Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:31:36


Post by: Daedalus81


While everyone is whining about T'au -- it looks like extra mods can matter, but only when they're counteracting each other.



Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:42:37


Post by: Amishprn86


I guess no reason to play quins unless their rules amendment is heavily changed to help them survive. It was already hard to play them as is. I'mm just play Coven DE for now lol.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:49:49


Post by: harlokin


I wonder what they'll do with Lightning Fast Reacions.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:52:36


Post by: Aash


Interesting that this is specifically for hit rolls rather than all modifiers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting that this is specifically for hit rolls rather than all modifiers.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:55:27


Post by: TheAvengingKnee


They were the most common issue for it, not fun to not be able to hit a target at all. Similar to why most rules that reduce attacks do so to minimum of 1.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:57:43


Post by: catbarf


It sounds like this applies to melee, as well as shooting, which will be a nerf for units that can stack +1s to hit from various sources (eg Carnifexes).


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 16:59:16


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Note that this doesn't make multiple stacking hits/minuses useless.

If you have a +2 to hit, for example, and your enemy has a -1 to hit, you're still getting that +1 to hit.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:01:32


Post by: Kcalehc


Interesting to see this, and how it interacts with the cover rules we've seen. Some units that have -1 to hit, gain less benefit from some of those cover types that add an additional -1 to hit then. May also render some psychic powers less effective overall.

And isn't '6's always hit' an Ork thing? Do they get a different rule now I wonder.

Also 'an unmodified 6 always hits' how does that interact with rules that proc off 6's to hit. I assume that it still hits, but doesn't 'count as a 6' for the purposes of the extra whatever (if a modifier would make it not a 6).


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:01:38


Post by: alextroy


Applying a Maximum of +1/-1 to rules other than To-Hit would break the game. Just AP alone is based on the fact that you can have more than a -1 to Saves.

I won't be surprised if the Fail on Unmodified 1 and Succeed on Unmodified 6 stays for most rolls (Saves excluded on the Succeed on 6 side).


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:06:46


Post by: nekooni


 Kcalehc wrote:

Also 'an unmodified 6 always hits' how does that interact with rules that proc off 6's to hit. I assume that it still hits, but doesn't 'count as a 6' for the purposes of the extra whatever (if a modifier would make it not a 6).


That's really easy: If the proc needs an unmodified roll of 6, it will proc when you roll an unmodified 6 regardless of any modifiers. If it needs a roll of 6+ (and your modified result is a 5), you still hit but you don't proc.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:08:42


Post by: catbarf


 Kcalehc wrote:
Interesting to see this, and how it interacts with the cover rules we've seen. Some units that have -1 to hit, gain less benefit from some of those cover types that add an additional -1 to hit then. May also render some psychic powers less effective overall.

And isn't '6's always hit' an Ork thing? Do they get a different rule now I wonder.

Also 'an unmodified 6 always hits' how does that interact with rules that proc off 6's to hit. I assume that it still hits, but doesn't 'count as a 6' for the purposes of the extra whatever (if a modifier would make it not a 6).


With modifiers capped at -1, 'Always hits on 6s' will literally only ever be relevant to something that only hit on 6s to start with.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:10:47


Post by: tulun


 catbarf wrote:
 Kcalehc wrote:
Interesting to see this, and how it interacts with the cover rules we've seen. Some units that have -1 to hit, gain less benefit from some of those cover types that add an additional -1 to hit then. May also render some psychic powers less effective overall.

And isn't '6's always hit' an Ork thing? Do they get a different rule now I wonder.

Also 'an unmodified 6 always hits' how does that interact with rules that proc off 6's to hit. I assume that it still hits, but doesn't 'count as a 6' for the purposes of the extra whatever (if a modifier would make it not a 6).


With modifiers capped at -1, 'Always hits on 6s' will literally only ever be relevant to something that only hit on 6s to start with.


It's probably a catch all. I reckon we'll eventually see something that breaks this rule, and we'll have something that can lower modifiers to -2, or something.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:12:18


Post by: Kanluwen


 Daedalus81 wrote:
While everyone is whining about T'au -- it looks like extra mods can matter, but only when they're counteracting each other.


Stu said this basically on day one.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:17:01


Post by: Amishprn86


There's a difference in said and RAW


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:21:07


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


It's a crap implementation. You have no reason not to move and shoot at a hard to hit target. No sense of scaling whatsoever. Good job GW


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 17:49:38


Post by: Spoletta


Makes for quite a buff to assault weapons.

If you intend to attack a target with a -1, you may as well advance.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 19:11:09


Post by: Tyel


Spoletta wrote:
Makes for quite a buff to assault weapons.

If you intend to attack a target with a -1, you may as well advance.


Think that's intentional.

Very pro this. Yes it will change the meta, yes the points of various things will have to change - and yes, from the perspective of "everything dies too fast" - this seems tailored to *throw everything into the middle of the board and watch it die".

But stacked negatives to hit were crap gameplay.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 19:54:14


Post by: tulun


I am very curious if certain stratagems and abilities won't give negatives to WS or BS instead as a work around to this.

The difference between +1 BS and +1 to hit is massive now, as it adjusts the range you can hit in.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 19:57:18


Post by: Castozor


I´m overall in favor of preventing ridiculous -x to hit modifiers, but this is a lazy fix. As said why not advance my assault weapons now or move my heavy weapon infantry squad if the target has -1 to hit anyway.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 19:57:57


Post by: catbarf


I think it would have been better to cap penalties from the target to -1. That way Advance and Heavy would still have relevant disadvantages, without allowing the constant -2 or worse stacking that neuters BS4+ armies. I'm also not clear on the necessity of capping bonuses; are there any really exploitative builds that rely on a +2 or better?


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 20:06:10


Post by: Daedalus81


 catbarf wrote:
are there any really exploitative builds that rely on a +2 or better?


Not really. Could just be future proofing though. Tzaangor bows used to catch a lot of mods to get their auto-wounds, but that's about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Castozor wrote:
I´m overall in favor of preventing ridiculous -x to hit modifiers, but this is a lazy fix. As said why not advance my assault weapons now or move my heavy weapon infantry squad if the target has -1 to hit anyway.


I understand this complaint, but if I view the rule from the lens of T'au or other mid to low BS units then it is probably more fair to cap at -1 instead of -2.

And honestly - how many scenarios were you shooting something and got upset, because running your assault weapons would put you at -2? Did those devastators shooting the aircraft actually have to move?




Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 21:00:16


Post by: Sarigar


Checking if I understand correctly.

If a Harlequin unit has a -1 to hit and a unit shooting at it with a +1 to hit, the two offset. But, one can then add Lightning Fast Reaction stratagem to the Harlequins and it becomes a -1 to hit.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 21:12:16


Post by: tneva82


 catbarf wrote:
 Kcalehc wrote:
Interesting to see this, and how it interacts with the cover rules we've seen. Some units that have -1 to hit, gain less benefit from some of those cover types that add an additional -1 to hit then. May also render some psychic powers less effective overall.

And isn't '6's always hit' an Ork thing? Do they get a different rule now I wonder.

Also 'an unmodified 6 always hits' how does that interact with rules that proc off 6's to hit. I assume that it still hits, but doesn't 'count as a 6' for the purposes of the extra whatever (if a modifier would make it not a 6).


With modifiers capped at -1, 'Always hits on 6s' will literally only ever be relevant to something that only hit on 6s to start with.


Well lucky then that there's plenty of units that can end up with that? Leman russ etc for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sarigar wrote:
Checking if I understand correctly.

If a Harlequin unit has a -1 to hit and a unit shooting at it with a +1 to hit, the two offset. But, one can then add Lightning Fast Reaction stratagem to the Harlequins and it becomes a -1 to hit.


Correct.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 21:59:41


Post by: Castozor


 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I´m overall in favor of preventing ridiculous -x to hit modifiers, but this is a lazy fix. As said why not advance my assault weapons now or move my heavy weapon infantry squad if the target has -1 to hit anyway.


