Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 10:15:12
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
As only the hit rolls matter, it would not be so slow to roll the hit dice in pairs, remove the models that die, then resolve the wounds.
If you roll hit-wound-save for each weapon then it will slow the game down. simply having the right number of dice and rolling pairs of them, and for each pair which has one or more ones state that a model dies.
Whilst it could have an effect on the game if a specific model dies, I wouldn't have a problem playing someone who rolled like this, then picked which models died. however, if you rolled them all at once and killed 1 guy for each 2 1's then I would be a bit sceptical.
As for randomly applying them, it wouldn't work, as if you rolled 3 ones, then they all got randomly assigned to the same guy, you would be cheating.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 11:16:18
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
some bloke wrote:As only the hit rolls matter, it would not be so slow to roll the hit dice in pairs, remove the models that die, then resolve the wounds.
If you roll hit-wound-save for each weapon then it will slow the game down. simply having the right number of dice and rolling pairs of them, and for each pair which has one or more ones state that a model dies.
Whilst it could have an effect on the game if a specific model dies, I wouldn't have a problem playing someone who rolled like this, then picked which models died. however, if you rolled them all at once and killed 1 guy for each 2 1's then I would be a bit sceptical.
As for randomly applying them, it wouldn't work, as if you rolled 3 ones, then they all got randomly assigned to the same guy, you would be cheating.
Assigning them after can be done, it's just more complex than people realise, exponentially so with the number of 1s you roll!
Rolling in pairs is the way to go. As you say, after hits you can combine them all and fast roll wounds.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 11:17:59
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
I've said this three times now, you cannot assign after the fact because which model dies makes a difference for charges.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 11:20:01
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
BaconCatBug wrote:I've said this three times now, you cannot assign after the fact because which model dies makes a difference for charges.
You don't have a choice in which model dies either way though. It's all down to which model rolls the 1, which is accounted for equally whether or not you assign before or after (provide the probability distribution is correct).
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 11:22:29
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
Stux wrote: BaconCatBug wrote:I've said this three times now, you cannot assign after the fact because which model dies makes a difference for charges.
You don't have a choice in which model dies either way though. It's all down to which model rolls the 1, which is accounted for equally whether or not you assign before or after (provide the probability distribution is correct).
It doesn't work that way. You can't randomly determine because it might cause the back model to die when the front model should have died.
Just because it's "random" doesn't mean it simulates the correct outcome.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 11:25:10
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
BaconCatBug wrote: Stux wrote: BaconCatBug wrote:I've said this three times now, you cannot assign after the fact because which model dies makes a difference for charges.
You don't have a choice in which model dies either way though. It's all down to which model rolls the 1, which is accounted for equally whether or not you assign before or after (provide the probability distribution is correct).
It doesn't work that way. You can't randomly determine because it might cause the back model to die when the front model should have died.
Just because it's "random" doesn't mean it simulates the correct outcome.
If it's the same probability it's the same.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 12:11:59
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
How is giving you a 4/5 chance to not have the front dude die, thus denying you the charge, the same?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/12 12:12:09
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 12:14:46
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
BaconCatBug wrote:How is giving you a 4/5 chance to not have the front dude die, thus denying you the charge, the same?
What of you mean? There's exactly the same probability of the front dude dying or not. It's only different if you don't calculate your probability distribution correctly.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/12 12:14:55
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 12:19:25
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
Stux wrote: BaconCatBug wrote:How is giving you a 4/5 chance to not have the front dude die, thus denying you the charge, the same?
What of you mean? There's exactly the same probability of the front dude dying or not. It's only different if you don't calculate your probability distribution correctly.
It does matter because of charging. It doesn't matter if the probabilities the same, the point is that you need to specify which dice belong to what model. I don't get why this argument is continuing because you simply cannot randomly determine who dies after the fact without breaking the rules, period. Any "solution" people come up with is meaningless.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 12:24:21
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
BaconCatBug wrote: Stux wrote: BaconCatBug wrote:How is giving you a 4/5 chance to not have the front dude die, thus denying you the charge, the same?
