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.

Most of why I ask is that my own experience is rather limited while I've done a lot of testing with running numbers, and my more interesting results I've tested in games where I can.

Mathhammer will tell you how a unit will perform given average rolls.

So if your unit X will kill half of your opponents unit Y given average rolls, going by pure mathhammer you know to double the firepower, or in a strictly abstract sense, to have 2 unit X attacking unit Y

Experience tells us that you cannot rely on mathhammer since the law of averages tells us that your unit X may under perform, and leave unit Y above what is statisticly probable. so, we as player compensate by making sure that we don't simply have 2 of unit X available to do the job, we have 3, or 4 able to shoot unit Y.
We also understand that units may over perform, and as such position our units so that they have the option of shooting multiple units should the situation warrant it.
there is also the art of which order to shoot your units, and only experience can tell you what that order should be, and that order is determined by your targetting priorities.

Concentration of force is a very old concept, and applies very readily to the table top. when shooting a unit, experience tells us that whatever mathhammer says, overkill is what you should aim for, because just enough is too often not enough firepower

The best kill IS overkill. So true.

madtankbloke wrote:
Mathhammer will tell you how a unit will perform given average rolls.

So if your unit X will kill half of your opponents unit Y given average rolls, going by pure mathhammer you know to double the firepower, or in a strictly abstract sense, to have 2 unit X attacking unit Y

Experience tells us that you cannot rely on mathhammer since the law of averages tells us that your unit X may under perform, and leave unit Y above what is statisticly probable. so, we as player compensate by making sure that we don't simply have 2 of unit X available to do the job, we have 3, or 4 able to shoot unit Y.
We also understand that units may over perform, and as such position our units so that they have the option of shooting multiple units should the situation warrant it.
there is also the art of which order to shoot your units, and only experience can tell you what that order should be, and that order is determined by your targetting priorities.

Concentration of force is a very old concept, and applies very readily to the table top. when shooting a unit, experience tells us that whatever mathhammer says, overkill is what you should aim for, because just enough is too often not enough firepower

Mathhammer can do all of that

Sure, it CAN, but most often it doesn't as you can't consistently define overkill mathematically. Is it when the probability of a killing all models in a unit is 100%? double the number of wounds left? Triple?

MarkCron wrote:
Sure, it CAN, but most often it doesn't as you can't consistently define overkill mathematically. Is it when the probability of a killing all models in a unit is 100%? double the number of wounds left? Triple?

Experience has the same problem.
2 units of shooting?
3 units?

With maths you can ask yourself what an acceptable percentage is, and work to that. Personally I think that a 75% chance to wipe it is good enough for me, because if it doesn't get wiped, it's likely to be unable to do anything useful anymore anyway.

Experience has the advantage that you can see when the unit is dead.....so you can stop shooting

MarkCron wrote:
Experience has the advantage that you can see when the unit is dead.....so you can stop shooting

Haha
As funny as that is, so can maths

MarkCron wrote:
Sure, it CAN, but most often it doesn't as you can't consistently define overkill mathematically. Is it when the probability of a killing all models in a unit is 100%? double the number of wounds left? Triple?

That only applies to people that don't know math!
Math-hammer doesn't just calculate the average; It can also calculate the odds of you doing double the average.
It also calculates the odds of your unit sucking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation < That would be a good place to start.

"Math-hammer says that 1 in 6 terminators die."
This is an example of people that don't understand the math.
Math-hammer can tell you the odds of 0 terminators dying, or 1, or 2, or more.

Kangodo wrote:

MarkCron wrote:
Sure, it CAN, but most often it doesn't as you can't consistently define overkill mathematically. Is it when the probability of a killing all models in a unit is 100%? double the number of wounds left? Triple?

That only applies to people that don't know math!
Math-hammer doesn't just calculate the average; It can also calculate the odds of you doing double the average.
It also calculates the odds of your unit sucking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation < That would be a good place to start.

"Math-hammer says that 1 in 6 terminators die."
This is an example of people that don't understand the math.
Math-hammer can tell you the odds of 0 terminators dying, or 1, or 2, or more.