I understand this complaint, but if I view the rule from the lens of T'au or other mid to low BS units then it is probably more fair to cap at -1 instead of -2.

And honestly - how many scenarios were you shooting something and got upset, because running your assault weapons would put you at -2? Did those devastators shooting the aircraft actually have to move?



At least before it was an actual penalty, now there is no reason not to do it and that just feels wrong. If the enemy or me is fielding plague bearers there is no reason not to move unless you fear a charge now, not to mention the new obscure terrain does absolutely nothing for them. This is bad design in my mind, terrain should be useful for them as well, there is now 0 reason not to just park them into the open unless yu can avoid LOS otherwise and good luck with that on a 30 man squad. It's the same reason I have always hated that my friends IW ignored cover, so what reason exactly is there for me to move tactically then? Since there is 0 reason to do that as he ignores the rules anyway and now units with a -1 to hit when moving also can ignore that when the target has a modifier already.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 22:08:52


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Alpha Legion Sorcerers dedicated to Nurgle have to find something else to do it seems.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 22:25:35


Post by: Trickstick


I just really want them to change the "rerolls before modifiers" rule back to how it was. I find it unintuitive, and much preferred the old system. I understand why it was changed, to make rerolls less OP when combined with modifiers. I'm hoping that the limiting of modifiers will make rerolls easier to balance and they will revert back to the old way.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 22:46:58


Post by: Galas


 Trickstick wrote:
I just really want them to change the "rerolls before modifiers" rule back to how it was. I find it unintuitive, and much preferred the old system. I understand why it was changed, to make rerolls less OP when combined with modifiers. I'm hoping that the limiting of modifiers will make rerolls easier to balance and they will revert back to the old way.


Not only that but space marines received a new better version for rerolls (Unless you are ba, DA or SW because feth those in particular) that makes that "nerf" to rerolls useless.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 22:52:34


Post by: Martel732


 Galas wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
I just really want them to change the "rerolls before modifiers" rule back to how it was. I find it unintuitive, and much preferred the old system. I understand why it was changed, to make rerolls less OP when combined with modifiers. I'm hoping that the limiting of modifiers will make rerolls easier to balance and they will revert back to the old way.


Not only that but space marines received a new better version for rerolls (Unless you are ba, DA or SW because feth those in particular) that makes that "nerf" to rerolls useless.


The RAI on that will likely catchup in 9th.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 22:55:15


Post by: yukishiro1


This is a step in the right direction in theory, but worse than useless without nerfing rerolls too. All this does is make rerolls even more powerful, and I don't think there's a single person in the entire game who thought rerolls were underpowered in 8th.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/25 22:56:24


Post by: Martel732


 Galas wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
I just really want them to change the "rerolls before modifiers" rule back to how it was. I find it unintuitive, and much preferred the old system. I understand why it was changed, to make rerolls less OP when combined with modifiers. I'm hoping that the limiting of modifiers will make rerolls easier to balance and they will revert back to the old way.


Not only that but space marines received a new better version for rerolls (Unless you are ba, DA or SW because feth those in particular) that makes that "nerf" to rerolls useless.


The RAI on that will likely catchup in 9th.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 06:33:10


Post by: Spoletta


Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).

They are much much much better than + and - modifiers.

A rr1 will always be an effectiveness increase of 16%, no matter who has it, which weapon it has and what it is shooting at. Same for rr1 hits or wounds. It is a mathematically nice way to give a fixed effectiveness buff. Direct modifiers depend a lot on who has them, and in the case of wounding modifiers also depends on the target.

Something that always has the same relative effect is easier to price that something which wildly changes in behaviour depending on conditions.

Full rerolls are a different matter.

Full reroll hits are better the worse BS you have. This means that applied in SM, it is fine. They all have the same BS mostly, so a full reroll to hit is a flat 33% increase in effectiveness. It is simply double the bonus of an rr1.
It gets sketchy when hit maluses appear, but luckily in 9th they are capped at -1.

Full rerolls to wound are dumb.
The effect is so variable and depends on so many conditions, that it cannot be balanced. In fact, Gman in the end was changed.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 07:16:23


Post by: Jidmah


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Alpha Legion Sorcerers dedicated to Nurgle have to find something else to do it seems.


You can still buff non-infantry, non-character, non-helbrute units though.

The Shokk-Jump Dragsta got boned though, it has a low RoF gun with +2 hit, because GW didn't want to give an ork BS3+.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 07:20:05


Post by: Karol


So if you run around ruind doing back flips shoting your multi melta at a target in dense cover, you have the same chance of hiting it, if you stood still and aimed? Hilarious.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 07:26:25


Post by: Spoletta


Karol wrote:
So if you run around ruind doing back flips shoting your multi melta at a target in dense cover, you have the same chance of hiting it, if you stood still and aimed? Hilarious.


You can dance your way toward your target, but only just as far as you could get there by walking. Move even a millimeter more and you can't shoot!


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 09:33:19


Post by: Nym


 Jidmah wrote:
The Shokk-Jump Dragsta got boned though, it has a low RoF gun with +2 hit, because GW didn't want to give an ork BS3+.

I hadn't thought of this... This is... rather unfortunate, to speak politely. :/

Let's hope Day 1 FAQ will fix these few units that got boned by the new rules.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 10:45:21


Post by: Blackie


 Jidmah wrote:


The Shokk-Jump Dragsta got boned though, it has a low RoF gun with +2 hit, because GW didn't want to give an ork BS3+.


I wouldn't be so sure. The new rule is clearly intented to cap overlapping bonuses and auras, while the +2 to hit on the main weapon of the SJD is an inner ability. It could be easily fixed by FAQing the model's datasheet: BS4+ base (it would make sense as the main weapon is handled by a Gretchin), +1 to hit for the Kustom Shokk Rifle, -1 to hit for the Rokkit Launcha.

Freeboterz dakkajets might suffer from the new rule though, as they hit on 3s only by stacking two different abilities/auras, but at least they can still be a useful tool to trigger the +1 to hit aura for other units.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 11:01:42


Post by: Jidmah


True, basically all freeboota grot gunners are worthless now.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 12:40:21


Post by: vipoid


This rule seems like classic GW design: we're not actually solving a problem, we're just trading one problem for another.


Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).


I think the problem lies far more in auras being constant and free. It removes almost every meaningful decisions as you don't have to choose which unit to buff, nor allocate any resources to make it happen.

The only possible limit lies with how many units you can physically fit within 6" of a given model, though even that is rarely an issue given the ability to daisy-chain units (so all you need is for one model in a unit to have his foot in the aura).


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 12:40:52


Post by: BaconCatBug


While I like the fact that, for example, being -2 to hit will let you still be -1 to hit against something with +1 to hit, I dislike the fact it means Heavy weapons now have no downside to being used against "hard to hit" units.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 12:43:20


Post by: Daedalus81


 Castozor wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I´m overall in favor of preventing ridiculous -x to hit modifiers, but this is a lazy fix. As said why not advance my assault weapons now or move my heavy weapon infantry squad if the target has -1 to hit anyway.


I understand this complaint, but if I view the rule from the lens of T'au or other mid to low BS units then it is probably more fair to cap at -1 instead of -2.

And honestly - how many scenarios were you shooting something and got upset, because running your assault weapons would put you at -2? Did those devastators shooting the aircraft actually have to move?



At least before it was an actual penalty, now there is no reason not to do it and that just feels wrong. If the enemy or me is fielding plague bearers there is no reason not to move unless you fear a charge now, not to mention the new obscure terrain does absolutely nothing for them. This is bad design in my mind, terrain should be useful for them as well, there is now 0 reason not to just park them into the open unless yu can avoid LOS otherwise and good luck with that on a 30 man squad. It's the same reason I have always hated that my friends IW ignored cover, so what reason exactly is there for me to move tactically then? Since there is 0 reason to do that as he ignores the rules anyway and now units with a -1 to hit when moving also can ignore that when the target has a modifier already.


