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 was just wondering what people use for average amounts of hits for blast markers? I was trying to math hammer some stuff, and I didn't even know what number of hits to allocate from a direct hit. Any help with this and an explanation of how it works would be appreciated.

You need to count how many models are under it as it will vary every time.

I'm talking about in theory, not in an actual game. Is there a way to calculate average number of hits from large blast, small blast, and templates.

small blast: about 2

large blast: about 4

Too many factors to say, but I'd go with three or four. If you wanted to do your own calculation then watch a bunch of batreps online and take an average.

With small blasts, on a direct hit I assume 1 hit. On a drift, 2.

With large, maybe 3 on a direct hit. 4ish on a drift.

Thats assuming small based models at maximum coherency.

Squad dispersion has everything to do with how many models you might catch under a blast template. Also bear in mind, how close your opponent places one unit next to other of his units, can determine whether a blast hits a model or not. As well as the model count of said target unit plays another important factor. Other than the actual size of the blast template, these 3 other factors, can be just as important.

I would conservatively say 2 on the small blast, 4 on the large blast. While spreading units out to maximum coherency is a thing, trying to fit your units inside cover-granting terrain is also a thing, and that can often reduce the space a unit spreads out in.

So it seems that on a direct hit the numbers are like 1-2 for small blast and 3-4 for large blast, and if it scatters no one can predict what will happen (makes sense). So for math hammering stuff, would it be wise to say on average a scatter causes one hit?

Well, if folks are ready we could math hammer out respective likely results. But I prefer to use my expertise to guess how many hits I could get.

 Waaagh 18 wrote:
So it seems that on a direct hit the numbers are like 1-2 for small blast and 3-4 for large blast, and if it scatters no one can predict what will happen (makes sense). So for math hammering stuff, would it be wise to say on average a scatter causes one hit?

No, no.

At BS4 and scatter included we assume over the course of an entire game, a model that doesnt get killed and one that gets to fire every turn with its blast weapon will on average score 1.5 hits per turn with a small blast marker and 3.5 with a large. I rounded up

The "best" guideline I have come up with are;
Assuming a unit with 5+ models
For quick calcs use 1.5 hits per blast and 3 hits for large blast.
For longer calcs use 2 "shots" at the units BS for blast and 5 "shots" at the units BS for large blast.

For a single large model like a landraider, waevserpent, etc. For a large blast I add +2 to the BS. This gives ~80% chance to hit with BS3, which seems about right. With small blasts I add +1 to BS. An imperial knight or baneblade is an additional +1 BS btw these are nearly auto hits but not quite.

I don't think there's an effective way to model this kind of action mathematically.

Template weapons have to cover a unit, and players spread them out all sorts of ways. Even when you take into account the 2 inch separation rule, players could still arrange their models in a conga line so that the max wounds from a 3 inch template could only be 2.

Given the fact that arrangement and unit size are big deltas, maybe the real metric is not about average wounds. Not sure what an alternative would be, I just don't think you can account for factors totally in the opponents control.

With large blasts I often find myself hitting 5 or more guys. maximum coherency is not common in reality.

Here's a can of worms for math-hammer, theorycrafting types:

25mm base, or 32mm base?

bwahahahaha....

The larger the base, the more hits you'll generate. This is because coherency doesn't scale with base size.

 Grey Templar wrote:
The larger the base, the more hits you'll generate. This is because coherency doesn't scale with base size.

I would say the opposite. Smaller bases means that more models can fit under a blast.

A small blast marker centred over a model with a 60mm base will only be hitting 1 model if it does not scatter.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
The larger the base, the more hits you'll generate. This is because coherency doesn't scale with base size.

I would say the opposite. Smaller bases means that more models can fit under a blast.

A small blast marker centred over a model with a 60mm base will only be hitting 1 model if it does not scatter.

You are ignoring model coherency.

Yes, you have the potential for more hits if the models have smaller bases, but at maximum coherency you are more likely to generate more hits on average. You have larger targets.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
The larger the base, the more hits you'll generate. This is because coherency doesn't scale with base size.

I would say the opposite. Smaller bases means that more models can fit under a blast.

A small blast marker centred over a model with a 60mm base will only be hitting 1 model if it does not scatter.

You are ignoring model coherency.

Yes, you have the potential for more hits if the models have smaller bases, but at maximum coherency you are more likely to generate more hits on average. You have larger targets.

Larger but fewer targets. The overall area that the bases occupy under the template should remain fairly constant, however the smaller base sizes mean more potential hits.

You're still ignoring that, if every base is a set distance from the other, you will be more likely to clip more bases if they are larger.

IE: You are more likely to completely miss with 25mm bases than you are with 35 or 40mm bases.

It depends on the size of the squad you are shooting.

I agree that if shooting a small blast at a 5 man squad that has just deepstriked, it would be better if the squad had larger bases, as this would increase the chance of landing a hit.

However, if you were shooting an IG 50 man blob, it would be better if they had smaller bases, as you are not realistically going to miss, and having smaller bases means that there are more models in a smaller place, potentially giving you more hits.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You're still ignoring that, if every base is a set distance from the other, you will be more likely to clip more bases if they are larger.

IE: You are more likely to completely miss with 25mm bases than you are with 35 or 40mm bases.

I'm lazy I'll just say a small base is 1", and a large is 2" in diameter. For max spread, you need 2" between the edges of the bases.

Three of the 1" bases at max spread would span a distance (from the edge of one base to the far opposite one) of 7".

Now three of the 2", in the same setup, would span 10".

If the blast is centered over one of the small bases, the blast would have to have a radius of ~2.5" to reach the next model. The radius of the base, plus the 2" of spacing.

If the blast is centered over one of the large bases, the blast would need a radius of ~3" to reach the next model.

Larger bases mean that, if the models are all 2" apart, there's a greater distance from the center of the blast to get to the other models.

But you don't have to center the blast

 Grey Templar wrote:
But you don't have to center the blast

Having to place the blast over to one side of a large base reduces the chance of hitting models on the opposite side.

Smaller bases are effected by this to a lesser extent.