Excellent, can you let me know the probability of overkilling a unit of terminators?

MarkCron wrote:

Kangodo wrote:

MarkCron wrote:
Sure, it CAN, but most often it doesn't as you can't consistently define overkill mathematically. Is it when the probability of a killing all models in a unit is 100%? double the number of wounds left? Triple?

That only applies to people that don't know math!
Math-hammer doesn't just calculate the average; It can also calculate the odds of you doing double the average.
It also calculates the odds of your unit sucking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation < That would be a good place to start.

"Math-hammer says that 1 in 6 terminators die."
This is an example of people that don't understand the math.
Math-hammer can tell you the odds of 0 terminators dying, or 1, or 2, or more.

Excellent, can you let me know the probability of overkilling a unit of terminators?

Sure! What are you firing with and how many Terminators are there?

MarkCron wrote:
Excellent, can you let me know the probability of overkilling a unit of terminators?

Sure, if you will give me the amount of Terminators, the weapons you are shooting with and your definition of overkilling.
Do you really need a 100% chance to kill them if you already have a 99% chance?

So tell me, what chance of killing them all is enough for you?

I love math, and to be honest compared to most folks I have not been playing that long(less than a year) and have to say hammering out my lists and those I'm playing has won me many games.

I think experience comes into play when folks have the same basic match concepts of the game. I can look at a unit and estimate how much VoF I will need to put it down. I also plan my moves at least a turn in advance based on where I think your going and how well my turn will come out and when the person I'm playing can do all of that too... the dynamic changes. Things like wild card moves, baiting tricks, the psychological moves all come to those that have played more games.

I have won games that by averages I should lose 9 out of 10 times. I know I can't face you in a traditional way so I do something crazy. If it works it throws off their game and gives me the opening. If I fail, I was likely to lose anyway so there really wan't much of a risk.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

MarkCron wrote:

Kangodo wrote:

MarkCron wrote:
Sure, it CAN, but most often it doesn't as you can't consistently define overkill mathematically. Is it when the probability of a killing all models in a unit is 100%? double the number of wounds left? Triple?

That only applies to people that don't know math!
Math-hammer doesn't just calculate the average; It can also calculate the odds of you doing double the average.
It also calculates the odds of your unit sucking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation < That would be a good place to start.

"Math-hammer says that 1 in 6 terminators die."
This is an example of people that don't understand the math.
Math-hammer can tell you the odds of 0 terminators dying, or 1, or 2, or more.

Excellent, can you let me know the probability of overkilling a unit of terminators?

Sure! What are you firing with and how many Terminators are there?

Kangodo wrote:

MarkCron wrote:
Excellent, can you let me know the probability of overkilling a unit of terminators?

Sure, if you will give me the amount of Terminators, the weapons you are shooting with and your definition of overkilling.
Do you really need a 100% chance to kill them if you already have a 99% chance?

So tell me, what chance of killing them all is enough for you?

Thanks guys, but that just highlighted what I've been saying. Mathhammer is the only way you can compare the efficiency of units or weapons, and to do that you make certain assumptions. Sometimes, the assumptions you need make the answer too specific....in this case - what units am I shooting, what's my definition of overkill, how many terminators are there. So the answer you'd give me is correct for the assumptions I gave you - but not correct for any other circumstances. Even putting the terminators into cover would make a significant difference.

And for me, that's why experience is better. I'm not saying that math is wrong and I'm not saying that it has no place. What I am saying is that experience gives you the ability to short circuit the math - it enables you to come up with a strategy or action that is good enough and quickly enough to be able to use it on the tabletop.

On the tabletop, there is an 16.6% chance of rolling a given number with a single D6. It doesn't change. So, even though on average I should roll one 1 for every 6 dice, on the table I can roll 6 dice and get six 1. Experience allows most people to adjust that.

I think that mathhammer generally is useful for understanding what units are best suited to doing and how reliable they are at the margin (you know when you're tossing up between unit A or B - like @labmouse showed).

As many people have said, you are better off with both. If you are only going to have one, pick experience - you'll be less surprised and frustrated on the table.

A definition of terms would be appropriate here.