Well, a 30 man likely never wants to be hiding. It still benefits from dense should the opponent want a +1 on them, but I realize that's also not likely. The other end of this is +1 to hit could become more common meaning stacking becomes more relevant - all speculation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).

They are much much much better than + and - modifiers.

A rr1 will always be an effectiveness increase of 16%, no matter who has it, which weapon it has and what it is shooting at. Same for rr1 hits or wounds. It is a mathematically nice way to give a fixed effectiveness buff. Direct modifiers depend a lot on who has them, and in the case of wounding modifiers also depends on the target.

Something that always has the same relative effect is easier to price that something which wildly changes in behaviour depending on conditions.

Full rerolls are a different matter.

Full reroll hits are better the worse BS you have. This means that applied in SM, it is fine. They all have the same BS mostly, so a full reroll to hit is a flat 33% increase in effectiveness. It is simply double the bonus of an rr1.
It gets sketchy when hit maluses appear, but luckily in 9th they are capped at -1.

Full rerolls to wound are dumb.
The effect is so variable and depends on so many conditions, that it cannot be balanced. In fact, Gman in the end was changed.


I'm not sure that is correct. Higher BS is still better. A marine rerolling a 1 will get a hit 66% of the time. An ork will otherwise get a hit 33% of the time. If both of them get +1 they bpth get an addition 16% hits -- though the ork gets 50% more hits and the marine 25%, but that seems a better balance against marines.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 12:47:39


Post by: Jidmah


 vipoid wrote:
This rule seems like classic GW design: we're not actually solving a problem, we're just trading one problem for another.


Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).


I think the problem lies far more in auras being constant and free. It removes almost every meaningful decisions as you don't have to choose which unit to buff, nor allocate any resources to make it happen.

The only possible limit lies with how many units you can physically fit within 6" of a given model, though even that is rarely an issue given the ability to daisy-chain units (so all you need is for one model in a unit to have his foot in the aura).


I think the issue is not auras, but auras providing re-rolls to something that is happening as often as hitting.

Auras should also get their own explicit rules, which include something like requiring a third or half of a unit's models to be within range of the aura to benefit from it to eliminate conga-lining.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 12:48:07


Post by: Daedalus81


 Jidmah wrote:


The Shokk-Jump Dragsta got boned though, it has a low RoF gun with +2 hit, because GW didn't want to give an ork BS3+.


I'd bet that one will take a FAQ.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 12:55:36


Post by: vipoid


 Jidmah wrote:

I think the issue is not auras, but auras providing re-rolls to something that is happening as often as hitting.

Auras should also get their own explicit rules, which include something like requiring a third or half of a unit's models to be within range of the aura to benefit from it to eliminate conga-lining.


I disagree. I think auras just need to be removed altogether. As should Stratagems.

Instead, give HQs Command abilities akin to those of AoS Heroes. Or, at the very least, tie the use of Stratagems to HQs (e.g. in order to use a stratagem on a unit, you have to have an appropriate HQ within 6" of it, maybe 12" if it's your Warlord).

As it stands, Stratagems are so divorced from the rest of the game that we might as well be tying the outcome of specific actions to an interim game of Yugioh.



Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 13:05:05


Post by: bullyboy


 vipoid wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:

I think the issue is not auras, but auras providing re-rolls to something that is happening as often as hitting.

Auras should also get their own explicit rules, which include something like requiring a third or half of a unit's models to be within range of the aura to benefit from it to eliminate conga-lining.


I disagree. I think auras just need to be removed altogether. As should Stratagems.

Instead, give HQs Command abilities akin to those of AoS Heroes. Or, at the very least, tie the use of Stratagems to HQs (e.g. in order to use a stratagem on a unit, you have to have an appropriate HQ within 6" of it, maybe 12" if it's your Warlord).

As it stands, Stratagems are so divorced from the rest of the game that we might as well be tying the outcome of specific actions to an interim game of Yugioh.



Auras are fine but should be targeted, no free aura to all within 6" (at least reroll auras, other ones are fine). I really hope they have addressed the SM reroll everything issue.....I know many of the people who are playtesters don;t like it, did they listen?

As for strats, many armies are going to be starting with a lot less CPs than what they were used to. This is a good thing (and many armies will have more). You will need some in list building, outflanking units, etc. I think it's a definite step in the right direction.

As to my Harlies and the to hit roll, LFR will still be decent for troupes and I won't have to waste the CP on skyweavers (since I'm probably spending quite a few on pivotal roles, relics, anyway)


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 14:22:33


Post by: sanguine40k


 vipoid wrote:
I think the problem lies far more in auras being constant and free. It removes almost every meaningful decisions as you don't have to choose which unit to buff, nor allocate any resources to make it happen.


Once again, I feel like the solution is to remove 'always on' auras and switch them to the T'au Commander version - once per game for 1 turn and multiple captains/commanders/etc don't give extra uses.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 14:27:54


Post by: harlokin


 vipoid wrote:
Or, at the very least, tie the use of Stratagems to HQs (e.g. in order to use a stratagem on a unit, you have to have an appropriate HQ within 6" of it, maybe 12" if it's your Warlord).

As it stands, Stratagems are so divorced from the rest of the game that we might as well be tying the outcome of specific actions to an interim game of Yugioh.



I agree with the sentiment, but tying it to HQs would be fraught with problems. It would make assassins and the like massively powerful as an army could be denied acesss to Stratagems, but also mechanised armies like the Drukhari could find themselves having to footslog their HQs just to be able to use their strats.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 14:38:49


Post by: yukishiro1


Spoletta wrote:


Full reroll hits are better the worse BS you have. This means that applied in SM, it is fine. They all have the same BS mostly, so a full reroll to hit is a flat 33% increase in effectiveness. It is simply double the bonus of an rr1.
It gets sketchy when hit maluses appear, but luckily in 9th they are capped at -1.


If by "fine" you mean it's fine to have a faction that basically hits every shot they take...yeah, I guess. If the hit roll wasn't supposed to be a real part of the game for space marines and you weren't supposed to be able to realistically stop space marines from hitting you with nearly every shot they take.

Personally, if you're going to have a hit roll, I think it should be meaningful. Marines always hitting 75% of their shots no matter what, and usually hitting 88% or better, in the new system with a reroll bubble doesn't feel very meaningful.

In the current system, if you play space marines, you basically roll buckets of dice for very little effect because you end up hitting almost all the time. This feels like a tremendous amount of wasted effort, and it isn't much fun for the person on the receiving end either to watch you roll two sets of dice for 10 attacks and announce they hit you 9 of those times.

The way rerolls neuter minuses to hit is a big issue when you cap minuses to hit.

If you're going to cap modifiers at +1/-1 reroll bubbles should only ever allow you to reroll 1s too, to balance it out.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 15:47:36


Post by: Dysartes


Is it too much to hope that we see plasma move to "unmodified 1's to hit" across the board, alongside this modifier change?


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 15:57:36


Post by: harlokin


 Dysartes wrote:
Is it too much to hope that we see plasma move to "unmodified 1's to hit" across the board, alongside this modifier change?


Yes please. This may be unpopular, but I'd also like to see it move to not being re-rollable, and inflicting 1MW rather than killing outright.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:11:20


Post by: Tycho


Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).


In principle I agree, but rerolls taken to the "GW extreme" actually are bad. In some games, there can be so many rerolls that you practically play the game twice. It's too much.

It will be interesting to see what this modifier rule does to things like Eliminators. They can get enough buffs right now to essentially "auto-hit" w/their rifles. Wonder if we see a drop in their use now as they will become more expensive but slightly less capable.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:11:50


Post by: BaconCatBug


 harlokin wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
Is it too much to hope that we see plasma move to "unmodified 1's to hit" across the board, alongside this modifier change?


