your own units, answer what you think other players should pay to upgrade their living units.

Alathir
11-11-2009, 13:02
Hmmm... those are some very nice bonuses, although you cant flee as a charge reaction which is a slight penalty. I could be way off mark here (posting first makes me nervous...) but perhaps +5 points/model for the upgrade? I think that works, I'd pay an extra 5 points to make my elven Spearmen get those upgrades.

Nice idea by the way! What kind of campaign are you running? Mind pm'ing me the details? My gaming group is eager to create our own and we are looking for a good ruleset.

Lijacote
11-11-2009, 13:08
Your soul!

I'm not sure you should have a blanket cost, since different units will interact with that upgrade in different ways (Daemonic Night Goblins, Daemonic Empire Swordsmen?)... but given it's available for everyone, I'd go for 4 on gut instinct. The more models you have in the upgraded unit, the better it is due to the breaking thing and Fear, but it'll quickly mount up to something very high. Daemonic Swordsmen would cost 8 points, wouldn't they*?

I guess 4 is a bit low for them. 4+ save with parry bonus in addition to ward save, more secure breaking and Fear. No, 4 is too low. The undead pay a hefty price to gain some of those benefits (though they do rise up after that) and suck a lot. 5 or 6.

I'm voting 6. That special rule has some really great potential with some armies, and is a good bonus for anyone. Daemonic Clanrats? Leadership 10 would have you live forever. Empire Generals give that, don't they*?

6 it is.

*EDIT: Apparently I am wrong. Damn. 9 LD, 10 points.

TheSil
11-11-2009, 13:11
maybe it helps to think what daemonic units would be worth without the daemonic rule?

best example are daemonettes I'd say. how much would you pay for them? Compared to empire free company they are a lot faster, penetrate armour, have more WS and initiative. Other than that they are equally vulnerable. So I would probably pay around 7-8 pts for a model, which means that about 4 points as upgrade would be a reasonably good margin (which was also my intuitive guess)

Avian
11-11-2009, 13:13
Nice idea by the way! What kind of campaign are you running? Mind pm'ing me the details? My gaming group is eager to create our own and we are looking for a good ruleset.

I've been asked to run a little local campaign and being a lazy sort of person I though to use my generic Little War in the Borderlands (http://www.avianon.net/downloads.php?f=campaign_littlewar) map campaign rules with a little "Path to Damnation" set of additional rules tacked on for flavour.
My idea would be that armies (well, non-chaos ones anyway) would start off as pure and could then choose to advance down the path to damnation little by little (chaos armies would naturally be some way down it to begin with). The further down the more chaos special rules you get, but if you play against an army that is more corrupt that you, you will also gain some sort of campaign bonus depending on the difference in corruption levels. So for example a battle you win might give you, say 6 campaign points, but if you are at corruption level 1 and your opponent is at level 4, you gain an additional 3 campaign points.
Something like that, anyway. I'm still in the brainstorming phase. :)





Daemonic Swordsmen would cost 8 points, wouldn't they?
Swordsmen cost 6 pts each. ;)


Empire Generals give that, don't they?
Empire generals are Ld9.

rtunian
11-11-2009, 13:43
out of curiosity, is there any reason at all to stay "pure" ?? perhaps, some kind of bonus against the daemonic ??

Avian
11-11-2009, 13:44
Quite possibly. Still in the brainstorming phase here. :)

Lijacote
11-11-2009, 13:46
Swordsmen cost 6 pts each. ;)
Empire generals are Ld9.

I have lost my face.

O&G'sRule
11-11-2009, 14:49
I'd say less than they normally cost, that seems to be the norm.

Thunderfist
11-11-2009, 15:07
I voted 4 points.

Depends on the unit though.

Daemonic Clanrat slaves! Autobreaking fear causing units for 6p would be pretty awesome indeed.

Or just Clanrats with it (8,5-9p).

Just give them a Warbanner or something like that and your enemy might get trouble winning the fight vs 4+ AS (normal Clanrats) and 5+ Ward in a big unit with 6 CR base. And if they lose even a single round of combat they break.

Perhaps 5 more points would be better...

