Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I use both, If you have a squad of banshees about to charge some marines, a unit of DA's about to shoot a mob of boyz and a farseer in the middle. You need to decide if your going to guide the avengers, doom the marines or doom the boyz. Thanks to mathhammer you know roughly how many you will kill of each and see who's going to need most help. you can't know for sure, but it can help you make educated guesses.

Which is correct in your scenario?

Gorechild wrote:I use both, If you have a squad of banshees about to charge some marines, a unit of DA's about to shoot a mob of boyz and a farseer in the middle. You need to decide if your going to guide the avengers, doom the marines or doom the boyz. Thanks to mathhammer you know roughly how many you will kill of each and see who's going to need most help. you can't know for sure, but it can help you make educated guesses.

This is a good scenario for explaining what I attempted at 4am this morning before I left for work...

The 2 are not mutually exclusive and Mathhammer begins with your list. You do not throw units into a list with the hope that 'luck' or 'chance' favour them in game... (unless you consider WD battle reports for the army facing opff against the latest Codex)

I would say that 'trying your luck' is okay as an opportunist tactic, but it is less viable as a long term strategy.

'Math hammer' shows you the probability of an action succeeding with average luck. The more times you attempt something, the more your luck should average out. Over millions of attempts you can expect the Math Hammer to be pretty much spot on; over 10 or 20 attempts it will be little more than an educated guess.

The problem is that the number of games a person can play and the number of events within those games is far too small for Math Hammer to be 100% accurate, so luck will always play a big part.

A good player shouldn't put 'faith' in either. They will just stack the odds as high as they can in their favour.

When building my list i take mathhammer into account to try and remove luck from my stratagey as much as possible.

During a game, i don't worry about it so much. i just use the tools I've given myself to win.

I'm wondering a little if the OP has possibly misnamed this thread.

Perhaps it should be "Mathhammer or Gut Instinct?"

Those two are more mutually exclusive.

The Bringer wrote:I feel like the poll numbers aren't correct...

Why doesn't everybody say math-hammer???

People play games to win, and have fun, and most people have fun by winning.

Thus the goal is winning.
Your strategy is to then to maximize chances of winning.
Math-hammer maximizes your chances of winning.
Math-hammer relies on probability, but chance takes over in the end.
However, mathhammer, even if it relies on a chance, is the best way to go, because it maximizes victory chances.

Tactics and strategy intermingled with math hammer will create a winner.

Tactics and strategy couple with hoping for luck will on average work less of the time.

I feel like this should be re-worded to Mathhammer/Luck.

I say play using Ork theory...sure maybe the enemy got a bunch of points, held some objectives, and technically won...but you have to ask...did ya crump up some stuff real good? Do ya gots some boyz left to fight next time? Then you won.

Good example...my last Battletech game...my buddy made a general mess of most of my mechs, and though most were still standing at the end they werent much of a threat anymore. However, what did he remember most? The moment where I got up a hill above one of his mechs and stomped the cockpit into dust with one kick.

@Johira: Well obviously people dissagree with you on that.

@Sebster: If you want to know some players who do just that scroll up through the thread and look at all of the players who have said they put their faith in luck.

And I'm unsure how wanting to know what players personal choices are on the subject dosen't make sense but I'm not trying to apply my opinion as an absolution.

General Reminder: I would like to remind everyone that I have already said I want the cross point discussion to stop. This is about personal opinion and choice which for some reason dosen't make sense to some of you but obviously makes sense to the others who have answered and voted on the pole. Everyone is free to put their opinion on the subject in the thread as this is a subject that is entirely about opinions.

Forgive me if I'm being terse but I don't want this thread turning into something it's not just because a few people think that it is impossible for a player to put the majority of their faith in one aspect or another when quiet clearly it is not impossible. If you put your faith in either luck or the math then say it, if you put your faith in both or neither say it. But do not try and sway others from their personal opinions and create arguments that will go absolutly nowhere.

Just post your choice and let others post theirs.

Thank you

Math hammer is the only reliable option. However it should be used with target priority. While my 15 lootas could easily kill that squad of 3 marines, the dakka predator is a much bigger threat.
So while math hammer says I will NOT kill the predator I will probably at least stop it from firing next turn which is more than worth it.