Yes please. This may be unpopular, but I'd also like to see it move to not being re-rollable, and inflicting 1MW rather than killing outright.
It can't do 1MW without being changed to the T'au system where Shas'ui'intern can tank the mortal wounds for Shas'vre'reqless, because it would cause multiple models to be wounded, which is not permitted under the rules. Since Primaris exist...


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:17:09


Post by: Stux


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
Is it too much to hope that we see plasma move to "unmodified 1's to hit" across the board, alongside this modifier change?


Yes please. This may be unpopular, but I'd also like to see it move to not being re-rollable, and inflicting 1MW rather than killing outright.
It can't do 1MW without being changed to the T'au system where Shas'ui'intern can tank the mortal wounds for Shas'vre'reqless, because it would cause multiple models to be wounded, which is not permitted under the rules. Since Primaris exist...


Slays non character infantry. 1MW to all other units.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:31:44


Post by: Spoletta


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Castozor wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I´m overall in favor of preventing ridiculous -x to hit modifiers, but this is a lazy fix. As said why not advance my assault weapons now or move my heavy weapon infantry squad if the target has -1 to hit anyway.


I understand this complaint, but if I view the rule from the lens of T'au or other mid to low BS units then it is probably more fair to cap at -1 instead of -2.

And honestly - how many scenarios were you shooting something and got upset, because running your assault weapons would put you at -2? Did those devastators shooting the aircraft actually have to move?



At least before it was an actual penalty, now there is no reason not to do it and that just feels wrong. If the enemy or me is fielding plague bearers there is no reason not to move unless you fear a charge now, not to mention the new obscure terrain does absolutely nothing for them. This is bad design in my mind, terrain should be useful for them as well, there is now 0 reason not to just park them into the open unless yu can avoid LOS otherwise and good luck with that on a 30 man squad. It's the same reason I have always hated that my friends IW ignored cover, so what reason exactly is there for me to move tactically then? Since there is 0 reason to do that as he ignores the rules anyway and now units with a -1 to hit when moving also can ignore that when the target has a modifier already.


Well, a 30 man likely never wants to be hiding. It still benefits from dense should the opponent want a +1 on them, but I realize that's also not likely. The other end of this is +1 to hit could become more common meaning stacking becomes more relevant - all speculation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).

They are much much much better than + and - modifiers.

A rr1 will always be an effectiveness increase of 16%, no matter who has it, which weapon it has and what it is shooting at. Same for rr1 hits or wounds. It is a mathematically nice way to give a fixed effectiveness buff. Direct modifiers depend a lot on who has them, and in the case of wounding modifiers also depends on the target.

Something that always has the same relative effect is easier to price that something which wildly changes in behaviour depending on conditions.

Full rerolls are a different matter.

Full reroll hits are better the worse BS you have. This means that applied in SM, it is fine. They all have the same BS mostly, so a full reroll to hit is a flat 33% increase in effectiveness. It is simply double the bonus of an rr1.
It gets sketchy when hit maluses appear, but luckily in 9th they are capped at -1.

Full rerolls to wound are dumb.
The effect is so variable and depends on so many conditions, that it cannot be balanced. In fact, Gman in the end was changed.


I'm not sure that is correct. Higher BS is still better. A marine rerolling a 1 will get a hit 66% of the time. An ork will otherwise get a hit 33% of the time. If both of them get +1 they bpth get an addition 16% hits -- though the ork gets 50% more hits and the marine 25%, but that seems a better balance against marines.


They both get the same bonus with rr1.

A marine will hit 16,66% more attacks. The accuracy goes from 66% to 77%. 7/6 of the original value.

An ork will hit 16,66% more attacks. An ork goes from 33% to to 39%. 7/6 of the original value.

The BS of the models doesn't count in the least.

That's why in theory rr1 are a more manageable mechanic than straight modifiers. It doesn't matter who you are, you get the same bonus.

The drawback is that it takes more time to resolve than a straight modifier.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:34:00


Post by: ERJAK


Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).

They are much much much better than + and - modifiers.

A rr1 will always be an effectiveness increase of 16%, no matter who has it, which weapon it has and what it is shooting at. Same for rr1 hits or wounds. It is a mathematically nice way to give a fixed effectiveness buff. Direct modifiers depend a lot on who has them, and in the case of wounding modifiers also depends on the target.

Something that always has the same relative effect is easier to price that something which wildly changes in behaviour depending on conditions.

Full rerolls are a different matter.

Full reroll hits are better the worse BS you have. This means that applied in SM, it is fine. They all have the same BS mostly, so a full reroll to hit is a flat 33% increase in effectiveness. It is simply double the bonus of an rr1.
It gets sketchy when hit maluses appear, but luckily in 9th they are capped at -1.

Full rerolls to wound are dumb.
The effect is so variable and depends on so many conditions, that it cannot be balanced. In fact, Gman in the end was changed.



That's...not...how that math works. A reroll 1 to hit on weapon that hit's on 3s is a .1667*.667 boost, which is 11% ish. A reroll 1 to hit on a weapon that hits on 5s is a .1667*.333 boost, which is 5.5%.

Full rerolls on a 3+ to hit are a .333*.667 boost or about 22.2% Full rerolls on a 4+ to hit are a .5*.5 boost, which is 25%. It's a bell curve. 4+ has the most benefit with it going down as it moves out from there.

A +1 modifier a 3+ to hit would be a flat 16.67% increase. +2 modifier on a 5+ to hit would be a flat 33.3% increase. Rerolls are always some fraction because it's the % chance you have to miss(or roll a 1 in the case of reroll 1s) on the first shot multiplied buy the chance to succeed the second shot, added to the base probability of success.

Your conclusion is correct, just none of that math is anywhere near correct.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:35:04


Post by: Jidmah


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:


The Shokk-Jump Dragsta got boned though, it has a low RoF gun with +2 hit, because GW didn't want to give an ork BS3+.


I'd bet that one will take a FAQ.


I'll take that bet, orks tend to be completely forgotten when rules change. I'm ready to be pleasantly surprised by the new playtesters though.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:37:27


Post by: ERJAK


Spoletta wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Castozor wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I´m overall in favor of preventing ridiculous -x to hit modifiers, but this is a lazy fix. As said why not advance my assault weapons now or move my heavy weapon infantry squad if the target has -1 to hit anyway.


I understand this complaint, but if I view the rule from the lens of T'au or other mid to low BS units then it is probably more fair to cap at -1 instead of -2.

And honestly - how many scenarios were you shooting something and got upset, because running your assault weapons would put you at -2? Did those devastators shooting the aircraft actually have to move?



At least before it was an actual penalty, now there is no reason not to do it and that just feels wrong. If the enemy or me is fielding plague bearers there is no reason not to move unless you fear a charge now, not to mention the new obscure terrain does absolutely nothing for them. This is bad design in my mind, terrain should be useful for them as well, there is now 0 reason not to just park them into the open unless yu can avoid LOS otherwise and good luck with that on a 30 man squad. It's the same reason I have always hated that my friends IW ignored cover, so what reason exactly is there for me to move tactically then? Since there is 0 reason to do that as he ignores the rules anyway and now units with a -1 to hit when moving also can ignore that when the target has a modifier already.


Well, a 30 man likely never wants to be hiding. It still benefits from dense should the opponent want a +1 on them, but I realize that's also not likely. The other end of this is +1 to hit could become more common meaning stacking becomes more relevant - all speculation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not bad on a game design level ( except for the fact that they take more time to resolve).

They are much much much better than + and - modifiers.

A rr1 will always be an effectiveness increase of 16%, no matter who has it, which weapon it has and what it is shooting at. Same for rr1 hits or wounds. It is a mathematically nice way to give a fixed effectiveness buff. Direct modifiers depend a lot on who has them, and in the case of wounding modifiers also depends on the target.