Mark's perspective (and the perspective of many others in this thread) is born from a colossal misunderstanding of what math actually is, and what math is appropriate for determining outcomes in a game of 40k. This misunderstanding is borne from being immersed hip-deep in the muck of what we'll affectionately call ''failure math aka some kid smashing out long divison on an IHOP napkin'' that pervades this forum, ie. something asinine like ''if I shoot x terminators at y amount of genestealers in cover on average I'll score 6.35135636 wounds" - understanding why every single piece of this assessment is either flawed, inaccurate, incorrect, or just plain awful, is both core to this debate and a huge part of why points like "So, even though on average I should roll one 1 for every 6 dice, on the table I can roll 6 dice and get six 1. Experience allows most people to adjust that. " are being advanced with no idea of why that is a 100% flawed assessment of what math actually does.

"Thanks guys, but that just highlighted what I've been saying. Mathhammer is the only way you can compare the efficiency of units or weapons, and to do that you make certain assumptions. Sometimes, the assumptions you need make the answer too specific....in this case - what units am I shooting, what's my definition of overkill, how many terminators are there. So the answer you'd give me is correct for the assumptions I gave you - but not correct for any other circumstances. Even putting the terminators into cover would make a significant difference. "

This is another great example of flat-out misunderstanding. To someone that can actually calculate the odds of x unit doing exactly y performance in z conditions, it's frankly quite *trivial* to add in any additional number of factors ie. night fight range probabilities, cover, weird invuln saves, etc. These factors (as well as your challenging "well ok then! tell me what the odds of my termies killing something are!" as if it was actually a non-trivial thing to do) only seem complicated to you because you're not familiar with how the calculations are actually done.

There should be a sticky in the tactics thread really showing how to do actual calculations for probabilities for discrete events. There was a recent thread titled something like "Do librarians belong in a crimson fists army" that showed how the actual math is supposed to be done by several people (hint: it's not spamming long division followed by something like ''ok you will kill 2.525136234634234634 orks on average)

Put a great mathemitician in front of me. See what happens.

He'll rapidly be the guy in the room who pouts and throws models because "that shouldn't have happened".

Ah the land of should. such a lonely place. No one lives there and very few pass through.

 Jancoran wrote:
Put a great mathemitician in front of me. See what happens.

He'll rapidly be the guy in the room who pouts and throws models because "that shouldn't have happened".

No, that would be a stupid mathematician. A great mathematician understands the difference between "most likely outcome" and "guaranteed outcome", and doesn't throw their toys in frustration because they didn't get the most likely outcome.

 Jancoran wrote:
Put a great mathemitician in front of me. See what happens.

He'll rapidly be the guy in the room who pouts and throws models because "that shouldn't have happened".

Ah the land of should. such a lonely place. No one lives there and very few pass through.

This pretty accurately describes what someone that's *not* a mathematician (or a good sport) would do. Your opinion also speaks to the large misunderstanding within the Dakka community of, again, what math actually *is*

Uh huh. Because its such a hard concept to grasp, right?

 Jancoran wrote:
Uh huh. Because its such a hard concept to grasp, right?

Apparently it is, because you're spreading wrong information.
A mathematician will not only know the most likely outcome, he will also know the chance on that outcome.
It are the "experience"-people who think 2+ is bad because they "always roll 1's." (See what I did there?)

 Jancoran wrote:
Uh huh. Because its such a hard concept to grasp, right?

Judging by the majority of posts in this thread, apparently so.

MikeMcSomething wrote:A definition of terms would be appropriate here.

Agreed. Many posters in the last 4 pages have sought to point out what definitions they are using. Interestingly, you didn't actually provide any definitions before continuing, so let me help.

Math : "a group of related sciences, including algebra, geometry, probability and calculus, concerned with the study of number, quantity, shape, and space and their interrelationships by using a specialized notation" - thanks to the Free Dictionary and with word in italics added by me.