What of you mean? There's exactly the same probability of the front dude dying or not. It's only different if you don't calculate your probability distribution correctly.
It does matter because of charging. It doesn't matter if the probabilities the same, the point is that you need to specify which dice belong to what model. I don't get why this argument is continuing because you simply cannot randomly determine who dies after the fact without breaking the rules, period. Any "solution" people come up with is meaningless.
Randomly deciding after is identical to randomly deciding before though! There are no decisions to make that can alter that.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/12 12:26:54
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 12:33:07
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
Command Point re-roll means there is a decision to make and a difference that can be made.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 12:41:35
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
BaconCatBug wrote:Command Point re-roll means there is a decision to make and a difference that can be made.
Ok, now you have a point. If you have fast rolled you can't use command re-roll because you have more information than your should.
However, doesn't that apply any time you fast roll? You have the advantage of knowing how many hits you have before using the strat, compared to slow rolling?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 14:08:07
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
Yes, you get more information when fast rolling, that's the usual GW not bothering to think and write rules properly. That being said you still have to denote which dice belong to which model before rolling because the rule explicitly says "the bearer" is slain.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 14:31:59
Subject: Re:Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
BCB and others are correct.
The optional fast rolling has no provision regarding how to resolve self damage when the result of the fast roll would affect the outcome of the said resolution.
In a permissive ruleset, you cannot assume you can do something (allocate 'slain' mechanism randomly or by selecting) when it doesnt specifically allow you do so.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 15:13:02
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
BaconCatBug wrote:Yes, you get more information when fast rolling, that's the usual GW not bothering to think and write rules properly. That being said you still have to denote which dice belong to which model before rolling because the rule explicitly says "the bearer" is slain.
Fair enough.
For the record I absolutely agree that everyone should roll them separately.
It's just if you've messed up and already rolled, it is possible to allocate in a way that gives the same result so long as there is no command re-roll or similar intervention. I'll admit it's not perfect, and so everyone SHOULD slow roll overcharged plasma.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 15:31:36
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Witch Hunter in the Shadows
Aachen
|
BaconCatBug wrote:Yes, you get more information when fast rolling, that's the usual GW not bothering to think and write rules properly.
What a gem.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 19:17:38
Subject: Re:Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Stux wrote: alextroy wrote:@Stux I think you misunderstood me. Each of the dice give an individual result between 1 and 5, which is the model that dies. If the dice matched, then that model rolled both 1's.
I did fail to mention that this method assumes all models rolled a equal number of dice and that you don't allow any specific model to get more results than attacks, but you get the point. Randomly determine which model rolled the one and take them off the board.
That being said, different colored dice is the best way to resolve this issue.
No I understand you, but your method is still flawed. When you roll the second dice you have a 1/5 chance of it landing on the same model which took the first hit, which is incorrect.
You need to weight the other four Black Knights as twice as likely to be selected as the one that already took a hit, thus it should be 1/9.
This is because there are 10 possible shots for the 1s. After you've assigned one of them, there are now 9 possible shots left for the 1 to be assigned to.
Actually you don't weight the other black knights. You're rolling the first shot of the 5 models, then you're rolling the second shot of the 5 models. If you have 1 roll of 1 in the first set, you have an equal chance of it coming from any of the knights. Likewise for the second set, if I have one hit from the second set it has an equal chance of being on any of the 5 models. You've differentiated between the first shot and the second shot. You've already determined that 4 of the 5 shots did not have the overheating problem, so there are only 5 shots left to determine the origin of. If you have one 1 show up, then it's a 1/5 chance as you only have 5 shots to account for, not 9 as you claim.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 19:50:09
Subject: Re:Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
doctortom wrote: Stux wrote: alextroy wrote:@Stux I think you misunderstood me. Each of the dice give an individual result between 1 and 5, which is the model that dies. If the dice matched, then that model rolled both 1's.