Something that always has the same relative effect is easier to price that something which wildly changes in behaviour depending on conditions.

Full rerolls are a different matter.

Full reroll hits are better the worse BS you have. This means that applied in SM, it is fine. They all have the same BS mostly, so a full reroll to hit is a flat 33% increase in effectiveness. It is simply double the bonus of an rr1.
It gets sketchy when hit maluses appear, but luckily in 9th they are capped at -1.

Full rerolls to wound are dumb.
The effect is so variable and depends on so many conditions, that it cannot be balanced. In fact, Gman in the end was changed.


I'm not sure that is correct. Higher BS is still better. A marine rerolling a 1 will get a hit 66% of the time. An ork will otherwise get a hit 33% of the time. If both of them get +1 they bpth get an addition 16% hits -- though the ork gets 50% more hits and the marine 25%, but that seems a better balance against marines.


They both get the same bonus with rr1.

A marine will hit 16,66% more attacks. The accuracy goes from 66% to 77%. 7/6 of the original value.

An ork will hit 16,66% more attacks. An ork goes from 33% to to 39%. 7/6 of the original value.

The BS of the models doesn't count in the least.

That's why in theory rr1 are a more manageable mechanic than straight modifiers. It doesn't matter who you are, you get the same bonus.

The drawback is that it takes more time to resolve than a straight modifier.


No they won't. You're imagining that the rerolled shot will automatically hit, but it won't. It also has to be greater than or equal to the model's ballistic skill.

A reroll 1 on a 3+ is a 72% chance to hit, or an 11% bonus. A reroll 1 on a 5+ to hit is a 38.8% chance to hit or a 5% bonus.

So I just realized that not everyone has the common percentages memorized so here we go.

Chances to hit:
Full Rerolls: 2+=97.2% 3+= 89%ish, 4+=75%, 5+= 55.5%, 6+= 30.5%

Reroll 1s: 2+=97.2%, 3+=72.2%, 4+=58.3%, 5+= 38.8%, 6+=19.4%


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:47:03


Post by: slave.entity


 harlokin wrote:
I wonder what they'll do with Lightning Fast Reactions.

I'm guessing they'll leave it as is. You can't stack it on Alaitoc anymore but there are plenty of things that aren't Alaitoc.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:50:00


Post by: Tyel


Shoot 36 shots.
Normally with a 3+ = 24 hits. (Asuming 6 1s, 6 2s, 6 3s etc).
Now reroll those 6 1s that miss.
Get 4 more hits.
Therefore 28/36 hits.
Which is 77%.
Which is 7/6 more hits than 66%.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:53:20


Post by: harlokin


 slave.entity wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
I wonder what they'll do with Lightning Fast Reactions.

I'm guessing they'll leave it as is. You can't stack it on Alaitoc anymore but there are plenty of things that aren't Alaitoc.


You are probably right, but at 2 CP it makes it fairly useless/niche. I mainly use it to protect the Venom carrying all my HQs.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:55:53


Post by: Tyel


 harlokin wrote:
 slave.entity wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
I wonder what they'll do with Lightning Fast Reactions.

I'm guessing they'll leave it as is. You can't stack it on Alaitoc anymore but there are plenty of things that aren't Alaitoc.


You are probably right, but at 2 CP it makes it fairly useless/niche. I mainly use it to protect the Venom carrying all my HQs.


Can use it on a raider.

The very optimistic - perhaps too optimistic - is that having taken away the ability to stack, it can be a 1 CP stratagem.
Which obviously doesn't change the power - but makes it more of an auto-use each turn sort of thing.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 16:58:07


Post by: Jidmah


I think it's pretty well costed at 2CP as a reactive stratagem, most defensive stratagems that cost 1CP have to be used without knowing whether the target unit is getting shot at all.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:00:01


Post by: harlokin


Tyel wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
 slave.entity wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
I wonder what they'll do with Lightning Fast Reactions.

I'm guessing they'll leave it as is. You can't stack it on Alaitoc anymore but there are plenty of things that aren't Alaitoc.


You are probably right, but at 2 CP it makes it fairly useless/niche. I mainly use it to protect the Venom carrying all my HQs.


Can use it on a raider.

The very optimistic - perhaps too optimistic - is that having taken away the ability to stack, it can be a 1 CP stratagem.
Which obviously doesn't change the power - but makes it more of an auto-use each turn sort of thing.


I agree. 2CP per turn is too much to bleed just for that though. If the cost doesn't drop, I suspect my HQs will spend a great deal of time in reserves, where they will contribute about as much as they do on the board


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:08:59


Post by: Daedalus81


Spoletta wrote:


They both get the same bonus with rr1.

A marine will hit 16,66% more attacks. The accuracy goes from 66% to 77%. 7/6 of the original value.

An ork will hit 16,66% more attacks. An ork goes from 33% to to 39%. 7/6 of the original value.

The BS of the models doesn't count in the least.

That's why in theory rr1 are a more manageable mechanic than straight modifiers. It doesn't matter who you are, you get the same bonus.

The drawback is that it takes more time to resolve than a straight modifier.


BS matters a ton as it determines which of the 1s that you reroll can hit.

Also ratios are the same, but ratios do not represent the raw value.

If I have a 10" pie and I increase it by 7/6 it is now 11.7"
If I have a 5" pie and I increase it by 7/6 it is now 5.8"

One of those pies got much bigger than the other one.

Or am I missing something?


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:11:55


Post by: Martel732


Reroll 1s is much more valuable for better ballistic skill. That's undeniable.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:18:51


Post by: yukishiro1


Yeah, space marines already benefit more from reroll 1s than most people, they don't need to get a full reroll aura too because they're GW's posterboys. Allowing full rerolls when -to hit is capped at -1 is just silly.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:38:28


Post by: catbarf


 Daedalus81 wrote:
BS matters a ton as it determines which of the 1s that you reroll can hit.

Also ratios are the same, but ratios do not represent the raw value.

If I have a 10" pie and I increase it by 7/6 it is now 11.7"
If I have a 5" pie and I increase it by 7/6 it is now 5.8"

One of those pies got much bigger than the other one.

Or am I missing something?


A pie analogy is bad because area increases proportionally to the square of diameter, so it's a non-equivalent comparison.

What you're missing is that it's a flat percentage increase regardless of starting BS.

Let's say we have a unit of BS5+ troops (maybe Orks) that will do 6 wounds on average. And we have an equivalently-costed BS3+ unit (maybe Marines) that gets half as many shots, so it also does 6 wounds on average.

Give them each a re-roll 1s ability, and they both go up by 17%, to 7 wounds on average. The BS3+ unit doesn't benefit more; they both increase in firepower by the same percentage. While it's true that the BS3+ unit is more likely to turn a re-roll into a successful hit, it's exactly the same likelihood as they were to hit in the first place, so all the other balancing factors (in this case, number of shots) still apply equally.

However, if we give them a re-roll all fails ability, then they don't behave the same way, because now the likelihood of the re-roll being invoked is different for the two units. The BS5+ unit goes up by 67% to 10 wounds on average, while the BS3+ unit goes up by 33% to 8 wounds on average.

The basic summary is:
-Flat modifiers (+1/-1) help/hurt low-accuracy models more than high-accuracy ones.
-Re-roll 1s affects everybody equally.
-Re-roll all helps low-accuracy models more than high-accuracy ones.

It may not be intuitive, but this is why many game companies pay good money for designers with an understanding of probability.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:42:16


Post by: alextroy


Why is it silly? The modifier cap on To-Hit actually regularizes the value of full re-rolls. The value of the full re-roll is easier to estimate if there are only three possible BS values for a unit.