Mathhammer : "Failure math aka some kid smashing out long divison on an IHOP napkin'' that pervades this forum, ie. something asinine like ''if I shoot x terminators at y amount of genestealers in cover on average I'll score 6.35135636 wounds" OR "spamming long division followed by something like ''ok you will kill 2.525136234634234634 orks on average" - snip from MikeMcSomething accurately summarising my view and that of many posters (imo )

MikeMcSomething wrote:
Mark's perspective (and the perspective of many others in this thread) is born from a colossal misunderstanding of what math actually is, and what math is appropriate for determining outcomes in a game of 40k. This misunderstanding is borne from being immersed hip-deep in the muck of what we'll affectionately call ''failure math aka some kid smashing out long divison on an IHOP napkin'' that pervades this forum, ie. something asinine like ''if I shoot x terminators at y amount of genestealers in cover on average I'll score 6.35135636 wounds" - understanding why every single piece of this assessment is either flawed, inaccurate, incorrect, or just plain awful, is both core to this debate and a huge part of why points like "So, even though on average I should roll one 1 for every 6 dice, on the table I can roll 6 dice and get six 1. Experience allows most people to adjust that. " are being advanced with no idea of why that is a 100% flawed assessment of what math actually does.

Thanks Mike Unfortunately, the only colossal misunderstanding here is your interpretation of what has been happening in the last 4 pages of this topic. For the last 4 pages, people like myself, who DO have an understanding of "math", have been putting forward their view of why experience is better than "mathhammer" (note I'm using your definitions - well one of them anyway ).

Also, re my comment "So, even though on average I should roll one 1 for every 6 dice, on the table I can roll 6 dice and get six 1." I agree that was badly worded. I should have said "If I roll 6 dice I have a very high probability of getting one 1, however, it is possible I can roll all 6 dice and get six 1's" because my probability of getting a 1 on any individual dice roll is 1/6 (as I have noted in my earlier posts).

MikeMcSomething wrote:
"Thanks guys, but that just highlighted what I've been saying. Mathhammer is the only way you can compare the efficiency of units or weapons, and to do that you make certain assumptions. Sometimes, the assumptions you need make the answer too specific....in this case - what units am I shooting, what's my definition of overkill, how many terminators are there. So the answer you'd give me is correct for the assumptions I gave you - but not correct for any other circumstances. Even putting the terminators into cover would make a significant difference. "

This is another great example of flat-out misunderstanding. To someone that can actually calculate the odds of x unit doing exactly y performance in z conditions, it's frankly quite *trivial* to add in any additional number of factors ie. night fight range probabilities, cover, weird invuln saves, etc. These factors (as well as your challenging "well ok then! tell me what the odds of my termies killing something are!" as if it was actually a non-trivial thing to do) only seem complicated to you because you're not familiar with how the calculations are actually done.

Yes I agree. There was a misunderstanding, however, perhaps it was because you didn't read what I wrote, or perhaps it was your subsequent misquote of my challenge.

I'm not sure how to clarify the statement "So the answer you would give me would depend on the assumptions I gave you, but not correct for any other circumstances. Even putting terminators in cover would make a significant difference.". The point clearly was that WHEN you do the "mathhammer" (noting that I didn't anywhere say it was non-trivial to do the calculation) the result you get by adding another variable may make a significant difference. Unless you are suggesting that putting the terminators into cover won't make a difference to the calculation?

And just to clarify my challenge - the wording was "Excellent, can you let me know the probability of overkilling a unit of terminators? " which is something that "math" CAN do (see definitions above) but "mathhammer" (see definitions above) can't.

MikeMcSomething wrote:
There should be a sticky in the tactics thread really showing how to do actual calculations for probabilities for discrete events. There was a recent thread titled something like "Do librarians belong in a crimson fists army" that showed how the actual math is supposed to be done by several people (hint: it's not spamming long division followed by something like ''ok you will kill 2.525136234634234634 orks on average)

Agreed.

Kangodo wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Uh huh. Because its such a hard concept to grasp, right?

Apparently it is, because you're spreading wrong information.
A mathematician will not only know the most likely outcome, he will also know the chance on that outcome.
It are the "experience"-people who think 2+ is bad because they "always roll 1's." (See what I did there?)

Not really . Experience people are effectively modifying their data set to reflect actual results - it is entirely possible that their dice don't conform to statistical averages.