Urgat
11-11-2009, 15:12
Mmh, dunno, demonic gobs? Depends on the unit, certainly demon squigs (hooooo) would cost more than demonic gobs, but what about demonic trolls (oh man :p). I'd pay 2pts w/o any qualm for my gobs to just be immune to psychology, but then again, my horde army wouldn't be horde anymore, so I guess I'd stay clean anyway.

Avian
11-11-2009, 15:14
I voted 4 points.

Depends on the unit though.

Daemonic Clanrat slaves! Autobreaking fear causing units for 6p would be pretty awesome indeed.
Heh, basically slightly better Skeletons you can't raise back for 2 pts less (disregarding that most Skeletons are "free"). :D

puppetmaster24
11-11-2009, 15:25
I have lost my face.

if someone finds it i am sure they will give it back.
But i do agree with your initial point.

DarkTerror
11-11-2009, 15:36
The point value should definately depend on the cost of the infantry.

For example, spearmen only 3 points or so. But Swordmasters 7. I don't know the exact points of either, but I was thinking +50% rounding down.

mattschuur
11-11-2009, 16:09
Personally I've found that giving a unit a massive rule like Daemonic to be problematic points wise. There's a lot of factors involved and quickly the task of figuring out what it costs for each individual unit in each army will become a Herculian task. The simplest answer is to make it simple.

Example. Stage 1 of corruption could be as simple as gaining the Chaos rule to reroll psychology tests. This could explained that the power of chaos is beginning to effect them. Stage 2 could be either flat out immune to psychology or stubborn. etc. You don't need to rush to Daemonic, slowly build it up.

Another aspect could be individual units beginning to dedicate themselves to a specific gods. After they gain say fear, ITP, and stubborn (or the daemon break rules) allow them as the last act of throwing themselves into chaos to dedicate to a god. High Elf Spearman of Nurgle, crazy fun.

As far as flat out Daemonic goes, I think it would be best served to be only for characters. A daemon takes over a lord and leads his chaos infused legions to war. A whole daemonic empire army doesn't really fit any fluff and brings about the forementioned problems with points. an empire army falling to chaos but remaining mortal is fluffy and i think much cooler.

As far as what purity gets you, it could be dependent upon the corruption level of their opponent. A pure army against a Level 1 corrupt force could have an extra 150 points. Or, my favourite, allow them to take special rules on specific units. An example would be a Bretonian army could have the 'crusader' rule when facing a Level 4 corruption army. Crusader rule basically allowing ITP and eternal hatred.

If you're decided upon the daemonic rule for a set points total, the best thing you can do is sit down with a piece of paper and divide every unit into poor, average, good and great categories. Examples- Goblins poor, halberdiers average, Marauders good and swordmasters great. Then give a standard points increase for each of the 4 categories, relative to their game effectiveness. My opinion would be 3 for bad, 4 for average, 6 for good and 8 for great.

Good Luck and have fun!

Matt Schuur

Enigmatik1
11-11-2009, 16:12
Heh, basically slightly better Skeletons you can't raise back for 2 pts less (disregarding that most Skeletons are "free"). :D

Avian, don't make me hurt you! :D

The SkaerKrow
11-11-2009, 16:27
My first response would be 50% of the price of the unit, without magic item upgrades (banners, champion items, what-have-you).

Red Metal
11-11-2009, 16:37
I think it should depend entirely on the unit and race.

For example, a Dwarven Ironbreaker, who already has a great Armor Save, would now get a Ward Save, as well. That's a pretty beafy Dwarf, that also Causes Fear - great for close combat, which Dwarves love. On the other hand a Wood Elf Glade Guard may not get to use the "Casues Fear" (as they will always try not to be close to their opponent for shooting reasons) and they will be crippled by not being able to Flee. So, for them, Deamonic is not much of a bonus.

Tokamak
11-11-2009, 16:49
Next to a willingness to pay (WTP) there's also always a willingness to accept (WTA). I'm wondering what the WTA is for daemon players to lose all those benefits.

Baggers
11-11-2009, 16:54
My gut instinct would say something along the lines of an extra 40% of the unit cost. so a unit of ten high elf archers costting a 110 points would now cost 154points.