I did fail to mention that this method assumes all models rolled a equal number of dice and that you don't allow any specific model to get more results than attacks, but you get the point. Randomly determine which model rolled the one and take them off the board.
That being said, different colored dice is the best way to resolve this issue.
No I understand you, but your method is still flawed. When you roll the second dice you have a 1/5 chance of it landing on the same model which took the first hit, which is incorrect.
You need to weight the other four Black Knights as twice as likely to be selected as the one that already took a hit, thus it should be 1/9.
This is because there are 10 possible shots for the 1s. After you've assigned one of them, there are now 9 possible shots left for the 1 to be assigned to.
Actually you don't weight the other black knights. You're rolling the first shot of the 5 models, then you're rolling the second shot of the 5 models. If you have 1 roll of 1 in the first set, you have an equal chance of it coming from any of the knights. Likewise for the second set, if I have one hit from the second set it has an equal chance of being on any of the 5 models. You've differentiated between the first shot and the second shot. You've already determined that 4 of the 5 shots did not have the overheating problem, so there are only 5 shots left to determine the origin of. If you have one 1 show up, then it's a 1/5 chance as you only have 5 shots to account for, not 9 as you claim.
No, that's not correct, it's not how probabilities work.
The first roll has been simplified to a 1/5, but really it's a 1/10. The 10 total shots. The first 1 can be any of those 10. Then you assign the second 1 and now you have 9 shots it might have fallen on.
As I said previously, you can tell the method you're talking about is wrong because it doesn't allow for the possibility that both shots are in the first 5 you're rolling or both shots are in the second 5 you're rolling.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/12 19:50:31
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 20:10:25
Subject: Re:Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Stux wrote: doctortom wrote: Stux wrote: alextroy wrote:@Stux I think you misunderstood me. Each of the dice give an individual result between 1 and 5, which is the model that dies. If the dice matched, then that model rolled both 1's.
I did fail to mention that this method assumes all models rolled a equal number of dice and that you don't allow any specific model to get more results than attacks, but you get the point. Randomly determine which model rolled the one and take them off the board.
That being said, different colored dice is the best way to resolve this issue.
No I understand you, but your method is still flawed. When you roll the second dice you have a 1/5 chance of it landing on the same model which took the first hit, which is incorrect.
You need to weight the other four Black Knights as twice as likely to be selected as the one that already took a hit, thus it should be 1/9.
This is because there are 10 possible shots for the 1s. After you've assigned one of them, there are now 9 possible shots left for the 1 to be assigned to.
Actually you don't weight the other black knights. You're rolling the first shot of the 5 models, then you're rolling the second shot of the 5 models. If you have 1 roll of 1 in the first set, you have an equal chance of it coming from any of the knights. Likewise for the second set, if I have one hit from the second set it has an equal chance of being on any of the 5 models. You've differentiated between the first shot and the second shot. You've already determined that 4 of the 5 shots did not have the overheating problem, so there are only 5 shots left to determine the origin of. If you have one 1 show up, then it's a 1/5 chance as you only have 5 shots to account for, not 9 as you claim.
No, that's not correct, it's not how probabilities work.
The first roll has been simplified to a 1/5, but really it's a 1/10. The 10 total shots. The first 1 can be any of those 10. Then you assign the second 1 and now you have 9 shots it might have fallen on.
As I said previously, you can tell the method you're talking about is wrong because it doesn't allow for the possibility that both shots are in the first 5 you're rolling or both shots are in the second 5 you're rolling.
The first roll is 1 out of 5, with 4 out of 5 other shots being accounted for in this. That only leaves 5 shots to account for. If I have 5 different colored dice and roll each of them twice (for this example, not having 2 dice of each color), if you have only 1 die that rolls 1 it has an equal chance of being any of the five. This would be true if you had one die that was going to roll a 1 in the second shot you actually roll - there's a 1 in 5 chance of it being any color.