But I agree "A mathematician will not only know the most likely outcome, he will also know the chance on that outcome".
However, a Mathhammerite (mathhammerer?) won't.

*************

So, to summarise. (I'm going to repeat the definitions first so that this hopefully won't get taken out of context).

Math : "a group of related sciences, including algebra, geometry, probability and calculus, concerned with the study of number, quantity, shape, and space and their interrelationships by using a specialized notation" - thanks to the Free Dictionary and with word in italics added by me.

Mathhammer : "Failure math aka some kid smashing out long divison on an IHOP napkin'' that pervades this forum, ie. something asinine like ''if I shoot x terminators at y amount of genestealers in cover on average I'll score 6.35135636 wounds" OR "spamming long division followed by something like ''ok you will kill 2.525136234634234634 orks on average" - snip from MikeMcSomething

Imo experience beats Mathhammer every time. Mathhammer can be useful in getting a broad idea of unit capabilities but is not to be relied on on the tabletop.
On the table experience is more useful than math - purely because most people cannot explicitly do the complex equations required to accurately do the math while playing a game. I accept that experience is effectively "short-circuiting" the math and that experience may not give the mathematically correct results. Experience is, however, something that everyone can get, it's generally quicker and it is a hell of a lot more fun (for most ).




Automatically Appended Next Post:
@OP - GREAT topic

Well I've gone down this road before so let me tell you what you may not know: I own a business in financial services so all I DO is numbers. I know the probabilities and I see math in my head at night. Part of why Im good is that I can estimate (quickly) my chances in any given situation pretty darn quick.

BUT... We're talking about before the game, aren't we?

Despite this ability, I do NOT field armies that feature 9 Broadsides or 5 flyers or any of that stuff. I could. I know the math on fronht armor and back. Why don't I?

But what I have found is that a good general can create the opportunities to skew those odds in his favor if he takes something that ISNT a cockpuncher unit...but IS a numbers skewer. A disruption unit is what some people like to call them.

and the numbers dont show you ANYTHING in relation to that value. I could tell you for example that my NUMBER ONE vehicle killers (especially flyers) are the Kroot units. Hands down. Know anyone else who says that? I bet very few, if any.

I also know how to make Mandrakes work. I also have a Sisters of Battle Army that had no transports in 5E and only one exorcist and cleaned house with them again and again. I have a Footdar army that was footdar before footdar ever THOUGHT about being good. When everyone was saying Crisis Suit, I was saying I have none, and won. When people curse the gawds over Stingwings, i won with them too.

Want to play a math game? Trey this one.

Averages mean that a result is more likely than not if ALL the variables are accounted for. Whats the variable applied to OPPORTUNITY? For example: How much does your kill ratio matter...in fact... if you have no target?

Second question: How many rounds in which you don't have a target (that matters) does the value of the units kill ratio degrade?

Because obviously we know that a unit that costs 300 points could be postulated to be worth 1800 over the course of 6 rounds if it loses no strength. In other words, that unit does 300 points worth of X, given the opportunity.

So if we give every unit their points vaslue in efficacy and modify it by its kill ratio (simple math that anyone can do) we can sort of calculate what the units useful output is in a game in perfect conditions.

Each round that the unit is not allowed to output a result, we subtract that amount of rounds from its value.

This all ignores objectives and deals only with total usefulness in a killing sense.

So if I create a situation in which you EFFECTIVELY cannot act meaningfully, for three of the six rounds, i have cut your value in half, while leaving my units undiminished.

An outflanker unit coming in on turn 3 of 180 point value with a kill ratio of 3 MEQ shooting could be said to be an 2160 point value. The 300 point unit (say Grey Knight Purifiers) with a 4 MEQ kill ratio who are negated but at full str until 4th round when their target reveals itself could be said to be worth 300x3 roundsx4 = 3600.

Notice how you got a 12 production per point output from the outflanker and got a 12 production per point out of the Purifiers? What happens if the Purifiers don't get a target for FOUR rounds! Their stock plummets in comparison. And the enemy can almost afford TWO Opportunities (points wise) instead of 1, because he bought the cheaper unit. Lol. Advantage: the Grey Knights opponent in this example.