The main thing to point out that giving the unit the option to be demonic should cost the unit not the individual. Maybe make it a flat rate of 100 points. A core unit should be cheap to but expensive to make Demonic.

Avian
11-11-2009, 17:01
Then give a standard points increase for each of the 4 categories, relative to their game effectiveness. My opinion would be 3 for bad, 4 for average, 6 for good and 8 for great.
I don't think that is really necessary, because the usefulness of both Fear and (In)stability increases the larger your unit is and the usefulness of a Ward saves and Immune to Psychology increases the weedier the model is.

Thus having it be a larger percentage of a model's cost the cheaper the model is makes sense - ergo a flat rate is a good solution if you ask me.

And it is significantly easier to implement.

Lordsaradain
11-11-2009, 21:30
Makes quite abig differance if its a marauder or warrior you upgrade, but I'd say around 3pts.

ChaosVC
12-11-2009, 03:13
I would go for 8pts~10pts per model. Too much advantage to be had, imagine an empire army full of these cheap speed bumpers and a large group with griffon banner. How about saurus spearmen and chaos warriors, Whoopi do!

Ward.
12-11-2009, 03:54
I'd pay 3 points to make my clanrat units demonic, 2-3 points for the slaves.

Any more and they become overpriced and loose their synergy with the rest of the list.

rtunian
13-11-2009, 16:51
Quite possibly. Still in the brainstorming phase here. :)

well you really got me thinking, so here are some random ideas that i had. i don't know if this will be of any use to you, but here they are anyway :):

- after x campaign turns, an army that remains pure is visited by a mysterious stranger who gives the army general a choice of anti-daemon magic items. choose from a sword, a suit of armor, or a bound spell item

- pure armies get x d3 rerolls per game against damned armies, where x corresponds to the level of damnation of the opponent army

- pure armies are charged with the destruction of damned armies, and as such, damned army standards captured become a currency used to purchase upgrades for the pure armies (battle standards are worth a multiple of regular standards). upgrades can be anything from increased stats for a particular unit (along the lines of veteran status), to x rerolls, to magic items, to additional attributes to a character (along the lines of warbands character development), to additional points allotment in fielding their army

- pure armies all have hatred for damned armies

- pure army generals may, once per game against a damned army, issue a battlecry that automatically rallies all fleeing troops

- pure army general has +1 ld and +6" influence range (bigger ld bubble)

oCoYoRoAoKo
13-11-2009, 17:40
hmm, i dont think that the daemonic rules are something you can put a set points cost on. It would be better as something like +X% of the units starting cost. The reason for this is that a daemonic Chaos Warrior is WAAYYY better then a daemonic goblin.

Also, the damonic instability rules get far better the higher LD you have. If i had to put a cost on it i would say approx +50% on the unit value.

Cy.

Leogun_91
13-11-2009, 18:03
Based on unit cost as follows....
equal to or less than 5pts per model:
Normal: 4pts
If fear causer: 3pts
If Unbreakable: 1pts (as daemonic instability replaces unbreakable in this case)
If Stubborn: 6pts

Equal to or less than 10pts per model:
Normal: 6pts
If fear causer: 4pts
If Unbreakable: 2pts
If Stubborn: 9pts

More than 10pts per model:
Normal: 8pts
If fear causer: 5pts
If unbreakable: 2pts
If Stubborn: 12pts

Hero choice:
Normal: 20pts
If fear causer: 15pts
If Unbreakable: Free
If Stubborn: 30pts

Lord choice:
Normal: 40pts
If fear causer: 30pts
If Unbreakable: Free
If Stubborn: 60pts

In case of models that are both fear causers and stubborn use the price for stubborn troops and for units that are both unbreakable and fear cuasers use the price for unbreakable troops.

Additional note: Models with the forest spirit rule may not be upgraded to daemons.

Sygerrik
13-11-2009, 18:12
I think it should definitely be % based, not points based. I would pay a lot more to make a Swordmaster daemonic than a Spearman, for example. I also think there should be a second rate for undead models, since it is not quite as great an upgrade for them.