What you're missing is that I don't have to allow for the second one to be in the first 5. I'm rolling the first 5, and if I get two 1's showing up, then it's 2 out of the 5 that get the overheat assigned to them. Then you could roll randomly to determine which 2 different models overheated (if you're not rolling different colored dice that you've already assigned). You've accounted for 5 out of the 10 shots, though. I could just as likely not have any 1's in the second round of 5. I'm saying you roll first shot, then second shot, then you randomly assign the first shots then the second shots. You know that for the first shots you can't have both come from the same model, but you must have all 1's from the first shots on different models. Likewise, all 1's from the second shots must be on different models if there are more than 1, but one or more can be on the same model(s) that had suffered from the first shots.
You've already determined that there was only one 1 in the first 5 shots because you only rolled one 1. If you were going to have more, you would have rolled more. I've already accounted for the possiblity of more 1's in the first 5 by actually having rolled the first 5 before rolling the second shots for each model. You're in error thinking that hasn't already been accounted for. If I only roll one 1 for the first 5 shots, then the chance of two 1's being in the first shots from each model is precisely 0, because I've already rolled and made the determination that there wasn't more than one 1 in the first 5 shots.
EDIT: You do realize I'm talking about rolling the initial shots 1 for each model then the second shots for each model, don't you? You haven't determined how many 1's have been rolled yet at that point. Random distribution of shots means an equal chance for a model to get a one, with none stacking on the same model for the first shot group if you roll more than one. Your probability argument doesn't apply to this.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/12 20:23:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 21:35:15
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
Based on your edit it is clear we are talking about completely different things I'm afraid!
We were talking previously about how to fairly allocate the 1s in a situation where 5 models firing twice each have rolled exactly 2 1s.
In that circumstance, what I described is the correct method.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 21:39:29
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Whyyyyyyy is this still going???
|
Stormonu wrote:For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/12 22:03:31
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
Because people keep getting maths wrong
I kid, the last few posts were a misunderstanding.
You're right though... I'll try to stop responding.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/13 15:06:57
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Yeah, he was trying to do it for someone who had already rolled 10 dice and I was pointing out a better way to roll them if you're not just going to roll one model at a time.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/13 19:22:27
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
So in summary, the most efficient way to roll 5 models shooting 10 plasma shots (2 per model), is 5 pairs of different colored dice, assigning each color to a specific model.
Correct?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/13 19:23:16
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/13 19:27:57
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
deviantduck wrote:So in summary, the most efficient way to roll 5 models shooting 10 plasma shots (2 per model), is 5 pairs of different colored dice, assigning each color to a specific model. Correct?
Correct, assuming you assign pre-rolling.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/13 19:28:08
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/13 19:28:01
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Horrific Hive Tyrant
|
deviantduck wrote:So in summary, the most efficient way to roll 5 models shooting 10 plasma shots (2 per model), is 5 pairs of different colored dice, assigning each color to a specific model.
Correct?
Yes, although realistically rolling 5 sets of two doesn't actually take that long if you don't have lots of different colours to hand!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/13 20:06:02
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Powerful Phoenix Lord
|
It also takes no time to roll 2 at a time saying "for this guy" roll, "for that guy" roll, etc. until you've rolled all 10 dice, each allocated for a specific model.
Different colored dice work great, but you have to remember what color is for which model.
Allocation, then immediate rolling both dice will instantly show who rolls any 1s.
-
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2018/11/13 23:05:15
Subject: Plasma overheating on multiple models
|
 |
Focused Fire Warrior
|
Whew! This debate got a bit heated while I was away lol! For the record, I went with rolling 2 dice at a time. All the hits, I then piled off to the side, I luckily didn't roll any 1s(thanks Sammael!) I then rolled all the hits' to-wound rolls at once. It's not that slow, only a little slower. Although, if I was playing a bigger game with 10 black knights or something, it might have been a bit more of a pain in the ass haha.
Go and look at my recent Ravenwing-themed Army list posts and give me some critique if you don't mind! Not many people chiming in on my lists lol.
|
|
 |
 |
|