Now this assumes the Outflankers didnt use their round to damage the Purifiers. And that is the OPPORTUNITY cost that the Purifiers are paying: they cant get that jump on the outflanker. They can be hurt FIRST, dropping their production value first and any drop affects ALL subsequent rounds. that value can plummet and probably would, faster than the outflanker who bopped out of nowhere and shot them.

And what if the Grey Knight catches the offensing unit? well that Grey Knight unit may now have cost himself rounds of FUTURE production by his POSITION. By going after the one threat, he now cannot go after more that he otherwise would have been able to. So each time i LURE him into killing a smaller unit that is behind him, for example, I put his value lower JUST by knowing that his range will preclude FUTURE targets from being affected. So if he takes the bait, round 4, he then loses two rounds and his value goes to 2400. Oops. Suddenly, quite inefficient indeed for its cost.

Now some units are really great in melee. If the purifiers are good (and they are), and they are ALLOWED a target (that matters) then one can probably guess what the outcome is. but the more rounds the unit DOESN'T get to do what it wants, the worse it is.

So the trick is to find WAYS to fight and units that compliment that method, that you can use to time the enemy and dictate his movement to him. If he ignores the bait, the bait lives, doesn't it? and this bait bites back. That allows you to penalize the production value of the other units. Your ability to ABLATE the enemy's production is something that can be reflected in Saves but it cant be reflected in opportunity because terrain and tactics, and unit abilities that interact with that much it all up.

I can go on but this is just ONE of a dozen ways you can parse the numbers and look at the problem.

SITUATION determines the value of each unit using this model. So it is the SITUATION that needs to be manipulated by the General and THAT is a function of terrain, mission, timing and a little luck as always.

So there's math to it. But the so called acolytes of Math Hammer would beat me a lot more often if they were thinking bigger than a damn kill ratio. And I find it laughable to think anyone can say that experience at setting up the SITUATION can be trumped by a weak argument like "but a Crisis suit does X MEQ wounds".

It does if I let it and its alive to try. Sure. But thats not going to be the SITUATION when the time comes (against a target that matters). Not if I have anything to say about it.

...and sometimes the dice roll funny and sometimes the other guy is on his game and sometimes the terrain isn't cooperating. Stuff happens. Its a dice game. No one wins all the time.

Jancoran, you're making a ridiculous straw man here. Nobody is saying that math in isolation can tell you all you need to know about the game. The point is that math will always give you the correct answer to the question you're asking. People will say endless stupid things about "I always roll badly" or whatever, but in the end they're simply wrong. And the fact that some people make bad decisions by asking "what's my average MEQ kills per turn" instead of "what are my chances of killing the four survivors this turn to clear the objective I need to hold" doesn't make this any less true.

And what's especially amusing is that you complain about how people give too much credit to math while not asking the same question about the validity of your experience. For example, did you win with vespids because they defy the common math and you've found a way to make them a really good unit, or did you win with vespids because you were playing against weaker players with battleforce lists?

MarkCron wrote:


Thanks guys, but that just highlighted what I've been saying. Mathhammer is the only way you can compare the efficiency of units or weapons, and to do that you make certain assumptions. Sometimes, the assumptions you need make the answer too specific....in this case - what units am I shooting, what's my definition of overkill, how many terminators are there. So the answer you'd give me is correct for the assumptions I gave you - but not correct for any other circumstances. Even putting the terminators into cover would make a significant difference.

Guess what? If you're really experienced at shooting plasma at Tactical Terminators, it's not going to matter if you're shooting at TH/SS Terminators, because the variables have changed.

Do you see how ridiculous that is? When a variable changes, you modify the calculations accordingly. Saying that mathhammer is worse because "one specific calculation isn't always right" is just a staggering level of ignorance of how you're supposed to be using the math in the first place.

For me math serves a very similar role as it seems to for Labmouse. That is, I use it not to optimize my list but to find how best to use what I think would be fun. I think we can all agree that spending days getting a unit to tabletop only to have it flounder isn't very fun even in a casual environment. I think we can also all agree that using something that shouldn't be very effective, and is a cool model, to great effect is extraordinarily fun.