I have learned never to trust "the odds" after years of being burned by failing dice rolls that "should" have gone my way.

When I used to play Warmachine I would boost my dice rolls for nearly every roll I was eligible to because I wouldn't even trust my dice to produce low end rolls like 4's or 5's with 2D6.

Anything can happen despite the odds, though it probably won't.

It's usually best to play the odds, but sometimes you have to take extreme chances because the alternative is certain failure.

I really don't understand this question or the poll. Could someone give me an example of gameplay where you put "faith" in luck? is it making decisions by consulting a random number table? Does anyone play like this?

I was in Platinum Devil in April and played a scenario where an IG force with a huge cannon was blowing crap out of my Tyranids. (1,000 point game.)

I had my Trygon Prime in reserve, so I decided to try and deep strike her into the corner of the table where the cannon plus other tanks where hiding.

My reckoning was that I had no other units capable of reaching the cannon in the time of the game, so if I didn't do this I would have to endure the fire of the cannon (Basilisk?) for the rest of the game.

On the plus side, I had a better than 33% chance that the Trygon would come down close enough to where I wanted, and would be able to scrag the IG artillery for major points.

I had to take the calculated risk of the Trygon getting lost through a Deep Strike mishap.

This happened, unfortunately, as the Trygon did a major deviation off the table and never got into combat.

What's the quote? Ah, found it...

"Expect the best. Prepare for the worst. Capitalize on what comes." - -- Zig Ziglar

That about sums it up mathhammer, strategy and luck for me.

I tend to build my army lists based 0n looks or theme: basically "what would look cool on the table against this opponent" or "I really want to play a lot of tanks today"., or "What if..." statements like "What if a Big Mek and a rabble of grots went out scavenging and ran into trouble..." etc.

I'll usually eyeball my collection and whatever models/units jump out to me at that moment I pull out and calculate their points. Then i play around with points to fill in the remaining points with whatever fits.

As a result My armies sometimes win, but often go down in flames as MathHammer does not motivate my list design and luck ends up playing a big part in my games.

This is fine by me though as I play for he RPG aspects and the challenge of fighting a tough fight, not as an exercise in mathhammer and pie charts...

@KK: If you were answering me with that anecdote, it doesn't make sense to me that taking a low percentage chance on something is having "faith" on luck. It seems more like you took the highest percentage chance you had available to you right?
@CT Gamer: So did you answer you had faith in luck?

Right, as said this poll is off because the correct answer is "both". Mathhammer exists so that you can talk objectively about things in the abstract - it will in no way tell you if an attack you're going to make right there on the table top that one time will go in a certain way. Meanwhile, people who base objective, abstract decisions on the results of a couple small instances of luck are idiots.

This discussion seriously baffles me. I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but putting your faith in luck is simply choosing to hope for a certain outcome in a set of probabilities. We all do it but having "faith" in luck doesn't effect the outcome of a dice roll, that is preposterous.

It is not one or the other. It just isn't getting up and saying you "choose" to trust one or the other, ignoring math is an expression of seriously shocking ignorance.

http://www.google.com/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LnLmR0nJdMs/S_p1Gs-V6II/AAAAAAAAAII/xdRuoaRxW0w/s1600/GAO%2BDice.png&sa=X&ei=rbvRTNuMDpOqsAOL1ZjoCg&ved=0CAQQ8wc4sAE&usg=AFQjCNFKEUW82_sa80clb32lNTkQbkC6IA

Look at this, it is so simple.

I was an English major in College, I didn't even take math and this is obvious.

Here is a practical application: Two terminators are sitting on an objective, you need to kill them to win. You shoot them with weapons that do not penetrate their armor and do two wounds, so they each need to roll a 1 to die.

You don't sit there and say, well golly, today I am going to trust in luck! Dur!

No, you wait for your opponent to roll the dice and hope he gets the 1 in 36 possible combination's of dice that will come up double 1. That is it, that is the ONLY possible outcome. Hoping on one foot, turing in a circle three times and rubbing your lucky rabbit's foot isn't going to change this probability curve.