I would say 35-40% for most units, 30% for units that currently cause fear, and 20% for undead.

isidril93
13-11-2009, 18:24
+25% rounded up

Enrico
13-11-2009, 18:31
You know what's interesting? The 4 points per model that the poll indicates as the most preferred cost would price Daemon core units without the Daemon rule at 8 points a model.

That seems about right to me

DarkTerror
13-11-2009, 20:06
You know what's interesting? The 4 points per model that the poll indicates as the most preferred cost would price Daemon core units without the Daemon rule at 8 points a model.

That seems about right to me

Right, but take 4 points off a flamer...


and it still doesn't come close to working. The system HAS TO be based off the base unit prices (e.g. +50%). Swordmasters are indeed crazy good with the daemonics rule. Empire... umm... well, anything isn't amazing with the daemonic rules.

Making the upgrade a straight points increase (e.g. +4 points) will definately benefit powerful units tons more than weak ones. I'd see it as a flop, personally.

Avian
13-11-2009, 20:16
See post #21 as to why a percentage cost doesn't really work. A 90 pt Daemonic Night Goblin unit isn't going anywhere simply because a 5+ Ward and (In)stability means it dies very, very slowly. Meanwhile, if you throw it into combat in support of another unit, it can really help with the Fear + Outnumbering fun. And being Immune to Psychology when you have Ld5 is much better than with Ld8.



- after x campaign turns, an army that remains pure is visited by a mysterious stranger who gives the army general a choice of anti-daemon magic items. choose from a sword, a suit of armor, or a bound spell item
This is Warhammer, not Harry-Frickin-Potter. :p



hmm, i dont think that the daemonic rules are something you can put a set points cost on. It would be better as something like +X% of the units starting cost. The reason for this is that a daemonic Chaos Warrior is WAAYYY better then a daemonic goblin.
Yes, which is why you pay more for the Chaos Warrior than the Goblin in the first place.



Based on unit cost as follows....
equal to or less than 5pts per model:
Normal: 4pts
If fear causer: 3pts
...
Too complicated.

decker_cky
13-11-2009, 20:24
IMO, it should cost whatever a musician costs in the unit (or 1/2 of the champion cost for non-musician models). For a night goblin, it bumps them up to 7 pts, but for more elite units, it's a few extra points (not many daemonic units have armour).

blackjack
13-11-2009, 20:33
Well I am just now using an all cav WOC army . Paying 4-6 pts for those upgrades would be an absolute no brainer for my chaos knights!

The only way to make sense of an upgrade like that is to set it as a percent of unit cost, say 20%

Avian
13-11-2009, 20:37
Well I am just now using an all cav WOC army . Paying 4-6 pts for those upgrades would be an absolute no brainer for my chaos knights!
Infantry only. Read first post.

decker_cky
13-11-2009, 20:40
Even an all tzeentch WoC army....2+/4+ daemonic infantry. How much should that cost?

Avian
13-11-2009, 20:49
A bit more than 2+/6+ infantry, which are 1) already very expensive, and 2) Movement 4 (which is the main problem with Chaos Warriors). ;)


I think people are missing the point a bit. Yes, a very nasty unit that becomes Daemonic would be very nasty, but it was very nasty to begin with. It is proportionally better for a unit that was not nasty in the first place, which people seem to not really grasp.

DarkTerror
13-11-2009, 20:53
See post #21 as to why a percentage cost doesn't really work. A 90 pt Daemonic Night Goblin unit isn't going anywhere simply because a 5+ Ward and (In)stability means it dies very, very slowly. Meanwhile, if you throw it into combat in support of another unit, it can really help with the Fear + Outnumbering fun. And being Immune to Psychology when you have Ld5 is much better than with Ld8.


Avian, you are comparing a unit with itself instead of unit advantages between units.

Comparison example:

30 Goblins (90 points) --- +3 points turn into daemonic makes the unit 180 points. Points difference is 90 points.

VS.

21 Swordmasters (294 points??) --- +3 points turn into daemonic makes the unit 357 points. Points difference is 63 points. *And yes, with Swordmasters, I'd make them that large*

Now let's Analyze the advantages each unit receives to determine if the value is approximately equal.

Unit gains:
- 5+ Ward save (against anything) - Who benefits the most? Units with the highest points cost. One of the swordmaster's primary problems, getting cut down prior to combat is helped enormously. Goblins don't get targeted by ranged weapons very often.