What we really need to hope is that GW finally realizes how valuable re-rolls are and increases the points value of units that give re-roll bubbles. Add 35 points to the base value of all types of Space Marine Captains and suddenly it won't feel so bad.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:46:14


Post by: leopard


Sad Panda here, I like the idea but wanted the cap to be related to where the mod came from, so no matter what you do you never get more than a -1, no matter what the enemy does never provides more than a -1 and no matter the terrain/situation never more than a -1 (or plus one obviously)

so max is +/-3, but hard to force


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 17:55:59


Post by: Kanluwen


 alextroy wrote:
Why is it silly? The modifier cap on To-Hit actually regularizes the value of full re-rolls. The value of the full re-roll is easier to estimate if there are only three possible BS values for a unit.

What we really need to hope is that GW finally realizes how valuable re-rolls are and increases the points value of units that give re-roll bubbles. Add 35 points to the base value of all types of Space Marine Captains and suddenly it won't feel so bad.

Realistically, Space Marine Captains don't need point hikes.
They need 0-1 limits per Detachments. Same as the one Tau Commanders got...except the difference is that Marines have Lieutenants to bulk up their required HQ slots if necessary.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 18:01:05


Post by: catbarf


To clarify on my previous post- this doesn't mean that all 're-roll 1s' abilities should have equivalent cost regardless of context.

For instance, getting re-roll 1s on a unit of 10 Gretchin is significantly less useful than getting re-roll 1s on a unit of 10 Primaris, because the delta between the starting and ending values is greater (ie: turning 1 wound into 2 wounds is much less useful than turning 10 wounds into 20) even though it's the same proportional benefit, so in the context of things like Stratagems that has to be taken into account.

For aura abilities, the points value of the aura scales proportionally to how much value of units can benefit; so if a Guard character needs a 12" aura to cover 500pts of Guard, that's roughly equivalent value to a Marine character needing a 6" aura to cover 500pts of Marines (in either case, you are buffing 500pts of troops to have the firepower of 583pts of troops).

So this can get really difficult to balance on a game-wide level; but on a per-unit level it holds true that a re-roll 1s ability increases damage output by 17%, whether you're applying it to a 30pt unit of Grots or a 300pt unit of Marines.

Marines don't actually get more out of their re-rolls than other armies do. What makes Marines problematic is more that they have such easy and widesprad access to re-rolls, on top of firepower that is already pretty damn powerful to begin with. Most armies only get a re-roll 1s to hit here and there, usually from expensive characters with auras too small to cover a significant part of the army. Marines can cheaply get full re-rolls to hit on top of re-rolling 1s to wound and easily cram a thousand points into the bubble, with basically no strings attached.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 18:09:27


Post by: yukishiro1


 alextroy wrote:
Why is it silly? The modifier cap on To-Hit actually regularizes the value of full re-rolls. The value of the full re-roll is easier to estimate if there are only three possible BS values for a unit.

What we really need to hope is that GW finally realizes how valuable re-rolls are and increases the points value of units that give re-roll bubbles. Add 35 points to the base value of all types of Space Marine Captains and suddenly it won't feel so bad.


Because it means people with full rerolls always hit at least 75% of the time no matter what. There's very little granularity there, and it feels bad to be on the receiving end of too. You start to wonder what the point of even rolling to hit it is if you're guaranteed to hit 3/4 of the time, and 88% of the time against most stuff.

Armies have all these strats and rules aimed at making the hit roll actually difficult, and yet the most played army just effectively ignores all of it and hits 3/4 of the time no matter what. That's not fun gameplay.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 18:09:28


Post by: ERJAK


Meh



Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 18:25:16


Post by: catbarf


yukishiro1 wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
Why is it silly? The modifier cap on To-Hit actually regularizes the value of full re-rolls. The value of the full re-roll is easier to estimate if there are only three possible BS values for a unit.

What we really need to hope is that GW finally realizes how valuable re-rolls are and increases the points value of units that give re-roll bubbles. Add 35 points to the base value of all types of Space Marine Captains and suddenly it won't feel so bad.


Because it means people with full rerolls always hit at least 75% of the time no matter what. There's very little granularity there, and it feels bad to be on the receiving end of too. You start to wonder what the point of even rolling to hit it is if you're guaranteed to hit 3/4 of the time, and 88% of the time against most stuff.

Armies have all these strats and rules aimed at making the hit roll actually difficult, and yet the most played army just effectively ignores all of it and hits 3/4 of the time no matter what. That's not fun gameplay.


It would be a huge overhaul for the game, but I would personally be completely fine with rescaling the game to put basic human/Ork/Tau BS at 5+, most armies at 4+, and the really elite things at 3+, with 2+ being extremely rare.

As it stands, having everything clustered around 3+ with re-rolls, with penalties capped at -1, makes for very little actual variety.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 19:38:36


Post by: Tyel


 catbarf wrote:
Marines don't actually get more out of their re-rolls than other armies do. What makes Marines problematic is more that they have such easy and widesprad access to re-rolls, on top of firepower that is already pretty damn powerful to begin with. Most armies only get a re-roll 1s to hit here and there, usually from expensive characters with auras too small to cover a significant part of the army. Marines can cheaply get full re-rolls to hit on top of re-rolling 1s to wound and easily cram a thousand points into the bubble, with basically no strings attached.


*How much you can get under an aura* matters a bit - but in practice, I think the issue is more whether an intercessor's shooting/survival/movement is fairly priced at say 17 points (or 20) - versus say a guardsman's shooting/survival/movement being worth 4/? points. In context of all the buffs etc.

Reroll 1s are the same for everyone - much like 6+++ saves are the same for everyone. But if something is too cheap to begin with, further buffs will serve to magnify that fact. If my units performs like 120% points of yours, and we both get a 17% buff, I'm going to benefit from it more than you.

The problem with Marines is that they got so many buffs in a relatively short period of time, its a gordian knot to decide which should be toned down. If you raise the points of everything, its fine that everything gets a Chapter Master/lieutenant bubble. But it also makes Marine armies quite one-dimensional, and so they will suck without such buffs.

The simplest way is to scrap Chapter Master, or make it cost 75 points or something in addition to the CP. But I can't see it happening.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/26 23:54:10


Post by: Spoletta


 catbarf wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
BS matters a ton as it determines which of the 1s that you reroll can hit.

Also ratios are the same, but ratios do not represent the raw value.

If I have a 10" pie and I increase it by 7/6 it is now 11.7"
If I have a 5" pie and I increase it by 7/6 it is now 5.8"

One of those pies got much bigger than the other one.

Or am I missing something?


A pie analogy is bad because area increases proportionally to the square of diameter, so it's a non-equivalent comparison.

What you're missing is that it's a flat percentage increase regardless of starting BS.

Let's say we have a unit of BS5+ troops (maybe Orks) that will do 6 wounds on average. And we have an equivalently-costed BS3+ unit (maybe Marines) that gets half as many shots, so it also does 6 wounds on average.

Give them each a re-roll 1s ability, and they both go up by 17%, to 7 wounds on average. The BS3+ unit doesn't benefit more; they both increase in firepower by the same percentage. While it's true that the BS3+ unit is more likely to turn a re-roll into a successful hit, it's exactly the same likelihood as they were to hit in the first place, so all the other balancing factors (in this case, number of shots) still apply equally.

However, if we give them a re-roll all fails ability, then they don't behave the same way, because now the likelihood of the re-roll being invoked is different for the two units. The BS5+ unit goes up by 67% to 10 wounds on average, while the BS3+ unit goes up by 33% to 8 wounds on average.

The basic summary is:
-Flat modifiers (+1/-1) help/hurt low-accuracy models more than high-accuracy ones.
-Re-roll 1s affects everybody equally.
-Re-roll all helps low-accuracy models more than high-accuracy ones.

It may not be intuitive, but this is why many game companies pay good money for designers with an understanding of probability.


Thanks for explaining it better than I did.

I thought that the knowledge of probabilities and how rerolls affect them was common knowledge, but I was wrong...


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 03:02:48


Post by: Martel732


That analysis is not quite correct.