On the tabletop I also use math to assess and manage risk and gain while using units in inventive ways by examining the probability of certain events occurring in given situations. As I learn more I find that my experience doesn't negate what the numbers are telling me, in fact it supports them. Using these in conjunction allows me to pull off things that I don't think I could with either.

I personally am glad I learned the math behind how everything works first though. It gave me a footing to square off against people with much more experience than I and allowed to me to learn more form them. Hopefully it will continue to.


So I have a question, what situation would you think that experience would completely trump math and vice-versa?

Every tool has a select use, and just as I want to compare each of my units objectively to see how each can be used, I want to evaluate when I would have to rely upon each of these tools independently and in conjunction.

@MarkCron: Thank you Hopefully as I learn more about the game I can keep asking good questions.

 laginess wrote:
So I have a question, what situation would you think that experience would completely trump math and vice-versa?

Math trumps experience when the question you're asking is "what will these dice do".

Math is not relevant when the question is something else.

Experience never trumps math, math is just sometimes cited inappropriately when it isn't relevant.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

MarkCron wrote:


Thanks guys, but that just highlighted what I've been saying. Mathhammer is the only way you can compare the efficiency of units or weapons, and to do that you make certain assumptions. Sometimes, the assumptions you need make the answer too specific....in this case - what units am I shooting, what's my definition of overkill, how many terminators are there. So the answer you'd give me is correct for the assumptions I gave you - but not correct for any other circumstances. Even putting the terminators into cover would make a significant difference.

Guess what? If you're really experienced at shooting plasma at Tactical Terminators, it's not going to matter if you're shooting at TH/SS Terminators, because the variables have changed.

Do you see how ridiculous that is? When a variable changes, you modify the calculations accordingly. Saying that mathhammer is worse because "one specific calculation isn't always right" is just a staggering level of ignorance of how you're supposed to be using the math in the first place.

Hmmm. Actually, I hate to break it to you, but whether you mathhammer or use experience it DOES make a difference whether the target you are shooting at has storm shields.

Also, I didn't say "mathhammer was worse because one specific calculation isn't always right". That was your conclusion. The point I was making is that math calculations rely on variables (assumptions) and that these can be very specific. Apparently you agree. I also never said you couldn't recalculate. Sure you can.

I'm going to give you some credit and assume that you know how to use "math" as opposed to being a "mathhammerite". If you want to know the difference, check my earlier post.

If you are one of the people who can, in the middle of the game, quickly, probably without a calculator, calculate the probability of the range of wound outcomes possible from shooting x of weapon z at unit A, who have wargear X, saves Y, special rule Z, with half the unit in cover - knock yourself out. If you can then take that, factor it into your mathematical equation(s) which helps you determine the course of action that maximises your probability of winning the game - then go ahead - use math exclusively.

If you aren't one of those people, then use "math" to get an idea of the capability of your units and get experience on the table to help you make the right decision. If you are going to use "mathhammer" make sure you understand the limitations and what the result really means.

And, just in case I've displayed my "staggering ignorance" of how to use math again, please feel free to let me know how to use "math" properly . Apparently I'm doing it wrong.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 laginess wrote:
So I have a question, what situation would you think that experience would completely trump math and vice-versa?

Math trumps experience when the question you're asking is "what will these dice do".

Math is not relevant when the question is something else.

Experience never trumps math, math is just sometimes cited inappropriately when it isn't relevant.

QFT

@MarkCron:
I do think separating mathhammer and maths is incorrect. Here is my definition:
Maths: what you said.
Mathhammer: maths applied to 40k
Failmathhammer: what your definition of mathhammer was.

My main army is Dark Eldar, mathematically they should lose almost every game they lay simply because of the squishyness of them, however my experience of getting whooped on so many times has taught what is tactically sound and what isn't you can't really on math purely. I do use calculations in my head to to aid me, but I mostly play off of my experience. With my experience I win most my games, quite simply because I do things that most people won't, but with Dark Eldar you have to play that way, every turn just about as Dark Eldar is calculations and a hell of a lot of experience. In short, math hammer is great and all but an experienced player is what wins the game.