- Immune to Psychology - Who benefits the most? Swordmasters. Why? Goblins might be more prone to running away and failing psychology tests, but relative to their points cost, the advantage of not failing such tests goes to the Swordmasters.

- cause Fear - Who benefits the most? Equal.
Goblins outnumber, but Swordmasters having their opponents fail a fear test is more valuable during a game.

- magical attacks - Who benefits the most? Swordmasters. They're faster (able to get to targets which require magical weapons) and can actually hurt opponents, unlike Goblins.

- Unbreakable/Instability - Who benefits the most? Swordmasters. The bane of Swordmasters is impact hits/fleeing at the start of combat. A Swordmaster unit wins in combat. Being unbreakable for Goblins is mostly for tarpitting.


Who wins? Swordmasters, far and away. Who pays more? Goblins.

People would be stupid to not put this daemonic ability on their best units if it's a flat cost, assuming they don't have these abilities already.

Beyond stupid actually. It's a flat-out no brainer.

rtunian
13-11-2009, 20:53
This is Warhammer, not Harry-Frickin-Potter. :p

sorry avian, but what i suggested has serious precedent in the warhammer universe. the white dwarf, one of the oldest and most recognized icons of warhammer, is a mysterious stranger who randomly shows up to join a dwarf host on the day of a big battle. my idea was a variant of that.

Avian
13-11-2009, 21:10
Now let's Analyze the advantages each unit receives to determine if the value is approximately equal.
Your comparison is not meaningful. You either need equal number of models or equal initial cost per unit or the analysis will be all over the place. :p

DarkTerror
13-11-2009, 21:16
Your comparison is not meaningful. You either need equal number of models or equal initial cost per unit or the analysis will be all over the place. :p

Huh? It's not all over the place at all. The point is unit costs.

Units without the same initial cost do not have the same advantages brought upon them with the upgrade.

If you really want to, fine. Add an extra 9 Swordmasters onto the unit of 21, making them 30 strong.

Swordmasters still win in exactly the same way. Take some time and think it through.

Enrico
13-11-2009, 21:18
Yeah, they have to be pointed differently to show who benefits more...
If they cost the same what the hell would be the point of the comparison?

Avian
13-11-2009, 21:21
Because if the cost was the same you could test the percentage cost (they'd both pay the same) and see if they did in fact get the same bonus.
They should if that is a good way of doing it. If they didn't get the same bonus, then the percentage cost isn't a good solution.

If the number of models was the same, you could test the flat rate cost (they'd again pay the same) and again see if they did in fact get the same bonus.
They should if that is a good way of doing it. If they didn't get the same bonus, then the flat rate cost isn't a good solution.


One of DarkTerror's points was that although one of the rules was better for the Goblins, the Swordmaster unit got the bigger bonus because the Swordmaster unit was more expensive. That is a comparison in which the Goblin unit is set to lose from the outset because he DECIDED to make the Swordmaster unit more expensive.

;)

DarkTerror
13-11-2009, 21:26
Because if the cost was the same you could test the percentage cost (they'd both pay the same) and see if they did in fact get the same bonus.
They should if that is a good way of doing it. If they didn't get the same bonus, then the percentage cost isn't a good solution.

If the number of models was the same, you could test the flat rate cost (they'd again pay the same) and again see if they did in fact get the same bonus.
They should if that is a good way of doing it. If they didn't get the same bonus, then the flat rate cost isn't a good solution.

;)

Your testing method is faulty. The testing units must reflect actual units as they will be used on the field. 30 Swordmasters compared to 30 Goblins is an irrational comparison due to unit sizes.

None the less, Swordmasters win either way and prove that a flat points cost increase doesn't work.


One of DarkTerror's points was that although one of the rules was better for the Goblins, the Swordmaster unit got the bigger bonus because the Swordmaster unit was more expensive. That is a comparison in which the Goblin unit is set to lose from the outset because he MADE the Swordmaster unit more expensive.

Exactly. Making one unit of a more expensive kind proves value. And that's even being short on models. Being short on models is in no way an advantage, hence why the numbers do not have to be equal.