BS 3+ reroll 1s yields 2/36 more of an increase in absolute hits than BS 5+ rerolls 1s. Relative increase is not the game-relevant stat. Absolute hits is.
as


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 06:16:26


Post by: Spoletta


Martel732 wrote:
That analysis is not quite correct.

BS 3+ reroll 1s yields 2/36 more of an increase in absolute hits than BS 5+ rerolls 1s. Relative increase is not the game-relevant stat. Absolute hits is.
as


Absolute yields doesn't tell you anything.

Relative gain is what you have to look at.

Assume that you have 2 units. Both cost 200 points.

Unit A shoots 45 shots at BS3+

Unit B shoots 90 shots at BS5+

In normal condtions, both units have identical firepower and will hit 30 shots.

Now apply an rr1 to both of them.

The first one now rerolls 7,5 dices. 5 hit and has now scored 35 hits.

The second one rerolls 15 dices. 5 hit and has now scored 35 hits.


As you can see, the effect is the same. Assuming that you apply them to comparable units, both the relative and absolute gains are identical.


BS is useless when looking at rr1.

The same is true for Strenght with rr1 to wound.

Obviously if you compare the effect of a Captain applied to 30 intercessors and the effect of Bad Moons applied to a Grot, you will get the same relative gain and drastically different absolute gains.

That's why you cannot assess a buff in terms of absolute gains, because you are "polluting" you analysis with external factors that have nothing to do with it.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 06:41:09


Post by: Martel732


Don't use twice as many shots for Unit B. That's not telling us what we want to know.

For a given unit A with BS 3+, irrespective of price, gets more out of reroll one than unit B with BS 5+ in a one model vs one model comparison.

And absolute increase is what I care about, not relative.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 07:29:07


Post by: Spoletta


Martel732 wrote:
Don't use twice as many shots for Unit B. That's not telling us what we want to know.

For a given unit A with BS 3+, irrespective of price, gets more out of reroll one than unit B with BS 5+ in a one model vs one model comparison.

And absolute increase is what I care about, not relative.


You may have missed this until now, but there's a thing called "Point cost" in this game.

Two models with the same number of shots and different BS have a different point cost.

This may come as a shocking revelation, but if you apply a buff to a unit which cost more points, you are more likely to get a bigger benefit from that buff.

If you want to discuss the effects of a buff, you do it applying it to comparable base values.

You don't get to say "Buff A is better than buff", if you applied the buff A to a 1500 point deathstar and the buff B to a lone termagant.

Apples to apples.
Oranges to oranges.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 07:48:30


Post by: Jidmah


Your absolute increase calculation is worthless because it completely ignores the value of the unit and number of shots it has.

The absolute gain on a landraider crusader is higher than it is on a unit of bolter scouts, simply because having more points affected by re-rolls is better than having less points affected by re-rolls.
BS is irrelevant to the effectiveness of re-rolling ones, only number of hits per points spent is.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 08:03:22


Post by: grouchoben


The idea of a cap is a good one, but this feels bluntly implemented to be honest. I think the following would be a much better resolution:

"When determining to hit modifiers, both yourself and your opponent can contribute no more than -1 or +1 to hit."

Short and simple... This would make it possible to stack -2 to hit, if your opponent wsa hard to hit, and you made it harder to hit him by advancing with assault, moving infantry with heavy, shooting through dense, being debuffed, etc.

As the rule now stands the game just lost a lot of design space relevance.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 08:05:23


Post by: Dysartes


Starting off by ignoring points costs for a second...

Unit A - BS 3+, 36 shots
Unit B - BS 5+, 36 shots

Assuming an even distribution of results, and a RR1 effect...

Unit A - 24 hits, 6 shots to reroll, 6 shots can't be rerolled. 50% of misses get rerolled, adding a further 4 hits. Total of 28 hits. 4/12 misses converted to hits, or 1/3.
Unit B - 12 hits, 6 shots to reroll, 18 shots can't be rerolled. 25% of misses get rerolled, causing 2 more hits. Total of 14 hits. 2/24 missed converted to hits, or 1/12.

We can see that a RR1 aura has half the effect on Unit B, as it only gets to reroll 25% of its misses instead of 50%. Overall unit accuracy remains proportional to its BS, as you'd expect (A is twice as accurate as B).

+ + +

The problem with then trying to factor points costs in is that a unit's points cost factors in more than just its shooting acumen. Resiliency (in theory, anyway), melee potential, mobility, etc.

Even if we allow for theoretical units where their points costs scales only based on shooting ability, you'll see different benefits - even if the models in unit A cost twice as much as unit B, they'll still see four times the benefit in terms of the proportion of misses turned into hits.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 09:20:26


Post by: Turnip Jedi


 grouchoben wrote:
The idea of a cap is a good one, but this feels bluntly implemented to be honest. I think the following would be a much better resolution:

"When determining to hit modifiers, both yourself and your opponent can contribute no more than -1 or +1 to hit."

Short and simple... This would make it possible to stack -2 to hit, if your opponent wsa hard to hit, and you made it harder to hit him by advancing with assault, moving infantry with heavy, shooting through dense, being debuffed, etc.

As the rule now stands the game just lost a lot of design space relevance.


what Grouch done said

plus Id suspect gw ran the numbers as above and then chose the path of least resistance (as a meeny CHE once shooted all their metal monkeigh bawxs)


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 09:28:39


Post by: Tyel


Not really sure how to express this in words.

A reroll 1s to hit gives you, on average, 7/6 more hits than you would have got. Its a flat increase for all units. So the issue is how *good* your shooting is per point before this buff is applied. Obviously if you can have 36 BS 3+ shots for X points, its going to benefit more from the buff than 36 BS 5+ shots for X points - because its twice as good to begin with.

There is possibly an argument in second order mathhammer that higher absolute probabilities are good in themselves, because it makes the game more predictable - and when you are essentially betting on dice rolls, predictability is a virtue all its own.

So for example, lets say you really needed 5 hits on a target. theoretically 6 attacks hitting on 2s, should get you 5, in the same as 15 attacks hitting on 5s should get you 5. (Keeping it simple to avoid additional stats of wounding/armour saves etc).
But the odds of getting anything but 4/5/6 hits on the first is really quite low - whereas I think (too lazy to calculate it out on Saturday morning) the second has much bigger tails.
By way of a quick example - the odds of rolling 15 1-4s is 0.22% whereas the odds of rolling 6 1s is 0.0021%. Both incredibly unlikely to the point it will probably never happen - but one is a hundred times more likely than the other.

So with those 15 dice hitting on 5+ you might get lucky and get loads of hits - but that may not be useful due to overkill - but you also might get unlucky, and not get your 5 hits. So that enemy unit survives, can shoot you next turn, can claim objective points, can cost you the game etc.

This is partly what makes Marines so powerful. The odds are in your favour - you should usually get what you expect. You much less frequently have to rethink turns because the dice refuse to cooperate. Whereas say with Ork shooting, the dice can be really with you one game and not with you the next.

You can just shrug that off for individual games, but if army power is determined by winning GTs, its going to have a negative effect.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 09:33:21


Post by: Karol


Doesn't the game have more -1 to hit, then +1 to hit with the rules armies have right now. That seems to me like most rolls are going to be done at -1 most of the times, at least as far as shoting goes.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 09:36:56


Post by: Aash


Karol wrote:
Doesn't the game have more -1 to hit, then +1 to hit with the rules armies have right now. That seems to me like most rolls are going to be done at -1 most of the times, at least as far as shoting goes.


This might end up the case, if so I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, IMHO the game is too deadly at present, especially shooting.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 10:00:41


Post by: Spoletta


Aash wrote:
Karol wrote:
Doesn't the game have more -1 to hit, then +1 to hit with the rules armies have right now. That seems to me like most rolls are going to be done at -1 most of the times, at least as far as shoting goes.


This might end up the case, if so I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, IMHO the game is too deadly at present, especially shooting.