Putting your faith in luck isn't a strategy it is hoping for certain outcomes. You don't escape math by putting your head in the sand, you just remain ignorant of the mechanics of what is happening which is foolish. It's like thinking thunder is the anger of the gods instead of knowing it is the sound generated by lightening which is caused by static discharge from storm clouds. Does it make it any less cool? No, but it allows you to understand what is happening.

Anyway, I don't want to brow beat anyone any longer but this is like having an argument of whether the earth is flat or not, it is that backwards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Ailaros
Word up, brotha. Math teachers around the world shed tears because of this thread.

I don't know Reecius, your practical application almost goes in favor for chance. I think if you trusted the math hammer you would use something that negated the armor and force a better (in your favor) inv save. As this example stands the luck or chance of those double 1's are what you hope for rather than the math hammer hope of 1 in 36. What I mean is math hammer is more than odds to me. It's applying all the dice rolls and going with the best strategy. Needing the worst odds sounds like it's a last ditch, do or die, no other guns can reach reliance on chance.

But I would like to point out I did start this with an almost and so I still agree you. I think there's more replies in forums of 'the odds' and that this is 'as much a game of chance as strategy' that muddied people's thoughts on this subject.

As the great and all powerful han solo says, "Never tell me the odds."

I think that if the math-hammer route was completley true, you would never really get those 100-1 rolls, i think that you must have done something to please the dice gods

Speaking mostly from a WFB pov.
Part of being a balanced game is that each unit has it's specific uses. While most players would go for a core of "overall usefull in most situations" units to fill out their armies. Depending on your intent and execution most units have some kind of potential to wreak havoc with your enemy. Take Dark Riders or Goblin wolf riders, for example. Here we have a relatively weak unit that, when brought to bear effectively against the right opponent, can be devastating. Much of the strategy involved in Warhammer games is creating a list where each unit has specific tasks, and then doing everything you can on the table to make sure that they don't deviate from those tasks. Anvil units take tons of punishment and don't break. Hammer units flank and don't get flanked, light fast cav harrass war machines and other small units and don't get charged.... and so on. Where things start breaking apart is if you field a bunch of specialist units (and some lists, even some entire army books, are filled with nothing but) and can't effectively execute with them.

So to answer the question... I try to leave most of the math to the developers and trust that they've come up with a balanced game and try to make a list with units that work well with each other and I think would perform their respective jobs well. Tank units tank, hammer units hammer, support units suppot, etc...

@mrwhoop
My point is that when you trust to chance, which is what we all do every time we roll the dice, you are not ignoring math. When you use math, you aren't ignoring chance.

When someone who isn't ignorant of probability rolls the dice he or she knows that more than likely, they will not roll double 1's and kill the terminators in the suggested example. However, they also do not think that because today is a "lucky" day they will. It's the acceptance of what it and an understanding of how things work while still hoping for a favorable outcome.

For someone to say they ignore math is first, false, second incredibly dumb. It's like when someone has their "lucky" dice, or what have you. It is attributing a false characteristic to something that has no bearing on outcome, like when cave people think a rain dance actually brings rain.

What you are talking about is applying your knowledge of probability to decision making, which is actually two steps, and two intelligent ones at that. You analyze a situation and go with what is most likely to happen which is what the best players do. You don't say, I feel lucky and so I am going to charge my grots into bloodthrister and expect to win.

Math hammer is simply the estimation of probability in regards to possible dice rolls or determining what is the most points efficient unit during list building. How you use that data is another step entirely.

@Torin the Wayfarer
Dude.
Really?
No offense, but what you said was incredibly imperceptive. You countered your own point in your conclusion.

If math hammer didn't work you'd never get those 100-1 rolls?

Hahahahaha, I am pretty sure you wold get that result 1 in 100 times.....wait for it. It'll come.

The question is perfectly fine. If you don't get it don't answer

Reecius wrote:Here is a practical application: Two terminators are sitting on an objective, you need to kill them to win. You shoot them with weapons that do not penetrate their armor and do two wounds, so they each need to roll a 1 to die.

You don't sit there and say, well golly, today I am going to trust in luck! Dur!

No, you wait for your opponent to roll the dice and hope he gets the 1 in 36 possible combination's of dice that will come up double 1. That is it, that is the ONLY possible outcome. Hoping on one foot, turing in a circle three times and rubbing your lucky rabbit's foot isn't going to change this probability curve.