Avian
13-11-2009, 21:37
You are saying that the unit you made more expensive get the bigger bonus because it is more expensive. That doesn't prove anything, that follows automatically from the premise of the comparison.



If 30 Swordmasters vs 30 Goblins does not seem meaningful, pick different units that are more comparable.

Edit
13-11-2009, 21:48
I would do a %, not a set cost, as has been mentioned.

demonic gobos are not as scary as demonic templeguard, etc

DarkTerror
13-11-2009, 22:06
Apparently you don't get my point and examples, so I'll stop. Please realize though that there's a reason that so many people object to the flat points increase.

Good luck.

AtmaTheWanderer
14-11-2009, 03:54
(10-Armor Save)-(6-Basic Leadership) = Cost (MINIMUM 2)

No armor save counts as 7.
Armor save does not count shield+hw bonus.

x2 If Stubborn.
x2 if Cavalry.
x5 If Monster
x10 If Hero
x15 If Lord.

There you go.

Now a Skaven Slave with nothing costs 2 points, a Shield-Carrying Clanrat costs 4, a Chaos Warrior costs an impressive 9, A Chaos Knight is 24 (at least I think they're LD9 off the top of my head.

Enrico
14-11-2009, 09:04
Apparently you don't get my point and examples, so I'll stop. Please realize though that there's a reason that so many people object to the flat points increase.

Good luck.

Your advice is the advice that makes sense. He would do well to heed it if he is serious about this business.

Eta
14-11-2009, 10:13
....

Now a Skaven Slave with nothing costs 2 points, a Shield-Carrying Clanrat costs 4, a Chaos Warrior costs an impressive 9, A Chaos Knight is 24 (at least I think they're LD9 off the top of my head.

The only things with Ld9 in the WoC book are some lords...

Greetings
Eta

mattschuur
19-11-2009, 08:10
Its actually very simple. Your not talking about creating units from nothing, your using existing troops with existing abilities and options. The comparison is simple, look at it this way. 10 sword masters and 30 goblins ( I use common with shields). Now, looking at other rules that potentially could be added, who has the advantage? example, hatred. 30 goblins with maybe 5 or 6 attacks at Ws 2 and S3 will gain some help from hatred but no where near as much as 10 swordmasters who have double the attacks with WS 6 and S 5. Swordmasters gain more from hatred.

Look at stubborn- Goblins, with Ld 6, my common boyz, gain less from stubborn as compared to swordmasters with LD 8 combined with squad size and survivability (which is the same T and armor wise) swordmasters benefit.

How about armor piercing? There shouldn't be any doubt that 10 S5 attacks with armour piercing is infinitely better than 5 or 6 S 3 attacks. Swordmasters gain more from armor piercing.

What's my point? It's ludicrous to claim that 2 units with a wide gap in function and capability should pay the same points for an upgrade. Want another example, characters. Why is it a great weapon or shield or what not costs more for a lord character than a hero? Because the Lord is better and the options are much more dangerous with the lord so are thus priced accordingly. Another example, what's scarier with the unbreakable rule? 30 Night goblins with spears or 12 Chaos warriors with shields?

matt schuur

Zilverug
19-11-2009, 11:36
I'd probably start at the current cost of a daemonette (being the most boring daemonic core unit causing the least number of complaints) and then adjust that cost to the stats and abilities of the unit you want to make daemonic.

EdFireborn
19-11-2009, 11:41
+50% of model cost.

with a minimum of +5 points

Grimstonefire
19-11-2009, 12:44
This is a tricky one to work out. I like the suggestion of basing it initially on the cost of the command models somehow (like a musician for instance), as this makes elite units more expensive as a starting point, and it scales up and down reasonably fairly.

I think movement should be taken into account, as should the armour save and base leadership. As to how all these would be calculated is beyond me.

I don't have the time for mathhammer here, but something like this;

Daemonic costs the same as a musician per model (or maybe musician -2pts?)
+1 per leadership over 7
-1 per leadership under 7
+1 per movement over 4
-1 per leadership under 4
+1 per armour save (without shield)

If the cost is 0 or less it now costs 1 pt/ model

etc