KT is like that, and it works.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 11:18:29


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Spoletta wrote:
Aash wrote:
Karol wrote:
Doesn't the game have more -1 to hit, then +1 to hit with the rules armies have right now. That seems to me like most rolls are going to be done at -1 most of the times, at least as far as shoting goes.


This might end up the case, if so I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, IMHO the game is too deadly at present, especially shooting.


KT is like that, and it works.
Yeah, with Kill Team' very common obscuring rules and "long range" effect on weaponry, shooting at long range isn't particularly reliable without some specific skills (sniper, demolitions, comms), which, coupled with the high terrain density and smaller tables, promotes close combat and close range shooting strongly (as well as how there's a 50/50 chance that a shot probably won't even kill you outright).


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 11:26:44


Post by: Ice_can


Tyel wrote:
Not really sure how to express this in words.

A reroll 1s to hit gives you, on average, 7/6 more hits than you would have got. Its a flat increase for all units. So the issue is how *good* your shooting is per point before this buff is applied. Obviously if you can have 36 BS 3+ shots for X points, its going to benefit more from the buff than 36 BS 5+ shots for X points - because its twice as good to begin with.

There is possibly an argument in second order mathhammer that higher absolute probabilities are good in themselves, because it makes the game more predictable - and when you are essentially betting on dice rolls, predictability is a virtue all its own.

So for example, lets say you really needed 5 hits on a target. theoretically 6 attacks hitting on 2s, should get you 5, in the same as 15 attacks hitting on 5s should get you 5. (Keeping it simple to avoid additional stats of wounding/armour saves etc).
But the odds of getting anything but 4/5/6 hits on the first is really quite low - whereas I think (too lazy to calculate it out on Saturday morning) the second has much bigger tails.
By way of a quick example - the odds of rolling 15 1-4s is 0.22% whereas the odds of rolling 6 1s is 0.0021%. Both incredibly unlikely to the point it will probably never happen - but one is a hundred times more likely than the other.

So with those 15 dice hitting on 5+ you might get lucky and get loads of hits - but that may not be useful due to overkill - but you also might get unlucky, and not get your 5 hits. So that enemy unit survives, can shoot you next turn, can claim objective points, can cost you the game etc.

This is partly what makes Marines so powerful. The odds are in your favour - you should usually get what you expect. You much less frequently have to rethink turns because the dice refuse to cooperate. Whereas say with Ork shooting, the dice can be really with you one game and not with you the next.

You can just shrug that off for individual games, but if army power is determined by winning GTs, its going to have a negative effect.


This is part of the issue,
Part 2 is it's not just Reroll1's with Marines is Every hit, followed by Reroll 1 to wound. It's a stacked bonus.

Saying Reroll Aura's is fine based on the way no-one plays marines is rather pointless as When people are complaining about rerolls it's 9 times out of 10 Marines.

Not to mention adding a -1 to hit vrs Reroll 1 at BS4 vrs -1 to hit vrs BS3+ with full rerolls as thats the reality for most armies compaired to marine's it's contributing to poor balance.

The third and final issue as has been touched on but brushed aside is how many points of units can marines leverage their aura against vrs how many points of units can other armies leverage it against.

All of these factors contribue with marines each model avaraging 4 dice per model, Agressors Repulsors etc jack the avarages a lot.

To making it feel like Marine players do nothing but throw dice, throw them again and again and again and demolish half your army.

The math is part of it, but it's the weekend and I can't be bothered to do it all right now, but 2 repulsors and 3 units of agressors being able to reroll all hits and 1's to wound is a stupid increase in damage caused.

The points if you had to buy aditional units to make up the short fall compaired to the cost of a CM & LT I'm certain is in the CM < being less points.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 14:15:46


Post by: Spoletta


That was not the point.

We are talking about rerolling as concept, which we have mathematically demonstrated that in some cases is fine (rr1 hit and wound), in some case is not (rr hits) in some cases it is utter dumb (rr wounds).

Obviously once you go into actual application of a concept, you can screw it. That's like saying that Termagants can get Lascannons for 1 point, so single shot high damage weapons are dumb game design.

Rerolls are fine, handing them that easily is not. Also, they are not actually handed "easily" at the moment, there is just ONE source of them which is problematic, the CM stratagem. Everything else is actually fine.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 16:49:19


Post by: Tyel


Spoletta wrote:
That was not the point.

We are talking about rerolling as concept, which we have mathematically demonstrated that in some cases is fine (rr1 hit and wound), in some case is not (rr hits) in some cases it is utter dumb (rr wounds).

Obviously once you go into actual application of a concept, you can screw it. That's like saying that Termagants can get Lascannons for 1 point, so single shot high damage weapons are dumb game design.

Rerolls are fine, handing them that easily is not. Also, they are not actually handed "easily" at the moment, there is just ONE source of them which is problematic, the CM stratagem. Everything else is actually fine.


Its Space Marine Points really.
Guilliman was broken, until he and various Marine units got nerfed. And then they basically left the scene outside of increasingly desperate fish for mortal wound style builds.

I think the major complaint of auras is that they encourage this blobbed up castle - even if you don't just camp right in the corner with 36"+ ranged guns. Even if you have to spread a bit for objectives (12" from one side of an aura to another covers a fair chunk of the centre of any table.)

I mean since the DE codex, I think any DE force which hasn't had 3 ravagers and probably 2 flyers in a reroll 1s to hit, reroll 1s to wound from living muse Archon Bubble, has been... well, not competitive. (I mean 9 Talos... but I still think you'd try and slot this in behind them.)

If you were going to take these units - and you probably were because they were some of the best units in the codex - not giving them a 36% damage boost is irrational.
To a degree you have to have an Archon (probably 2) - but even if we just talk about just reroll 1s to wound, its so ludicrously better than anything else the Archon can take in the codex, that not taking it is irrational.

In the years that followed DE have slowly fallen down the pecking order - due to a few nerfs, the reduction in synergy with CW Eldar and so on. So barring that Marine Player whose Primaris is still getting hosed every week by massed Dissies, no one much cares about DE, and they seem for all intents and purposes competitively dead. But you are still at the point where these buff bubbles are better than anything other way to play.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 23:16:40


Post by: NoPoet


I really like this rule. People have complained about how powerful hit modifiers of any kind are. Last edition it was cover saves giving ridiculous invulnerable saves, this time around it's ridiculous -5 to hit nonsesnse. There should be a strict and hard cap to how much you can increase any such value by, otherwise you end up with Guardsmen and Gretchin who are almost as hard to kill as Iron Warriors Terminators (in other words, you end up with Gaunt's Ghosts characters).

A strict cap also prevents the possibility of rule-exploiting rubbish.

Unfortunately, it won't be long until we start seeing units and abilities which circumvent this cap. Later Codices will start relying on it to keep up with the curve. Then it won't be a cap any more, and then we'll need the 10th edition...


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 23:24:55


Post by: catbarf


 NoPoet wrote:
otherwise you end up with Guardsmen and Gretchin who are almost as hard to kill as Iron Warriors Terminators


That was never the problem. It was Eldar fliers, Chaos magic-stacking, and a handful of other niche builds that could pile up penalties.

The new system will be less punishing to Guard and Tau, but BS3+ armies (especially with rerolls) won't care about negatives anymore. And the sledgehammer solution they've taken means that now penalties that players could mitigate, like moving and firing Heavy or advancing and firing Assault, won't matter against anything with a -1 to hit.


Hit modifiers @ 2020/06/27 23:26:08


Post by: Jidmah


From reading the last few posts, I just realized that from a variety point of view, orks are quite lucky to simply not have any re-roll auras.
If I'm running infantry, a weird boy with da jump is mandatory, and the two orks carrying our killy relics are for every build. Outside of that, I'm pretty much free to pick whatever I like best.

Death Guard? It's re-roll arch-contaminator or bust.