On the flip side... Knowing the probability will not change the outcome either, and in such a small set probability might not even be relevant. If you roll the same dice 36 times, could you be sure to roll once and only once? The truth is you could roll those dice an infinite number of times and never roll double 1, or never roll anything but double 1. The probability of this happening is zero, but since it doesn't break and physical or mathematical laws it can still happen, even with a probability of zero. Here we start to get into the concept of 'almost surely'.

The truth is probability only becomes meaningful with large sets. I've been sitting here a rolling 2 dice just out of interest, and I've rolled 5 times now in less than 64 attempts. So even though the mathematical odds are 1 in 36 the actual frequency has been about 1 in 13, which of course is nothing like the predicted odds. You just never know when you are going to hit a streak or a freak roll, and games of 40k are short enough that lucky rolls can be decisive.

It's probably much smarter to base decisions on risk versus reward, rather than probable versus improbable. That may mean taking bigger chances, and ignoring favourable odds.

@ SmackCakes and Reecius

You bring up good points about rolling and dancing for rain (respectively quoting). There is that wonderful idea that people get into 'practiced rolling' and can get the desired results without the intent to 'cheat' and get them. And even barring that statistics is a math anyway as the odds are infinitesimally small of rolling straight it is still a mathematical possibility. So I guess I'll finish by saying it is called 'dumb luck' for a perceivable reason.

Take Care all

asmith wrote:@KK: If you were answering me with that anecdote, it doesn't make sense to me that taking a low percentage chance on something is having "faith" on luck. It seems more like you took the highest percentage chance you had available to you right?
...?

Yes. Also it was a high risk, high reward strategy. Secondly, 40K is such a quick game, especially at the 1,000 point level, that you normally have only one chance to change (lose or win) the game in a major way., so there is no point messing around.

I agree with both of you guys but at the very least you understand the concept behind it and that chance is an expression of a given set of probabilities. It is not one or the other. Your perception of actual outcomes can vary and as you said, SmackCakes, that one lucky roll can make or break a game and is in fact one of the things that makes this game tense and fun. Every time you roll dice it is a unique event. The galaxy doesn't step in and say, whoa, whoa, whoa, too many 6's today, we have surpassed our quota! Every time you roll the odds remain what they are but what you actually get is chance. Over time, if you continued to roll the 2d6 you'd eventually come to a statistical average. That is how casinos function, they play the odds and while there are statistical anomalies (which is what gamblers hope to experience), in the long run the house always comes out ahead.

But to say either chance or math takes precedence is a false premise. They are two ways of discussing the exact same thing. Everyone "uses" both even if they don't think they do. There is no difference. Using math doesn't influence the results anymore than having a lucky charm does, it merely enables the smart player to have more data from which to make decisions.

Perhaps I came on a bit strong, but it is just aggravating to see the perpetuation of ideas that are inherently false.

Math can explain trends in data, probabilities etc.. Outside forces that intrude on a game of luck are there either because someone is cheating, or the dice are poorly designed. Yep... i do not believe in god or any other non scientifcally explainable explanation. There are no other factors that should influence play besides Your ability and your opponents ability, and army composition.
You should be able to use math hammer to determine the effectiveness of your army versus another army. some units on paper have much higher damage outputs. a great example is the Sterngaurd that marines now get. They are awsome for what you pay for them. all math hammer enables you to do is to allow a statistical tool to analyze your army and hopefully remove units that are low in damage and high in cost.

Math hammer is great for list design and working out who should shoot what.

But, the potential for a unit is far beyond the math hammer effect. The potential for a lucky strike is part of a unit's ability. Furthermore, when dice rolls are made once to affect a whole unit, math hammer is dangerously unpredictable.

So, for example. I've struggled to see why flash gitz get such hate. Math-hammer wise, they are pretty poor: only 1 in 3 shots get through. So you double it with more dakka and get three hits. And then the S is only above average, so you won't always wound. And it can only penetrate power armour half of the time.

But the AP roll is made once. So, given a lucky roll or two and some ammo runts, you will wipe a unit of terminators off the table. And your opponent will know it and avoid them.